FBI wrapping up investigation into Clinton: Director of the FBI requesting an interview with the for - Polidicks

[QUOTE=sgman91;50038412]I'm thinking more political in nature. You'll have Bernie supporters who feel betrayed by the party who are protecting someone they see as a criminal shill, effectively stopping Bernie from winning, and you'll have the GOP hit the democrats very hard. It would just be an extremely clear case of what's wrong in politics sitting directly on the lap of the democratic party.[/QUOTE] The Bernie supporters will feel betrayed regardless of Clinton going on, they would feel betrayed if this whole scandal didn't even exist simply because their candidate didn't win the nomination. If Bernie supporters cared about justice instead of "this is a tool to pave the way for my candidate" then I would understand but Clinton has a giant support core among Democratic voters and minority Bernie supporters want to get rid of what the majority of Dems want through this 'other means' rather than a democratic process of having the most votes. As for the GOP attacking, all Clinton would have to do is say that there wasn't anything to prosecute on, which will be backed up by the fact that she's not being prosecuted. Along the lines of "if I were in trouble, would I be here?" regardless of the truth or honesty about it. But the GOP is in chaos at the moment too bothered by Trump to worry about the Democrats.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50038440]The Bernie supporters will feel betrayed regardless of Clinton going on, they would feel betrayed if this whole scandal didn't even exist simply because their candidate didn't win the nomination. As for the GOP attacking, all Clinton would have to do is say that there wasn't anything to prosecute on, which will be backed up by the fact that she's not being prosecuted. Along the lines of "if I were in trouble, would I be here?" regardless of the truth or honesty about it. But the GOP is in chaos at the moment too bothered by Trump to worry about the Democrats.[/QUOTE] Note that I said that the FBI recommends prosecution. That's enough to establish that there's reason to prosecute. As far as the Bernie supporters. I think there's going to a be a different feeling in the air if he loses because of the DNC protecting a criminal Hillary and Hillary winning because the regular process allows her to win.

[QUOTE=sgman91;50038444]Note that I said that the FBI recommends prosecution. That's enough to establish that there's reason to prosecute. As far as the Bernie supporters. I think there's going to a be a different feeling in the air if he loses because of the DNC protecting a criminal Hillary and Hillary winning because the regular process allows her to win.[/QUOTE] Ultimately it is up to the Attorney General. Like you said, it's a recommendation.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50038390] And that's different from any other time, how? Republicans will hate her regardless of her allegations or prosecution.[/QUOTE] even if she's pardoned that will give them a lot of ammo to impeach her in the future (our president was PARDONED?!) and even a lot of dems don't trust her, meaning they would be less willing to defend her [editline]31st March 2016[/editline] getting pardoned may save you from the slammer but it will still destroy your reputation

Her negatives are already SO high. You add a backroom pardon and/or the democrats purposefully not prosecuting after an FBI recommendation and no one will be able to take her seriously.

[QUOTE=sgman91;50038462]Her negatives are already SO high. You add a backroom pardon and/or the democrats purposefully not prosecuting after an FBI recommendation and no one will be able to take her seriously.[/QUOTE] This election will be the most demoralizing election to date if its Clinton Vs. Cruz or Trump if this happens

[QUOTE=Jund;50038453]even if she's pardoned that will give them a lot of ammo to impeach her in the future (our president was PARDONED?!) and even a lot of dems don't trust her, meaning they would be less willing to defend her [editline]31st March 2016[/editline] getting pardoned may save you from the slammer but it will still destroy your reputation[/QUOTE] A lot of dems don't trust her? The party favored in this campaign? Explain

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50038492]A lot of dems don't trust her? The party favored in this campaign? Explain[/QUOTE] I think he means Bernie supporters.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50038492]A lot of dems don't trust her? The party favored in this campaign? Explain[/QUOTE] i would say the vast majority of Bernie supporters dislike her. with even something like 30% of dems thinking you're untrustworthy those would be awful numbers going into an election

