That whole post is essentially everyone taking it seriously are admitting to being worthless little weeby shits. It is so glorious when they put themselves like that!
/r/Drama is one of the most reactionary and transphobic subreddits on this website. Their moderators consistently promote this behaviour, and their userbase has been known to harass leftists and brigade their posts.
I created this subreddit as a response to that. All hatred and shenanigans at /r/drama can be catalogued and made fun of accordingly.
There are only two rules: no bigotry and no /r/drama users.
Not really funny. Clinton didn't actually break the law. Show me a single civilian convicted of mishandling classified information using a gross negligence standard. You have to royally fuck up to be charged with that shit.
In other words, the defendant had to intend for his conduct to benefit a foreign power for his actions to violate 793(f).
Without the requirement of intent, the phrase “relating to the national defense” would be unconstitutionally vague. This reading of the statute has guided federal prosecutors ever since, which is why Comey based his decision not to file charges on Clinton’s lack of intent. This is also why no one has ever been convicted of violating 793(f) on a gross negligence theory.
Only one person has even been charged under a gross negligence theory: FBI Agent James Smith. Smith carried on a 20-year affair with a Chinese national who was suspected of spying for Beijing, and Smith would bring classified material to their trysts, behavior far more reckless than anything Clinton is accused of. But Smith was not convicted of violating 793(f). He struck a plea agreement that resulted in a conviction to the lesser charge of lying to federal agents. Smith was sentenced to three months of home confinement and served no jail time.
Members of the U.S. military have been charged with the negligent mishandling of classified material, but not under 793(f). Criminal charges in military court are brought under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, not the Espionage Act (although violations of the Espionage Act can be charged under Article 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice in military court). The military has extensive regulations that govern the handling of classified material and the failure to follow these regulations is a criminal offense. Negligence can result in a conviction under Article 92 because the test is whether the service member “knew or should have known” they were violating the regulation. But these rules do not apply to any civilian personnel at the State Department and can only be applied to DoD civilians in very limited circumstances.
Comey is talking about the particulars of one case and bending words to go, well in this case, which is unique, totally because of where tech is now, she would be the first to get cuffed for it.
You're completely delusional. Like this is why I laugh at guys that run around Reddit claiming mishandling classified information is some grave offense. Pretty much everyone in the government is doing what Clinton was doing.
The difference is the GOP needed propaganda for the upcoming election and ran with it. Seriously:
When I worked with the FBI on tremendously sensitive espionage matters, their top officials were forced to go to a separate facility to process secure fax transmissions since they could not write or speak at the requisite level on their own systems. Many busy FBI executives would simply resort to double-speak on the phone, a practice arguably less secure than using unclassified e-mail. It is also a too frequent practice at the State Department and the White House to simply strip off the classification headers on material so that they can transmit it on unclassified systems. Many of us in CIA joked how fun it would be to serve as a foreign intelligence officer in the U.S. You would have a field day.
1
Despite the entitled attitude, there is some truth to their claim. Senior policymakers indeed are forced to work in a gray area. For senior leaders entrusted to help solve big issues, it is hard to clearly compartment secret from non-secret information. The fact that the USG over-classifies information makes this even harder. For every issue involving a key foreign partner, a senior official receives reams of classified and unclassified information from numerous agencies and sources, spoken and written alike. Some of the classified information is conflicting or simply confirms other information from unclassified sources. It is easy to blur the distinction over where the line should be.
However, the fact that former senior CIA officials like Michael Hayden, Mike Morrell, Leon Panetta and George Tenet have to excise material from their books after submitting them to the CIA’s publication review board, makes clear that this is not an easy distinction. If CIA Directors can’t easily determine what is classified, and what is not, it is surely difficult for other consumers of intelligence information to do so. The classification system itself plays into this problem. The level of classification of a specific document is based on a judgment call as to how damaging the information would be if released. Reasonable and experienced people can disagree, and find it expedient to simply classify at the higher level. This, in turn, leads many busy policymakers to dismiss the classifications as expedient and unjustified.
Anyone, regardless of party should get prison time for sharing info that they shouldn't the only caveat to that is if it involves whistle blowing, which in this case it did not.
You should have, because it dismantles your argument.
I didn’t know it was legal to have classified documents on a home server.
Highly debatable depending on the context. You'd have to prove she sent it, knew it was classified, and intentionally stored said classified information.
"A State Department spokeswoman says Hillary Clinton did not break any rules by relying solely on her personal email account. Federal law allows government officials to use personal email so long as relevant documents are preserved for history."
The main thing retards tried to nail her on was record keeping laws, but they amended them after Clinton left office:
The law was amended in late 2014 to require that personal emails be transferred to government servers within 20 days. But that was after Clinton left office. Watchdog groups conceded that she may not have violated the text of the law, but they argue she violated the spirit of it. The Sunlight Foundation's John Wonderlich explained to Horsley:
1
Nice cop out. Not the standard of it we’re being prosecuted sweaty. Check out the Berger case. Deatch was a good one as well.
If you think Berger is even in the same solar system as anything Clinton did, you're basically retarded. You just tried to compare a guy literally stealing classified materials from a reading room to a person running a private email server, what in the actual fuck?
Hillary arguably broke the law. She mishandled classified materials. Just like daddy certainly obstructed (or attempted to) justice.
She didn't break the law, not according to any credible legal expert, which is why they predicted months in advance she'd not be charged.
It’s not worth fighting over. They’e both crooks, it would be hilarious to watch them point the finger at one another.
You can say what you want about Clinton. I'm still going to call your bullshit. I'm not slapping you down because I care about Clinton, I'm slapping you down because you're repeating misinformation on the internet.
Yes/no: did Clinton have a home server that she stored classified information on?
Yes/no: did Clinton let security officials know of such server?
Yes/no: did persons without valid credentials have access to such server?
