Russiagate

[tkhayes 348]

Quote

All one needs to do is listen to what he said.

He spoke to the evidence and her lies.

we did listen to what he said and what he said was EXACTLY what he said. Which is not what you say he said. Yes, listen to what he said. He never ever said a crime was committed, he never ever said anything that you concluded that was said.

Not ever...not even once, nil zilch, zip zero. But of course, you and others seem to have the authority to reinterpret what was said into what you wanted to be said even though is was not said or never said.

[JerryBaumchen 1,363]

Hi rush,

Quote

Absolutely no doubt about it.

For a guy who was in the Honor Society I find it odd that you seem to not understand how things work in this country.

You know, that old thing about: Innocent until proven guilty.

Or would you like to change that?

Jerry Baumchen

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

JerryBaumchen

Hi rush,

Quote

Absolutely no doubt about it.

For a guy who was in the Honor Society I find it odd that you seem to not understand how things work in this country.

You know, that old thing about: Innocent until proven guilty.

Or would you like to change that?

Jerry Baumchen

Well, for the people he doesn't like, sure. Clinton, Obama, ect. They should be convicted simply on accusations and innuendo.

For the people he does like, they shouldn't even have to answer the charges against them. They couldn't possibly have done those things.

And the people leveling those false accusations should be punished too.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[DanG 1]

Since rush is clearly incapable of communicating anything with any clarity, let me translate:

Rush believes that intent is not an element of the crime of mishandling classified information. Comey said he didn't find intent, but that Clinton, et al were careless in how they handled classified information. In rush's mind, because intent is not a factor, any carelessness with classified information is a crime and all crimes must be prosecuted. Since Clinton was careless, she is guilty of a crime and should be prosecuted. It doesn't matter to him that Comey said there wasn't enough evidence to prosecute, the only sentence in Comey's statement that matters is the one about carelessness.

No matter that intent is quite clearly an important factor in determining whether to prosecute. Since it is not technically an aspect of the crime, rush thinks that anyone who mishandles any classified information should be prosecuted. Well, except Trump, who handed classified information directly to the Russian Foreign Minister. That's okay.

- Dan G

[ryoder 1,590]

billvon

Great post from Scaramucci on Thursday - "And as you know from the Italian expression: The fish stinks from the head down." (He then realized what he said, and quickly added "uh, I can tell you two fish that don't stink, and that's me and the President.")

Yes, yes it does.

Apparently, Scaramucci is a total wackjob.
He will fit right in.

http://www.newyorker.com/news/ryan-lizza/anthony-scaramucci-called-me-to-unload-about-white-house-leakers-reince-priebus-and-steve-bannon

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[billvon 2,991]

Some quotes from that article:

"Who leaked that to you?” The reporter would not reveal his sources.

“What I’m going to do is, I will eliminate everyone in the comms team and we’ll start over. I ask these guys not to leak anything and they can’t help themselves. You’re an American citizen, this is a major catastrophe for the American country. So I’m asking you as an American patriot to give me a sense of who leaked it.” The reporter still refused to violate confidentiality.

“Is it an assistant to the President? . . .O.K., I’m going to fire every one of them, and then you haven’t protected anybody, so the entire place will be fired over the next two weeks.”

“They’ll all be fired by me. I fired one guy the other day. I have three to four people I’ll fire tomorrow. I’ll get to the person who leaked that to you. Reince Priebus—if you want to leak something—he’ll be asked to resign very shortly. Reince is a fucking paranoid schizophrenic, a paranoiac. [Reince said] ‘Oh, Bill Shine is coming in. Let me leak the fucking thing and see if I can cock-block these people the way I cock-blocked Scaramucci for six months.’ ”

"I’m not Steve Bannon, I’m not trying to suck my own cock. I’m not trying to build my own brand off the fucking strength of the President. I’m here to serve the country. . . What I want to do is I want to fucking kill all the leakers and I want to get the President’s agenda on track so we can succeed for the American people."

There is something very . . . special about threatening to fire and/or kill everyone over a leak, then asking a reporter to leak his sources.

[yoink 321]

DanG

Since rush is clearly incapable of communicating anything with any clarity, let me translate:

Rush believes that intent is not an element of the crime of mishandling classified information. Comey said he didn't find intent, but that Clinton, et al were careless in how they handled classified information. In rush's mind, because intent is not a factor, any carelessness with classified information is a crime and all crimes must be prosecuted. Since Clinton was careless, she is guilty of a crime and should be prosecuted. It doesn't matter to him that Comey said there wasn't enough evidence to prosecute, the only sentence in Comey's statement that matters is the one about carelessness.

No matter that intent is quite clearly an important factor in determining whether to prosecute. Since it is not technically an aspect of the crime, rush thinks that anyone who mishandles any classified information should be prosecuted. Well, except Trump, who handed classified information directly to the Russian Foreign Minister. That's okay.

Great post!

Don't forget that rush thinks that outcome of an event is also part of whether it is a crime, as well as the lack of intent.
His position has always been that since Russian interference in the election didn't alter the result then this current investigation is a complete waste of time since no crime can have been committed.

So no intent required for an action, AND a definite impact as a result of the action. So Hillary's still not guilty of anything...

[headoverheels 333]

ryoder

Apparently, Scaramucci is a total wackjob.
He will fit right in.

http://www.newyorker.com/news/ryan-lizza/anthony-scaramucci-called-me-to-unload-about-white-house-leakers-reince-priebus-and-steve-bannon

Late night TV writers really have it too easy these days.

