Welcome to the Killington Zone Message Board
https://www.killingtonzone.com/forums/
Complete nonsense, Powell used a personal email server from AOL. He was also a board member of AOL. Whether he actually built his own server is immaterial. In fact, as an AOL server, we have no idea where it was physically located or whether it was hacked.madhatter wrote:Powell, who did not have a private server, recently spoke out against claims that his email practices excused Clinton’s own use of a private email server, or that her advised her to set up such a system in any way.
first it was up to lynch ( not comey)who tainted the case by meeting w clinton on the tarmac...Coydog wrote:There must be a grand jury indictment to charge someone with a federal crime. But a grand jury is a check on the prosecutor, not the accused. As you say, the FBI decides not to pursue cases all the time because they believe their evidence will not survive grand jury scrutiny. So Comey's recommendation not to convene a grand jury was completely within his purview, and though unlikely, the Justice Department could have proceeded regardless (one of the reasons Gump is upset with Sessions' recusal, he believes Sessions should be loyal to him, not the law). the evidence is overwhelmingly agains tclinton and comey's dismissal is inconsistent with the evidence, you are justifying an outcome using the least probable means...XtremeJibber2001 wrote:What I'm saying is the FBI does have some autonomy ... they pursue and drop cases all the time without calling a grand jury or meeting with the AG.madhatter wrote:DOJ/Lynch may have that leeway, comey? not so much...not even sure how lynch simply deferred to comey...XtremeJibber2001 wrote:Is the FBI required to establish a grand jury for all potential crimes or do they have some form of autonomy?madhatter wrote:let's try this one more time:
it's up to a COURT to decide, not jim comey...
Counselor Hatter seems to believe the evidence in EmailGate would have indeed survived grand jury scrutiny and Clinton would have been sentenced to 10 years hard labor for not backing up her email. Conversely, if the Mueller investigation results in a recommendation to convene a grand jury, this of course would be more evidence of a deep state conspiracy. And if a grand jury actually returned an indictment, then the secret society problem is may more pervasive that anyone, um, imagined.
But the public may not always understand that the FBI does not have the job of deciding who should, or should not, be prosecuted for crime. It was created to do investigations – period. When it finishes one of its probes, it can and usually does make recommendations, but someone else has the job of deciding what to do with the results of those investigations – an actual prosecutor.
impossible to take you seriously here...stupidest argument you've ever made...maybe...at least top ten anyway...Coydog wrote:Complete nonsense, Powell used a personal email server from AOL. He was also a board member of AOL. Whether he actually built his own server is immaterial. In fact, as an AOL server, we have no idea where it was physically located or whether it was hacked.madhatter wrote:Powell, who did not have a private server, recently spoke out against claims that his email practices excused Clinton’s own use of a private email server, or that her advised her to set up such a system in any way.
If I was or did, I wouldn't talk about it online.XtremeJibber2001 wrote:Are you a lawyer? Do you have an active security clearance?Highway Star wrote:You're clearly not a lawyer nor have you ever held a security clearance. It's not some casual thing.
And this is exactly what Comey did, he made a recommendation. Yet in the right wingnut alternative world, this is a scandal of the highest order, because they do not agree with his recommendation.But the public may not always understand that the FBI does not have the job of deciding who should, or should not, be prosecuted for crime. It was created to do investigations – period. When it finishes one of its probes, it can and usually does make recommendations, but someone else has the job of deciding what to do with the results of those investigations – an actual prosecutor.
Except there actually was a criminal conspiracy in the FBI to let her off the hook, which really does explain why she was let off.Coydog wrote:https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/con ... prosecuted
And this is exactly what Comey did, he made a recommendation. Yet in the right wingnut alternative world, this is a scandal of the highest order, because they do not agree with his recommendation.But the public may not always understand that the FBI does not have the job of deciding who should, or should not, be prosecuted for crime. It was created to do investigations – period. When it finishes one of its probes, it can and usually does make recommendations, but someone else has the job of deciding what to do with the results of those investigations – an actual prosecutor.
brilliant analysis jack...Coydog wrote:https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/con ... prosecuted
And this is exactly what Comey did, he made a recommendation. Yet in the right wingnut alternative world, this is a scandal of the highest order, because they do not agree with his recommendation.But the public may not always understand that the FBI does not have the job of deciding who should, or should not, be prosecuted for crime. It was created to do investigations – period. When it finishes one of its probes, it can and usually does make recommendations, but someone else has the job of deciding what to do with the results of those investigations – an actual prosecutor.
Awfully condescending towards Coydog for something you either know nothing about or foolishly admitted on a public forum.Highway Star wrote:If I was or did, I wouldn't talk about it online.XtremeJibber2001 wrote:Are you a lawyer? Do you have an active security clearance?Highway Star wrote:You're clearly not a lawyer nor have you ever held a security clearance. It's not some casual thing.
Do you think during her tenure Clinton only dealt with 110 classified emails? And if she handled more, likely far more, why did she target these 110 unmarked emails to "willfully act in a negligent manner?"Highway Star wrote:
The marking doesn't matter. Clinton knew (and was literally an original classifier in her Sec State role only if the email originated from her) this was classified information, then consistently and willfully acted in a negligent manner handling it. She literally didn't give a sh*t what the rules were.
Just about anybody who does defense related contract work needs some sort of security clearance. The two emails marked with a ( c ) indicate "confidential" level classification. Depending on the required category level, the process to get a clearance at this level is that not much different than a thorough job interview, though it may take longer. But yes, it is not some casual thing.Highway Star wrote: Any of the 5 million other people holding clearances who did this would have had their lives ruined and gone to jail. You're clearly not a lawyer clearly, but then clearly neither are you nor have you ever held a security clearance. naively presumptuous It's not some casual thing.
quit while yer only miles behind...Coydog wrote:Do you think during her tenure Clinton only dealt with 110 classified emails? And if she handled more, likely far more, why did she target these 110 unmarked emails to "willfully act in a negligent manner?"Highway Star wrote:
The marking doesn't matter. Clinton knew (and was literally an original classifier in her Sec State role only if the email originated from her) this was classified information, then consistently and willfully acted in a negligent manner handling it. She literally didn't give a sh*t what the rules were.
yep we all agree there were "likely far more"...
It turned out that Keilar’s assumption was accurate. The 31,830 personal emails that Keilar asked about were deleted “sometime between March 25-31, 2015,” according to the FBI. That was about three weeks after Clinton received a House subpoena on March 4, 2015.
she had the rest deleted AFTER being subpoenaed...another crime...
Just about anybody who does defense related contract work needs some sort of security clearance. The two emails marked with a ( c ) indicate "confidential" level classification. Depending on the required category level, the process to get a clearance at this level is that not much different than a thorough job interview, though it may take longer. But yes, it is not some casual thing.Highway Star wrote: Any of the 5 million other people holding clearances who did this would have had their lives ruined and gone to jail. You're clearly not a lawyer clearly, but then clearly neither are you nor have you ever held a security clearance. naively presumptuous It's not some casual thing.
Coydog wrote:she handled more, likely far more
As someone that used to hold one, I can guarantee he does not.XtremeJibber2001 wrote:Do you have an active security clearance?Highway Star wrote:You're clearly not a lawyer nor have you ever held a security clearance. It's not some casual thing.
Like I said, once you can establish intent, you'll have a case - ask all those people you talked to who are not morons.Highway Star wrote:Pretty much everybody I've talked to who has or has held a clearance (and who takes it seriously, and who isn't a moron) believes that Hillary still should be properly prosecuted for her actions.
I've posted the actual LAW in this THREAD. Anyone can read that "intent" is not required. Simply "Gross Negligence" . Which begins with her not getting, asking for or remembering ANY of her classified material training, according to the FBI interview.Coydog wrote:Like I said, once you can establish intent, you'll have a case - ask all those people you talked to who are not morons.Highway Star wrote:Pretty much everybody I've talked to who has or has held a clearance (and who takes it seriously, and who isn't a moron) believes that Hillary still should be properly prosecuted for her actions.