Yes/no: after discovery of such server, did Clinton wipe it/fail to surrender it to investigating authorities?
Those aren’t GOP talking points. When you sit down for a classified materials handling presentation, the do’s and do not’s are made abundantly clear. She fucked up.
Yes/no: did Clinton have a home server that she stored classified information on?
She had a server that classified information, unmarked, happened to be present.
Yes/no: did Clinton let security officials know of such server?
I don't know, and as far as I know it's not the law she has to inform them of anything.
Yes/no: did persons without valid credentials have access to such server?
This goes back to #1. There was unmarked classified information on the server, that's not the same as "she intentionally stored classified information on a private email server."
Yes/no: after discovery of such server, did Clinton wipe it/fail to surrender it to investigating authorities?
False. She had ordered the emails deleted well before any of that stuff.
In December 2014, after the work-related emails were preserved, Mills told Platte River Networks – which at the time was managing Clinton’s private server – that Clinton “decided she no longer needed access to any of her e-mails older than 60 days.” Mills instructed the PRN employee — who was not identified — “to modify the e-mail retention policy” on Clinton’s server “to reflect this change,” the FBI said.
But the PRN employee mistakenly did not make the retention-policy change and did not delete the old emails until sometime between March 25 and March 31, even though Mills had sent PRN an email on March 9 that mentioned the committee’s request to preserve emails.
The PRN employee who deleted the emails was a recipient of Mills’ message. However, the employee told the FBI that “he had an ‘oh shit’ moment and sometime between March 25-31, 2015 deleted the Clinton archive mailbox from the PRN server and used BleachBit to delete the exported .PST files he had created on the server containing Clinton’s e-mails.”
She preserved work related emails and had all personal emails deleted as she left office. The person in charge of deleting the personal emails didn't do so until march, but she had asked for them to be deleted well before any of that stuff.
So no, she didn't "fail to turn them over or erase them" after learning of the investigation. You lied.
Those aren’t GOP talking points. When you sit down for a classified materials handling presentation, the do’s and do not’s are made abundantly clear. She fucked up.
And I'm telling you that your understanding of the subject is not there. you have no clue what you are talking about:
The emails were not marked classified. They actually again, asked Comey this exact question, they asked him if someone well versed in the classification system saw those emails, would he/she think they were classified, and Comey said no.
Rep. Cartwright: Those three documents with the little “c”s on them, were they properly documented? Were they properly marked according to the manual?
Director Comey: No.
Rep. Cartwright: According to the manual, and I ask unanimous consent to enter this into the record, Mr. Chairman. According to the manual, if you’re going to classify something, there has to be a header on the document, right?
Director Comey: No, there were three e-mails. The “c” was in the body in the text, but there was no header on the email or in the text.
Rep. Cartwright: So if Secretary Clinton really were an expert at what's classified and what’s not classified and we're following the manual, the absence of a header would tell her immediately that those three documents were not classified. Am I correct in that?
Director Comey: That would be a reasonable inference.
because it couldn't have even said that within the framework of the report, the only thing it could have said basically was 'not guilty' or 'not not guilty' and it said the latter while saying 'theseX things could definitely be interpreted as obstruction of justice' plenty of times
and for the record i don't think it's wise to impeach him for it, since to the general public it will another BS process crime, but if you had him in court with an independent minded jury (won't happen), he would be found guilty of it with the evidence that's out there
i don't give a fuck honestly, Clinton obstructed justice back in 1998, Trump obstructed justice in 2018, the conviction in senate will be split by party lines, the same BS cycle culture will repeating in few years, nothing will come out of it
I didn’t know it was legal to have classified documents on a home server.
Legal, no. What she did was most likely highly illegal, but because she was a former Senator, she was never going to get more than a wag of the finger.
If you or I had classified documents on a home server, we'd go down for that shit.
That's the same reason that they didn't spit roast Trump Jr. Though. Muller said he couldn't prove that he knew he was breaking the law in the Trump Tower meeting.
Yeah, I'm sure Mueller explained what obstruction was, then listed like 10 different examples of Trump doing things that meet the level of obstruction of justice and saying congress could do something about it wasn't at all Mueller saying Trump obstructed.
What? The DOJ can't even charge a president. mueller literally said he wasn't trying to charge Trump with anything and that Congress would have to do it.
James Comey spent 45 minutes explaining why Hillary Clinton should have been charged over her email server before pulling a "PSYCH!!!!" and saying she wasn't going to be charged. Yet you argue that she did nothing wrong and is clean as the windswept snow in the Rocky Mountains.
Meanwhile, Mueller spends 400 pages in a schizophrenic back-and-forth with himself about whether or not Trump did anything, at some times saying "yeah, totally, for sure" and other saying "nah, not really." Like Comey, he does lay down some rationale for charging for obstruction before yelling "PSYCH!!!" and refusing to actually make a call. In this case you say that totally makes Trump guilty.
The two situations are nearly identical. We're presented with evidence of criminal wrongdoing and told no one will be charged. I could understand how you could believe Clinton did nothing wrong IF you also believe Trump did nothing wrong, but that's not the case. Why are you so inconsistent?
James Comey spent 45 minutes explaining why Hillary Clinton should have been charged over her email server before pulling a "PSYCH!!!!" and saying she wasn't going to be charged.
No, he didn't. This is called you being dumb.
Meanwhile, Mueller spends 400 pages in a schizophrenic back-and-forth with himself about whether or not Trump did anything, at some times saying "yeah, totally, for sure" and other saying "nah, not really."
And confirmed. The report lays out obstruction pretty clearly.
He can't "recommend" anything. The DOJ does not believe they can charge a president.
Then he could have said there was clear evidence a crime was committed. He refused to do that. Instead, he made the case both for and against obstruction, and left it to his superiors to figure out what course of action should be taken. Mueller is an anti-Trump republican and James Comey's butt-buddy. He hired a crew of democrat donors to conduct his investigation. If there were sufficient evidence to suggest a crime had occurred they would have found ample space to say so in the hundreds of pages they put in their report.
