The big lie: "anyone else would have been prosecuted".

[DanTex]

So this is the spin the media has decided upon, led by those separated-at-birth triplets named Trump, Greenwald, and Scarborough.

Total bullshit. The truth is, nobody else would have even been investigated. And it's not speculation. Rice and Powell, who did precisely the same thing, were not investigated and nobody cared. Not only that, but in Comey's statement he pointed out that these were email chains, meaning that a bunch of other people were forwarding the classified info around, and they didn't get investigated. And if you think that those email chains (along with Rice's and Powell's) were the only times that high-ranking government officials unknowingly discussed matters that were technically classified over unsecured email, then I have a bridge to sell you.

Which brings us to the big lie part 2: that a private server is "more illegal" than state.gov or gmail. This is totally false, and there's no ambiguity. Classified info must be transmitted through secure means, and no email is considered secure. Period. The government has a whole parallel system for transmission of classified information.

Now we get to big lie part 3: Hillary's setup was more insecure than .gov or gmail. Comey hilariously tried to imply this. And then a few sentences later he was forced to concede that there was zero evidence that Hillary got hacked, but that multiple other high-ranking officials using commercial emails did get hacked. Comey failed to mention that state.gov also suffered a massive breach. And it doesn't stop there. The friggin' NSA, the most secretive and encryption savvy organization the world has ever seen also had a massive breach (something Greenwald, who aided and abetted it, knows about). Speaking empirically, Hillary's email server was possibly the most secure computer system used by any government official during the entire Obama administration.

The reality is, the state department's procedures regarding classified info are imperfect, mainly because they are carried out by humans. In Hillary's case, about 0.1% of her communications contained classified information, and as Comey pointed out, there was neither intent nor gross negligence. Hillary is not the only one who did this, in fact not only the two SoSes before her, but also any other high-ranking official that deals with classified information is going to, very rarely but still more than zero times, end up transmitting non-secure. If everyone who did this got prosecuted, there would be no high-ranking officials left. It would be like prosecuting every college student that has a single pirated song or movie on their computers or phones. You might as well just turn colleges into prisons.

The question we should be asking is: does any of this matter? Some tiny fraction of a percent of government email communications unintentionally contain technically classified information, how bad is this really? Should we try to put in another layer of bureaucracy to fix this? Where does this rank in the problems we face as a nation? The answer is, it doesn't. It has no real consequences. It's like trying to stop Sharia Law from taking over Oklahoma.

We're talking about this because her name is Clinton. She was investigated because her name is Clinton. You'd think that after decades of non-scandals, people would figure this out. But the MSM is going to be the MSM. They need to make the Clintons the bad guys.

[seabeyond]

1. Biggest lie... Anyone else would have been prosecuted. As we saw, that isn't the case. Only Clinton

[MaggieD]

2. Exactly

Money quote:

Total bullshit. The truth is, nobody else would have even been investigated. And it's not speculation. Rice and Powell, who did precisely the same thing, were not investigated and nobody cared. Not only that, but in Comey's statement he pointed out that these were email chains, meaning that a bunch of other people were forwarding the classified info around, and they didn't get investigated. And if you think that those email chains (along with Rice's and Powell's) were the only times that high-ranking government officials unknowingly discussed matters that were technically classified over unsecured email, then I have a bridge to sell you.

Nailed it, Dan.

[cosmicone]

3. kicked and highly recommended n/t

[Cha]

4. "Total bullshit. The truth is, nobody else would have even been investigated. And it's not

speculation. Rice and Powell, who did precisely the same thing, were not investigated and nobody cared. Not only that, but in Comey's statement he pointed out that these were email chains, meaning that a bunch of other people were forwarding the classified info around, and they didn't get investigated."

Thank you, Dan.. The sooner comey is out of job the better.

[Surya Gayatri]

5. ^^^WORD!^^^

We're talking about this because her name is Clinton. She was investigated because her name is Clinton. You'd think that after decades of non-scandals, people would figure this out.

The MSM is in high dudgeon, desperately trying to keep the "untrustworthy" narrative going. All the better to make the "horse race" competitive.

MSNBC has been especially rabid in pushing the lies, half-truths and innuendos this morning. They're almost unhinged.

[riversedge]

10. Most of cnn and msnbc were horrible--could have had on fox and not

noted the difference. Todd was beyond horrible. I shut it off after a while.

