New York Times: Hillary Clinton illegally used private email for all State Dept. business

Yeah... your average Joe clearly has access to this sort of information.

Republican wing nuts: "Screw elections! Let's get the Clinton's for BJ's and e-mail!"

Mean while the realm of voters and people who work for a living... Not a single **** was given.

 

Yeah, not so much.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...ost-think-clinton-knowingly-lied-about-emails

Hell even over 1/4 of Democrat voters think she lied and 3 in 10 think her server use was a threat to national security.

 

I find it hilarious that they are trying to nail Hillary Clinton over emails while Bush got away with lying to the country to go to war and kill thousands of American soldiers without so much as an investigation.

It just goes to show the ruthlessness and ridiculousness of it all. They are truly desperate to take out Clinton. Why didn't the dems do this to Bush?

 

Bush didn't lie. The war was based on faulty intelligence. Based on what they knew at the time, going to war was a reasonable option.

Congress agreed and voted in favor of the war.

Lying is the act of purposely deceiving. There is zero proof that he lied.

 

Actually, for your average joe, there would be an investigation and trial before prison time, which is exactly what is occurring. It's only for Clinton that you choose to jump to the endgame immediately. Fits well with your hypocritical BS.

That said, I'm pretty sure it's not illegal to send emails about non-classified information that then becomes classified later on. So if that's all they have, this is likely just yet another non-scandal where you jump to conclusions and demand indictments without any facts.

 

To be fair, in the other hypocritical bs, there was an indictment based on facts from an investigation. In this bs, there is a conclusion to jail time based on no indictment, no investigation, no facts.

 

Prior to your hero Manning, classified information was loosely shared among those who had a clearance, which included drone information.

While everyone who has a security clearance doesnt have access to this information, there are many who do. To say your average person doesnt have information to classified information is not exactly true. The military complex is huge, employee millions of people both in the government and private sector. Many of those entering the military itself have clearances.

The point being is every one of them know the rules of having a clearance and the punishment for mishandling is harsh. For example, anyone with a clearance who intentionally views documents on wikileaks can be prosecuted.

I dont know the nature of Clintons email server. Im not going to blast her for inadvertently having a classified document on the server. However the way she handled everything is very suspicious and leads me to believe she is bending the rules and going about doing things that she shouldnt be doing.

 

I dont think I have ever heard of non-classified information stepping up to classified.

 

From the AP link on the previous page:


While neither of the emails was marked classified at the time they were sent, they have since been slapped with a "TK" marking, for "Talent Keyhole," suggesting material obtained by spy satellites. And they also were marked "NOFORN," meaning information that can only be shared with Americans with security clearances.

The two emails got those markings after consultations with the CIA and other agencies where the material originated, officials said. Some officials said they believed the designations were a stretch — a knee-jerk move in a bureaucracy rife with over-classification.


There's more in the article itself on the details of the two emails. One doesn't appear to even contain classified info at all, really. The other is a little bit more questionable:


Clinton didn't transmit the sensitive information herself, they said, and nothing in the emails she received makes direct reference to communications intercepts, confidential intelligence methods or any other form of sensitive sourcing.

The drone exchange, the officials said, begins with a copy of a news article about the CIA drone program that targets terrorists in Pakistan and elsewhere. While that program is technically top secret, it is well-known and often reported on. Former CIA director Leon Panetta and Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, have openly discussed it.

The copy makes reference to classified information, and a Clinton adviser follows up by dancing around a top secret in a way that could possibly be inferred as confirmation, the officials said. Several people, however, described this claim as tenuous.

But a second email reviewed by Charles McCullough, the intelligence community inspector general, appears more problematic, officials said. Nothing in the message is "lifted" from classified documents, they said, though they differed on where the information in it was sourced. Some said it improperly points back to highly classified material, while others countered that it was a classic case of what the government calls "parallel reporting" — receiving information the government considers secret through "open source" channels.

 

I might have misread there - it might be that the email itself wasn't classified until later, rather than the information itself? Not sure how that works exactly or if/how emails get classified in real-time.

 

Yes, that sounds more like it. Anything TK related is automatically classified. I am not sure how inter compartment emails are handled. If she simply forgot to tag the email with the appropriate header, its not that big of a deal. If she is transferring classified information (regardless if its common knowledge) over anything but SIPRNet, then I find that very significant.

 

The Clintons, like most politicians, are really bad at damage control. When they make a mistake, or get caught do something wrong, they just need to admit it and move on.

Bill should have just said, "yes it's true, I put a cigar in that young girls vagina, so what." Americans are very forgiving, they would have understood. But no, he chooses to lie and evade the truth.

Hillary should have just said, "yes, I screwed up having my own private server when I was Secretary of State, I'm really sorry." Americans are very forgiving, they would have understood. But no, she chooses to delete emails and refused to turn over the server to the investigator.

Will these people ever learn?

 

Yeah but there was no real consequences to Bill lying and there will be no real consequences to Hillary lying. Americans basically expect the Clintons to be lying pretty much any time their mouths are moving yet for some reason they don't care about it.

Basically if the Clintons do it, then it's alright for whatever reason.

 

No they wouldn't. Who the hell would be understanding of cheating on your wife ? Who would be understanding of an old boss taking advantage of his young female subordinate? I don't know what ****ty role models you have in your life , but most moral people would not be forgiving or understanding of what Clinton did. Most people aren't understanding of sexual harassment and that's pretty much what it is when a powerful, old boss man has relations with his 20 something secretary.

Most people go to jail for this. A simple 'my bad that I broke the law and left top secret information unsecured' would not suffice.

 

No one gives a ****.

It is like BENGHAZI!!!! ..... and all the other faux outrage that has been floated for years.

The people OUTRAGED were not going to vote for her and it is just another excuse to hate her... The people that were going to vote for her still will and the independents are going to be swayed far closer to the election.

 

Just as much proof as Hillary lying so why not the massive amounts of investigations?

 

You are correct.

Most people do not care because they think highly of Bill Clinton as a President and as a man. His sensibilities were ahead of his time and in many ways he ushered in modernity. His wife is popular by proxy. She lacks the charisma of Bill but has carved out her own successful political career and whoever runs against her is also running against the greatest living campaigner in the world (Slick Willie).

Americans don't care that Bill wanted young vagina on the side or that Hillary used the wrong e-mail server. Most folks figure it is better than hating gays, blacks, trans, Mexicans, poor people or women.

 

My hero Manning?

She may very well be lying, however it won't matter to most people. It is about what she lied about.

 

Yeah.... he said the same thing about BENGHAZI! and the IRS....