You're grasping at straws. As far as clear-headed, rational people are concerned Mueller's report but this shit to bed. Anyone who continues pushing it does so at the peril of it damaging the democrats chances in 2020. If the report were going to damage Trump, it would have done so already. It hasn't done anything but given his base an opportunity to say "told you so" and made moderates/independents wary of any further allegations against Trump.
By all means, let the House start some new hearings or impeachment bullshit. I'm all for it. Just realize the price tag that goes on that wet dream you're trying to have.
Then he could have said there was clear evidence a crime was committed
No, he could not. All he could do was lay out the evidence and let congress decide. Reading the report paints a pretty clear picture of what obstruction is, and how Trump did it. Mueller clearly considers what Trump did obstruction of justice.
Instead, he made the case both for and against obstruction, and left it to his superiors to figure out what course of action should be taken.
Are you people still repeating the Barr spin? This wasn't a case of "equal evidence." It's like 90% obstruction 10% not obstruction. The evidence for obstruction is far more substantial than the argument against the obstruction.
Serious question, did you even read the report?
Mueller is an anti-Trump republican and James Comey's butt-buddy. He hired a crew of democrat donors to conduct his investigation.
Mueller is one of the most respected law enforcement officials in the country and the people he hired were some of the most qualified in the country. You're again, repeating Trumpian talking points you've never bothered to vet.
You're grasping at straws. As far as clear-headed, rational people are concerned Mueller's report but this shit to bed.
If by clear-headed, rational people, you mean unhinged Trumptards, sure. Trump's approval actually dropped after the report became public. The outcome might not have been so bad for Trump had Barr been honest and avoided lying like he did to spin the report before it became public.
Anyone who continues pushing it does so at the peril of it damaging the democrats chances in 2020.
Can you provide data supporting anything you just said here?
f the report were going to damage Trump, it would have done so already.
It literally did. His approval dropped.
It hasn't done anything but given his base an opportunity to say "told you so" and made moderates/independents wary of any further allegations against Trump.
Can you provide some data supporting this claim?
By all means, let the House start some new hearings or impeachment bullshit. I'm all for it. Just realize the price tag that goes on that wet dream you're trying to have.
I don't want him impeached. He's a noose around the neck of the GOP and amazing for GOTV. He's one of the least popular presidents in US history and has been for his entire term.
Sweaty, you're a retard and the DOJ doesn't believe they can charge a president, the report saays as much:
First, a traditional prosecution or declination decision entails a binary determination to
initiate or declin e a prosecution, but we determined not to make a traditional prosecutorial
judgment.
Your reasoning makes zero sense. Mueller included that line as a cop out so people like you would cling to it and have it to COPE with after you have been lied to for 2 years.
If Mueller was of the opinion that no matter what a sitting President cannot be charged, he wouldn't have done the investigation in the first place. C'mon pizza, you're smart enough to know that, right?
In 1973, in the midst of the Watergate scandal engulfing President Richard Nixon, the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel adopted in an internal memo the position that a sitting president cannot be indicted. Nixon resigned in 1974, with the House of Representatives moving toward impeaching him.
“The spectacle of an indicted president still trying to serve as Chief Executive boggles the imagination,” the memo stated.
The department reaffirmed the policy in a 2000 memo, saying court decisions in the intervening years had not changed its conclusion that a sitting president is “constitutionally immune” from indictment and criminal prosecution. It concluded that criminal charges against a president would “violate the constitutional separation of powers” delineating the authority of the executive, legislative and judicial branches of the U.S. government.
Laws for Democrats but not for me, seems to be the Republican's modus when it comes to impeachment and shit.
The case against Clinton was ten times weaker, but the articles of impeachment we're still brought against him, over lying about a fucking blow job lmao.
I could get on board with the Republicans on some issues, but what the party has become would even have Nixon rolling in his grave. Democrats are what the Republican party was during Nixon's presidency.
Democrats need to drop the strict gun control bullshit, to an extent, and quit shoving SJW bullshit down our throats.
Where is this magical proof Trump himself colluded or obstructed? Saying “our findings don’t exonerate him” doesn’t equate to “he actually totally obstructed and now the ball is in congress’s court to push for further investigations.
Mommy should release Vince Foster back to his family from the secret jail she’s been holding him in since 1993. That’ll score her some PR points. I’m picturing it like that scene with Molotov’s wife in The Death of Stalin.
Please. I've seen the infographics. She suicided a C-47 full of Navy SEALS because a friend of a friend of one of their half-sisters took a selfie with her and used a slightly unflattering hashtag.
So Hillary has this supernatural Final Destination sort of control over the forces of death, to the point at which any loss of life can be attributed to her, but you don't want her to be President?
Americans are somewhat stupid and religious and therefore have this thing about witchcraft. Now if she were made a saint that'd be another matter, saintly magic powers are acceptable.
Dubya's two terms. GOP's control of house, senate, and supreme court since 2010, and 2 years of the current administration with 2+ Attorney Generals of Trump, but she's yet to be charged with anything. why's that?
Do you remember the Clinton email scandal that happened in 2016? Hillary Clinton didn't get any charges against her for it but some people say that if it was anyone else, they would have been sent to prison.
Not sure if anyone said it in 2019, but I remember a Joe Rogan podcast where they were talking about how Hillary Clinton would have gone to jail if it was anyone else. I think Ben Shapiro's said the same thing. I'm sure there's others too, I just can't remember.
I'm pretty sure Wu Tang Clan weighed in on the "she should have been charged and wasn't because of who she was" side, and Wu Tang Clain ain't nothin' to fuck with.
If it was anyone else who was not a former Secretary of State, or in any position of power within the US Government, they would be charged.
