The H. Clinton Emails - What's known, What's not

[flghtr65]

Originally Posted by Ex-CEO

Here's a great explanation for you to try if you get caught in a radar trap:

"Officer, it was MY CAR that was going 45 in a 35. I was just sitting here minding my own business and had nothing to do with that!"

Counselor, it's pretty simple. In those first 4 emails(that were found on Hillary's server) they were all marked unclassified, as in the example below. The state department at a LATER DATE deemed the contents of the email as classified. Again, it was sent to Hillary as unclassified. The links are in the dead candidates walking thread. A first year law student could beat this. Here is the example of the email that the FBI found on her server (regarding the first 4 emails). The Federal government has a regulation the Burden is on the sender to use the correct classification. This was in the Washington Post. The link was already given. Go back and read the dead candidates walking thread. I am not posting all the links again. Your example above is nonsense. A first year law school could easily beat the allegation that Hillary sent or received classified material (UFC 1924).

[flghtr65]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Wait a minute - that might actually work. Flighty has one of those new self-driving vehicles on loan from the DNC. He sits in the backseat and lets it do the driving. Just like his brain is on loan from the DNC. Whenever he gets in over his head (like now), he can always plead "My brain is being spoon-fed the Hildabeast's latest libtard talking points! I had nothing to do with that!"

.

This is the reply one gives when one loses an argument. Ivy leaguer you can't do better than this? FYI your buddy OLD-T said the FBI is not investigating Hillary.

Old-T is on your side remember.

[The_Waco_Kid]

An ominous precedent for Hillary Clinton

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...297_story.html


"Former CIA director John Deutch was also found to have stored classified documents — including top-secret intelligence — on computers in his homes in Bethesda and Belmont, Mass., leading to an investigation by the CIA inspector general and a criminal investigation by the Justice Department. Deutch was stripped of his security clearance and ended up reaching a plea agreement admitting to his crimes — but was saved by a last-minute pardon from none other than . . . President Bill Clinton."


"The parallels between the Deutch and Clinton cases suggest that come January 2017, instead of planning her presidential transition, Clinton may find herself lobbying for a last-minute pardon of her own."


"The inspector general’s report also includes a note for caution for anyone in the bureaucracy who is thinking of protecting Clinton from proper scrutiny. In the Deutch case, the inspector general took CIA officials to task for failing to properly investigate “Deutch’s continued suitability for access to classified information” and criticized the agency for its failure to submit “a crimes report to the Department of Justice.”

[WombRaider]

It's over

http://www.dailynewsbin.com/news/sta...olicies/21851/

[flghtr65]

Originally Posted by WombRaider

It's over

http://www.dailynewsbin.com/news/sta...olicies/21851/

+1,000,000

WR, excellent post. The ballgame is over.

L-Lad in over my head? Ivy leaguer you need to study up on policy at the State Department.

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

An ominous precedent for Hillary Clinton

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opini...297_story.html


"Former CIA director John Deutch was also found to have stored classified documents — including top-secret intelligence — on computers in his homes in Bethesda and Belmont, Mass., leading to an investigation by the CIA inspector general and a criminal investigation by the Justice Department. Deutch was stripped of his security clearance and ended up reaching a plea agreement admitting to his crimes — but was saved by a last-minute pardon from none other than . . . President Bill Clinton."


"The parallels between the Deutch and Clinton cases suggest that come January 2017, instead of planning her presidential transition, Clinton may find herself lobbying for a last-minute pardon of her own."


"The inspector general’s report also includes a note for caution for anyone in the bureaucracy who is thinking of protecting Clinton from proper scrutiny. In the Deutch case, the inspector general took CIA officials to task for failing to properly investigate “Deutch’s continued suitability for access to classified information” and criticized the agency for its failure to submit “a crimes report to the Department of Justice.”

Opinion...

[Guest040616]

Originally Posted by WombRaider

Opinion...

If I am guessing, it is more like wishful thinking!

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by bigtex

If I am guessing, it is more like wishful thinking!

Or, like Benghazi, we can waste more time and money trying to pin the tale on a non-existent donkey. How many committees are they up to now?

[Jackie S]

Originally Posted by WombRaider

Or, like Benghazi, we can waste more time and money trying to pin the tale on a non-existent donkey. How many committees are they up to now?

They are all tied together.

Hillary Clinton is a lying, money grubbing sack of shit.

In the end, that is what it comes down too.

The American People will, sooner or later, learn that her decision to not provide adequate protection for our Embasy in Lybia resulted in the deaths of our Ambassador and four Marines. She, and Her entire State Department lied about this in the beginning, and she knows that despite her conniving, untruthful ways, the truth will come out.

The Democrats might as well go up in the attic and find those Joe Biden pins and posters. You're gonna need them now.

[Ex-CEO]

Originally Posted by flghtr65

Counselor, it's pretty simple...

Yet it seems not to be so simple that you can actually understand the import of what's transpiring here.

Your statement that the FBI is investigating "only emails, not people" is comically ridiculous even by the bizarre standards of this forum.

Do you really think it's perfectly OK for a Secretary of State to correspond with foreign leaders and many others by using an insecure personal email server, and then to follow up by allowing the server to be handled and moved by parties without a security clearance? And then to simply delete all the emails?

You will get a thrill up your leg in Chris Matthews-style, though, when Hillary gets away with all this, as she likely will. Partisan public officials and media lackeys will run interference for her all the way.

The late Richard Milhous Nixon would be so proud!

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

They are all tied together.

Hillary Clinton is a lying, money grubbing sack of shit.