[QUOTE=Helix Snake;50038530]I think he means Bernie supporters.[/QUOTE][QUOTE=Jund;50038535]i would say the vast majority of Bernie supporters dislike her. with even something like 30% of dems thinking you're untrustworthy those would be awful numbers going into an election[/QUOTE] Okay, so what? Bernie supporters aren't going to like her regardless of this - she's their candidate's opponent. You may as well say "Cruz supporters aren't going to like Trump after what he said last night!" no shit they don't like him already. As for the 30% of dems thinking she's untrustworthy - I'm sure they will still trust her more than any GOP candidate.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50038557]Okay, so what? Bernie supporters aren't going to like her regardless of this - she's their candidate's opponent. You may as well say "Cruz supporters aren't going to like Trump after what he said last night!" no shit they don't like him already. As for the 30% of dems thinking she's untrustworthy - I'm sure they will still trust her more than any GOP candidate.[/QUOTE] you're completely avoiding the point i'm making you can claim that a pardoning won't affect her politically (it will) but you're still ignoring the fact that a lot of dems don't like her, which means that while they'll still vote for her over trump she's going to have a terrible approval rating from the get-go. and approval is kinda a big deal if you want to get anything done as president

[QUOTE=Jund;50038579]you're completely avoiding the point i'm making you can claim that a pardoning won't affect her politically (it will) but you're still ignoring the fact that a lot of dems don't like her, which means that while they'll still vote for her over trump she's going to have a terrible approval rating from the get-go. and approval is kinda a big deal if you want to get anything done as president[/QUOTE] I think it could affect her, but I don't believe it will a great deal. And yes, a lot of dems don't like her. But but like you said, they'll still vote for her over Trump or any other GOP candidate. People's approval rating means jackshit once in offic, Congress's opinion of the president is what gets things done.

Approval rating of the current president is actually pretty important. It's hard to use the bully pulpit when no one likes you. It saps away a lot of your power when you can't really appeal to the voters.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50038604]I think it could affect her, but I don't believe it will a great deal. And yes, a lot of dems don't like her. But but like you said, they'll still vote for her over Trump or any other GOP candidate. People's approval rating means jackshit once in offic, Congress's opinion of the president is what gets things done.[/QUOTE] and congress won't reflect the approval of the people? for some reason i doubt the dems in congress are all hillary supporters

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50038390]Like what? Protests? Okay, waste your time standing in front of a building yelling, nothing will be done. Petitions? They'll be thrown in the trash after received. News reporting how bad it is? It'll pass as soon as the ratings for the story begin to drop. [/QUOTE] More votes for whoever the RNC puts forward.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50038270]Possibly to go so far as Obama pardoning her.[/QUOTE] That would have ramifications of epic proportions. Republicans would be riding that for the next 20 years, and then some. More to the point, trials, particularly large ones like this, don't happen overnight. It's entirely possible that even if she is charged, the verdict won't be reached before Obama leaves office.

[QUOTE=Doctor Zedacon;50038353]No it won't. How in the hell does that do better for the country to say, "Whatever, do what you want, you're a big name politician so you can get away with serious stuff." [editline]31st March 2016[/editline] Because we literally know she did send and store the fucking information. The entire problem.[/QUOTE] I am pretty sure this is kinda hard, which is why it takes the FBI a year to investigate, before even considering making it a case. (For example last counter argument I heard they argued the info wasn't classified at the time of sending. ) But hey, you read a bunch of news posts, ofc your judgment is 100% without a doubt correct, why even have an FBI investigation and a court case. When you can just decide for yourself whos guilty of what crime.