Although I'm not sure if it would involve prison. Depends on what they did with the documents. Probably just a loss of access to classified material, prison if they were leaking documents.
She deleted evidence while under investigation to determine whether or not she may have leaked classified information. James Comey just kind of shrugged and said yeah, it was pretty legal but we're not going to press charges anyway.
It's even better than that! "The statute says 'knowingly'. Hillary claims she forgot that she's not allowed to exfiltrate classified from secure environments, so she didn't 'knowingly' mishandle classified. Sorry!"
I wished she'd just go away already. The right already hates her, the Bernie Bros hate her, the only ones that seem to like her are the r/neoliberal squad.
I would call myself neoliberal too, but have you been to that subreddit? They can't stop themselves from screaming YASSS QUEEN anytime Hillary does something
No, I stay away from political subs. Even for drama material because it makes me want to bash my head. I make a special exception when they say spectacularly retarded things.
If anything it’s the wing-nut mouth breathers that are keeping her relevant.
I’d gladly have the 2016 election wiped from my memory, but I guess I’ll settle for watching these septuagenarian fucks mentally decaying before our very eyes.
Hillary Clinton is a testament to the sheer force of will. I have never met anyone that actually likes her in any way, shape or form, yet she was one Boomer Plant Grandma 3rd party candidate away from being President of the free world.
Hillary Clinton ate my asshole. She made me do copious amounts of cocaine with her, to the point I thought my heart was gonna stop. She told me to calm down, gave me a drink, and I don't know what was in the drink but I blacked out. And when I woke up, she had both my legs over her shoulders, and she was numb-sucking my asshole like there was no tomorrow. I tried to fight it, I tried to get away, but I was restrained. She told me that I liked it, she told me not to worry cause she used the good jelly, the Smuckers. So nobody's paid me to, uh, confess this now, and I've kept it under wraps for all these years because I knew no one would believe me. No one would believe that Hillary Clinton ate my asshole.
Anyone else would have resigned to a private retirement of shame. Losing to a galaxy brained populist. People voting against you because they hate everything that you are.
163 comments
1 BussyShillBot 2019-04-23
That whole post is essentially everyone taking it seriously are admitting to being worthless little weeby shits. It is so glorious when they put themselves like that!
Outlines:
I am a bot for posting Outline.com links. github / Contact for info or issues
1 SnapshillBot 2019-04-23
/r/Drama is one of the most reactionary and transphobic subreddits on this website. Their moderators consistently promote this behaviour, and their userbase has been known to harass leftists and brigade their posts.
I created this subreddit as a response to that. All hatred and shenanigans at /r/drama can be catalogued and made fun of accordingly.
There are only two rules: no bigotry and no /r/drama users.
Snapshots:
I am a bot. (Info / Contact)
1 LucidHuckleberry 2019-04-23
Ok this is hilarious.
Clinton 2020, so we can have both candidates scream, "you'd be in jail!" at one another.
1 IDFSHILL 2019-04-23
Not really funny. Clinton didn't actually break the law. Show me a single civilian convicted of mishandling classified information using a gross negligence standard. You have to royally fuck up to be charged with that shit.
https://warontherocks.com/2016/07/why-intent-not-gross-negligence-is-the-standard-in-clinton-case/
1 LongPostBot 2019-04-23
Posts like this is why I do Heroine.
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 WarSanchez 2019-04-23
Comey is talking about the particulars of one case and bending words to go, well in this case, which is unique, totally because of where tech is now, she would be the first to get cuffed for it.
1 IDFSHILL 2019-04-23
You're completely delusional. Like this is why I laugh at guys that run around Reddit claiming mishandling classified information is some grave offense. Pretty much everyone in the government is doing what Clinton was doing.
The difference is the GOP needed propaganda for the upcoming election and ran with it. Seriously:
https://www.thecipherbrief.com/column_article/sloppiness-in-handling-highly-classified-information-is-widespread
1
1 LongPostBot 2019-04-23
I don't know what you said, because I've seen another human naked.
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 WarSanchez 2019-04-23
Anyone, regardless of party should get prison time for sharing info that they shouldn't the only caveat to that is if it involves whistle blowing, which in this case it did not.
1 IDFSHILL 2019-04-23
Your opinions do not = the law.
1 WarSanchez 2019-04-23
Snitches get stiches.
I don't care what position they hold or what a rule book says.
1 averagewhitebrah69 2019-04-23
what do you do for work? genuinely curious because you’re retardation is impressive. i feel like your a line cook or something
1 IDFSHILL 2019-04-23
You won't get a real response from me unless you refute anything I said. I'm not interested in anything else you have to say.
1 WarSanchez 2019-04-23
This message brought to you by the DNC™
1 averagewhitebrah69 2019-04-23
so you’re unemployed
1 PeskyPapaya 2019-04-23
He's a prince who coincidentally can't be rinsed
1 -Steve_French- 2019-04-23
You're wrong, Hillary for Prison, Trump 2020.
Now spill those sweet beans, at what fast food joint do you force patrons to be subjected to you?
1 menvaren 2019-04-23
Do you honestly think a kid with his social skills ever leaves the house?
1 SpiceAndEvNice 2019-04-23
Neither do yours but you pretend they do every single time lmao.
Where is the lawyer mod when we need him?
1 a_few 2019-04-23
The difference between her and other people doing what she did is that she was dumb enough to get caught
1 LucidHuckleberry 2019-04-23
I am not reading the text wall on a cell phone.
I didn’t know it was legal to have classified documents on a home server.
Nice cop out. Not the standard of it we’re being prosecuted sweaty. Check out the Berger case. Deatch was a good one as well.
Google civilians convicted for mistreatment of classified materials. There’s plenty of them.
Hillary arguably broke the law. She mishandled classified materials. Just like daddy certainly obstructed (or attempted to) justice.
It’s not worth fighting over. They’e both crooks, it would be hilarious to watch them point the finger at one another.
