If Hillary is a crook, why...

[Wry Catcher]

Bureaucratic bs...no, nobody cares.

Just another example of regressives not caring about the criminality of their own, fucking hypocrites.

After 500 million taxpayer dollars spent on the Clinton's you have come up with NOTHING. The 8th investigation of Benghazi--in comparison to Reagan where he lost 240 U.S. marines in Lebanon resulted in 1 investigation and it was over. Clearly it's been nothing more than a Reich wing dog and pony show for nothing more than political gain--and the 8th investigation cost the taxpayers 7 million dollars.

It couldn't be better stated than this:

"Herein lies a lesson for Republicans who are perpetually trying to appease the far right: It’s a fool’s errand. They went to the tea party – and now they’re taking Donald Trump to the prom. Likewise, then-House Speaker John Boehner named the Benghazi committee because activists were dissatisfied that seven previous congressional investigations had failed to uncover major scandal material. Now an eighth has produced more of the same – and the agitators are as agitated as ever."
With Clinton exonerated, conspiracy theorists turn on Trey Gowdy

Emails the same thing. You can look on this board right now, and you'll see more threads about email conspiracy's more Benghazi statements.

It's not about Hillary Clinton per se, it's much more about the 1st woman President of the United States that you can't stand the thought of.

I wish I had you capacity to ignore reality, are you saying she didn't even violate State Dept email policies and federal records keeping laws?

She's admitted that setting up the server was wrong, and she was unaware that it was a problem, and has apologized for it time & time again. Furthermore, it was Senior IT staffer working at the State Department that set up and maintained her server. Now one would think that a Senior IT staffer working at the State Department would have known State Department protocol, & that it was wrong to set her up with one. I imagine he has set up several in the past and it never was an issue until now. Of course he was granted immunity to save his own ass.

You are aware that Colin Powell & Condi Rice, both former Secretary's of State on the Republican side of the isle had their own issues with emails, RIGHT? Or is it possible that FOX News and Rush Limbaugh never told you that-LOL
State Department: Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice staffers received classified info via personal email - CNNPolitics.com

The FBI said no criminal intent--so there will be no criminal charges. The FBI also gave a very good description between the cases of Hillary Clinton & 4 star General and director of the CIA, David Petraeus of why he was charged and she wasn't.
James Comey: David Petraeus case worse than Hillary Clinton's emails - CNNPolitics.com

And as far as those so-called secure government servers. Here are the ones that have been hacked so-far--and it may make your straight hair curl.
List of hacked government agencies grows: State Department, White House, NOAA & USPS

You know if you stay away from these Reich wing talk show hosts, and FOX News--and start reading and getting sources of information from links available to you at your fingertips, you will be very surprised how much you can learn in a short span of time.

More crap, Comey ignored the law, period. Intent is not required as an element of the crime, as the the law is written. Petraeus allowed someone who had clearance to see his calendar, she just didn't have a need to know. Clinton made all the classified information on her server available to her lawyers who didn't have any clearance. They were granted limited clearance to review the emails, but that was long after they had possession of the drives.

Mens rea is an important element in an indictment. This may be too abstract for you to understand, but I'll try to edify you:

You are driving an car on a road you've never traveled before. A police officer pulls you over for not stopping at a stop sign. You claim you never saw one and get a ticket. You go back and see there is a stop sign, and the stop sign is hidden by the limbs of a shade tree. You photograph the scene and protest the ticket. You plead NG and provide the photo as evidence, Are you guilty or innocent?

 

[ClosedCaption]

She's a super villian and the Republicans arent smart enough to lay a hand on her extensive list of crimes...thats possible, but not probable

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Actually what he said was, "There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation."

He only stated that there was evidence. He rendered no opinion. You did. You jumped to the conclusion that since he said there was evidence then she was guilty without even knowing what that evidence was. This is understandable because you believed Hillary was liar and crook without every seeing the evidence

He also did not say specify that there was evidence that Clinton should have known that an unclassified system was no place for the conversation. He said Clinton or the government employees with whom she was corresponding should have known... Whether Clinton should have known depends on the construction of the conversation and whether Clinton saw the classified document. If Clinton never saw the classified document, then it is the person that sent it to her who should have know... Again you jump to a conclusion because of what you believe about Clinton.

