Hillary Clinton's Private E-Mail Draws Scrutiny

[Red Flag 1]

Guess we'll see how long the left can support ole Hillary. There's lots-a-love for "Hil" out still there, and November is still two political conventions away.

 

[Brill]

Well.. there's a start...

http://www.nytimes.com/politics/fir...n-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

At this point, what is the difference between "I never sent or received any emails that were marked classified." and "I never had sexual intercourse with that woman."?
:-/

Hillary for Prison 2016!!!

This is incredible. Our "democracy" is a total sham.

The public MUST demand the assignment of a special prosecutor immediately!

EXCLUSIVE: At least four classified Hillary Clinton emails had their markings changed to a category that shields the content from Congress and the public, Fox News has learned, in what State Department whistleblowers said may be an effort to hide the true extent of classified information on the former secretary of state’s server.

The changes, which came to light after the first tranche of 296 Benghazi emails was released in May, was confirmed by two sources -- one congressional, the other intelligence. The four emails originally were marked classified after a review by career officials at the State Department. But after a second review by the department's legal office, the designation was switched to "B5" -- also known as "deliberative process," which refers to internal deliberations by the Executive Branch. Such discussions are exempt from public release.

The B5 coding has the effect, according to a congressional source, of dropping the email content "down a deep black hole."

-
The whistleblowers told intelligence community officials that they did not agree with the B5 changes, and the changes had the effect of shielding the full extent of classified content on the server. The incident was referenced in a Washington Times report mid-August, but this is the first time fuller details have been available. Because the emails are now marked B5, or deliberative, it is impossible to know the content and relevance to the congressional and FBI investigations.

Sources: Clinton email markings changed to hide classified info

 

[Red Flag 1]

Thank our lucky stars that we have an administration with such transparency. God I hate all this crap. The assumption must be, that we are a nation of mindless idiots.

 

[AWP]

Wait...in an effort to hide the classified nature of the email and thus implicate herself, they went and upgraded the classification so no one could conclude she hid classified info on her server?

What the hell?

 

[Dame]

Pay no attention to the Manchurian behind the curtain.

 

[Brill]

Is CNN covering the same story?

Clinton's email controversy, explained
Hillary Clinton's email controversy, explained - CNNPolitics.com

 

[racing_kitty]

Is CNN covering the same story?

Clinton's email controversy, explained
Hillary Clinton's email controversy, explained - CNNPolitics.com

It's the Clinton News Network, baybeeee! What else would you expect? Someone could roll out a video tomorrow morning showing Bill receiving fellatio from a 12 year old paraplegic after he's just knocked out half of her teeth, Hillary running the camera, and Chelsea acting as producer, and CNN would run with the headline that they were promoting dental health for the underprivileged by sizing said 12yo for dentures.

Something I'm still pondering over, that I read earlier on a blog, referencing the Model Penal Code and the definition of "knowingly" (link leads to University of Dayton, not the blog) when it comes to bringing up charges (emphasis mine):

(2) Kinds of Culpability Defined

(a) Purposely.

A person acts purposely with respect to a material element of an offense when:


(i) if the element involves the nature of his conduct or a result thereof, it is his conscious object to engage in conduct of that nature or to cause such a result; and

(ii) if the element involves the attendant circumstances, he is aware of the existence of such circumstances or he believes or hopes that they exist.


(b) Knowingly.

A person acts knowingly with respect to a material element of an offense when:


(i) if the element involves the nature of his conduct or the attendant circumstances, he is aware that his conduct is of that nature or that such circumstances exist; and

(ii) if the element involves a result of his conduct, he is aware that it is practically certain that his conduct will cause such a result.

I'm not sure that CNN's use of the word is in line with the legal context of what the Hildebeast's accused of. We'll see soon enough, since the FBI's looking around.

Maybe.

Some day.

 

[Florida173]

Tomkins wrote this week in USA Today that Clinton committed no crime because she didn't "knowingly" share classified materials.

Interesting that she knows what Clinton "knowingly" did or not. With such insight this shouldn't even be an issue apparently.

 

[Red Flag 1]

It's the Clinton News Network, baybeeee! What else would you expect? Someone could roll out a video tomorrow morning showing Bill receiving fellatio from a 12 year old paraplegic after he's just knocked out half of her teeth, Hillary running the camera, and Chelsea acting as producer, and CNN would run with the headline that they were promoting dental health for the underprivileged by sizing said 12yo for dentures.

Something I'm still pondering over, that I read earlier on a blog, referencing the Model Penal Code and the definition of "knowingly" (link leads to University of Dayton, not the blog) when it comes to bringing up charges (emphasis mine):



I'm not sure that CNN's use of the word is in line with the legal context of what the Hildebeast's accused of. We'll see soon enough, since the FBI's looking around.

Maybe.

Some day.

For the last 8-9years, CNN, and the MSM, has had the same profile of reporting on the present administration, as Pravda has with it's leaders. We may be looking at the end of a two party system of govenment for the USA. Not so much because of the greatness of the Democtatic Party, as much as the absolute failure of the GOP to get it's shit together to find and support a sucessful candidate.

 

[DA SWO]

For the last 8-9years, CNN, and the MSM, has had the same profile of reporting on the present administration, as Pravda has with it's leaders. We may be looking at the end of a two party system of govenment for the USA. Not so much because of the greatness of the Democtatic Party, as much as the absolute failure of the GOP to get it's shit together to find and support a sucessful candidate.

GOP also fails to follow through on campaign promises which is why the dems win the White House and two years later we vote a bunch of Republicans in.
GOP needs to split in two with RINOs becoming "Moderate Democrats" and the Conservative Wing becoming a new party.

 

[Red Flag 1]

GOP also fails to follow through on campaign promises which is why the dems win the White House and two years later we vote a bunch of Republicans in.
GOP needs to split in two with RINOs becoming "Moderate Democrats" and the Conservative Wing becoming a new party.

With no follow through after the midterm gains, GOP is a huge fail. GOP has had eight years to find, groom and prep at least one candidate for a supported run for POTUS. HRC has been in the wings for the DIMS for years, and with all the dirt, and slime sticking to her, she still has support; the GOP has NADA. Both parties are in the business of finding and supporting a CEO to run the nation, how many really think the GOP can do the job? The track record is a fail.

 

[Florida173]

I don't know how this is damning on its own merit...

Former Clinton IT staffer to lawmakers: No testimony without immunity

Hillary Clinton’s former IT staffer who is asserting his Fifth Amendment right not to answer self-incriminating questions rejected two Senate chairmen’s request for sneak peek at what he’d say if given immunity.

Former Clinton IT staffer to lawmakers: No testimony without immunity - POLITICO

 

[DA SWO]

I don't know how this is damning on its own merit...

He won't get immunity without a sneak peek.
Give him immunity and he can perjure himself without fear of prosecution.
Slap charges on his ass and see how loyal he stays.

 

[Brill]

I don't understand how an attorney's office could even be certified to store TS info, which is NEVER private property but can ONLY be USG property. The SCI caveat is a whores of a different color.

State Dept: Clinton email storage safe not secure for some messages

Well, well, well.

That Private Email Server ....

What If Russia's Foreign Minister Conducted Official Business on an Unsecured Private Server?

COTTON:

Are the communications of the senior-most advisers to the president of the United States, even those that may be unclassified, a top priority for foreign intelligence services, in your opinion?

ROGERS:

Yes.

COTTON:

If an NSA employee came to you and said, "Hey, boss, we have reason to believe that Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov or Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif is conducting official business on a private server." How would you respond?

ROGERS:

From a foreign intelligence perspective, that represents opportunity.

Oh, if only this would turn out to be true!

Hillary Clinton's lawbreaking and lying have caught up with her | Fox News

 

[AWP]

She's had so many scandals she's scandal-proof. If she isn't charged with a crime this will all blow over.

 

[Brill]

If she isn't charged with a crime this will all blow over.

Ref to Monica?

 

[Centermass]

Mess with the bull, and you'll get the horns.

 

[DA SWO]

Mess with the bull, and you'll get the horns.

That former staffer is an idiot.

 

[AWP]

Even a rather liberal journalist for Vice.com (itself pretty liberal) has a problem with her email story. For him it is more about how government didn't work and how she's concerned with her image, but he eventually touches upon the illegality of her actions.

Why You Actually Should Care About Hillary Clinton's Damn Emails | VICE | United States

The most important aspect of her emails that anyone should be paying attention to is the fact that we don't have answers as to why she was using a private email account, and avoiding the Federal Records Act—which is a law—and why the State Department failed to respond to legitimate requests from journalists under the Freedom of Information Act for her emails years before this scandal was ever revealed.

She changes her story time and time and time again. These are things that anyone should care about when it comes to an elected official. My takeaway is that the rules, for some reason, did not apply to Hillary Clinton, as they would have applied to anyone in the federal government. It's also a failure on the part of the State Department, which did not reign her in.

If the media would focus on being journalists instead of money-whoring vermin they could bust this thing wide open. Sadly, this will take the little guys like Vice staying on the story and the DOJ pressing charges (HAHAHAHAHA!) for this to go anywhere.

 

[Brill]

Honestly, whoever doesn't realize WHY she was using a private server is a fucking moron. Even diehard Clitonites know EXACTLY why a private vice public server was used: total control over who had access.

Prosecutorial discretion will come into play here...if it hasn't already.