1 IDFSHILL 2019-04-23
You should have, because it dismantles your argument.
Highly debatable depending on the context. You'd have to prove she sent it, knew it was classified, and intentionally stored said classified information.
https://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/04/02/396823014/fact-check-hillary-clinton-those-emails-and-the-law
The main thing retards tried to nail her on was record keeping laws, but they amended them after Clinton left office:
1
If you think Berger is even in the same solar system as anything Clinton did, you're basically retarded. You just tried to compare a guy literally stealing classified materials from a reading room to a person running a private email server, what in the actual fuck?
She didn't break the law, not according to any credible legal expert, which is why they predicted months in advance she'd not be charged.
You can say what you want about Clinton. I'm still going to call your bullshit. I'm not slapping you down because I care about Clinton, I'm slapping you down because you're repeating misinformation on the internet.
1 LongPostBot 2019-04-23
You can type 10,000 characters and you decided that these were the one's that you wanted.
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 LucidHuckleberry 2019-04-23
Ok, let’s go one step at a time.
Yes/no: did Clinton have a home server that she stored classified information on?
Yes/no: did Clinton let security officials know of such server?
Yes/no: did persons without valid credentials have access to such server?
Yes/no: after discovery of such server, did Clinton wipe it/fail to surrender it to investigating authorities?
Those aren’t GOP talking points. When you sit down for a classified materials handling presentation, the do’s and do not’s are made abundantly clear. She fucked up.
1 IDFSHILL 2019-04-23
She had a server that classified information, unmarked, happened to be present.
I don't know, and as far as I know it's not the law she has to inform them of anything.
This goes back to #1. There was unmarked classified information on the server, that's not the same as "she intentionally stored classified information on a private email server."
False. She had ordered the emails deleted well before any of that stuff.
https://www.factcheck.org/2016/09/the-fbi-files-on-clintons-emails/
She preserved work related emails and had all personal emails deleted as she left office. The person in charge of deleting the personal emails didn't do so until march, but she had asked for them to be deleted well before any of that stuff.
So no, she didn't "fail to turn them over or erase them" after learning of the investigation. You lied.
And I'm telling you that your understanding of the subject is not there. you have no clue what you are talking about:
The emails were not marked classified. They actually again, asked Comey this exact question, they asked him if someone well versed in the classification system saw those emails, would he/she think they were classified, and Comey said no.
https://oversight.house.gov/news/press-releases/fbi-director-comey-emails-were-not-properly-marked-as-classified
1 LongPostBot 2019-04-23
I've known more coherent downies.
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 jubbergun 2019-04-23
Jesus, LongPostBot must be getting upgrades from Snappy.
1 Turtle_shell_wok 2019-04-23
Save everyone some time
1 -Steve_French- 2019-04-23
Trump has not broken any laws and will be reelected in 2020
1 IDFSHILL 2019-04-23
He obstructed justice.
1 -Steve_French- 2019-04-23
No he didn't
1 IDFSHILL 2019-04-23
That report is pretty damning on obstruction of justice.
1 -Steve_French- 2019-04-23
Not enough to say he actually did it though
Hmm 🤔🤔🤔
1 Tytos_Lannister 2019-04-23
because it couldn't have even said that within the framework of the report, the only thing it could have said basically was 'not guilty' or 'not not guilty' and it said the latter while saying 'theseX things could definitely be interpreted as obstruction of justice' plenty of times
1 -Steve_French- 2019-04-23
Totally cleared 😎
1 Tytos_Lannister 2019-04-23
in the eyes of DDF yes
and for the record i don't think it's wise to impeach him for it, since to the general public it will another BS process crime, but if you had him in court with an independent minded jury (won't happen), he would be found guilty of it with the evidence that's out there
1 -Steve_French- 2019-04-23
T O T A L L Y
C L E A R E D
1 Tytos_Lannister 2019-04-23
whatever suits your Daddy fetish
1 -Steve_French- 2019-04-23
Your cope tastes bad, bigly ☹️☹️☹️
1 Tytos_Lannister 2019-04-23
i don't give a fuck honestly, Clinton obstructed justice back in 1998, Trump obstructed justice in 2018, the conviction in senate will be split by party lines, the same BS cycle culture will repeating in few years, nothing will come out of it
1 -Steve_French- 2019-04-23
Cope + fibbing. Naughty naughty 🤬🤬🤬
1 Tytos_Lannister 2019-04-23
no u
1 -Steve_French- 2019-04-23
Shit ok you win
1 Wolkenfresser 2019-04-23
Didn't Clinton wipe her emails as well?
1 jubbergun 2019-04-23
Yes, and she did it in the midst of a subpoena for the contents of said server, if I remember correctly.
1 Wolkenfresser 2019-04-23
/u/IDFSHILL
1 BeanerShnitzel 2019-04-23
Proceeds to write wall of text on a cell phone.
1 KikiFlowers 2019-04-23
Legal, no. What she did was most likely highly illegal, but because she was a former Senator, she was never going to get more than a wag of the finger.
If you or I had classified documents on a home server, we'd go down for that shit.
1 ManBearFridge 2019-04-23
That's the same reason that they didn't spit roast Trump Jr. Though. Muller said he couldn't prove that he knew he was breaking the law in the Trump Tower meeting.
1 averagewhitebrah69 2019-04-23
hahahahhaha holy shit you’re a faggot
1 -Steve_French- 2019-04-23
Trump didn't break the law though lmfao
1 IDFSHILL 2019-04-23
Well, except for the obstruction of justice.
1 -Steve_French- 2019-04-23
Prove it tbh.
Otherwise, daddy's a good boy 🤗🤗🤗
1 IDFSHILL 2019-04-23
Yeah, I'm sure Mueller explained what obstruction was, then listed like 10 different examples of Trump doing things that meet the level of obstruction of justice and saying congress could do something about it wasn't at all Mueller saying Trump obstructed.