The bottom line is if she had nothing to hide, she could have used the dot.gov website from anywhere in the world including from the comfort of her own home. If I were to be contacting a customer of the company I work for and instead of using my company e-mail addy, I were to use my Yahoo address because I wanted to make a "side deal" and didn't want a record of my e-mail being on the company server because it's a conflict of interest....would that be moral? You can't whitewash this nor can you justify what she did no matter how hard you all try.

You are starting with a conclusion that the reason for the private server was to hide information. However, from all the investigations, the problem centered around Clinton's insistence on using her Blackberry which was tethered to a private server. She had no problem having it connected to the secure network in the State Dept. Apparently the IT and Security folks did. She said, she just wanted to use a single device, namely the Blackberry or a similar device that Obama used and a single email address for both private and state department use. This she latter admitted was a mistake.

Yet Comey said she used multiple devices, the single device claim was another LIE.

Multiple servers but only one in use at any given time and always in their home. Comey broke this down in his testimony as well. You keep pointing to testimony but leave out the exculpatory bits. You're dishonest in your assertions.

The discussion is how many devices the hildabitch used to access those servers, pay attention. And no, the servers were not always in the home, we know for a fact it was located at Platt River Tech in CO for a time.

No, Comey testified as to what she was referring to. Like I said you're dishonestly making false assertions. There was only one server in use at any time and that server was always in their home. A disused server was stored elsewhere.

 

[OKTexas]

So you're promoting a man with no respect, no honor, no dignity & the only loyalty he has shown anyone is to himself and Russia. A man that is currently involved in 3500 class action law suits over Trump University. The most incompetent, unqualified, dangerous candidate in this nations history.
Yes, Trump University Was a Massive Scam, by Ian Tuttle, National Review
Donald Trump is a unique threat to American democracy
A neuroscientist explains: Trump has a mental disorder that makes him a dangerous world leader

And all because of your 20 year spoon fed hate of Hillary Clinton, with enough conspiracy theories to fill the capital building from floor to ceiling, without ONE single thread of evidence to prove any guilt on any one of them.

Bravo--you're a true Patriot of this country.

Hitlery is the most dangerous ever....even worse than the Barrypuppet...hands down.

This ^^^ is one of the most childish idiot-grams to date.

She is a globalist and a crook. She is thicker than thieves with the very .01 percent you leftard morons claim to be so against. Seriously, your type of "stupid" should be declared a mental illness.

Yep, 20 million in two years for speaking fees from wall street. They don't pay for shit they don't want to hear.

Why do you post on issues you know nothing about? Clinton had facts known to her by her world wide experience as Sect. of State; in a global economy such facts and opinions are valuable to banks and brokers who have international investments.

Great, then there should be no problem releasing the transcripts.

 

[OKTexas]

Just another example of regressives not caring about the criminality of their own, fucking hypocrites.

After 500 million taxpayer dollars spent on the Clinton's you have come up with NOTHING. The 8th investigation of Benghazi--in comparison to Reagan where he lost 240 U.S. marines in Lebanon resulted in 1 investigation and it was over. Clearly it's been nothing more than a Reich wing dog and pony show for nothing more than political gain--and the 8th investigation cost the taxpayers 7 million dollars.

It couldn't be better stated than this:

"Herein lies a lesson for Republicans who are perpetually trying to appease the far right: It’s a fool’s errand. They went to the tea party – and now they’re taking Donald Trump to the prom. Likewise, then-House Speaker John Boehner named the Benghazi committee because activists were dissatisfied that seven previous congressional investigations had failed to uncover major scandal material. Now an eighth has produced more of the same – and the agitators are as agitated as ever."
With Clinton exonerated, conspiracy theorists turn on Trey Gowdy

Emails the same thing. You can look on this board right now, and you'll see more threads about email conspiracy's more Benghazi statements.

It's not about Hillary Clinton per se, it's much more about the 1st woman President of the United States that you can't stand the thought of.

You're a damn fool, did Reagan deny 600 requests for additional security in Lebanon?

8 investigations each with a report. Read them.

Why, the dems have already slaughtered their sacrificial Lamb. Pun intended.

Why

So you don't make the foolish mistake of making allegations that have already been addressed of course.

Stop quoting me out of context.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Actually what he said was, "There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation."

