Lynch would do everything she could to protect Hillary from criminal charges

lurchadams said:

I know this is off-topic, but out of curiousity, how did the sailor get caught?

Click to expand...

A US Navy sailor was sentenced on Friday to a year in prison for taking photos of classified areas inside a nuclear attack submarine while it was in port in Connecticut.
Kristian Saucier, of Arlington, Vermont, appeared in federal court in Bridgeport, where a judge also ordered him to serve six months of home confinement with electronic monitoring during a three-year period of supervised release after the prison time. He pleaded guilty in May to unauthorized detention of defense information and had faced five to six years in prison under federal sentencing guidelines.
. . . .
“It was a foolish mistake by a very young man,” his lawyer, Greg Rinckey, said after the sentencing. “It’s a very sad case because Kristian Saucier is a fine young man. We don’t believe this was really his true character.”
. . . .

The investigation began in 2012 when a waste station supervisor in Hampton, Connecticut, found Saucier’s cellphone with the submarine photos on top of a pile of demolition trash and showed it to his friend, who was a retired Navy chief and brought the phone to the NCIS, according to court documents.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...otos-of-classified-areas-of-nuclear-submarine

Click to expand...

2 other sailors who took photos in the sub were disciplined by the Navy.

Absentglare said:

Your preference is that the head of the DOJ prosecute innocent people for your political purposes?

I'm inclined to disagree.

Click to expand...

I'm generally against innocent people being prosecuted . But it's far from clear whether Hillary Clinton committed a crime or not.The fact that she repeatedly lied about the whole affair is very suspicious to sane, grounded people.
But I'm not naive- I knew the Democrats were going go bend over backwards NOT to have her indicted.

eohrnberger said:

2 other sailors who took photos in the sub were disciplined by the Navy.

Click to expand...

Thanks. Poor kids!

Absentglare said:

Your preference is that the head of the DOJ prosecute innocent people for your political purposes?

I'm inclined to disagree.

Click to expand...

I think you might be off by likening Hillary to "innocent people". She's not.

In Comey's testamentary before congress early July last year, he recited the long laundry list of what Hillary had done and the crimes she committed.

Comey let her off the hook with a lame 'lack of intent' excuse, a decision that wasn't his to make.

Comey is head of the FBI, an investigative branch of the federal government. The decision to charge or not charge someone lies with federal prosecutors, who are under a different DOJ department entirely, not something within the responsibility nor authority of the FBI to make.

So not only did Comey step over his bounds in declaring that she'd not be charged, he also gave the lame excuse that let Hillary off the hook, an excuse which only applies to Hillary, and no one else.

So clearly, not only is Hillary not innocent, the corrupt system failing the American people in the lack of criminal changes against her, the corrupt system also failed in equally applying law to everyone, regardless of political connections.

lurchadams said:

Thanks. Poor kids!

Click to expand...

Yep. But they had the training. They took the classes. They knew what was what. They have to answer for it.

Hillary, she gets to skate.

From the OP article....

Of course Comey wouldn’t reveal who sent the email and to whom it was sent. But it sounds like it was sent from someone who worked closely with Lynch, and sent to someone who was very worried about Clinton going down in flames, probably someone very close to Clinton.


:2rofll: :2funny:

Cons are funny
Funny cons

ludin said:

this is what I don't understand. there was collusion between the administration, the DOJ, and the FBI to stop Hillary from facing charges.
this is what would be considered high crimes of office on corruption and collusion charges.

this is why I said someone should be going to jail over this whether it is Clinton, that hack lynch or Obama.

yet nothing will be done about and these clots now get their get out of jail free where anyone else would be hung out to try.
so much for equal protection.

Click to expand...

In the end, the most important thing is that voters are getting a first hand look at the apparatus that has been built to control them.

Is there any wonder why it's working so hard to get that control back?

BWG said:

From the OP article....

Of course Comey wouldn’t reveal who sent the email and to whom it was sent. But it sounds like it was sent from someone who worked closely with Lynch, and sent to someone who was very worried about Clinton going down in flames, probably someone very close to Clinton.


:2rofll: :2funny:

Cons are funny
Funny cons

Click to expand...

He didn't deny it's existance, nor it's content. :lamo

eohrnberger said:

I think you might be off by likening Hillary to "innocent people". She's not.

