General Politics Discussion [ARCHIVED] • Page 160

Hmm. I dunno we (Britain) did colonise a fair share of the world and then recently spent 4 months complaining about immigration.

 

There's only two comments on this and they're both calling out the author on his bullshit. Love that.

 

Yeah tbf we get a lot of bad traits from you guys

 

I always wonder which nation was the worst for the non western world... US or the British kingdom. The UK defined the baseline and had the massive extent of imperialism while the US applied the most extremes of capitalism to it.

 

I don't respect ideologies that purport the existence of a meritocracy.

 

And we seem to be wanting to take your lead in destroying public healthcare

 

Now that Farage and Johnson have both bailed it looks increasingly obvious that none of them had a fucking clue of what to do

 

The Trump campaign is beyond parody

 

FBI director says they will not recommend charges against Clinton for the email server because there is no clear evidence she intended to break the law. However he also said that she was "extremely careless" in handling classified information and said any reasonable person should have known better and acted differently.

Good for Hillary for not getting any charges, but bad for her because some of the things the FBI director said could definitely be used in attack ads on her

FBI: eight Clinton email chains had 'top-secret information' – politics live

 

So we want an extremely careless person running the country?

 

It's too bad that the people screeching about this and Benghazi won't be deterred because I feel like it distracts from valid criticism of her

 

That's usually what we end up with

 

Also we now know that she lied many times about not sending classified emails.

 

I'm by no means anti-Hilary, but I don't understand how someone could act "extremely careless" with "top-secret information" and not face any repercussions.

 

Just thinking of what Trump is going to say about this is already nauseating.

 

Right wing is having a conniption right now. Wowza.

 

Bernie supporters on the left are too, and it's not like it's unwarranted or anything.

 

Trump compromises our national security pretty much every time he opens his mouth, sooo.


Also a bit dishonest to say Petraeus got in trouble for less.

 

It pretty much is. The rule of the law from the get go is ambiguous, which makes it easier to get out of trouble. The wording of the law is "knowingly mishandle", more or less, which means if you can't prove they knowingly did it, you can't make a case in court.

I'm a Bernie supporter, I would have welcomed an indictment because it almost definitely would have led to a Bernie nomination....but the "conspiracy" nonsense already flying around this is giving me a headache.

 

Watching the right talk about the "system is rigged" now when they praised (and will continue to praise) the system every time it lets a killer cop off the hook is infuriating.

on the other hand, this is certainly more evidence to back up the claims of those that believe that the system truly is rigged and don't just use it as a catch all for "the courts made a decision I don't like"

 

So do you think that she was unaware that she was mishandling classified information?

 

I don't believe any of the information originated from her server, which gives her enough reasonable doubt to say she didn't realize there was classified info in the chains and what not. Which basically makes everything Comey said super on point. She fucked up big time, but not enough there to bring charges.

 

Yeah but what the evidence they lack, from my understanding, is that of intent, not whether or not she committed a crime. It seems that when it comes to Clintons, ignorance of the law is an excuse. Maybe I am wrong and if so please correct me, but the fact that she did indeed violate the law is not in dispute correct?

"Hillary Clinton: reckless and incompetent, but technically not a felon" isn't necessarily the inspiring message that sends me speeding to the voting booth.

 

This is why the wording of the law is important in it's ambiguity. It's been a while since I read it, but the wording more or less says "knowingly mishandle or act in gross negligence"...the first part meaning you have to be able to prove the information was knowingly mishandled, and the second one being a matter of opinion and perspective, more or less. It makes it hard (probably purposefully) to actually prosecute in court.