He only stated that there was evidence. He rendered no opinion. You did. You jumped to the conclusion that since he said there was evidence then she was guilty without even knowing what that evidence was. This is understandable because you believed Hillary was liar and crook without every seeing the evidence

He also did not say specify that there was evidence that Clinton should have known that an unclassified system was no place for the conversation. He said Clinton or the government employees with whom she was corresponding should have known... Whether Clinton should have known depends on the construction of the conversation and whether Clinton saw the classified document. If Clinton never saw the classified document, then it is the person that sent it to her who should have know... Again you jump to a conclusion because of what you believe about Clinton.

The bottom line is if she had nothing to hide, she could have used the dot.gov website from anywhere in the world including from the comfort of her own home. If I were to be contacting a customer of the company I work for and instead of using my company e-mail addy, I were to use my Yahoo address because I wanted to make a "side deal" and didn't want a record of my e-mail being on the company server because it's a conflict of interest....would that be moral? You can't whitewash this nor can you justify what she did no matter how hard you all try.

You are starting with a conclusion that the reason for the private server was to hide information. However, from all the investigations, the problem centered around Clinton's insistence on using her Blackberry which was tethered to a private server. She had no problem having it connected to the secure network in the State Dept. Apparently the IT and Security folks did. She said, she just wanted to use a single device, namely the Blackberry or a similar device that Obama used and a single email address for both private and state department use. This she latter admitted was a mistake.

Yet Comey said she used multiple devices, the single device claim was another LIE.

A lie by omission - technology advances create the need for newer and better. Do you still have that 3 pound cell phone first produced in the 1980's?

Wrong, she told congress after she left State that she use one device for convenience. She knew that not to be true when she said it and Comey said as much in his testimony.

One device in 2013, a new device in 2014 is using one device, spin it however you like, but if you don't want to continue to be scene as a liar by omission, show me a photo of her using two devices at the same time.

 

[Wry Catcher]

Hitlery is the most dangerous ever....even worse than the Barrypuppet...hands down.

This ^^^ is one of the most childish idiot-grams to date.

She is a globalist and a crook. She is thicker than thieves with the very .01 percent you leftard morons claim to be so against. Seriously, your type of "stupid" should be declared a mental illness.

Yep, 20 million in two years for speaking fees from wall street. They don't pay for shit they don't want to hear.

Why do you post on issues you know nothing about? Clinton had facts known to her by her world wide experience as Sect. of State; in a global economy such facts and opinions are valuable to banks and brokers who have international investments.

Great, then there should be no problem releasing the transcripts.

Oh there is a huge problem, asshole on the right will take parts of her remarks out of context and spin them to their benefit. That needs not to be done with Trump's comments, his unedited comments in context are killing him.

 

[OKTexas]

Just another example of regressives not caring about the criminality of their own, fucking hypocrites.

After 500 million taxpayer dollars spent on the Clinton's you have come up with NOTHING. The 8th investigation of Benghazi--in comparison to Reagan where he lost 240 U.S. marines in Lebanon resulted in 1 investigation and it was over. Clearly it's been nothing more than a Reich wing dog and pony show for nothing more than political gain--and the 8th investigation cost the taxpayers 7 million dollars.

It couldn't be better stated than this:

"Herein lies a lesson for Republicans who are perpetually trying to appease the far right: It’s a fool’s errand. They went to the tea party – and now they’re taking Donald Trump to the prom. Likewise, then-House Speaker John Boehner named the Benghazi committee because activists were dissatisfied that seven previous congressional investigations had failed to uncover major scandal material. Now an eighth has produced more of the same – and the agitators are as agitated as ever."
With Clinton exonerated, conspiracy theorists turn on Trey Gowdy

Emails the same thing. You can look on this board right now, and you'll see more threads about email conspiracy's more Benghazi statements.

It's not about Hillary Clinton per se, it's much more about the 1st woman President of the United States that you can't stand the thought of.

I wish I had you capacity to ignore reality, are you saying she didn't even violate State Dept email policies and federal records keeping laws?

She's admitted that setting up the server was wrong, and she was unaware that it was a problem, and has apologized for it time & time again. Furthermore, it was Senior IT staffer working at the State Department that set up and maintained her server. Now one would think that a Senior IT staffer working at the State Department would have known State Department protocol, & that it was wrong to set her up with one. I imagine he has set up several in the past and it never was an issue until now. Of course he was granted immunity to save his own ass.