[Surya Gayatri]

14. Me, too. Mika was totally unhinged, as was Scar. What a sleazy, lying bunch of lowlifes.

[TCJ70]

6. Maybe, maybe not...

...there is this case:

https://www.fbi.gov/sacramento/press-releases/2015/folsom-naval-reservist-is-sentenced-after-pleading-guilty-to-unauthorized-removal-and-retention-of-classified-materials

This guy did the same thing. FBI found no intent to distribute the classified info to anyone inappropriate but he was prosecuted.

[DanTex]

12. Not remotely the same thing. That guy didn't mistakenly, 0.1% of the time, send an email

that unbeknownst to him at the time contained classified information, the way Hillary or Powell or Rice or countless other high-ranking officials that work with classified information on a daily basis. He intentionally downloaded classified materials onto his cell phone and/or laptop.

[TCJ70]

32. It's definitely the same thing. He had classified information on unsecured devices.

The only difference is that you're right, he didn't email anything unsecurely. In that way it is different from Hillary's situation. He just had stuff.

[DanTex]

34. He intentionally downloaded it onto an unsecured device. And he knew the stuff was

classified, it wasn't a mistake or carelessness. Very different from what Hillary or Powell or Rice or countless other high-ranking officials have done and continue to do.

[TCJ70]

37. The "knowing it was classified" part doesn't matter...

...per Comey's statement:

"Separately, it is important to say something about the marking of classified information. Only a very small number of the e-mails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information. But even if information is not marked “classified” in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it."

Also, Hillary intentionally had a server set up in her house, unsecurred, to receive State Department communications. She did the same thing this guy did.

[DanTex]

40. Of course it does. It goes to intent. Like I said in the OP, all high-ranking officials who deal

with classified information on a daily basis end up making a small number of mistakes like this. Powell did. Rice did. Hillary did. So did others at state. Because people are human, this happens. It was well under 1% of her communications, it wasn't any kind of big pattern or anything, it was a simple error, which many other people have made, and everyone knows happens all the time.

[TCJ70]

43. So, you're suggestion is that Hillary didn't know State Department...

...information was going to end up on the server she had set up in her home for State Department business?

[DanTex]

46. Not classified information, no. Unclassified state information, yes.

No matter how you slice it, it's the same thing as what happened with Powell and Rice.

[TCJ70]

50. It is not the same thing that happened to Powell and Rice.

They did not set up unapproved, improperly set up servers in their homes to store classified materials.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/mar/09/hillary-clinton/hillary-clinton-said-my-predecessors-did-same-thin/

[DanTex]

53. Legally, it is. She didn't set up her server to store classified materials.

You seem to not understand the difference between "state department information" and "classified information." I don't blame you, the MSM hasn't been particularly helpful here.

Her server was set up to handle emails, which are non-classified. The same as Rice or Powell, except that instead of a home server, they used a commercial server, which is less secure -- as I pointed out there are many instances of commercial emails being hacked, and also state.gov, but no evidence that Hillary was ever hacked. But even though Powell and Rice had a less secure, set-up, legally it's the same. Classified material isn't supposed to be on any email server, whether it's a home server or a gmail server or a state.gov server. It ended up there by mistake. But mistakes aren't crimes.

[Bill USA]

117. commercial email accounts are NOT secure. Email service providers have cyber-security personnel who

in order to do their jobs have to be able to examine any and all emails (and attachments) on their system (servers). They are employed by the email service providers and DO NOT have government security clearances. Nobody can say, with confidence, that any classified info in emails in such accounts were NOT compromised.

Comey said they found no evidence of any hacking into HRC's server. he said, however, given the sophistication of those 'bad actors' who would have been interested in hacking her server - they might have hacked in and not left any evidence that they had been there.

BUT, he also said they did find evidence of hacking into emails of persons HRC sent emails to. But if you can detect malware in emails - you can detect malware on a server. Plus, if somebody is going to the trouble to hack into your server - they are going to want that malware to remain on your server so as to send update on what is being done on that server (e.g. email communications). So if they (the FBI) could find malware residing in emails, they certainly could find it residing on a server.

Thus, if Comey was going to stick to facts, he should make the proper inference that, unlike the emails he referred to, that they found evidence of hacking in - Hillary's server WAS NOT HACKED!