1 -Steve_French- 2019-04-23
But he didn't say he obstructed justice.
This totally clears the president! Thank you!
1 IDFSHILL 2019-04-23
What? The DOJ can't even charge a president. mueller literally said he wasn't trying to charge Trump with anything and that Congress would have to do it.
1 -Steve_French- 2019-04-23
Pizzabitch will see because daddy will stay free 🤗
1 eva_remastered 2019-04-23
sick name and pizza trolling dude, I have a crush on you now
1 throwaway-familyhelp 2019-04-23
Wrong.
Daddy wasn't charged with nuffin. He's clean as can be.
1 IDFSHILL 2019-04-23
He blatantly obstructed.
1 -Steve_French- 2019-04-23
Prove it
1 IDFSHILL 2019-04-23
I mean, it's all in the report.
1 -Steve_French- 2019-04-23
That he didnt break the law? I know.
Thank you Mueller, very cool and very legal!
1 jubbergun 2019-04-23
James Comey spent 45 minutes explaining why Hillary Clinton should have been charged over her email server before pulling a "PSYCH!!!!" and saying she wasn't going to be charged. Yet you argue that she did nothing wrong and is clean as the windswept snow in the Rocky Mountains.
Meanwhile, Mueller spends 400 pages in a schizophrenic back-and-forth with himself about whether or not Trump did anything, at some times saying "yeah, totally, for sure" and other saying "nah, not really." Like Comey, he does lay down some rationale for charging for obstruction before yelling "PSYCH!!!" and refusing to actually make a call. In this case you say that totally makes Trump guilty.
The two situations are nearly identical. We're presented with evidence of criminal wrongdoing and told no one will be charged. I could understand how you could believe Clinton did nothing wrong IF you also believe Trump did nothing wrong, but that's not the case. Why are you so inconsistent?
1 IDFSHILL 2019-04-23
No, he didn't. This is called you being dumb.
And confirmed. The report lays out obstruction pretty clearly.
1 jubbergun 2019-04-23
Well, you're half right. It was on fifteen minutes, not forty-five. You do realize that Comey's nonsense was broadcast live and is on the interwebs, right?
But not clearly enough for Mueller to put his reputation on the line by recommending charges/impeachment, which is all I need to know.
1 IDFSHILL 2019-04-23
He can't "recommend" anything. The DOJ does not believe they can charge a president.
Congress is meant to make the choice based on the evidence presented to them, but we do not have a functioning congress.
1 jubbergun 2019-04-23
Then he could have said there was clear evidence a crime was committed. He refused to do that. Instead, he made the case both for and against obstruction, and left it to his superiors to figure out what course of action should be taken. Mueller is an anti-Trump republican and James Comey's butt-buddy. He hired a crew of democrat donors to conduct his investigation. If there were sufficient evidence to suggest a crime had occurred they would have found ample space to say so in the hundreds of pages they put in their report.
You're grasping at straws. As far as clear-headed, rational people are concerned Mueller's report but this shit to bed. Anyone who continues pushing it does so at the peril of it damaging the democrats chances in 2020. If the report were going to damage Trump, it would have done so already. It hasn't done anything but given his base an opportunity to say "told you so" and made moderates/independents wary of any further allegations against Trump.
By all means, let the House start some new hearings or impeachment bullshit. I'm all for it. Just realize the price tag that goes on that wet dream you're trying to have.
1 LongPostBot 2019-04-23
That was a mistake. You're about to find out the hard way why.
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 IDFSHILL 2019-04-23
No, he could not. All he could do was lay out the evidence and let congress decide. Reading the report paints a pretty clear picture of what obstruction is, and how Trump did it. Mueller clearly considers what Trump did obstruction of justice.
Are you people still repeating the Barr spin? This wasn't a case of "equal evidence." It's like 90% obstruction 10% not obstruction. The evidence for obstruction is far more substantial than the argument against the obstruction.
Serious question, did you even read the report?
Mueller is one of the most respected law enforcement officials in the country and the people he hired were some of the most qualified in the country. You're again, repeating Trumpian talking points you've never bothered to vet.
If by clear-headed, rational people, you mean unhinged Trumptards, sure. Trump's approval actually dropped after the report became public. The outcome might not have been so bad for Trump had Barr been honest and avoided lying like he did to spin the report before it became public.
Can you provide data supporting anything you just said here?
It literally did. His approval dropped.
Can you provide some data supporting this claim?
I don't want him impeached. He's a noose around the neck of the GOP and amazing for GOTV. He's one of the least popular presidents in US history and has been for his entire term.
1 LongPostBot 2019-04-23
Your pulitzer's in the mail
I am a bot. Contact for questions
1 still_futile 2019-04-23
Unironically posting this shit here. You're a special kind of AOC aren't ya?
1 throwaway-familyhelp 2019-04-23
Sweaty, if he did Mueller would've recommended charges. He didn't, thus daddy didn't do anything.
1 IDFSHILL 2019-04-23
Sweaty, you're a retard and the DOJ doesn't believe they can charge a president, the report saays as much:
1 -Steve_French- 2019-04-23
So youre saying that Daddy isn't guilty? Thank you pizzaboy!
1 IDFSHILL 2019-04-23
Illiteracy is a real issue with rightoids.
1 -Steve_French- 2019-04-23
I mean Trump is not guilty and no amount of cope can change that.
Daddy did nothing wrong, sweaty
1 IDFSHILL 2019-04-23
He obstructed justice.
1 -Steve_French- 2019-04-23
Ackshilly
1 throwaway-familyhelp 2019-04-23
Your reasoning makes zero sense. Mueller included that line as a cop out so people like you would cling to it and have it to COPE with after you have been lied to for 2 years.
If Mueller was of the opinion that no matter what a sitting President cannot be charged, he wouldn't have done the investigation in the first place. C'mon pizza, you're smart enough to know that, right?