You are aware that Colin Powell & Condi Rice, both former Secretary's of State on the Republican side of the isle had their own issues with emails, RIGHT? Or is it possible that FOX News and Rush Limbaugh never told you that-LOL
State Department: Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice staffers received classified info via personal email - CNNPolitics.com

The FBI said no criminal intent--so there will be no criminal charges. The FBI also gave a very good description between the cases of Hillary Clinton & 4 star General and director of the CIA, David Petraeus of why he was charged and she wasn't.
James Comey: David Petraeus case worse than Hillary Clinton's emails - CNNPolitics.com

And as far as those so-called secure government servers. Here are the ones that have been hacked so-far--and it may make your straight hair curl.
List of hacked government agencies grows: State Department, White House, NOAA & USPS

You know if you stay away from these Reich wing talk show hosts, and FOX News--and start reading and getting sources of information from links available to you at your fingertips, you will be very surprised how much you can learn in a short span of time.

More crap, Comey ignored the law, period. Intent is not required as an element of the crime, as the the law is written. Petraeus allowed someone who had clearance to see his calendar, she just didn't have a need to know. Clinton made all the classified information on her server available to her lawyers who didn't have any clearance. They were granted limited clearance to review the emails, but that was long after they had possession of the drives.

Mens rea is an important element in an indictment. This may be too abstract for you to understand, but I'll try to edify you:

You are driving an car on a road you've never traveled before. A police officer pulls you over for not stopping at a stop sign. You claim you never saw one and get a ticket. You go back and see there is a stop sign, and the stop sign is hidden by the limbs of a shade tree. You photograph the scene and protest the ticket. You plead NG and provide the photo as evidence, Are you guilty or innocent?

Maybe you should read the IGs report, people at State tried to raise the issue, she knew full well she was doing something wrong, she signed a statement that she had been briefed on proper procedures. She was also fully aware of records keeping laws.

 

[OKTexas]

The bottom line is if she had nothing to hide, she could have used the dot.gov website from anywhere in the world including from the comfort of her own home. If I were to be contacting a customer of the company I work for and instead of using my company e-mail addy, I were to use my Yahoo address because I wanted to make a "side deal" and didn't want a record of my e-mail being on the company server because it's a conflict of interest....would that be moral? You can't whitewash this nor can you justify what she did no matter how hard you all try.

You are starting with a conclusion that the reason for the private server was to hide information. However, from all the investigations, the problem centered around Clinton's insistence on using her Blackberry which was tethered to a private server. She had no problem having it connected to the secure network in the State Dept. Apparently the IT and Security folks did. She said, she just wanted to use a single device, namely the Blackberry or a similar device that Obama used and a single email address for both private and state department use. This she latter admitted was a mistake.

Yet Comey said she used multiple devices, the single device claim was another LIE.

A lie by omission - technology advances create the need for newer and better. Do you still have that 3 pound cell phone first produced in the 1980's?

Wrong, she told congress after she left State that she use one device for convenience. She knew that not to be true when she said it and Comey said as much in his testimony.

One device in 2013, a new device in 2014 is using one device, spin it however you like, but if you don't want to continue to be scene as a liar by omission, show me a photo of her using two devices at the same time.

So she used a tablet for a phone, because Come said she used on to access her email. You're the one trying to deflect and spin.

 

[Wry Catcher]

You are starting with a conclusion that the reason for the private server was to hide information. However, from all the investigations, the problem centered around Clinton's insistence on using her Blackberry which was tethered to a private server. She had no problem having it connected to the secure network in the State Dept. Apparently the IT and Security folks did. She said, she just wanted to use a single device, namely the Blackberry or a similar device that Obama used and a single email address for both private and state department use. This she latter admitted was a mistake.

Yet Comey said she used multiple devices, the single device claim was another LIE.

A lie by omission - technology advances create the need for newer and better. Do you still have that 3 pound cell phone first produced in the 1980's?

Wrong, she told congress after she left State that she use one device for convenience. She knew that not to be true when she said it and Comey said as much in his testimony.

One device in 2013, a new device in 2014 is using one device, spin it however you like, but if you don't want to continue to be scene as a liar by omission, show me a photo of her using two devices at the same time.

