Man who installed Hillary email server given immunity by government

[Jhhnn]

Maybe try adding a link to a YouTube video.

Something with the Illuminati, the Bilderbergers or the lizard people. And Benghazi, of course.

 

[zephyrprime]

Look, Hillary was real busy conspiring to assasinate Kadafi and overthrow a bunch of north african muslim governments. That's the cloak and dagger reason a private email server was set up. The investigation will result in nothing because all this stuff was no doubt done under the express instruction and full support of the administration.

 

[Brian Stirling]

If Hillary is indicted, and I think the odds of that happening are near zero, then she wins the WH easy. If, OTH, she's pardoned by Obama she loses all 50 states.

But, again, this is all wishful thinking on the part of righties as Hillary is NOT GOING TO BE INDICTED.


Brian

 

[werepossum]

If Hillary is indicted, and I think the odds of that happening are near zero, then she wins the WH easy. If, OTH, she's pardoned by Obama she loses all 50 states.

But, again, this is all wishful thinking on the part of righties as Hillary is NOT GOING TO BE INDICTED.

Brian

I agree that the odds of Hillary being indicted are effectively zero, but if she is indicted I highly doubt she can win against any Republican. However, there is no way in hell she loses all fifty states if Obama pardons her; many would vote her in from a prison cell, including New York and California.

 

[chucky2]

No way will she be indicted. Team Billary has enough dirt/co-dirt on the powers that be, and has greater than 50%+ chance of being POTUS for the next 4 years. Short of massive overwhelming evidence, nothing is going to happen to her. No way career Gov Leadership is going to jeopardize themselves.

 

[ivwshane]

Look, Hillary was real busy conspiring to assasinate Kadafi and overthrow a bunch of north african muslim governments. That's the cloak and dagger reason a private email server was set up. The investigation will result in nothing because all this stuff was no doubt done under the express instruction and full support of the administration.

Perfect!! See pissabird that's how you do it. You've got to think big like this idiot! Do you see how he tied it back to the administration? I'd give him an 8 out of 10.

 

[ivwshane]

I agree that the odds of Hillary being indicted are effectively zero, but if she is indicted I highly doubt she can win against any Republican. However, there is no way in hell she loses all fifty states if Obama pardons her; many would vote her in from a prison cell, including New York and California.

These are who you should be modeling your posts after pissabird! You see how he gracefully mixed a reasonable response with pure nuttery at the end there? He wasn't sloppy at all, he chose the two states for a reason, it only adds to his shit soufflé.

 

[Bowfinger]

Perfect!! See pissabird that's how you do it. You've got to think big like this idiot! Do you see how he tied it back to the administration? I'd give him an 8 out of 10.

I think that was sarcasm, though it's hard to tell. The real nutters are so far over the top it's getting really hard to parody them.

 

[werepossum]

These are who you should be modeling your posts after pissabird! You see how he gracefully mixed a reasonable response with pure nuttery at the end there? He wasn't sloppy at all, he chose the two states for a reason, it only adds to his shit soufflé.

You honestly feel that Mrs. Clinton would lose New York and California to the Pubbies if she is indicted for this, with or without being pardoned?

I think that was sarcasm, though it's hard to tell. The real nutters are so far over the top it's getting really hard to parody them.

Might I suggest that one good way to parody the nutters would be to pretend that the FBI is just investigating the handling classified documents with the Department of State and Mrs. Clinton just happened to get caught up in it.

 

[OutHouse]

No way will she be indicted. Team Billary has enough dirt/co-dirt on the powers that be, and has greater than 50%+ chance of being POTUS for the next 4 years. Short of massive overwhelming evidence, nothing is going to happen to her. No way career Gov Leadership is going to jeopardize themselves.

so in other words corruption wins, justice loses.

 

[chucky2]

so in other words corruption wins, justice loses.

Don't think of it like that. Think of it more like, Gov making sure Gov can remain Gov. Does it really matter if she's a F up if you get to keep your guaranteed 6 figure job, with the power and recognition perks?

 

[piasabird]

I think it more likely that trump will change parties and be Hillary's running mate than the chance of Hillary being charged with a crime.

 

[Jhhnn]

No way will she be indicted. Team Billary has enough dirt/co-dirt on the powers that be, and has greater than 50%+ chance of being POTUS for the next 4 years. Short of massive overwhelming evidence, nothing is going to happen to her. No way career Gov Leadership is going to jeopardize themselves.

Or maybe the answer is too simple for conspiracy theorists, that being no criminal activity occurred.

 

[chucky2]

Or maybe the answer is too simple for conspiracy theorists, that being no criminal activity occurred.

MMmm...I'm sure that's what it is.

 

[Jhhnn]

MMmm...I'm sure that's what it is.

I'm not, but there are a lot of bullshit artists claiming that couldn't possibly be true.

Cuz Hillary being the only reason.

 

[IBMer]

Or maybe the answer is too simple for conspiracy theorists, that being no criminal activity occurred.