1 IDFSHILL 2019-04-23
Mueller included that line because the DOJ does not believe they can not indict a president dude.
It's also not his opinion, it's what the DOJ believes:
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-indictment-explainer/can-a-sitting-us-president-face-criminal-charges-idUSKCN1QF1D3
1 AnnoyinTheGoyim 2019-04-23
Evidently not.
1 BeanerShnitzel 2019-04-23
Laws for Democrats but not for me, seems to be the Republican's modus when it comes to impeachment and shit.
The case against Clinton was ten times weaker, but the articles of impeachment we're still brought against him, over lying about a fucking blow job lmao.
I could get on board with the Republicans on some issues, but what the party has become would even have Nixon rolling in his grave. Democrats are what the Republican party was during Nixon's presidency.
Democrats need to drop the strict gun control bullshit, to an extent, and quit shoving SJW bullshit down our throats.
1 Tzar-Romulus-Dos 2019-04-23
Trump is a mayo. He's breaking laws of decency.
1 -Steve_French- 2019-04-23
Sriracha mayo tho
1 Tzar-Romulus-Dos 2019-04-23
No mayos should be spared and I say this as a potato taco.
1 FTFallen 2019-04-23
GOD SHUT THE FUCK UP NO ONE CARES GO MAKE OUT WITH YOUR FAT GIRLFRIEND
1 BeanerShnitzel 2019-04-23
Jesus the DDF is out in force today.
1 -Steve_French- 2019-04-23
Daddy dindu nuffin tbh
1 BeanerShnitzel 2019-04-23
😴😴😴
1 -Steve_French- 2019-04-23
Low energy due to diet exclusively consisting of nothing burgers
One 🍔 = one sad
1 Burnnoticelover 2019-04-23
“She’s not a criminal, just retarded.”
1 ManBearFridge 2019-04-23
That's the same saving grace as Daddy and Co.
Horseshoe theory wins again.
1 SpiceAndEvNice 2019-04-23
Where is this magical proof Trump himself colluded or obstructed? Saying “our findings don’t exonerate him” doesn’t equate to “he actually totally obstructed and now the ball is in congress’s court to push for further investigations.
1 IDFSHILL 2019-04-23
Lmao, where's the proof he obstructed justice.
In the fucking report and on his twitter.
1 -Steve_French- 2019-04-23
Can't charge daddy since it didn't happen. 😎👍
1 AlecOzzyHillPitas 2019-04-23
Why are you being downvoted, you’re right.
As usual.
1 -Shank- 2019-04-23
CAutists OUT OUT OUT
1 IDFSHILL 2019-04-23
Refute a single thing I said.
1 -Shank- 2019-04-23
I'm not here to participate in spergfights, I'm here to observe them and dunk on rapefugees
1 byobombs 2019-04-23
Lol ok sweaty don’t need your opinion on “if it was anyone else”. Privilege so white she’s blinded by it 🤩
MayocideNOW
1 MalcolmFFucker 2019-04-23
Mommy should release Vince Foster back to his family from the secret jail she’s been holding him in since 1993. That’ll score her some PR points. I’m picturing it like that scene with Molotov’s wife in The Death of Stalin.
1 Doctor-Pavel 2019-04-23
black-hole tier brain here, but how's this ironic?
1 WarSanchez 2019-04-23
Both are corrupt fucks that should be Gulag'ed™ for the sake of humanity.
You can't be completely ignorant to her shit can you?
1 MGTOWWOM 2019-04-23
If this is a serious-post then why didn't you make it in r/conspiracy? You'll shoot to #\1 and anyone like Pizzacel will get gulag'd.
1 WarSanchez 2019-04-23
I like flying under Murder Mommies radar tyvm
1 MGTOWWOM 2019-04-23
Please. I've seen the infographics. She suicided a C-47 full of Navy SEALS because a friend of a friend of one of their half-sisters took a selfie with her and used a slightly unflattering hashtag.
You're dead.
1 WarSanchez 2019-04-23
#RIP2ME
1 MGTOWWOM 2019-04-23
I stuck you down the bottom because there wasn't room.
https://i.imgur.com/O5HwzHV.jpg
1 WarSanchez 2019-04-23
HIS NAME WAS SOME BITCH
1 MGTOWWOM 2019-04-23
u/xNotch will reveal all to the DOJ if you buy his forthcoming rap album.
1 8675309999999999 2019-04-23
higher quality version of the infographic above cause pixelated text triggers my 'tism
1 UmmahSultan 2019-04-23
So Hillary has this supernatural Final Destination sort of control over the forces of death, to the point at which any loss of life can be attributed to her, but you don't want her to be President?
1 MGTOWWOM 2019-04-23
Americans are somewhat stupid and religious and therefore have this thing about witchcraft. Now if she were made a saint that'd be another matter, saintly magic powers are acceptable.
1 Doctor-Pavel 2019-04-23
I'm bretty dumb tbh, so bear with me.
Dubya's two terms. GOP's control of house, senate, and supreme court since 2010, and 2 years of the current administration with 2+ Attorney Generals of Trump, but she's yet to be charged with anything. why's that?
1 WarSanchez 2019-04-23
You'd create a black hole of complicity and mutually assured destruction with everyone bringing up dirt on everyone else.
But what do I know...
1 Doctor-Pavel 2019-04-23
"U KNU NUFFIN, SANCHEZ-SNU"
meme'd on like a fucking pleb
/r/YangGang 2020
1 employee10038080 2019-04-23
Do you remember the Clinton email scandal that happened in 2016? Hillary Clinton didn't get any charges against her for it but some people say that if it was anyone else, they would have been sent to prison.
1 Doctor-Pavel 2019-04-23
I don't remember this tbh. Which people said she would be in jail for the same crimes in 2019?
