Poll: Are you smarter than the FBI?

[Lyin' Steve]

You have two options:
1)  Yes, the FBI is a bunch of idiots, how could they not see what I so clearly see, that Hillary committed 110 felonies and should be behind bars?!  How stupid do you have to be to become an FBI director... they should fire the whole lot and just put me in charge.
2)  No, I don't actually know anything about national security law other than what I read in some obviously biased articles and some Facebook memes.

P.S. now we know where all that Clinton Foundation money went, must have been pretty expensive to pay off the entire FBI.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Does this really warrants another thread?

[Shameless Lefty Hack]

Well, you see, Lyin' Steve wants to prove the fact that his candidate is objectively the best because she wasn't indicted by the FBI. No way to do that without an obnoxious push poll.

[Lyin' Steve]

No, my facebook is drowning in people who are bewildered that the FBI didn't indict Hillary because obviously she's guilty, they heard it on Fox or from their left-wing tea party blog of choice and they've been seeing everyone else's memes all day about how stupid the FBI is, so that makes them experts in whatever it is the FBI does.

[Devout Centrist]

Shill!

[Devout Centrist]

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. If they did not believe that she should be indicted, then they shouldn't have presented the evidence and stated she had comitted a felony.

If this is incorrect, can somebody correct me?

Why didn't a Republican recommend charges for her? Bribery? Corruption? Internal government threats?

None of these accusations have basis in reality and it's part of the reason I can't vote for national Republican candidates anymore.

[fhtagn]

No, my facebook is drowning in people who are bewildered that the FBI didn't indict Hillary because obviously she's guilty, they heard it on Fox or from their left-wing tea party blog of choice and they've been seeing everyone else's memes all day about how stupid the FBI is, so that makes them experts in whatever it is the FBI does.

So basically you're mad that people on Facebook (and even some folks here) don't agree with you, so you felt the need to start a condescending topic.

[fhtagn]

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. If they did not believe that she should be indicted, then they shouldn't have presented the evidence and stated she had comitted a felony.

If this is incorrect, can somebody correct me?

Why didn't a Republican recommend charges for her? Bribery? Corruption? Internal government threats?

None of these accusations have basis in reality and it's part of the reason I can't vote for national Republican candidates anymore.

They do have basis in reality. They did find that she lied about her emails and that they did contain confidential information. They chose not to pursue it because she didn't *intend* harm in doing what she did. This does not mean she is innocent and not responsible for any wrongdoing. They just chose not to file any charges.

[Devout Centrist]

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. If they did not believe that she should be indicted, then they shouldn't have presented the evidence and stated she had comitted a felony.

If this is incorrect, can somebody correct me?

Why didn't a Republican recommend charges for her? Bribery? Corruption? Internal government threats?

None of these accusations have basis in reality and it's part of the reason I can't vote for national Republican candidates anymore.

They do have basis in reality. They did find that she lied about her emails and that they did contain confidential information. They chose not to pursue it because she didn't *intend* harm in doing what she did. This does not mean she is innocent and not responsible for any wrongdoing. They just chose not to file any charges.

Alright, please present the evidence that Comey was bribed or threatened.

I'll wait.

[fhtagn]

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. If they did not believe that she should be indicted, then they shouldn't have presented the evidence and stated she had comitted a felony.

If this is incorrect, can somebody correct me?

Why didn't a Republican recommend charges for her? Bribery? Corruption? Internal government threats?

None of these accusations have basis in reality and it's part of the reason I can't vote for national Republican candidates anymore.

They do have basis in reality. They did find that she lied about her emails and that they did contain confidential information. They chose not to pursue it because she didn't *intend* harm in doing what she did. This does not mean she is innocent and not responsible for any wrongdoing. They just chose not to file any charges.

Alright, please present the evidence that Comey was bribed or threatened.

I'll wait.

I never stated that Comey was bribed or threatened.

If you choose to ignore FACTS from the investigation that's on you.

[MK]

Fun Fact: The F.B.I is the nations political police force.

[Devout Centrist]

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. If they did not believe that she should be indicted, then they shouldn't have presented the evidence and stated she had comitted a felony.

If this is incorrect, can somebody correct me?

Why didn't a Republican recommend charges for her? Bribery? Corruption? Internal government threats?

None of these accusations have basis in reality and it's part of the reason I can't vote for national Republican candidates anymore.

They do have basis in reality. They did find that she lied about her emails and that they did contain confidential information. They chose not to pursue it because she didn't *intend* harm in doing what she did. This does not mean she is innocent and not responsible for any wrongdoing. They just chose not to file any charges.

Alright, please present the evidence that Comey was bribed or threatened.

I'll wait.

I never stated that Comey was bribed or threatened.

If you choose to ignore FACTS from the investigation that's on you.

You just said, "these accusations are based in reality," and then refuse to provide evidence that Comey was either bribed or threatened. Which was my initial claim.

So they are baseless. Thanks.