So she used a tablet for a phone, because Come said she used on to access her email. You're the one trying to deflect and spin.

Me deflect? LOL:

"Mens rea is an important element in an indictment. This may be too abstract for you to understand, but I'll try to edify you:

"You are driving an car on a road you've never traveled before. A police officer pulls you over for not stopping at a stop sign. You claim you never saw one and get a ticket. You go back and see there is a stop sign, and the stop sign is hidden by the limbs of a shade tree. You photograph the scene and protest the ticket. You plead NG and provide the photo as evidence, Are you guilty or innocent?"

There is no crime. Let the first person who has never made a mistake toss the first stone. And that ain't you bub.

 

[Flopper]

We don't even know if Clinton ever even saw any of the classified material on the server. About the only thing we do know for sure is there was classified information on the server and that she should not have allowed her IT employees to setup an un-certified private email server for her use. That was a mistake. However, reading about her lack knowledge of the technology, I doubt she understood the implications at the time. The purpose of the server was to handle her private email and State Dept email was to be stored on secure government servers, but that never happened.

Come January, Clinton will have Obama's phone will one email address for all of her email both private and government.

The one I posted that was marked confidential was addressed directly to the hildabitch. Of course she saw them. She also issued and signed a policy letter forbidding dept employees form doing the very thing she was guilty of herself. An ambassador was fired in part for not using the state.gov system. There is NO WAY she can claim ignorance, and you trying to do it for her just makes you look silly.

How do you know what you she saw? On an email server you can't determine if a user actually read an email. In fact, you can't tell it was even opened. Email conversation can contain dozens of emails and attachments. To think that the Secretary of State who receives tens of thousands of emails and attachments reads them all is a bit naive.

Yet Comey said no reasonable person in her position would have had the conversations she did on a insecure system. Meaning she participated in those conversations, and according to you, she did so with zero knowledge of the topics. Feel free to push that in the loony bin, I'm sure it will go over really well.

No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying she has not read all of the tens of thousands of emails and attachments that she receives. It's very common for a top executives to read only the first email in a chain from a subordinate which explains a problem and ask for directions. Executives in top positions don't routinely reads all the banter and attached documents in a chain of emails so it's quite likely that there would be classified emails on her servers that she never saw. Typically a staff member will summarize the conversation and ask for directions of the boss. If there were classified information buried in attachments and emails in the chain, she may or may not have seen them.

Of course, this get's back to the basically problem, she never should have allowed her staff to install a private un-certified server which Clinton and most of the world recognizes as a mistake.

That's all well and good, the particular email I posted with the classified marking was the first in the chain addressed to HRC and CC to others. And you're right, it was a mistake because she got caught, her intent was to get around federal records keeping laws in order to hide her activities. This new revelation that just came out about Clinton foundation folks asking favors of State on behalf of foreign interest just puts an exclamation point on that little fact. And don't bother to say the hildabitch wasn't included in the emails, her top aids act at her pleasure, she is directly responsible for EVERYTHING they do.

Assumptions and accusations. This is getting a bid repetitive.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

After 500 million taxpayer dollars spent on the Clinton's you have come up with NOTHING. The 8th investigation of Benghazi--in comparison to Reagan where he lost 240 U.S. marines in Lebanon resulted in 1 investigation and it was over. Clearly it's been nothing more than a Reich wing dog and pony show for nothing more than political gain--and the 8th investigation cost the taxpayers 7 million dollars.

It couldn't be better stated than this:

"Herein lies a lesson for Republicans who are perpetually trying to appease the far right: It’s a fool’s errand. They went to the tea party – and now they’re taking Donald Trump to the prom. Likewise, then-House Speaker John Boehner named the Benghazi committee because activists were dissatisfied that seven previous congressional investigations had failed to uncover major scandal material. Now an eighth has produced more of the same – and the agitators are as agitated as ever."
With Clinton exonerated, conspiracy theorists turn on Trey Gowdy

Emails the same thing. You can look on this board right now, and you'll see more threads about email conspiracy's more Benghazi statements.

It's not about Hillary Clinton per se, it's much more about the 1st woman President of the United States that you can't stand the thought of.

You're a damn fool, did Reagan deny 600 requests for additional security in Lebanon?