AND --- HE SHOULD REALIZE THAT EMAILS ON COMMERCIAL EMAIL SERVICE PROVIDERS SERVERS ARE NOT SECURE - because the cyber-security personnel who work for said email service providers can look at any email on their servers.

[BzaDem]

118. Would you be making exactly the same argument if she used official state email?

Because legally there is no difference between an unclassified mail on a private server and an unclassified mail on any official unclassified government email system.

[BlueStateLib]

113. Nishimura, downloaded and stored on his personal, unclassified electronic devices

Intent

In his role as a Regional Engineer for the U.S. military in Afghanistan, Nishimura had access to classified briefings and digital records that could only be retained and viewed on authorized government computers. Nishimura, however, caused the materials to be downloaded and stored on his personal, unclassified electronic devices and storage media. He carried such classified materials on his unauthorized media when he traveled off-base in Afghanistan and, ultimately, carried those materials back to the United States at the end of his deployment.

[politicaljunkie41910]

112. Agreed this was not the same thing. The reservist guy had a classified computer in his office and

was told that this computer was to be the only source for viewing classified data. The guy then downloaded files off of the classified computer onto his cell phone or laptop (whichever) and took this information home with him where he kept if for about a year and only when he time there was coming to an end, did he try and remove it from his home computer. He also lied about it. It is not the same.

This is not the same as when you're routing things in email format between others in your office and perhaps out of your office and there are things in that email that were classified and you knew or should have known that they were classified. Contrary to what Trump says, INTENT matters. MISTAKES happen.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

21. It wasn't remotely the same thing.

18 U.S. Code § 1924 is not a strict liability statute.

[MaggieD]

68. Isn't there some right wing site where you can peddle that BS?

It's not even remotely the same thing as was pointed out to you over and over yesterday. Enough with this bullshit false equivalency.

[TCJ70]

87. This is the first time I've linked a similar case...

...so I'm not sure how anything was pointed out to me numerous times yesterday.

[MaggieD]

89. Seems like you're here to bash Democrats 24/7

That's all you seem to do here. Like I said, there are better places to bash Dems than a site designed to support them.

[annavictorious]

104. This guy was charged under a different statute for a different crime

with entirely different elements. And the fact pattern was different as well.
Outside of that, it's the same thing!

Peddle your sloppy argument somewhere where it will work.

[TCJ70]

106. Hmmm...

Involves classified information? Check.
Classified information ended up where it didn't belong? Check.
Person didn't intend to distribute classified information inappropriately? Check.

Looks very much the same to me.

[Her Sister]

7. The investigations were done totally in bad faith!

They knew it! We knew it! Which is why millions voted for HER! Bet they did not expect that!

We said F*ckU! That's what we thought of the investigations! They probably thought/wanted/meant the investigations to be
GAME CHANGERS! Hahaha!

Voters were of a different mind! WE VOTERS HAD OTHER PLANS! We saw through it all and we showed them with them VOTES!



AND HERE OUR DEM NOMINEE!! HRC

HRC #45

[insta8er]

8. Why do you bring up this stuff? you expect to get someone to tell you that what you are saying is

not true? you know that it won't happen here right? I heard that posts like these have a name..can't remember what it was..but in general it was to give everyone a good feeling and give you praise for something that in eyes of others could be perceived as a highly selective memory of the events. But hey, whatever makes your boat float.. LOL have a good one!

[DanTex]

9. LOL. Well, you're apparently trying to tell me it's not true, so if that was my goal,

then I've succeeded. Yay me!

But the facts are the facts, as I've laid out in the OP. That this was even investigates was a joke. There are large numbers of people who have accidentally transmitted classified information by non-secure email, none of them were investigated except for Hillary. It's Benghazi, Whitewater, and all the rest all over again.

Oh well, so the MSM gets its news cycle. Another day or so and we can get back to defeating Trump.

[Her Sister]

13. Resentful much?

[insta8er]

16. No not at all, trying to participate in the festivities...and having some fun at those things that

are being implied. Been pretty much my whole adult live in the IT business, and it pains me to see some of the assumptions and outright nonsense people put out there. But let's all rejoice, because that is what this post is about right? LOL

[DanTex]

15. Yes. I am right. So sorry your indictment fairy was killed. At least you get to enjoy a day of

Greenwald/Trump outrage.