In the end, that is what it comes down too.

The American People will, sooner or later, learn that her decision to not provide adequate protection for our Embasy in Lybia resulted in the deaths of our Ambassador and four Marines. She, and Her entire State Department lied about this in the beginning, and she knows that despite her conniving, untruthful ways, the truth will come out.

The Democrats might as well go up in the attic and find those Joe Biden pins and posters. You're gonna need them now.

Your problem is you're beginning with something you believe to be a truth and working your way backwards. That isn't the way you investigate something. You follow the leads, wherever they take you. If we do learn that the lack of security was the reason for what happened, what is beyond a mistake in judgement? Are you hoping for some malicious email where they all had a good laugh about it? Is that really what you think happened? In the article below, from almost THREE years ago, she took responsibility for the decision. What more do you want?

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/secretar...nghazi-attack/

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by Ex-CEO

Yet it seems not to be so simple that you can actually understand the import of what's transpiring here.

Your statement that the FBI is investigating "only emails, not people" is comically ridiculous even by the bizarre standards of this forum.

Do you really think it's perfectly OK for a Secretary of State to correspond with foreign leaders and many others by using an insecure personal email server, and then to follow up by allowing the server to be handled and moved by parties without a security clearance? And then to simply delete all the emails?

You will get a thrill up your leg in Chris Matthews-style, though, when Hillary gets away with all this, as she likely will. Partisan public officials and media lackeys will run interference for her all the way.

The late Richard Milhous Nixon would be so proud!

The line about investigating the emails and not a person was a quote from an official, so if you think it's stupid, take it up with them. We don't know the security level of the personal server. Isn't that exactly what is currently being investigated? We don't know the security clearance of any moving parties. And then to disingenuously ask about deleting 'all' the emails when you know very well they've turned over thousands upon thousands of pages of emails.

Nobody wants anyone to get away with anything. If she actually violated the law then she should face prosecution. It's the zealous nature that you and others employ in this area that raises hackles. You are condemning her without even knowing all the information yet, because you're run by emotion and your hatred of her has clouded your ability to see straight.

[Ex-CEO]

Originally Posted by WombRaider

The line about investigating the emails and not a person was a quote from an official, so if you think it's stupid, take it up with them. So what if it was a quote from an "official?" All manner of "officials" make ridiculous, disingenuous claims all the time. Do you really want to see those on your side of the debate simply parrot them without so much as engaging a pair of brain cells? We don't know the security level of the personal server. Isn't that exactly what is currently being investigated? Yes, but why is it acceptable on any level for a Secretary of State to simply opt out of the .gov system so that she can do all her emailing from a private server in her home, and then to simply destroy large quantities of emails? We don't know the security clearance of any moving parties. And then to disingenuously ask about deleting 'all' the emails when you know very well they've turned over thousands upon thousands of pages of emails. LOL! Oh, yes. I'm sure everyone is certain that NOTHING was cherry-picked in any fashion whatsoever before being "turned over!"

Nobody wants anyone to get away with anything. If she actually violated the law then she should face prosecution. It's the zealous nature that you and others employ in this area that raises hackles. You are condemning her without even knowing all the information yet, because you're run by emotion and your hatred of her has clouded your ability to see straight. Oh, yes. That's it! You and flghtr65 are paragons of reason and objectivity, and anyone who dares question your judgment and wisdom must simply be biased and "run by emotion." Got it now!

.

[WombRaider]

Originally Posted by Ex-CEO

.

You're the one screaming for her head, not me. Paragon and virtue? I don't know about that, but I'm at least willing to wait till the jury is brought back in before I decide. You seem to lack that patience. Tone down the smug a bit, will you. It's not becoming.

I don't know why it's acceptable to opt out. Again, that is being investigated. Can't you wait for them to finish before you sharpen the blade? Or is the hard on for her that voracious? Between you and I, I do appear the more objective party. I'm willing to wait till the investigation is finished, while you would rather just proceed with beheading right bloody now. Is that objective, to you? That's a judgement a monkey can make, I can't take all the credit. Not too much wisdom involved in it either, just common sense.

[Ex-CEO]

Originally Posted by WombRaider

You're the one screaming for her head, not me. Paragon and virtue? I don't know about that, but I'm at least willing to wait till the jury is brought back in before I decide. You seem to lack that patience. Tone down the smug a bit, will you. It's not becoming. What "smug bit" are you referring to, asshole? Please refresh my memory: Which poster rashly boasted a month or so ago that his life was "better than I could hope that mine could ever be?" (That occurred just before he was caught falsely boasting of being a young, wealthy retiree despite only being able to afford fat, low-end Backpage hookers.) Who was that? Was it "UnderConstruction" or WombRaider?" (When you pop off in such fashion, you reap what you sow, you ignorant asshole.)

I don't know why it's acceptable to opt out. Here's a hint for you: IT ISN'T! Again, that is being investigated. Can't you wait for them to finish before you sharpen the blade? Or is the hard on for her that voracious? Between you and I, I do appear the more objective party. I'm willing to wait till the investigation is finished, while you would rather just proceed with beheading right bloody now. Is that objective, to you? That's a judgement a monkey can make, I can't take all the credit. Not too much wisdom involved in it either, just common sense. Did I ever declare that she should forthwith be convicted of a crime? I didn't, did I? But I do think it's clear that her actions were extremely inappropriate, involved an incredible degree of poor judgment, and are hard to defend. And I submit that if she were a Republican, you zealous partisans would be screaming for an indictment TODAY. And everyone reading this forum knows it!

.