8 investigations each with a report. Read them.

Why, the dems have already slaughtered their sacrificial Lamb. Pun intended.

Why

So you don't make the foolish mistake of making allegations that have already been addressed of course.

Stop quoting me out of context.

It's within context. You asked why and I told you.

 

[oreo]

After 500 million taxpayer dollars spent on the Clinton's you have come up with NOTHING. The 8th investigation of Benghazi--in comparison to Reagan where he lost 240 U.S. marines in Lebanon resulted in 1 investigation and it was over. Clearly it's been nothing more than a Reich wing dog and pony show for nothing more than political gain--and the 8th investigation cost the taxpayers 7 million dollars.

It couldn't be better stated than this:

"Herein lies a lesson for Republicans who are perpetually trying to appease the far right: It’s a fool’s errand. They went to the tea party – and now they’re taking Donald Trump to the prom. Likewise, then-House Speaker John Boehner named the Benghazi committee because activists were dissatisfied that seven previous congressional investigations had failed to uncover major scandal material. Now an eighth has produced more of the same – and the agitators are as agitated as ever."
With Clinton exonerated, conspiracy theorists turn on Trey Gowdy

Emails the same thing. You can look on this board right now, and you'll see more threads about email conspiracy's more Benghazi statements.

It's not about Hillary Clinton per se, it's much more about the 1st woman President of the United States that you can't stand the thought of.

I wish I had you capacity to ignore reality, are you saying she didn't even violate State Dept email policies and federal records keeping laws?

She's admitted that setting up the server was wrong, and she was unaware that it was a problem, and has apologized for it time & time again. Furthermore, it was Senior IT staffer working at the State Department that set up and maintained her server. Now one would think that a Senior IT staffer working at the State Department would have known State Department protocol, & that it was wrong to set her up with one. I imagine he has set up several in the past and it never was an issue until now. Of course he was granted immunity to save his own ass.

You are aware that Colin Powell & Condi Rice, both former Secretary's of State on the Republican side of the isle had their own issues with emails, RIGHT? Or is it possible that FOX News and Rush Limbaugh never told you that-LOL
State Department: Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice staffers received classified info via personal email - CNNPolitics.com

The FBI said no criminal intent--so there will be no criminal charges. The FBI also gave a very good description between the cases of Hillary Clinton & 4 star General and director of the CIA, David Petraeus of why he was charged and she wasn't.
James Comey: David Petraeus case worse than Hillary Clinton's emails - CNNPolitics.com

And as far as those so-called secure government servers. Here are the ones that have been hacked so-far--and it may make your straight hair curl.
List of hacked government agencies grows: State Department, White House, NOAA & USPS

You know if you stay away from these Reich wing talk show hosts, and FOX News--and start reading and getting sources of information from links available to you at your fingertips, you will be very surprised how much you can learn in a short span of time.

More crap, Comey ignored the law, period. Intent is not required as an element of the crime, as the the law is written. Petraeus allowed someone who had clearance to see his calendar, she just didn't have a need to know. Clinton made all the classified information on her server available to her lawyers who didn't have any clearance. They were granted limited clearance to review the emails, but that was long after they had possession of the drives.

Mens rea is an important element in an indictment. This may be too abstract for you to understand, but I'll try to edify you:

You are driving an car on a road you've never traveled before. A police officer pulls you over for not stopping at a stop sign. You claim you never saw one and get a ticket. You go back and see there is a stop sign, and the stop sign is hidden by the limbs of a shade tree. You photograph the scene and protest the ticket. You plead NG and provide the photo as evidence, Are you guilty or innocent?

Maybe you should read the IGs report, people at State tried to raise the issue, she knew full well she was doing something wrong, she signed a statement that she had been briefed on proper procedures. She was also fully aware of records keeping laws.

LINK--LINK--LINK? Again you have provided NO link to back up your statement, so what is it then? BULLSHIT. Hillary Clinton's investigations are OVER.

You are supporting a candidate that is going to be engulfed in 3500 CLASS ACTION LAW SUITS in the near future. Do you want a President or a Bozo that is going to be living in a court room for the next upteen years?
Yes, Trump University Was a Massive Scam, by Ian Tuttle, National Review

 

[francoHFW]

And ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ....