In Comey's testamentary before congress early July last year, he recited the long laundry list of what Hillary had done and the crimes she committed.

Comey let her off the hook with a lame 'lack of intent' excuse, a decision that wasn't his to make.

Comey is head of the FBI, an investigative branch of the federal government. The decision to charge or not charge someone lies with federal prosecutors, who are under a different DOJ department entirely, not something within the responsibility nor authority of the FBI to make.

So not only did Comey step over his bounds in declaring that she'd not be charged, he also gave the lame excuse that let Hillary off the hook, an excuse which only applies to Hillary, and no one else.

So clearly, not only is Hillary not innocent, the corrupt system failing the American people in the lack of criminal changes against her, the corrupt system also failed in equally applying law to everyone, regardless of political connections.

Click to expand...

She should be given the same burden of proof, innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, as any other American.

It was very unusual for director Comey to not recommend an indictment yet unnecessarily reveal so many private details and unnecessarily provide his opinions about her character. The FBI should be interested in crime, not political warfare.

In any case, the goal (political assassination of Hillary) was a resounding success. The right should move on from Hillary, Huma, and Susan. They just aren't politically relevant anymore. At some point, they should be left alone. This just seems too malicious.

Absentglare said:

She should be given the same burden of proof, innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, as any other American.

Click to expand...

This burden of proof was already met, based on Comey's July testimony before congress. All that was needed was a federal prosecutor to file the charges, a decision that wasn't Comey's decision to make. Comey's July testimony preempted a DOJ federal prosecutor's decision.

It was very unusual for director Comey to not recommend an indictment yet unnecessarily reveal so many private details and unnecessarily provide his opinions about her character.

The FBI should be interested in crime, not political warfare.

Click to expand...

Agreed. Comey should take a lesson from Joe Friday. The facts. Just the facts.

In any case, the goal (political assassination of Hillary) was a resounding success. The right should move on from Hillary, Huma, and Susan. They just aren't politically relevant anymore. At some point, they should be left alone. This just seems too malicious.

Click to expand...

The only political assassination of Hillary Clinton was caused by Hillary Clinton.

• No one told her or made her setup her private email server
• No one told her or made her use that private email server for 100% of her government emails while SOS
• No one told her or made her send classified materials through this email server (gross mishandling classified materials)
• No one told her or made her forward emails to Huma, which she sent to Weiner, to print out onto paper for delivery to Hillary (gross mishandling classified materials)
• No one told her or made her lie and obfuscate and delay for years about this email server, not cooperating with a federal court to the point the court chastised her and threatened her with incarceration should her cooperation not improve
• No one told her or made her delay, and refuse legitimate requests for documentation from congressional oversight (the purpose of the email server from the git go)

These were all her decisions and no one else's. She's responsible for the consequences of those decisions, which include, the loss of the election, and her fall from grace.

Yes, her fall from grace for her clear criminality, which she doesn't even recognize or acknowledge, re-injecting herself onto the public stage and now also setting up her own PAC (well now that the donations to The Clinton Foundation have dried up, gotta go and scam some money from someone, make a living, right?)

No, Hillary has most certainly deserved the public scorn and public derision she has received. She most certainly has. And no, it's not a right-wing witch hunt. Its fully justified given her behavior.

Left alone? Sure. We should be so lucky.

Problem is, they keep re-injecting themselves into public discourse and onto the public stage. Given this, their pasts follow them, and no, they can't just be left alone once they've re-injected themselves onto the public stage. Had they retired from the public into private retirement, never to be seen or heard from again, sure, leave them alone then.

eohrnberger said:

This

Left alone? Sure. We should be so lucky.

Problem is, they keep re-injecting themselves into public discourse and onto the public stage. Given this, their pasts follow them, and no, they can't just be left alone once they've re-injected themselves onto the public stage. Had they retired from the public into private retirement, never to be seen or heard from again, sure, leave them alone then.

Click to expand...

Yes. Precisely. Exactly.

I don't think she's given up on running again.

KLATTU said:

Yes. Precisely. Exactly.

I don't think she's given up on running again.

Click to expand...

Time for her to hang it up. She couldn't even win her own primary. She's been a loser two times now, once to an up and coming nobody with no experience and once to the worst nominee in presidential history.