[QUOTE=Cold;50038975]I am pretty sure this is kinda hard, which is why it takes the FBI a year to investigate, before even considering making it a case. (For example last counter argument I heard they argued the info wasn't classified at the time of sending. ) But hey, you read a bunch of news posts, ofc your judgment is 100% without a doubt correct, why even have an FBI investigation and a court case. When you can just decide for yourself whos guilty of what crime.[/QUOTE] We're talking about a massive amount of email's here, and the FBI isn't an organization to not examine every little detail in every email, they took the time to build up a bulletproof case. If the FBI didn't build up a bulletproof case they'd be throwing the reputation of themselves under the bus, they won't be throwing out wild accusations that can be easily dismissed.

[QUOTE=Cold;50038975](For example last counter argument I heard they argued the info wasn't classified at the time of sending. )[/QUOTE] First she said it was a non-work-related server. That was shown to be false. Then she said there were no classified emails. That was shown to be false. Then she said no emails were classified at time of sending. That was recently shown to be false. Every lie, every excuse she has given keeps evaporating. It is absolutely, unequivocally clear at this point that she removed classified information from classified networks to store on an unclassified server. She committed, at the [i]very least[/i], a data spill of the kind that would land us normal people in prison. Whether the FBI chooses to prosecute or not is going to be a political decision. It's absolutely clear to anyone who's been paying attention to the case that Clinton committed a crime.

-snip-

[QUOTE=catbarf;50039322]First she said it was a non-work-related server. That was shown to be false. Then she said there were no classified emails. That was shown to be false. Then she said no emails were classified at time of sending. That was recently shown to be false. Every lie, every excuse she has given keeps evaporating. It is absolutely, unequivocally clear at this point that she removed classified information from classified networks to store on an unclassified server. She committed, at the [i]very least[/i], a data spill of the kind that would land us normal people in prison. Whether the FBI chooses to prosecute or not is going to be a political decision. It's absolutely clear to anyone who's been paying attention to the case that Clinton committed a crime.[/QUOTE] The fact that she lied about classified emails under oath would mean she could be charged for that by itself. The burden of proof lies within her own emails, where she knowingly acknowledged that information was classified.

It's entirely worth mentioning that according to the Washington Times, the DOJ has made an immunity agreement with one of the guys involved with this. [url=http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/mar/30/monica-crowley-the-clintons-sense-a-breakdown/]Here's[/url] the article. Be warned, it definitely smells like there is some bias in this article, so grain of salt or whatever.

[QUOTE=Cold;50038975](For example last counter argument I heard they argued the info wasn't classified at the time of sending.)[/QUOTE] and according to the State Department Inspector General [quote]These emails were not retroactively classified by the State Department; rather these emails contained classified information when they were generated and, according to IC classification officials, that information remains classified today. This classified information should never have been transmitted via an unclassified personal system.[/quote] [url]https://oig.state.gov/system/files/statement_of_the_icig_and_oig_regarding_review_of_clintons_emails_july_24_2015.pdf[/url] :smile:

I wonder how many Hilary fans will vote for Trump if she gets prosecuted.

[QUOTE=Megadave;50040244]I wonder how many Hilary fans will vote for Trump if she gets prosecuted.[/QUOTE] Hopefully not many. I don't think Clinton supporters are supporting her with spite towards Bernie. She is just the middle road candidate to them. Trump on the other hand is a total opposite, and I feel like they would identify with Sanders more so than a Republican candidate.

Why did Hillary even do this in the first place?

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;50040535]Why did Hillary even do this in the first place?[/QUOTE] I'm guessing just being dumb rather than outright maliciousness.

[QUOTE=KillerJaguar;50040535]Why did Hillary even do this in the first place?[/QUOTE] Laziness What a wonderful quality to have for the potential future president of the United fucking States.

[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;50040555]I'm guessing just being dumb rather than outright maliciousness.[/QUOTE] No way. With all the other shady shit connected to her and her husband, she definitely knew what she was doing. She just thinks she can get away with it. In my opinion, not bringing charges against her would be a very large betrayal to the justice system and to the citizens of the US.

I mean the mother fucking fact that you can go through her emails on Wikileaks should be a dead ringer for the "Shit is fucked up" award.