 

[OKTexas]

Yet Comey said she used multiple devices, the single device claim was another LIE.

A lie by omission - technology advances create the need for newer and better. Do you still have that 3 pound cell phone first produced in the 1980's?

Wrong, she told congress after she left State that she use one device for convenience. She knew that not to be true when she said it and Comey said as much in his testimony.

One device in 2013, a new device in 2014 is using one device, spin it however you like, but if you don't want to continue to be scene as a liar by omission, show me a photo of her using two devices at the same time.

So she used a tablet for a phone, because Come said she used on to access her email. You're the one trying to deflect and spin.

Me deflect? LOL:

"Mens rea is an important element in an indictment. This may be too abstract for you to understand, but I'll try to edify you:

"You are driving an car on a road you've never traveled before. A police officer pulls you over for not stopping at a stop sign. You claim you never saw one and get a ticket. You go back and see there is a stop sign, and the stop sign is hidden by the limbs of a shade tree. You photograph the scene and protest the ticket. You plead NG and provide the photo as evidence, Are you guilty or innocent?"

There is no crime. Let the first person who has never made a mistake toss the first stone. And that ain't you bub.

You can repeat Mens rea. Mens rea, Mens rea till the freaking cows come home while ignoring the fact that she fully knew what she was doing was wrong, I don't really give a fuck. So why don't you continue this conversation with the voices in your head, I'm done.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Damn straight, GOP chumps...NADA

We have proved everything alledged against Crooked Hillary Clinton. It's the criminal DOJ of the Obama regime who refuses to indict her. When Trump wins, watch for your bitch indicted. There is no double jeopardy here.

 

[Pop23]

Damn straight, GOP chumps...NADA

Destruction of evidence works great.....

Until it don't.

 

[OKTexas]

The one I posted that was marked confidential was addressed directly to the hildabitch. Of course she saw them. She also issued and signed a policy letter forbidding dept employees form doing the very thing she was guilty of herself. An ambassador was fired in part for not using the state.gov system. There is NO WAY she can claim ignorance, and you trying to do it for her just makes you look silly.

How do you know what you she saw? On an email server you can't determine if a user actually read an email. In fact, you can't tell it was even opened. Email conversation can contain dozens of emails and attachments. To think that the Secretary of State who receives tens of thousands of emails and attachments reads them all is a bit naive.

Yet Comey said no reasonable person in her position would have had the conversations she did on a insecure system. Meaning she participated in those conversations, and according to you, she did so with zero knowledge of the topics. Feel free to push that in the loony bin, I'm sure it will go over really well.

No, that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying she has not read all of the tens of thousands of emails and attachments that she receives. It's very common for a top executives to read only the first email in a chain from a subordinate which explains a problem and ask for directions. Executives in top positions don't routinely reads all the banter and attached documents in a chain of emails so it's quite likely that there would be classified emails on her servers that she never saw. Typically a staff member will summarize the conversation and ask for directions of the boss. If there were classified information buried in attachments and emails in the chain, she may or may not have seen them.

Of course, this get's back to the basically problem, she never should have allowed her staff to install a private un-certified server which Clinton and most of the world recognizes as a mistake.

That's all well and good, the particular email I posted with the classified marking was the first in the chain addressed to HRC and CC to others. And you're right, it was a mistake because she got caught, her intent was to get around federal records keeping laws in order to hide her activities. This new revelation that just came out about Clinton foundation folks asking favors of State on behalf of foreign interest just puts an exclamation point on that little fact. And don't bother to say the hildabitch wasn't included in the emails, her top aids act at her pleasure, she is directly responsible for EVERYTHING they do.

Assumptions and accusations. This is getting a bid repetitive.

I see, you're running out of excuses for the bitch, so is she.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

If it's your job to investigate a family member for a crime, what do you think the conclusion of that investigation will be?

Yeah, these idiots think we're fools and can't see through her.

 

[OKTexas]

You're a damn fool, did Reagan deny 600 requests for additional security in Lebanon?

8 investigations each with a report. Read them.

Why, the dems have already slaughtered their sacrificial Lamb. Pun intended.

Why

So you don't make the foolish mistake of making allegations that have already been addressed of course.

Stop quoting me out of context.

It's within context. You asked why and I told you.

Screw off you posted one word of a nine word sentence.