FBI officially closes Clinton email investigation - she was "reckless" but will face no charges - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Raidyr;50652108]Hey anyone remember this entirely unrelated case involving something completely different? I, too, get my legal precedent arguments from @realDonaldTrump[/QUOTE] Okay now you're just bullshitting.

[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;50651241]And the corporate mass media pretty much decided she was the winner immediately by automatically assigning her a large number of superdelegates and giving Bernie a handful, many months before any of those superdelegates make a decision, almost inevitably without clearly pointing out how they're handling this speculative data. The American public has been fantastically misled and Hillary's [I]success[/I] is simply confirmation that this is how politics in America are now and will be going forward until Americans rise up and demand change in their democracy. Clinton was preordained to be the Democratic candidate and the likely next president and everything past that has been democracy theatre to give Americans the impression they're making a choice. The fact that Trump demolished the GOP's plans and is running an insane, broke, populist campaign appealing to bigots is handing her the keys to the country -- whether or not there's any basis for the "Trump ran to throw the election for Hillary" conspiracy theory.[/QUOTE] Basically this. Former-President Jimmy Carter publicly spoke out about this issue about a year ago, towards the end of July 2015. He stated in a very matter-of-fact tone that the United States is not a democracy anymore, that [url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-zuesse/jimmy-carter-is-correct-t_b_7922788.html]"now it's just an oligarchy with unlimited political bribery"[/url], and he was (and still is) absolutely correct. And he also pointed out how this pervades every aspect of the political system, from the presidency to Congress and governorships... wherever money has an influence in politics and business. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxbLwX0vZlU[/media] This is a serious issue, whether people want to admit to it or not. And it should be intolerable to Americans. We're going to have to do something about it ourselves eventually, because at the rate things are going, nobody is going to get into office and fix it for us using the preferred/formal channels and methods within the system to do so. The system itself is just too damn rotten. It's not going to get any better, it's only going to get worse. It's going to entrench itself further and further, it's going to start interfering with our lives and our society more than it already is... and the longer we tolerate it, the more desensitized we'll become to it until we collectively stop caring altogether and just accept it as a normal, unchangeable part of existence-- which is exactly what the people in power want. If they get us to that point of frustrated passivity, then they own us entirely, and that will be the sad end of the matter.

[QUOTE=Code3Response;50652080]well if Clinton was sharing classified material we'd be in a different situation[/QUOTE] Patraous was going to be charged for unauthorized removal of the documents. His plea deal had nothing to do with his mistress.

[QUOTE=sgman91;50652177]Patraous was going to be charged for unauthorized removal of the documents. His plea deal had nothing to do with his mistress.[/QUOTE] But you're wrong? [quote]Petraeus pled guilty in March to one federal charge for giving 5-by-8 inch black notebooks containing some classified information to Broadwell[/quote] He was sharing it.

[QUOTE=Code3Response;50652209]But you're wrong? He was sharing it.[/QUOTE] Yes, I know he shared it, but the actual plea deal was based on the incorrect storage of it in his home, nothing more. Here's the bill of information: [url]https://www.justice.gov/sites/default/files/opa/press-releases/attachments/2015/03/03/petraeus-bill-of-information.pdf[/url]

[QUOTE=Fish Muffin;50652147]Instead of arguing over which leg you would like cut off, you could vote for Gary Johnson. Please don't tell me "it's a waste", no vote is a waste. The reason a third party never seems viable is because of that mentality. I think this election will see a record number of votes for a third party, which will bring them into the debates and make the eligible for federal funding next election, effectively dismantling the two party system that has nearly destroyed this country. Johnson was last polled at 11% and only needs 15% to enter debates and reciever funding iirc.[/QUOTE] the two party system is a fucking logical consequence of the election system, and no matter how many times people repeat "well if people just believed" it will never fucking change Life isn't a fucking fairy tale. The power of faith doesn't make objectively bad strategies good. Voting for third party candidates will only ever increase the chances of the candidate you least agree with winning. That is just the fucking fact of the matter.

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;50652323]the two party system is a fucking logical consequence of the election system, and no matter how many times people repeat "well if people just believed" it will never fucking change Life isn't a fucking fairy tale. The power of faith doesn't make objectively bad strategies good. Voting for third party candidates will only ever increase the chances of the candidate you least agree with winning. That is just the fucking fact of the matter.[/QUOTE] Stop thinking that you goddamn idiot You have a choice You are the reason we are where we are Because people like you stick to their party lines regardless of anything and just accept the status quo instead of getting a little uncomfortable and voting for someone that isn't in the two party system. Don't vote for who you think will win, vote for who best represents you. You have been taught to believe that there are no other options besides left and right because the left and the right both benefit from the two party system and would loose power if a third party emerged. Literally all that has to happen for a third party to win is for enough people to check their box, just like every other election. But you, and many others, have been brainwashed into thinking that's impossible for no reason other than that they are not left or right. If you truly think Hillary or Trump will make a better president, vote for them. But don't vote simply because you think one has a better chance of winning. You have a choice, don't let the two parties tell you that you don't. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Flaming" - Craptasket))[/highlight]