1 employee10038080 2019-04-23
Not sure if anyone said it in 2019, but I remember a Joe Rogan podcast where they were talking about how Hillary Clinton would have gone to jail if it was anyone else. I think Ben Shapiro's said the same thing. I'm sure there's others too, I just can't remember.
1 Doctor-Pavel 2019-04-23
okay i should clarify: which people said this that actually matter?
1 employee10038080 2019-04-23
IDK niqqa, Google it
1 Doctor-Pavel 2019-04-23
google is a leftist cis-pool
1 employee10038080 2019-04-23
Then use Bing
1 Doctor-Pavel 2019-04-23
i used ur mom and even she couldnt handlen it
1 employee10038080 2019-04-23
But my mom's dead
1 Doctor-Pavel 2019-04-23
your mom was a tranny fyi
1 jubbergun 2019-04-23
I'm pretty sure Wu Tang Clan weighed in on the "she should have been charged and wasn't because of who she was" side, and Wu Tang Clain ain't nothin' to fuck with.
1 KikiFlowers 2019-04-23
If it was anyone else who was not a former Secretary of State, or in any position of power within the US Government, they would be charged.
Although I'm not sure if it would involve prison. Depends on what they did with the documents. Probably just a loss of access to classified material, prison if they were leaking documents.
1 vicedets 2019-04-23
She deleted evidence while under investigation to determine whether or not she may have leaked classified information. James Comey just kind of shrugged and said yeah, it was pretty legal but we're not going to press charges anyway.
Best timeline.
1 Douggem 2019-04-23
It's even better than that! "The statute says 'knowingly'. Hillary claims she forgot that she's not allowed to exfiltrate classified from secure environments, so she didn't 'knowingly' mishandle classified. Sorry!"
1 shaneoffline 2019-04-23
I hope Trump drops a proper 'no u' on her because you know it'll be amazing
1 JustStopDude 2019-04-23
Is she my ex? I have to tell my ex all the time "you still don't get it..."
1 Minimum_T-Giraff 2019-04-23
How is that irony?
1 WarSanchez 2019-04-23
#C O P E
1 Minimum_T-Giraff 2019-04-23
[ [ [ C O P E ] ] ]
1 Momruepari 2019-04-23
I have information that will kead to the arrest of Hillary Clinton
1 vicedets 2019-04-23
RIP
1 tHeSiD 2019-04-23
Did you by any chance recently get kicked from an embassy?
1 employee10038080 2019-04-23
I wished she'd just go away already. The right already hates her, the Bernie Bros hate her, the only ones that seem to like her are the r/neoliberal squad.
1 CirqueDuFuder 2019-04-23
She is the one person that is hated across the full spectrum.
1 throwaway-familyhelp 2019-04-23
Pizza is still in here as the lone member of Mommy defense force
1 CirqueDuFuder 2019-04-23
Even Bill doesn't defend her like this.
1 jubbergun 2019-04-23
Doesn't that make her the most radically centrist of all?
1 ManBearFridge 2019-04-23
I consider myself in the neoliberal squad, but I too, wish she went away.
1 employee10038080 2019-04-23
I would call myself neoliberal too, but have you been to that subreddit? They can't stop themselves from screaming YASSS QUEEN anytime Hillary does something
1 ManBearFridge 2019-04-23
No, I stay away from political subs. Even for drama material because it makes me want to bash my head. I make a special exception when they say spectacularly retarded things.
Also, boomers. Boomers will never not be funny.
1 Tytos_Lannister 2019-04-23
you just lack the acquired taste peasant
1 Lost_Traveller2_ 2019-04-23
If anything it’s the wing-nut mouth breathers that are keeping her relevant.
I’d gladly have the 2016 election wiped from my memory, but I guess I’ll settle for watching these septuagenarian fucks mentally decaying before our very eyes.
1 donaldslittleduck 2019-04-23
The comment section is delicious.
1 PalpatineDidNoWrong 2019-04-23
Way too much seriousposting for my taste.
1 donaldslittleduck 2019-04-23
I'm talking about the faux news comments. Enough drama in there for a week.
1 jaredschaffer27 2019-04-23
Hillary Clinton is a testament to the sheer force of will. I have never met anyone that actually likes her in any way, shape or form, yet she was one Boomer Plant Grandma 3rd party candidate away from being President of the free world.
1 natebronson 2019-04-23
She is an truly is an inspiration.
1 employee10038080 2019-04-23
That explains why she killed herself
1 AmericanAlicorn 2019-04-23
Listen here dramacels,
Hillary Clinton ate my asshole. She made me do copious amounts of cocaine with her, to the point I thought my heart was gonna stop. She told me to calm down, gave me a drink, and I don't know what was in the drink but I blacked out. And when I woke up, she had both my legs over her shoulders, and she was numb-sucking my asshole like there was no tomorrow. I tried to fight it, I tried to get away, but I was restrained. She told me that I liked it, she told me not to worry cause she used the good jelly, the Smuckers. So nobody's paid me to, uh, confess this now, and I've kept it under wraps for all these years because I knew no one would believe me. No one would believe that Hillary Clinton ate my asshole.
1 big_papa_stiffy 2019-04-23
lmao remember how people always said she was innocent because she got investigated for years but wasnt charged with anything
1 jubbergun 2019-04-23
Just like Trump, LOL?
1 big_papa_stiffy 2019-04-23
yeah thats the point you nigger
the same excuses they used for years can now be used by trump supporters
1 Alicesnakebae 2019-04-23
Were the retards already using that what do you think horseshoe theory
1 Ghdust2 2019-04-23
1 Acrimony01 2019-04-23
The gift that keeps giving.
Anyone else would have resigned to a private retirement of shame. Losing to a galaxy brained populist. People voting against you because they hate everything that you are.
Not mommy though. Not mommy.
1 WarSanchez 2019-04-23
She's the stereotypical whuyte "woman" with shit hot takes that always get her in trouble yet she keeps playing the victim.