[insta8er]

18. Dan, you became my fairy today....the stories you tell..LOL

[DanTex]

20. Truth hurts, huh. You reeeeeally wanted that indictment. LOL. Better luck next time.

[insta8er]

22. Nah Dan..only one thing in your "assumption" is right, the truth hurts. Boy if you only knew how.LOL

[DanTex]

23. Your comments are becoming increasingly cryptic. Everything I said in the OP is the truth,

and you seem to be at least subconsciously aware of this fact, because instead of, you know, challenging it, you're attacking me personally.

Which is weird. But I guess the stages of grief can have some weird side-effects.

[insta8er]

26. I just disagree with your post. And maybe you overlooked your personal attack on me?

but don't worry, i'm a big boy and can handle it. I just love reading your "pieces" it gives me such great joy..you always seem to be able to put a smile on my face. Thank you!

[DanTex]

29. Of course you do. Like I said, the truth hurts. Especially since you've been

praying to the indictment fairy for so long, I can imagine the disappointment.

But you'll get over it.

[insta8er]

30. More than you know :) To bad we both have a different thing in mind when it comes to the truth.

[brush]

63. What exactly are you complaining about? Spit it out, for God's sakes.

[Her Sister]

24. You're starting to get rude, for no goddamn reason!

No one here has provoked you. You came in the thread with a provoking stance. You are not constructive. Your resent is obvious!
Your agenda is showing. You are not in let's get the DEMS elected mode. We got a nominee. yesterday was a great day! You don't like that. You are resentful! That she got more votes and that she is the nominee and that she won't be indicted. So you're trolling around spreading resentment!

insta8er
18. Dan, you became my fairy today....the stories you tell..LOL

[insta8er]

33. I am very much for getting Dems elected, and spare me your faux outrage..next thing you are going to

say is that I am a Republican right? I am doing everything I can to have down ballot Dems elected. And will do so until we have a house and a senate that is full of democrats....the ones that don't bow to special interest but to us..the people.

[Maru Kitteh]

105. You mention down-ballot Dems, do you support the Democratic nominee for POTUS?

Do you plan to vote for the Democratic nominee for President?

[insta8er]

36. "So sorry your indictment fairy was killed" Very selective eh? you didn't see that one?

[BlueMTexpat]

44. I've added that poster to

my Ignore List.

[SkeleTim1968]

49. They sound extremely bitter

trying to seem not bitter. But they wouldn't be here provoking people if they weren't so bitter.

[1StrongBlackMan]

79. The Indictment Fairy wasn't killed ... It never existed outside the minds/prayers of the ...

"hopefully this will give us another shot" gang.

[Surya Gayatri]

17. Why the personal vitriol?

[insta8er]

19. Eh..I am responding to his thread? I guess anyone who responds to his tread would

make it personal? I don't agree with his assumptions...unlike everyone else. But at least allow me that right?

[Surya Gayatri]

25. No one is proscribing your rights...have at it.

Whatever brings balm to your troubled soul.

[insta8er]

27. Wow..troubled soul? eh..personal vitriol? that was you right?

[brush]

70. Care to tell us why instead of posting one cryptic insinuendo after another? Spit it out.

[cosmicone]

47. Poor you ... are you having a sad day?

I should offer you a hot beverage as Sheldon Cooper would say.

[George II]

67. Why bring it up? Did you not watch any news yesterday? It has been a big story since 11 AM.

[JTFrog]

76. You lecturing anyone on "posts like these" is pretty

rich.

10 hidden posts in a few short months mostly attacking a leading Democrat.

Whatever makes your boat float.... or sink I guess.

[runaway hero]

28. One problem.

None of these people want to be POTUS.

[DanTex]

31. What difference does that make? Legal standards don't change based on being a candidate for

president. The MSM/Trump/Greenwald claim that anyone else would be prosecuted is flat-out false. Nobody else would even be investigated. This, like all the others, was a political witch hunt.

[runaway hero]

35. That's not the point

This person is going to be in one of the most powerful seats in the world and they can't use Outlook and Exchange 2007 properly?

Of course it was a political which hunt. Which is why you don't give your enemies red meat as the Clinton's constantly do. She needs to be more careful.

