You have summed up the point already on the first page. I like you.
There is no point in this; both parties are absolutely stupid and being petty about it. Clinton is winning election statistics so far, so other side is trying to find incriminating evidence to get people to not vote for her. Happens with every election, happens all the time, it just gets pettier and pettier each time.
Last edited by TexasRules; 2016-02-24 at 11:13 PM.
It's not going away because Republicans never stop talking about it. But kudos for trying to immediately dismiss the obvious idea that this is a witch hunt by saying, "If this wasn't a witch hunt it would have gone away by now!"
You see that normally only works when its one quack screaming into the void that a thing is happening. But it's a political party insisting it is and wasting millions of dollars of public money trying to find something to indict her on.
The better question is, if this was a legitimate issue, why hasn't Clinton been indicted yet? It's only been going on since Benghazi happened.
The circumstances are different though. It's intellectually dishonest to say the situations are the exact same. It was know he directly gave classified information to someone not suppose to have it, Clintons circumstances are far more murky. I'm not saying she did nothing wrong, I'm saying we don't know yet conclusively if she did. People like you and Vyxn seem content to hang her over suspicion and hersay though.
a letter from the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community and Inspector General, Department of State
stating emails born classified quote "contained classified information when they were generated" was fond on in Clintons emails ones she stored on her on authorized server
Statement from the Inspectors General of the Intelligence Community and the Department of State Regarding the Review of Former Secretary Clinton's Emails
Yesterday the Office ofthe Inspector General ofthe Intelligence Community (IC IG} sent a
congressional notification to intelligence oversight committees updating them of the IC IG
support to the State Department IG (attached).
The IC IG found four emails containing classified IC-derived information in a limited sample of
40 emails of the 30,000 emails provided by former Secretary Clinton. The four emails, which
have not been released through the State FOIA process, did not contain classification markings
and/or dissemination controls. These emails were not retroactively classified by the State
Department; rather these em ails contained classified information when they were generated and, according to IC classification officials, that information remains classified today. This
classified information should never have been transmitted via an unclassified personal system.
IC IG made a referral detailing the potential compromise of classified information to security
officials within the Executive Branch. The main purpose of the referral was to notify security
officials that classified information may exist on at least one private server and thumb drive
that are not in the government's possession. An important distinction is that the IC IG did not
make a criminal referral- it was a security referral made for counterintelligence purposes. The
IC IG is statutorily required to refer potential compromises of national security information to
the appropriate IC security officials
https://oig.state.gov/system/files/s...ly_24_2015.pdf
The only thing I can't understand is that decorated military leader is disgraced for breaking the law and the secretary of state does much worse and gets nothing. Having her email on her personal server is breaking the law. You may think it's one of the laws obama chooses to ignore like immigration enforcement, but it is still breaking the law. Whether it has classified information on it or later classified information is up to your partisan politics to render your non objective opinion, but she broke the law.
The problem isn't with having them on there, the problem is if other people who didn't have clearance got a hold of them. Do you have evidence of that?
You're aware one of the biggest complaints his supports have of him is his constant deportation of Illegals? Once again he was proven to have given classified information away. I've yet to see proof that she did this. If you have it, I'll be more than willing to concede she did something major.
Right, as though JW isn't staffed with legal experts, lawyers and the like and hasn't filed hundreds if not thousands of suits, appeals and the like on this and a myriad of other relevant topics in their existence. You should probably become aware of what something is and is comprised of before you bash it.
The Fresh Prince of Baudelaire
Banned at least 10 times. Don't give a fuck, going to keep saying what I want how I want to.
Eat meat. Drink water. Do cardio and burpees. The good life.