Will the DoJ go after Hillary like they did Petraeus?
- Thread starter EERs 3:16
- Start date
how can you possibly know
That her server wasn't hacked? She violated federal law. She violated Obama Administration policy. She violated State Department policy. She placed her own interests above national security and libs on this board rush to defend her.
That her server wasn't hacked? She violated federal law. She violated Obama Administration policy. She violated State Department policy. She placed her own interests above national security and libs on this board rush to defend her.
Re: how can you possibly know
Also, the Obama administration and state department policies were put in place after she left office, unless what I've read is wrong.
Don't think there was a law in place for this when she was in office.
Also, the Obama administration and state department policies were put in place after she left office, unless what I've read is wrong.
Re: You are both wrong
http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/03/judge-napolitano-on-hillarys-emails-she-knowingly-violated-the-law-video/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clintons-use-of-personal-e-mail-at-state-dept-violated-obama-directive/2015/03/03/454d7938-c1b9-11e4-9271-610273846239_story.html
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/state-department-email-rule-hillary-clinton-115804.html
http://nation.foxnews.com/2015/03/05/did-hillary-commit-felony
This post was edited on 3/10 2:07 PM by WVPATX
http://dailycaller.com/2015/03/03/judge-napolitano-on-hillarys-emails-she-knowingly-violated-the-law-video/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clintons-use-of-personal-e-mail-at-state-dept-violated-obama-directive/2015/03/03/454d7938-c1b9-11e4-9271-610273846239_story.html
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/state-department-email-rule-hillary-clinton-115804.html
http://nation.foxnews.com/2015/03/05/did-hillary-commit-felony
This post was edited on 3/10 2:07 PM by WVPATX
Re: The Federal Records Act
She didn't break any laws, game over, you lose. Both parties agree now that she didn't break any laws.
If her security was so bad, where is all the news of her being hacked. Surely, if she had been hacked, we would all know about it.
She didn't break any laws, game over, you lose. Both parties agree now that she didn't break any laws.
If her security was so bad, where is all the news of her being hacked. Surely, if she had been hacked, we would all know about it.
Re: Exactly...Law was enacted last year...she left in '13.
It's the truth. If a law was broken, everyone would be citing the law. They would be able to quote or cite 18 USC $ 953 (used as an example).
Re: Exactly...Law was enacted last year...she left in '13.
It's an assumption based on not having the knowledge of whether she violated statutes by unwittingly providing classified information. There is no way to determine that at this point. They will need time to comb through every document to see if she did or did not. You are assuming she did not and if that is the case what you said would be factual. You are basing your fact off of an assumption.
Re: Exactly...Law was enacted last year...she left in '13.
What I find interesting in all of this is that if it was a GOP member there are some on here that would not be nearly as outraged about this.
To some, I'm sure this is sounding like a liberal defending a liberal ... I'm not (my viewpoint would be exactly the same regardless of what letter appeared in front of their name) ... I've mentioned many times that whether she broke a law or not she shouldn't have done this. But let's cool the jets on proclaiming somebody a felon until all the facts are in.
This post was edited on 3/10 3:26 PM by WhiteTailEER
Well, it is an assumption that didn't break any laws, but it also certainly isn't a fact that she did. She is required to turn over the emails for archival purposes. As long as she turns them all over, then she didn't break any law. I assume that she probably didn't turn them all over, or isn't going to turn them all over, but until somebody can prove that she didn't you can't claim that she broke the law.
What I find interesting in all of this is that if it was a GOP member there are some on here that would not be nearly as outraged about this.
To some, I'm sure this is sounding like a liberal defending a liberal ... I'm not (my viewpoint would be exactly the same regardless of what letter appeared in front of their name) ... I've mentioned many times that whether she broke a law or not she shouldn't have done this. But let's cool the jets on proclaiming somebody a felon until all the facts are in.
This post was edited on 3/10 3:26 PM by WhiteTailEER
Are you ignorant of the difference or just willfully ignorant ...
The email server was not for classified information. It was for unclassified communication. No matter what email address she was using, classified information on it would constitute spillage. That can be accidental or not, but someone would have had to have sent the info or received the info on another unclassified email account. Petraeus didn't secure classified documents, and that's something completely different than using a private email account for unclassified government communication.
The email server was not for classified information. It was for unclassified communication. No matter what email address she was using, classified information on it would constitute spillage. That can be accidental or not, but someone would have had to have sent the info or received the info on another unclassified email account. Petraeus didn't secure classified documents, and that's something completely different than using a private email account for unclassified government communication.
Re: Are you ignorant of the difference or just willfully ignorant ...
Hill has been on all networks saying she/we have removed the personal transmissions. She might want to keep quiet on the subject. She is not the person to make the call as to the classification of personal or professional. She probably needs to allow an independent to make that call for the period of time she was serving.
Gowdy acts like he is getting frustrated with her attempting to tell him what is pertinent.
Hill has been on all networks saying she/we have removed the personal transmissions. She might want to keep quiet on the subject. She is not the person to make the call as to the classification of personal or professional. She probably needs to allow an independent to make that call for the period of time she was serving.
Gowdy acts like he is getting frustrated with her attempting to tell him what is pertinent.
Re: Are you ignorant of the difference or just willfully ignorant ...
Please. She knows what's classified and what's not, and she knows what's personal and what's not. Gowdy is just frustrated because there's no e-mail from Hillary directing the terrorists to attack that "consulate" in Benghazi.
Re: Are you ignorant of the difference or just willfully ignorant ...
And you think she is the person to make that call? Gowdy will bust her fat *** with the first professional email she dumped. He is not the amature that she has dealt with in her past arrogant nature to run over people. He has been a Southern gentleman. She has always called the shots and played around the fringes.
She would have been better off to agree on an independent. Now, she has been involved in the decision making. And she has crossed a pretty shrewd proscecutor.
And you think she is the person to make that call? Gowdy will bust her fat *** with the first professional email she dumped. He is not the amature that she has dealt with in her past arrogant nature to run over people. He has been a Southern gentleman. She has always called the shots and played around the fringes.
She would have been better off to agree on an independent. Now, she has been involved in the decision making. And she has crossed a pretty shrewd proscecutor.
Re: Are you ignorant of the difference or just willfully ignorant ...
Wow, you aren't very bright. Stop letting your political stance cloud your judgment.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
Wow, you aren't very bright. Stop letting your political stance cloud your judgment.
Re: The Federal Records Act
Zero? Really? That would depend on what's in the emails wouldn't it?
Re: Are you ignorant of the difference or just willfully ignorant ...
Before addressing me, explain your lack of knowledge of Civics. What are duties of Exec branch and Legis branch. From where do they get their power?
It is OK to admit that you don't know the answer. But, preferred you read a little and learn basics.
Before addressing me, explain your lack of knowledge of Civics. What are duties of Exec branch and Legis branch. From where do they get their power?
It is OK to admit that you don't know the answer. But, preferred you read a little and learn basics.