[DanTex]

38. Legally, that's the point. Particularly with Trump/Greenwald saying that anyone else would have

been prosecuted. Nobody else would even have been investigated. The FBI isn't supposed to investigate people just because they're running for president. They're supposed to investigate when there is evidence of a serious crime, which there never was here.

As far as the politics, sure, Hillary should have been more careful. She knows that she has to play by the "Clinton rules". She gets all sorts of phony investigations, whereas Trump refuses to release his taxes, currently is being legally accused of child rape, and just yesterday praised the illegal way Saddam Hussein dealt with terrorists, and he just gets a pass.

So, yeah, I agree. The playing field is tilted against her, as it has always been, but that's not going to change, so she needs to be more careful than anyone else.

[runaway hero]

39. This isn't about Trump

This was an issue before he ran.

The field is against her, correct. So the smartest thing to do would be to not shoot yourself in the foot.

[The_Counsel]

52. The Point Is It Shouldn't Be About Clinton, Either.

The ONLY reason she was even investigated because she was/is a threat to win the Presidency. That's what this was always about.

Again, why is Rice, Powell or even Albright and Cohen given a pass here?

Or is the solution for the SoS to NOT COMMUNICATE VIA E-MAIL? At all?

[runaway hero]

55. You're right

But these people are not running for POTUS, their private citizens. She can't give them ammo like this.

[The_Counsel]

94. Whether Clinton "Gives Them Ammo" Doesn't Matter...

True, Clinton should watch what she does, lest she give her haters ammo, but that's exactly the problem.

If it weren't these e-mails it would have been something else. In fact the e-mails wouldn't have even come to light if not for the investigation into Benghazi.

Or Clinton could just go the Obama route and live a drama/scandal-free life. And then she'd simply be disrespected 24/7, just like Barack is. It never ends with these guys...

[treestar]

97. [phone]

No Democrat needs to give them any ammo, they will make it up. At the same time, Republicans give them tons of ammo and they aren't interested.

[treestar]

62. Exactly. And Kerry, why don't they check to make sure

this stuff does not continue? Answer, because it is not really important. Clinton bashing is what is important.

[treestar]

61. It's the media not her

Trump should be investigated with equal fervor, no? It isn't disconcerting that he's not. Trump has given them tons of ammo and shot himself many times, yet they don't seem to care.

[runaway hero]

66. Of course he should

I don't disagree. But again, this was national security.

[treestar]

95. That had little to do with it

or they would have investigated others. It's just sound and fury about national security to use to create Clinton scandals. If they cared about national security and were truly concerned for it, they'd be making sure Kerry is not using a private server.

[runaway hero]

98. I don't agree

this is a serious issue. It's a lack of judgegment. You can't give freebies to the other guys. It's like Hillary doesn't trust a lot of people.

[treestar]

99. then why aren't the other people being investigated?

[runaway hero]

102. Because they aren't running against Nasty Don to be president.

If you going to say the presidency is a responsibility... then be responsible.

[treestar]

59. She does her best

She is held to a higher standard than others, for being Bill's wife, a Democrat, and a female. Is there any evidence whatsoever she can't use Outlook, etc? Even so, a lot of high placed executives may not know much about it. The SOS is not some ordinary official who has a lot of clerical work to do.

In the old days, this communication could not have taken place at all - all they had was letters and phone calls. We were more secure then?

[treestar]

57. Exactly and they should be if the emails are of such

concern. If national security was at stake, then everyone in that chain would be investigated and also Condi and Powell and even Kerry would be checked up on. But they know that national security is not their point at all. Clinton scandal-invention is.

[treestar]

56. This is so dumb

whenever it is brought up. It is the excuse for everything. People who don't run for POTUS get less scrutiny and their errors don't come out and aren't publicized to death. But that does not mean they don't have to do the right thing too.

The POTUS is a human being too. If they hadn't made mistakes or risked anything they would not be successful people, let alone so successful they are being considered for President of the U.S.

I just really push against this dumb argument.

I heard it from right wingers when I asked them why they were not concerned to get birth certificates for any candidate other than Barack Obama. Even the VP was "not running for POTUS" which is laughable since the VP is specifically there to take over if needed and therefore has to be qualified.

[runaway hero]

58. The guy in your sig didn't do it

We aren't even asking for much here. Just don't give the RW ammo. That's what she did here.

[treestar]

60. LOL the RW needs no ammo

They will make it up out of whole cloth. Flag a minor thing into a major news story. A you've let it and blamed her instead of them.