[Beefalow and the Consumer]

3. The FBI is trained and experienced in investigating violations of federal law, and knows a lot more about the gathering of evidence, putting that evidence into legal context, and possesses much more complete information than I do. The question of whether they collectively are more intelligent than I am is irrelevant.

[fhtagn]

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. If they did not believe that she should be indicted, then they shouldn't have presented the evidence and stated she had comitted a felony.

If this is incorrect, can somebody correct me?

Why didn't a Republican recommend charges for her? Bribery? Corruption? Internal government threats?

None of these accusations have basis in reality and it's part of the reason I can't vote for national Republican candidates anymore.

They do have basis in reality. They did find that she lied about her emails and that they did contain confidential information. They chose not to pursue it because she didn't *intend* harm in doing what she did. This does not mean she is innocent and not responsible for any wrongdoing. They just chose not to file any charges.

Alright, please present the evidence that Comey was bribed or threatened.

I'll wait.

I never stated that Comey was bribed or threatened.

If you choose to ignore FACTS from the investigation that's on you.

You just said, "these accusations are based in reality," and then refuse to provide evidence that Comey was either bribed or threatened. Which was my initial claim.

So they are baseless. Thanks.

I was referring to Speaker Washington's accusations that the FBI is committing a felony, which IS based in reality. He never said in his post that Comey was bribed or threatened.

But please, go on and pull information from posts that simply did not exist in the original post to begin with.

[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. If they did not believe that she should be indicted, then they shouldn't have presented the evidence and stated she had comitted a felony.

If this is incorrect, can somebody correct me?

This is correct.

[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?

[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. If they did not believe that she should be indicted, then they shouldn't have presented the evidence and stated she had comitted a felony.

If this is incorrect, can somebody correct me?

Your "That in itself is the FBI committing a felony" comment is asinine.

[psychprofessor]

It was Comey's opinion re: carelessness. Essentially what he did was: I don't have any legal grounds to recommend prosecution but I'm going to editorialize about her behavior.

[Seriously?]

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. If they did not believe that she should be indicted, then they shouldn't have presented the evidence and stated she had comitted a felony.

If this is incorrect, can somebody correct me?

Eh, as much as I think she should have been indicted under the statute, any law enforcement agency has some form of prosecutorial discretion.

I do think that charges were not referred for political reasons, which in and itself is fine, it just shows how corrupt the system is and punts the question to the ballot box in November.

[Hermit For Peace]

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. If they did not believe that she should be indicted, then they shouldn't have presented the evidence and stated she had comitted a felony.

If this is incorrect, can somebody correct me?

Eh, as much as I think she should have been indicted under the statute, any law enforcement agency has some form of prosecutorial discretion.

I do think that charges were not referred for political reasons, which in and itself is fine, it just shows how corrupt the system is and punts the question to the ballot box in November.

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.

[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. If they did not believe that she should be indicted, then they shouldn't have presented the evidence and stated she had comitted a felony.

If this is incorrect, can somebody correct me?

This is incorrect.

[Mallow]

It was Comey's opinion re: carelessness. Essentially what he did was: I don't have any legal grounds to recommend prosecution but I'm going to editorialize about her behavior.

This, and...

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. If they did not believe that she should be indicted, then they shouldn't have presented the evidence and stated she had comitted a felony.

If this is incorrect, can somebody correct me?

Eh, as much as I think she should have been indicted under the statute, any law enforcement agency has some form of prosecutorial discretion.

I do think that charges were not referred for political reasons, which in and itself is fine, it just shows how corrupt the system is and punts the question to the ballot box in November.

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. Hillary has to be in the wrong, so either the FBI indicts, or the FBI made the wrong decision. That's exactly what the OP means--the armchair analysis is basically everywhere right now. "We all know better than the FBI" is all I hear.

[fhtagn]

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. If they did not believe that she should be indicted, then they shouldn't have presented the evidence and stated she had comitted a felony.

If this is incorrect, can somebody correct me?

Eh, as much as I think she should have been indicted under the statute, any law enforcement agency has some form of prosecutorial discretion.

I do think that charges were not referred for political reasons, which in and itself is fine, it just shows how corrupt the system is and punts the question to the ballot box in November.

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.

[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.

[Ebowed]

This focus on the emails has always been disingenuous.  Donald Trump routinely speaks of violating the Geneva Conventions and won't rule out using nuclear weapons.  It is clear that presently the gravest threat to American national security is the democratic election of somebody who is mentally unfit, and of a disturbed moral character, to hold the office.  If you think the rules don't apply to Hillary Clinton, they certainly don't apply to Donald Trump either.  How many bills of his have gone unpaid so that he can continue to lie about his wealth?  How many people has he made homeless and destitute so that he can stick his name on eyesore buildings?  How many incidents of racial hatred have occurred in direct response to people being inspired by his political rhetoric?

If the FBI isn't investigating Donald Trump for the grave threat that he poses to American national security, then, yes, it looks like I might be smarter than they are.