[QUOTE=Fish Muffin;50652147]Instead of arguing over which leg you would like cut off, you could vote for Gary Johnson. Please don't tell me "it's a waste", no vote is a waste. The reason a third party never seems viable is because of that mentality. I think this election will see a record number of votes for a third party, which will bring them into the debates and make the eligible for federal funding next election, effectively dismantling the two party system that has nearly destroyed this country. Johnson was last polled at 11% and only needs 15% to enter debates and reciever funding iirc.[/QUOTE] And how do you propose they dismantle the two-party system? To win a presidential election you need an absolute majority of the electoral college. You need over half the electoral votes to win. If every party out of four got 25%, the strictly Republican and Democratic House of Reps would choose the president. How in the hell would an outsider Libertarian win a vote in the House? Even if the Greens and the Libertarians got 25% each, equal to the Dems and Republicans, the vote would be pushed to the House, and the House is made up of democrats and republicans. Do you think they'd select a Green as president? Our electoral system is broken. Running third party in that electoral system won't change a damn thing. Feel free to vote your conscience - but unless a third party manages to upset a different party and cannibalize their voter base, they won't win. and if that happened, you'd have Libertarians versus Democrats. Two party. Exactly the same problem.

[QUOTE=Mr. Scorpio;50652323]the two party system is a fucking logical consequence of the election system, and no matter how many times people repeat "well if people just believed" it will never fucking change Life isn't a fucking fairy tale. The power of faith doesn't make objectively bad strategies good. Voting for third party candidates will only ever increase the chances of the candidate you least agree with winning. That is just the fucking fact of the matter.[/QUOTE] please stay home on election day

[QUOTE=Fish Muffin;50652405]Stop thinking that you goddamn idiot You have a choice You are the reason we are where we are Because people like you stick to their party lines regardless of anything and just accept the status quo instead of getting a little uncomfortable and voting for someone that isn't in the two party system. Don't vote for who you think will win, vote for who best represents you. You have been taught to believe that there are no other options besides left and right because the left and the right both benefit from the two party system and would loose power if a third party emerged. Literally all that has to happen for a third party to win is for enough people to check their box, just like every other election. But you, and many others, have been brainwashed into thinking that's impossible for no reason other than that they are not left or right. If you truly think Hillary or Trump will make a better president, vote for them. But don't vote simply because you think one has a better chance of winning. You have a choice, don't let the two parties tell you that you don't.[/QUOTE] You don't have a choice. Third parties can only last about one election season, spoil the vote or overtake a major party, and then disappear again. Fundamental electoral reform is required. Like, constitutional amendment level. Voting third-party can't and won't get that done. It'll just make it more likely that the person you dislike most will win. This is genuine, researched political science - the system doesn't allow for anything other than a two party system.

Like literally imagine if everyone was chained together and we all had to choose which leg to remove but also like 50 feet away is a pair of bolt cutters that could free us all but you're saying it's impossible to get to them because not everyone wants to go that direction and would rather just loose a leg because that's the way it always is. [editline]5th July 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=.Isak.;50652421]You don't have a choice. Third parties can only last about one election season, spoil the vote or overtake a major party, and then disappear again. Fundamental electoral reform is required. Like, constitutional amendment level. Voting third-party can't and won't get that done. It'll just make it more likely that the person you dislike most will win. This is genuine, researched political science - the system doesn't allow for anything other than a two party system.[/QUOTE] Unless the two major parties became so unfavorable that a third party became a viable alternative?????? Seriously,stop with this "it's inevitable" mentality. Youre just repeating exactly what these two parties (that you clearly don't like either) have taught you to say.

[QUOTE=Fish Muffin;50652426]Like literally imagine if everyone was chained together and we all had to choose which leg to remove but also like 50 feet away is a pair of bolt cutters that could free us all but you're saying it's impossible to get to them because not everyone wants to go that direction and would rather just loose a leg because that's the way it always is.[/QUOTE] Well, to reach the chain you have to get 2/3 of those people to agree with you and spend several years getting a constitutional amendment to fundamentally reform the electoral system to nullify the two party system. And to do that, those 2/3 all have to agree exactly on the implementation. And there's 50 distinct groups on the chain. With hundreds of government members in each group. Voting third party has happened time and time again in history. They've even won a few times. Guess what? They either disappear or cannibalize the other party. And then you have two parties. Problem solved, right...? [editline]5th July 2016[/editline] If a third party became a viable alternative, they'd take over the party that failed. The greens would be the new Dems. The libertarians would be the new republicans. This has already happened in history over and over, and yet none of the winning third parties have implemented wide-ranging reforms to allow us to have a functioning third party system.

[QUOTE=Fish Muffin;50652405]Stop thinking that you goddamn idiot You have a choice You are the reason we are where we are Because people like you stick to their party lines regardless of anything and just accept the status quo instead of getting a little uncomfortable and voting for someone that isn't in the two party system. Don't vote for who you think will win, vote for who best represents you. You have been taught to believe that there are no other options besides left and right because the left and the right both benefit from the two party system and would loose power if a third party emerged. Literally all that has to happen for a third party to win is for enough people to check their box, just like every other election. But you, and many others, have been brainwashed into thinking that's impossible for no reason other than that they are not left or right. If you truly think Hillary or Trump will make a better president, vote for them. But don't vote simply because you think one has a better chance of winning. You have a choice, don't let the two parties tell you that you don't. [highlight](User was banned for this post ("Flaming" - Craptasket))[/highlight][/QUOTE] It's pure math. Your soap boxing doesn't beat fact. The only thing you've convinced me of is that you don't actually understand why the two party system is a logical consequence of our electoral system, despite it being explained to you [I]in great detail[/I] several times. And you call [I]me[/I] an idiot. I'm sick of emotional demagogues acting like their fee-fees trump reality. It's infantile.

[QUOTE]Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) [B]through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed[/B], or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer - Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. [/QUOTE] today we learned that laws don't apply to the Clintons. Hopefully this changes some people's minds and gets them to vote for someone else.

probably you cannot vote them out. If you do, they will just set someone else :).

[QUOTE=bdd458;50650586]Prople like to bring up Conaleeza Rice and Colin Powel using a private email, but then explicitly forget that both of them never exclusively used their private email and still used the official government one. But hey, that's totally the same thing as setting up an entire server, stripping classified headers, and deleting nearly half of the emails as she was asked to hand them over. And obviously we can't have her getting prosecuted for breaking the law as she is running for president, cant let a court case get in the way of her turn![/QUOTE] So how isn't she being brought up on obstruction of justice on a potentially federal case? Because this is an investigation, that's destruction of evidence. I'm not well versed on american legalities but that's currently how i understand it

[QUOTE=Govna;50652158]Basically this. Former-President Jimmy Carter publicly spoke out about this issue about a year ago, towards the end of July 2015. He stated in a very matter-of-fact tone that the United States is not a democracy anymore, that [url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-zuesse/jimmy-carter-is-correct-t_b_7922788.html]"now it's just an oligarchy with unlimited political bribery"[/url], and he was (and still is) absolutely correct. And he also pointed out how this pervades every aspect of the political system, from the presidency to Congress and governorships... wherever money has an influence in politics and business. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sxbLwX0vZlU[/media] This is a serious issue, whether people want to admit to it or not. And it should be intolerable to Americans. We're going to have to do something about it ourselves eventually, because at the rate things are going, nobody is going to get into office and fix it for us using the preferred/formal channels and methods within the system to do so. The system itself is just too damn rotten. It's not going to get any better, it's only going to get worse. It's going to entrench itself further and further, it's going to start interfering with our lives and our society more than it already is... and the longer we tolerate it, the more desensitized we'll become to it until we collectively stop caring altogether and just accept it as a normal, unchangeable part of existence-- which is exactly what the people in power want. If they get us to that point of frustrated passivity, then they own us entirely, and that will be the sad end of the matter.[/QUOTE] Nice to see somebody else sees this the same as I do. We should have violently protested this attitude, but no one has the balls to do so in the numbers needed. Violence really is the answer. I think the next 8 years (and the long term future) are going to make a lot of people put Richard Nixon in higher regards.

[media]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wbkS26PX4rc[/media]

[QUOTE=Svinnik;50652727]today we learned that laws don't apply to the Clintons. Hopefully this changes some people's minds and gets them to vote for someone else.[/QUOTE] You need to proof 'gross negligence' vs 'negligence', its almost what the whole investigation was about.

It's amazing how on this supposed left-leaning forum that so many people fell for the Republican's crusade against Hillary. The whole reason these investigations happened is because the Republicans were trying to get dirt on Hillary. And guess what? There's none. The FBI is saying that if she were still in her former occupation, that she could [i]possibly[/i] face being demoted/fired or having her security clearance revoked, not criminal charges. You can't be fired from a job you no longer hold, and that was only a possibility anyways. The FBI doesn't have decisive evidence against Hillary on the criminal charges. Case closed.

all left and right nowadays, never "hey i support x and x which happen to fall into different ideologies" we're never gonna pull through unless people can stop being so polarized. like, i've heard so much "oh that person supports something right-wing haha let's not listen to him i bet he likes trump lol" or "how dare you don't think that way" on this forum it's almost inexcusable. people need to learn that the more polarized people become, the more extreme the sides. it really feels akin to communism vs fascism, same shit different facade

[QUOTE=sb27;50653090]It's amazing how on this supposed left-leaning forum that so many people fell for the Republican's crusade against Hillary.[/QUOTE] Legit just Benghazi 2.0, a hole for the Republicans to throw money in, in the hopes that something, [B][I]anything[/I][/B] incriminating will turn up for the next few decades. Expect them to be funding more investigations in full force for the next 6 or 7 years, wasting shitloads of taxpayer money investigating the same crime, coming to the same conclusions each time.

[QUOTE=sb27;50653090]It's amazing how on this supposed left-leaning forum that so many people fell for the Republican's crusade against Hillary. The whole reason these investigations happened is because the Republicans were trying to get dirt on Hillary. And guess what? There's none. The FBI is saying that if she were still in her former occupation, that she could [i]possibly[/i] face being demoted/fired or having her security clearance revoked, not criminal charges. You can't be fired from a job you no longer hold, and that was only a possibility anyways. The FBI doesn't have decisive evidence against Hillary on the criminal charges. Case closed.[/QUOTE] The single biggest threat to the US from the negligence of a cabinet member in maybe... forver, but no, you're right; it's just a republican crusade.

[QUOTE=sb27;50653090]It's amazing how on this supposed left-leaning forum that so many people fell for the Republican's crusade against Hillary. The whole reason these investigations happened is because the Republicans were trying to get dirt on Hillary. And guess what? There's none. The FBI is saying that if she were still in her former occupation, that she could [i]possibly[/i] face being demoted/fired or having her security clearance revoked, not criminal charges. You can't be fired from a job you no longer hold, and that was only a possibility anyways. The FBI doesn't have decisive evidence against Hillary on the criminal charges. Case closed.[/QUOTE] No, what's amazing is how hard you managed to fall for the left's defense of Clinton by blaming everything on Republicans yet again. This woman is going to control the most important data on the planet, and she was just outed as being extremely unreliable and negligent when in possession of top secret materials.

[QUOTE=sb27;50653090]It's amazing how on this supposed left-leaning forum that so many people fell for the Republican's crusade against Hillary. The whole reason these investigations happened is because the Republicans were trying to get dirt on Hillary. And guess what? There's none. The FBI is saying that if she were still in her former occupation, that she could [i]possibly[/i] face being demoted/fired or having her security clearance revoked, not criminal charges. You can't be fired from a job you no longer hold, and that was only a possibility anyways. The FBI doesn't have decisive evidence against Hillary on the criminal charges. Case closed.[/QUOTE] They're hoping for a fantasy where somehow she gets dropped as the candidate and the DNC picks up Bernie instead, its wishful thinking.

What do you guys think the next best step for us is?

Giant Meteor 2016

Well then. That just cements my voting choice come October.

[QUOTE=sb27;50653090]It's amazing how on this supposed left-leaning forum that so many people fell for the Republican's crusade against Hillary. The whole reason these investigations happened is because the Republicans were trying to get dirt on Hillary. And guess what? There's none. The FBI is saying that if she were still in her former occupation, that she could [i]possibly[/i] face being demoted/fired or having her security clearance revoked, not criminal charges. You can't be fired from a job you no longer hold, and that was only a possibility anyways. The FBI doesn't have decisive evidence against Hillary on the criminal charges. Case closed.[/QUOTE] well shit I'm glad you know everything about this situation there is possible to know and there's no variables that could be different or really, anything about the situation that may not be known to the public. I guess seeing as we're so "left leaning" that means we should just believe literally anything put out by that side of the playing field in some gross game of "Support your team: POLITICAL VERSION"? Is it impossible for you to reconcile even for a moment, that there's some reasonable doubt about the woman or would you just say "no you're being brainwashed by the right wing" as I suspect you would as you JUST did here? Honestly, I don't even know if Hilary's guilty or not, but neither do you and to claim so boldly that everything about this is now public knowledge and thus having any thoughts to the contrary is just blind brain washing by the republicans is just childish as a method of dismissing other people and their thoughts.

[QUOTE=sb27;50653090]It's amazing how on this supposed left-leaning forum that so many people fell for the Republican's crusade against Hillary. The whole reason these investigations happened is because the Republicans were trying to get dirt on Hillary. And guess what? There's none. The FBI is saying that if she were still in her former occupation, that she could [i]possibly[/i] face being demoted/fired or having her security clearance revoked, not criminal charges. You can't be fired from a job you no longer hold, and that was only a possibility anyways. The FBI doesn't have decisive evidence against Hillary on the criminal charges. Case closed.[/QUOTE] I bet you think a YouTube video caused Benghazi.