[runaway hero]

65. Because it was her email

Personal Responsibility. A person that wants to be POTUS has to be careful with every part of their life. Otherwise...we end up with people like Nasty Don running.

[treestar]

96. they don't if they are Republicans

why doesn't that bug you?

[runaway hero]

101. Why take about something else?

They're not in public service anymore. It would be the same if trump did it.

[baldguy]

41. K&R

And now the GOP wants to investigate the investigators for not coming to the conclusions the GOP wanted them to.

[Gothmog]

42. Great post

[citood]

45. Damage control

The FBI director did an infomercial yesterday, unchallenged, and made some damning statements.

Will the AG come out and add some clarity?

Or will this be cable news fodder for the next two weeks?

[cosmicone]

48. Your concern is noted

Welcome to DU and your first post.

[treestar]

51. K&R such good points

we know how out of proportion it all is.

[UtahLib]

54. K&R. nt

[George II]

64. Other Secretaries of State who did the same thing weren't even investigated, much less prosecuted.

[MirrorAshes]

69. Bravo. You've nailed it. (nt)

[Iliyah]

71. Most Americans know this was and still is a witch hunt and corporate media rarely gives

nor inform the general public of fact. The GOP has begun it's almost take over of the country although Dems will prevail in November and they know it and that's why GOPers are over board in combat mold. 24/7 of non-stop HRC bashing and T-rump gets off. That's why HRC is constantly attacking T-rump because corporate media refuse to do so.

I would love to see congress flip to Dem.

[Cary]

72. A couple more thoughts, although others may have mentioned them

Yes, it wasn't a secret. Why didn't anyone tell her to stop?

It was all security clearance to security clearance, so there was no improper disclosure and everyone who e-mailed her would have to be prosecuted too. Right? Just because the server was in her basement doesn't mean she's the only one responsible.

The final thing that no one is saying, because it's probably imprudent to say this, is that the State Department's system is antiquated and horrible because it's underfunded. So we're back to that. The Republican Congress isn't funding this system like they failed to fund security for our embassies.

Time to cut the crap and move on.

[DemonGoddess]

77. ^^^This!!!

[JTFrog]

73. There are those, even here, that think they can avenge the indictment fairy...

The TrumperPuffers and the rest of the GOP... and then there are those who invested in the whole indictment fairy fantasy these last few months... $27 bucks at a time.

No recommendation for indictment should have been the final word on this subject. Especially for Democrats. Instead of hanging on to the drooling words of a Republican with a grudge against the Clintons, we should be working toward the GE. Bernie should have already come out and endorsed and put this shit to bed. But instead he says none of this has a bearing on his campaign as if he and his supporters haven't been banking on the hopes of indictment for the last month or so. He had a chance to be a leading and healing voice and he chose his ego instead. He is quickly becoming a villain in his own play.

[cosmicone]

74. kicked and highly recommended n/t

[MADem]

75. "The Big Lie" -- boy, you got THAT right! The truth is that ONLY RIGHT WINGERS

would perpetuate such batty, blatantly untrue themes....and why? Because they are Clinton haters. That is the ONLY reason why they are trying to breathe life into this dead tale.

Comey himself said that no REASONABLE prosecutor would touch this case--of course, right wing nut jobs are NOT reasonable, which is why they keep wanting this story to grow legs and dance.

That just ain't happening.

Great OP, btw--sums up my POV on the topic.

[1StrongBlackMan]

80. Sadly, it wasn't/isn't just right wingers.

[cosmicone]

81. Precisely

Jack Pine Ridiculous members have always had a mass hysteria over a potential Clinton indictment.

[1StrongBlackMan]

82. I wonder how much of that is rightwing fakery vs ...

scorched earth "Well. This might give us another chance" wishfulness?

[cosmicone]

85. A bit of both ...

They think their beloved can run again in 2020 and primary Hillary -- or Trump if they are successful in defeating Hillary.

[MADem]

92. I think often times, people just don't realize their own true nature.

And they don't see how obvious it is, based on the opinions they express.

What kind of person could believe the vicious, ugly, crazed "no reasonable prosecutor" smears and falsehoods--or even WANT to believe them, or NEED to believe them?