Its like they think the reason she used her own private server was to sell national secrets to the highest bidder and that is what this investigation is about. They also like to compare it to Petraeus and say what she "did" is 10 times worse.

Petraeus willfully gave Top secret information to someone who shouldn't not have access and he knew should not have access in order to create a biography for himself. This is vastly different from using a private e-mail server which had been the case of the previous two Secretaries of State.

 

[chucky2]

I'm not, but there are a lot of bullshit artists claiming that couldn't possibly be true.

Cuz Hillary being the only reason.

You're not sure no criminal activity occurred? Wow, making progress!

 

[alien42]

Its like they think the reason she used her own private server was to sell national secrets to the highest bidder and that is what this investigation is about. They also like to compare it to Petraeus and say what she "did" is 10 times worse.

Petraeus willfully gave Top secret information to someone who shouldn't not have access and he knew should not have access in order to create a biography for himself. This is vastly different from using a private e-mail server which had been the case of the previous two Secretaries of State.

they also completely ignore or forget about this little problem...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_White_House_email_controversy

 

[Jhhnn]

You're not sure no criminal activity occurred? Wow, making progress!

Innocent until proven guilty is a precondition for civilized & informed discourse.

I think it's unlikely that Hillary or her aides did anything illegal given the power vested in the office of the SoS. That may not be true wrt other people who sent information to the Secretary's office. The compartmentalized information from other agencies made it out onto the web somehow.

 

[werepossum]

so in other words corruption wins, justice loses.

Would it really be justice to prosecute Hillary for cranking to 11 what the Pubbies did at 9? Look at Powell; he used a commercial email server for much of his official duties, and made no effort to properly archive anything. In terms of preserving documents as the law requires, that is worse than Hillary. The Bushies were also caught doing at least some official business on their RNC server. Mrs. Clinton just took it another step farther.

I have no problem with calling it institutional corruption, I just don't think that prosecuting the Hildabeast without prosecuting all the other critters would necessarily be justice. On the other hand, if the FBI wants to get really froggy and prosecute everyone, I'd have no problem with that, I just don't think it's likely or practical. Also, the wording on some of this stuff (including some that applies to Hillary) would make prosecution problematic. If you have a law that says employees must turn over all official work documents, but there is no time associated with it, how do you ever prove anyone is in violation of it versus in process of complying? Technically one has eternity to comply.

 

[werepossum]

they also completely ignore or forget about this little problem...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_White_House_email_controversy

Exactly. All Mrs. Clinton did was to do ALL her official business on a server under her complete control, versus only the possibly politically damaging. Same reason, to control any damaging information and keep it from reaching to public or the opposition. Doesn't make it right, but it does make it common.

 

[Sonikku]

DADT was a relaxing of military policy which prohibited gay people from serving altogether. It was a compromise. It's possible such a compromise made it take longer to move for gay people being openly allowed and it's possible that there were some people who were less cautious of hiding their homosexuality under the policy and got caught revealing it where they wouldn't have before.

Apparently the number of discharges for being gay increased for a while after DADT was implemented. But it's possible that a significant number of those people were looking to be discharged, possibly even including some that weren't actually gay.

If DADT was the relaxing of military policy then why were gays allowed to serve openly immediately following its repeal?

 

[ivwshane]

If DADT was the relaxing of military policy then why were gays allowed to serve openly immediately following its repeal?

Seriously?

Prior to DADT, being gay in the military meant you were discharged, whether or not you were open about your sexuality.
DADT allowed gay people to serve so long as they didn't make their homosexuality public.
Repeal of DADT meant it no longer mattered whether you were openly gay or not.

 

[werepossum]

If DADT was the relaxing of military policy then why were gays allowed to serve openly immediately following its repeal?

Prior to DADT, commanding officers (including noncoms) were empowered to ask if a military person were homosexual and in fact were honor bound to do so if someone brought it up. It was considered to be an aberration that made one unsuitable ofr military service. Since admitting that resulted in being cashiered, gays had the choice between lying to their commanding officer (an honor code violation) or getting kicked out. DADT changed that policy by removing the power to ask. Gays could still be kicked out if their behavior brought their orientation to official notice, but DADT made it much, much easier for gays to serve. If one squaddie comes to the company commander or platoon leader with accusations of homosexuality, it's probably someone with a disliking for homosexuals, and oddly enough I know guys who are virulently anti-homosexuals who knowing served with gays long before DADT without broaching the issue. If you did your job and were not a twat, you were probably fine in most squads even if one person had an issue. On the other hand, if the whole squad comes forward, then the homosexual in question almost certainly had other issues, so the commanding officer had reason to look more deeply. BTW it isn't radically changed today, it's just that now the homosexual can only be kicked out for the actual issues, not for being gay. Though it's probably more likely that the homosexual gets transferred; they are something of a protected class now even within the military, and anyway, someone who sucks at one job with one group may well excel with a different job or group.