Poll: Are you smarter than the FBI?

[ProudModerate2]

They admitted she comitted gross negligence and then refused to indict her. They essentially laid out the evidence-outside of court-convicting her of a felony, and then said she should not be prosecuted. That in itself is the FBI comitting a felony.

Really? What law does it violate?

Good question. The answer is 18 U.S. Code § 793, Subsection F:

(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

Wow. Someone else here who is smarter than the FBI.
Only SillyAmerican found and discovered this code .... the FBI missed it entirely .... I'm sure of it.

[SteveRogers]

They admitted she comitted gross negligence and then refused to indict her. They essentially laid out the evidence-outside of court-convicting her of a felony, and then said she should not be prosecuted. That in itself is the FBI comitting a felony.

Really? What law does it violate?

Good question. The answer is 18 U.S. Code § 793, Subsection F:

(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

But what felony did the FBI supposedly commit?

[SillyAmerican]

They admitted she comitted gross negligence and then refused to indict her. They essentially laid out the evidence-outside of court-convicting her of a felony, and then said she should not be prosecuted. That in itself is the FBI comitting a felony.

Really? What law does it violate?

Good question. The answer is 18 U.S. Code § 793, Subsection F:

(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

Wow. Someone else here who is smarter than the FBI.
Only SillyAmerican found and discovered this code .... the FBI missed it entirely .... I'm sure of it.

Emailking asked what statute was violated, so I told him. I'm sure Mr. Comey is keenly aware of the statutes; what folks would like to know is how, after spending 15 minutes clearly spelling out the ways in which Hillary Clinton's handling of sensitive government information was grossly negligent, the final recommendation was against indictment. I believe what Comey was actually saying that there is too little case precedent in these types of cases for him to recommend for indictment.

I'm not second guessing Mr. Comey's decision, I'd just like some clarification as to how he reached it, that's all.

[RFK Jr.’s Brain Worm]

Why, yes, of course I'm smarter than them.

Stupid questions get stupid answers.

[Crumpets]

IIRC, the last time someone thought Reddit was smarter than the FBI, they posted the picture of two innocent bystanders on the cover of the New York Post as suspects in the Boston Bombing.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Bryan Nishimura got convicted of less.
http://www.navytimes.com/story/military/crime/2015/07/29/navy-engineer-sentenced-for-mishandling-classified-material/30862027/

Sandy Berger got convicted of less
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Berger#Unauthorized_removal_and_destruction_of_classified_material

The Obama Department of Justice tried to get a 50 year sentence for Aaron Swartz before he commited suicide and there wasn't even classified or secret information involved in his case.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Swartz

[ProudModerate2]

They admitted she comitted gross negligence and then refused to indict her. They essentially laid out the evidence-outside of court-convicting her of a felony, and then said she should not be prosecuted. That in itself is the FBI comitting a felony.

Really? What law does it violate?

Good question. The answer is 18 U.S. Code § 793, Subsection F:

(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

Wow. Someone else here who is smarter than the FBI.
Only SillyAmerican found and discovered this code .... the FBI missed it entirely .... I'm sure of it.

Emailking asked what statute was violated, so I told him. I'm sure Mr. Comey is keenly aware of the statutes; what folks would like to know is how, after spending 15 minutes clearly spelling out the ways in which Hillary Clinton's handling of sensitive government information was grossly negligent, the final recommendation was against indictment. I believe what Comey was actually saying that there is too little case precedent in these types of cases for him to recommend for indictment.

I'm not second guessing Mr. Comey's decision, I'd just like some clarification as to how he reached it, that's all.

Yes, you are right.
We need at least 27 congressional investigations, with about 15 different reports to find out.
This should ONLY take about 3-1/2 years to complete.
Great .... What an excellent idea !

[Hermit For Peace]

I think it shows the system working just fine. Comey's integrity has gotten high marks during his political career, and yet, now that he isn't agreeing with armchair pundits, his fact-finding and decision-making are less than credible.

Some people in this fine country want to keep Hillary "in her place", so they want to throw the book at something she did that they find threatening. If it's not the email thing it's the Benghazi thing, or some other "thing" they are ranting about and going after Hillary for because she is a female in a man's world, playing her own game.

She is the scapegoat for what some people think ails them. They take their anger and frustration out on Hillary, but frankly she has become used to this cowardly behavior by now. She just takes it, rides out the storm, then continues on her path.

Good for the FBI that they aren't playing this sicko game with the the people who think Hillary ought to be pilloried for every petty issue that comes up in the course of a day.

This is why nobody takes the Clinton campaign seriously. There are plenty of respectable female politicians that aren't gone after at every turn. The Clintons are shady, literally the entire country knows this, and that's why it's so easy to go after her. Not because she is a woman.

I'm all for having a woman in office, but surely it should be someone who doesn't have as many skeletons in their closet.

The problem with your reasoning is that there really isn't another female out there with the name recognition, the experience, the strength, the staying power, and the drive to be President, who is electable at this moment. Someone who can wade through the good ol' boys sexist club to get to the pinnacle like Hillary already has. To be sure, since Hillary has shattered that glass ceiling, it will be easier for other females coming up the ranks to be elected President. But for now, Hillary is it.

You can call the Clintons "shady" or you can call them colorful. It's all a matter of opinion. But speaking of Hillary, she has never gone to trial for anything or been convicted of a crime. In fact she should be commended for getting as far as she has. I guess you gotta be open-minded to even want to see this side of story.

[emailking]

They admitted she comitted gross negligence and then refused to indict her. They essentially laid out the evidence-outside of court-convicting her of a felony, and then said she should not be prosecuted. That in itself is the FBI comitting a felony.

Really? What law does it violate?

Good question. The answer is 18 U.S. Code § 793, Subsection F:

(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

Wow. Someone else here who is smarter than the FBI.
Only SillyAmerican found and discovered this code .... the FBI missed it entirely .... I'm sure of it.

Emailking asked what statute was violated, so I told him.

I was asking (admittedly, sarcastically) what law the FBI violated, as Speaker Washington said that FBI committed a felony.

I don't know if you misunderstood and thought I was asking what law did Clinton violate, or if you think the FBI violated that statute. But if it's the latter, I don't see how the FBI violated that by laying out the evidence against Clinton and saying she shouldn't be prosecuted.

[SillyAmerican]

They admitted she comitted gross negligence and then refused to indict her. They essentially laid out the evidence-outside of court-convicting her of a felony, and then said she should not be prosecuted. That in itself is the FBI comitting a felony.

Really? What law does it violate?

Good question. The answer is 18 U.S. Code § 793, Subsection F:

(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

Wow. Someone else here who is smarter than the FBI.
Only SillyAmerican found and discovered this code .... the FBI missed it entirely .... I'm sure of it.

Emailking asked what statute was violated, so I told him.

I was asking (admittedly, sarcastically) what law the FBI violated, as Speaker Washington said that FBI committed a felony.

I don't know if you misunderstood and thought I was asking what law did Clinton violate, or if you think the FBI violated that statute. But if it's the latter, I don't see how the FBI violated that by laying out the evidence against Clinton and saying she shouldn't be prosecuted.

Ah, sorry, my misunderstanding. The FBI didn't violate any laws, they simply said that despite 110 clear instances of sensitive information being mishandled by Secretary Clinton, that there's no reason to move forward with an indictment. I'm not sure I understand how that conclusion was reached...