Anyone who doesn't see the genuine good that Clinton is trying to do for her fellow citizens, who doesn't understand that she will continue the Obama legacy, and who instead, believes all those right wing smears, is either willfully obtuse, or a wingnut. And really, what's the difference between them?

Haters gonna hate, I guess. Their loss!

[DemonGoddess]

78. K&R!

and the Republicans are already on their way to the next manufactured scandal, by wanting to investigate the investigation

[zappaman]

83. Only RWers think she set out to do and did something illegal.

[Sheepshank]

84. This whole witch hunt has been exposed exactly for what it was

and in typical RW fashion, they are coming out full bore to deflect from that clear tactic and claim some sort of noble cause. They will hammer that home. The masters at attempting to re-write history have set the wheels in motion. But messages like the OP make sure the reality stays clear!!!

[cosmicone]

86. kick n/t

[Pryderi]

88. Bryan Nishimura was indicted for the same offense. n/t

[ismnotwasm]

90. It was nowhere near the same offence n/t

[Vinca]

93. His attorney should seek to have his case reversed.

And everyone else convicted under "iffy" circumstances should also appeal their convictions.

[ismnotwasm]

100. He pled guilty

[Maru Kitteh]

116. That's the FOX noise Repuke talking point. Glad to know where you get your info.

like 99.5% of all right-wing, FOX noise, full-of-crap propaganda, your point is inaccurate, at best.

[ismnotwasm]

91. K&R

[mcar]

103. K&R

[ContinentalOp]

107. Here's something I don't understand about email, FOIA, and govt record keeping

I've been meaning to ask this for a while but I guess this is as good a place as any to ask it.

Do we really need to consider every email as an official government document that needs to be archived and available to the public? We don't record every phone call do we? We don't have records of every personal conversation in a hallway. Aren't government employees allowed any level of privacy?

Email seems to be largely informal to me. We don't need to see every "Huma can you come here and fix my blackberry" email. There should be some leeway for government officials to decide which of their informal emails, text messages, etc. are personal and which need to be archived. Of course this opens the door to Republicans deleting millions of emails to evade FOIA requests, but they did that anyway and nobody did anything about it. They could always just talk about stuff in person and then we would never know about it, so what's the difference?

What am I missing here?

[DanTex]

109. That's a good point and I don't know.

My guess is, the rules were written with the idea that actual physical memos that are sent around should be kept for historical records, and then they just applied that rule to emails. But emails are not really like memos. Some of them are, but others are more like text messages or phone calls. It's much easier to type an email than to have a physical memorandum distributed.

And you can also see how the information is used. It's not used for historical record-keeping, it's used for political games. And the game is, get all the emails you can, dig through them to find one sentence out of 30,000 emails that sounds ominous, and then write an angry press release about it.

I don't know the answer. There has to be some recordkeeping and openness, but this idea that every word that she spoke or wrote during her entire time as SoS needs to made public is overkill.

[DesertRat]

108. Well said! k&r

[Sancho]

110. Come is an ass...

The OP is correct of course, but there's another issue.

Hillary (hypothetically) could have any number of reasons to engage in the email discussions that were "classified".

1.) She could have KNOWN it was classified, but under a time constraint and security was not available. Maybe some emergency (like there's a nuke in the truck on the way to Berlin - send in the drone!). She whipped out her BB and got them! Even the FBI may not be in on the situation.

2.) She could have a CIA sting planned to test if her system was hacked and she's putting some fake stuff on the email knowing it was read. Again, maybe the FBI is not in the loop.

3.) She had encryption available. Maybe the FBI had to grant immunity to the IT guy to even read the damn things. That's why they know she really wasn't hacked.

4.) She has authority to decide if something is classified or unclassified - so she made a decision it was unclassified and someone else is pissed.

Whatever her logic, Hillary (and the State Dept.) understood the rules. She can't reveal why a handful of "sensitive" topics were included in a very few emails - she may not even be able to reveal anything to the FBI!! Comey knows she can't give it away so he publicly says she is "careless" just because he's a RW hack who hates the Clintons.

[Jamaal510]

111. K&R

[DawgHouse]

114. His mention about hacking was reaching.

There is no evidence of hacking but of course, hackers wouldn't LEAVE any evidence so she was more than likely hacked and we just don't know it.

Whut?

[Maru Kitteh]

115. K & R!

[pnwmom]

119. Great post. Thanks, DanTex! n/t