• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

To help Hillary THE FBI DIECTOR broke the number 1 law of the land.. JURY JUDGEMENT

Re: To help Hillary THE FBI DIECTOR broke the number 1 law of the land.. JURY JUDGEME

Well, no they're not. They never have been, and they never will be.



This is utter gibberish.


govt employees..... military employees..... the same and treating them different is outrageous.. one goes to jail for doing the same thing and the other walks ... outrageous !! and now we have 100% proof that the voting system is totally rigged where the will of the people can be stopped by the rich
 
Re: To help Hillary THE FBI DIECTOR broke the number 1 law of the land.. JURY JUDGEME

The evidence is overwhelming, the decision not to charge her was not made because of lack of evidence it was made because he didn't think he could prove intent, but that is not for him to decide. Many military personnel have been dishonorably discharged for a single breech of security with no question of intent even being considered. This is clearly the case of one set of laws for the Clintons and one for everyone else.

Have to differ with you about the intent. What makes this thing even worse than you're describing is that in section 793(f) (which is a small part of the Espionage Act), Congress purposely did not require intent, as crimes ordinarily do. Instead, to give everyone who handles secret government documents even more reason to stay on their toes, 793(f) requires only gross negligence--which is far easier to prove.

Director Comey never suggested he was recommending against prosecuting Mrs. Clinton because of any problem proving intent--he knew very well it didn't need to be proven. In fact, if you read his comments carefully, he laid out very strong evidence that Clinton had checked all the boxes for a violation of 793(f). Choosing his words very carefully, he said she had been "extremely careless" in her handling of the documents. Because there is no significant difference in meaning between "extremely careless" and "grossly negligent," that clever use of language allowed him to say she acted with the state of mind needed to violate 793(f) without ever using that statute's words.

Comey was saying, in a coded sort of way, that there was strong evidence Clinton had violated 793(f). But no sooner had he said that than he said--without ever explaining why--that it would be unreasonable to prosecute her. I think he found a clever way out of an impossible position. I am convinced his superiors had put him in that position by leading him to believe, without ever saying it, that he could not be sure they would support him if he recommended prosecuting her. That would have made him look like a relatively minor official who had overreached by trying to affect the outcome of a presidential election, and he is too smart to be made the goat.

Something similar happened to Director Hoover in the 1945 Amerasia scandal, in which Hoover knew that his superiors in Truman's Justice Dept., including the Attorney General himself, had rigged the grand jury proceedings. They did that to make sure a foreign service officer was no-billed by the grand jury, even though the FBI knew for dead certain he had passed dozens of secret military documents regarding U.S. plans in China to a Communist publisher, and that that man had then met with foreign Communist agents. The FBI Director is an important official, but he works for the Attorney General, and ultimately, for the President. Hoover had to bite his tongue in 1945, just as Comey did 70 years later.
 
Last edited:
Re: To help Hillary THE FBI DIECTOR broke the number 1 law of the land.. JURY JUDGEME

For a conviction? Absolutely. You won't find too many prosecutors who, having seen the case would say otherwise. As a criminal case this one is a loser. That has been obvious to objective observers for a while. There is a reason why the FBI directors subsequent appearance before Congressional committee to explain himself - you know, the one where the Republican's were going to get to the bottom of all this - went down with barely a whimper.

Now as far as facing some sort of internal sanction from the State Department,... that is another matter.

ahh yes, the standard 'if you don't agree with my position then you must not be 'objective'/'sane'/etc...' defense. He laid out a solid case for conviction. Then he ignored it and used a similar line to your nonsense with regards to no 'reasonable' person would file charges. That type of 'defense' of one's position is a strong indicator that you know you are wrong.
 
Re: To help Hillary THE FBI DIECTOR broke the number 1 law of the land.. JURY JUDGEME

STILL the BOTTEM line is comey FBI Director was going against the founders to going WITH what HE perceives.....

the BOTTEM line is it is NOT him that decides especially at the highest levels of power and harm... Take it to a JURY to decide as the FOUNDERS INTENT.... he was going against the founders and going with anti founders .........UNAMERICAN !!
 
Re: To help Hillary THE FBI DIECTOR broke the number 1 law of the land.. JURY JUDGEME

The evidence is overwhelming, the decision not to charge her was not made because of lack of evidence it was made because he didn't think he could prove intent, but that is not for him to decide. Many military personnel have been dishonorably discharged for a single breech of security with no question of intent even being considered. This is clearly the case of one set of laws for the Clintons and one for everyone else.

Apples and oranges. Civil and military law are different. If the law Clinton is alleged to have broken requires intent and intent cannot be proved then in the eyes of the law she did no wrong. If you have a problem with that ask Congress to change the law so that intent is no longer required.
 
Re: To help Hillary THE FBI DIECTOR broke the number 1 law of the land.. JURY JUDGEME

Apples and oranges. Civil and military law are different. If the law Clinton is alleged to have broken requires intent and intent cannot be proved then in the eyes of the law she did no wrong. If you have a problem with that ask Congress to change the law so that intent is no longer required.

making laws difference is what will bring down nations... it is OUTRAGEOUS that a lower level govt employee is charged MORE SO than a higher and on more harmful actions .......the military is govt employees


the BOTTEM line is America's votes IQ has dropped each and every year to RECORD LOWS and they are getting fooled and electing crooks..... and with crooked leaders then the nation falls .. they elect crooked congress who punishes the military more so with the same act

will the military step in and stop the outrageous harmful laws made by crooked congress elected by low IQ's ??

OUTRAGEOUS and this can make the military to revolt
 
Re: To help Hillary THE FBI DIECTOR broke the number 1 law of the land.. JURY JUDGEME

making laws difference is what will bring down nations... it is OUTRAGEOUS that a lower level govt employee is charged MORE SO than a higher and on more harmful actions .......the military is govt employees


the BOTTEM line is America's votes IQ has dropped each and every year to RECORD LOWS and they are getting fooled and electing crooks..... and with crooked leaders then the nation falls .. they elect crooked congress who punishes the military more so with the same act

will the military step in and stop the outrageous harmful laws made by crooked congress elected by low IQ's ??

OUTRAGEOUS and this can make the military to revolt

The military has ALWAYS been subjected to different - usually tougher - rules than civilians.

Like it or not if the law that Clinton would be charged under - a civilian law - says intent is required and intent cannot be proved then she walks. Simple as that.

And of course that doesn't even address the fact that cases are different. No two ones are exactly the same so bemoaning the fact that Clinton gets a pass when a non-military lower level government employee doesn't is, absent a lot more information, an invalid comparison.
 
Re: To help Hillary THE FBI DIECTOR broke the number 1 law of the land.. JURY JUDGEME

The military has ALWAYS been subjected to different - usually tougher - rules than civilians.

Like it or not if the law that Clinton would be charged under - a civilian law - says intent is required and intent cannot be proved then she walks. Simple as that.

And of course that doesn't even address the fact that cases are different. No two ones are exactly the same so bemoaning the fact that Clinton gets a pass when a non-military lower level government employee doesn't is, absent a lot more information, an invalid comparison.


very very valid comparison...... military are employees of the GOVT and the VOTERS.....
Elected officials are employees of the GOVT and the VOTERS..

THE VERY SAME...military bringing harm ... brings harm to the govt and the voters
Elected officials bringing harm... brings harm to the govt and the voters

THE VERY SAME.. and laws on harming the govt and the voters should be the same.... and the higher the power that harms the stronger the charge.... this is simply a wrong so called law that must be stopped.
 
Re: To help Hillary THE FBI DIECTOR broke the number 1 law of the land.. JURY JUDGEME

very very valid comparison...... military are employees of the GOVT and the VOTERS.....
Elected officials are employees of the GOVT and the VOTERS..

THE VERY SAME...military bringing harm ... brings harm to the govt and the voters
Elected officials bringing harm... brings harm to the govt and the voters

THE VERY SAME.. and laws on harming the govt and the voters should be the same.... and the higher the power that harms the stronger the charge.... this is simply a wrong so called law that must be stopped.

Look friend you can claim they're the same all you want but they are different. The military is subject to the UCMJ as well - potentially - as Federal and State law. Civilians are not subject to the UCMJ. It's that simple.
 
Re: To help Hillary THE FBI DIECTOR broke the number 1 law of the land.. JURY JUDGEME

Look friend you can claim they're the same all you want but they are different. The military is subject to the UCMJ as well - potentially - as Federal and State law. Civilians are not subject to the UCMJ. It's that simple.


VERY SIMPLE..... citizens work for the govt doing very important top secrete work especially the higher ups

citizens work for the govt military and if they cause harm they get punished same as sec of state who is a citizen working for the govt where harm could come ....

so very simple.. they are THE SAME


yes they are the same even when so called laws says they are not..... the laws are wrong and those laws will cause problems from being unequal.... laws that causes problems must be changed
 
Re: To help Hillary THE FBI DIECTOR broke the number 1 law of the land.. JURY JUDGEME

VERY SIMPLE..... citizens work for the govt doing very important top secrete work especially the higher ups

citizens work for the govt military and if they cause harm they get punished same as sec of state who is a citizen working for the govt where harm could come ....

so very simple.. they are THE SAME


yes they are the same even when so called laws says they are not..... the laws are wrong and those laws will cause problems from being unequal.... laws that causes problems must be changed

Okay. We disagree. The military is a unique institution with a unique mandate and a unique set of problems that cause it to require it's own legal system. If you want to disagree that is your right but it doesn't change the reality.
 
Re: To help Hillary THE FBI DIECTOR broke the number 1 law of the land.. JURY JUDGEME

Okay. We disagree. The military is a unique institution with a unique mandate and a unique set of problems that cause it to require it's own legal system. If you want to disagree that is your right but it doesn't change the reality.

The REALITY is they are the same... The Reality it is OUTRAGEOUS to charge differently when NOT DIFFERENT

CITIZENS Employed By THE GOVT Sec of State EQUALS CITIZENS Employed by the GOVT Military

NO DIFFERENCE !! The high up SEC of STATE... equals the high up GENERAL


the sec of state doing a crime EQUALS the GENERAL doing a CRIME..... the penalty MUST be the very same
 
Re: To help Hillary THE FBI DIECTOR broke the number 1 law of the land.. JURY JUDGEME

The REALITY is they are the same... The Reality it is OUTRAGEOUS to charge differently when NOT DIFFERENT

CITIZENS Employed By THE GOVT Sec of State EQUALS CITIZENS Employed by the GOVT Military

NO DIFFERENCE !! The high up SEC of STATE... equals the high up GENERAL


the sec of state doing a crime EQUALS the GENERAL doing a CRIME..... the penalty MUST be the very same

Dude take it up with the Joint Chiefs of Staff. They run the military, not me.
 
Re: To help Hillary THE FBI DIECTOR broke the number 1 law of the land.. JURY JUDGEME

Dude take it up with the Joint Chiefs of Staff. They run the military, not me.


nope take it up to the voters making laws unequal destroys nations... if voters are too stupid then a wisdom test for voters must come
 
Back
Top Bottom