[rushmc 23]

billvon

>All one needs to do is listen to what he said.



What do you imagine in Rush-land?

Imagine?

No, no imagination bill. Just the reality of his words. They clearly show she broke many laws that are felonies. And then there's this!

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/07/27/obama-official-made-hundreds-unmasking-requests-gop-chairman-says.html


The boomerang is returning. It's going to get fun. What do you think?

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,991]

>No, no imagination bill. Just the reality of his words. They clearly show she broke many
>laws that are felonies . . .

Here is the reality of his words.

Comey: "We did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information . . .Based on our review, we have not changed our conclusions that we expressed in July."

Now, what does your imagination tell you that contradicts that? Please be specific; so far you haven't shown anything to the contrary.

[millertime24 8]

Cool. So if I didn't intend to speed I shouldn't receive a citation.

Muff #5048

[pchapman 279]

@ Rush:
Don't you even try to provide information to back up your claims? A coherent defense would make the right seem less crazy.

People agree that Hillary was pretty arrogant and dumb about the way she handled things with her personal email server.

Comey didn't like what he saw, but as BillVon keeps saying, the FBI didn't find anything criminally proscecutable. For example, this summary of Comey's speech on the email scandal in July 2016, from the LA Times:

Quote

Here are highlights of what Comey said:
“Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.”
Clinton’s emails included seven message chains with information classified as top secret.
“None of these emails should have been on any kind of unclassified system.”
“The security culture of the State Department …was generally lacking in the kind of care for classified information found elsewhere in the government.”
Comey acknowledged that the FBI did not normally make public its recommendations to prosecutors as to whether to bring criminal charges. He added: “In this case, given the importance of the matter, I think unusual transparency is in order.”
“Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.”

Very careless, sloppy, not just her but the whole State Department...that all fits, and I think people across the political spectrum agree. But your chant of 'Comey found crimes!' doesn't fit.

[GeorgiaDon 362]

Quote

Don't you even try to provide information to back up your claims? A coherent defense would make the right seem less crazy.

Of course he doesn't. Actual facts and rule of law are irrelevant to the extreme right, it's all about feeding their hatred.

Why does everybody keep on feeding the troll?

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[ryoder 1,590]

GeorgiaDon

Why does everybody keep on feeding the troll?

Agreed!
I realize some people are amused by engaging in a battle of wits with the unarmed, but it gets tiresome seeing mosts of the posts wasted on that.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[normiss 801]

Generally I don't even read a few posters posts here anymore.
Waste of time to be honest.

Stop feeding the trolls!
I am also occasionally guilty though...

[ryoder 1,590]

normiss

Generally I don't even read a few posters posts here anymore.
Waste of time to be honest.

Stop feeding the trolls!
I am also occasionally guilty though...

Over on bikeforums.net, (sorry Mark but's its bicycles), they have a handy ignore feature which hides posts, but give you a name and a button to click if you want to make a hidden post visible. Very handy, but of course you still see the responses.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[TriGirl 318]

millertime24

Cool. So if I didn't intend to speed I shouldn't receive a citation.

No, you shouldn't face federal prosecution for being clocked going 3 mph over the speed limit by accident. Sec. Clinton no longer has access to classified information. And she herself said she had learned a lesson from it and would do things differently if she had it to do over. So, had she been elected, she likely would be much more careful with the handling of classified information. Like intel from Israel, and perhaps around Russians.

See the upside, and always wear your parachute! -- Christopher Titus

Shut Up & Jump!

[millertime24 8]

Federal prosecution? No. However, I still must either pay a monetary fine (which is admittance of guilt btw) and my insurance goes up as well as getting points on my license, or I must take time away from my workplace in order to go to court to argue my case.

What LEGAL ramifications has Hillary incurred? What monetary fines were imposed? The "I learned my lesson" doesn't do shit to get people like you and me out of legal trouble. Why should it for Hillary?

Muff #5048

[yoink 321]

Because speeding IS a crime. Therefore there are legal ramifications. A fine, points etc.

Carelessly storing sensitive data on an unsecured server isn't, despite whether people think it should be or not. That's the FBI's finding, not my interpretation.

'I learned my lesson' didn't get her out of legal trouble, in the same way that it wouldn't get you and me out of it.


Edit: actually, she's a powerful politician, so 'I learned my lesson' might actually get her out of trouble more than it would you or me. Just not in this case.

[kallend 2,027]

How many times have you been hauled into court for going 3mph over the limit?

How many times have you gone 3mph over the limit?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[millertime24 8]

Never been to court. I don't speed. You?

Muff #5048

[rushmc 23]

millertime24

Cool. So if I didn't intend to speed I shouldn't receive a citation.

You got it!!!!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

Her actions under the statue were criminal.

It does not take intent to make that true.

There are many in jail today who have done much much less.

But I guess you must like a two tiered justice system.

One for you and me and one for powerful public figures.

I for one, think all of us are accountable under one system.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[lippy 918]

Quote

Her actions under the statue were criminal.

I for one would like to know what she was doing under the statue!

I got nuthin

[rushmc 23]

yoink

Carelessly storing sensitive data on an unsecured server isn't, despite whether people think it should be or not. That's the FBI's finding, not my interpretation.

You are absolutely wrong!
You are using YOUR own interpretation here!!!

That law is very clear.

Comey bastardized it for political purposes, besides sticking his nose into a part of the process he had no business involving himself in!!!

I gotta think that the Clintons or Lych have something on him so he threw himself under the bus for crooked Hillary.


Not to mention she lied to the FBI which is a crime in and of itself.

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln