Thread: Another US Embassy Under Siege

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Originally Posted by Humbert

BUSTED: The Smoking Gun! Republicans Caught Altering Documents To Frame Hillary Clinton

In yet another bombshell revelation, the CIA confirmed to Democrats serving on the current committee for the eternal quest for “the truth” about Benghazi, that committee Republicans altered documentation provided to the committee regarding Hillary Clinton. You know, because when the first 6 committees don’t find anything, its time to just make stuff up...

BUSTED: The Smoking Gun! Republicans Caught Altering Documents To Frame Hillary Clinton | If You Only News

So what do you have to say about the current FBI investigation of Hillaries classified emails?

Why don't you respond to Humbert's post before changing the subject.

Not that it will change any nutball minds, but...

Former CIA chief in Benghazi challenges film version of 2012 attack

The Washington Post
Adam Goldman and Greg Miller

It is the most fateful moment in a movie that purports to present a searingly accurate account of the 2012 attacks that left four Americans dead in Benghazi, Libya: a scene in which the highest-ranking CIA operative at a secret agency compound orders his security team to “stand down” rather than rush off to rescue U.S. diplomats under siege less than a mile away.

According to the officer in charge of the CIA’s Benghazi base that night, the scene in the movie is entirely untrue.

“There never was a stand-down order,” said the base chief known as Bob, speaking publicly for the first time. “At no time did I ever second guess that the team would depart.”

Nor, he said, did he say anything that could be “interpreted as equivalent” as an order to stand down.

In a lengthy interview with reporters from The Washington Post, Bob provided new details about the attacks and his interactions with J. Christopher Stevens, the U.S. ambassador to Libya who perished in them. He agreed to talk on the condition his last name not be used because even though he has retired, his cover has not been lifted.

“I thought I would regret it if I didn’t,” he said about finally speaking out. “So much of this information has been wrong.”

More at:
Former CIA chief in Benghazi challenges film version of 2012 attack

Originally Posted by RPETER65

So what do you have to say about the current FBI investigation of Hillaries classified emails?

OK Repeater, you're pivoting off a post from October I see but I'll indulge you by asking if the results of the investigation have been made public or are you talking about new leaks coming out of the Gowdy witch hunt?

rpeters is off and running away from uncomfortable questions by posing others himself.

Originally Posted by Humbert

“Oh yeah. I’d shoot Hillary Clinton in the fuckin’ head. I don’t like the bitch at all,” said Len Toomey, who identified himself as a veteran of Desert Storm and Somalia. He’d seen the movie with some VFW friends. “Choke her. She should be in the pisser and I should be pissin’ on her every night.”

TDers?

Originally Posted by Humbert

Originally Posted by RPETER65

So what do you have to say about the current FBI investigation of Hillaries classified emails?

OK Repeater, you're pivoting off a post from October I see but I'll indulge you by asking if the results of the investigation have been made public or are you talking about new leaks coming out of the Gowdy witch hunt?

I am talking about the current FBI investigation of the e-mails Hillary claimed weren't classified. The results of the investigation are on going so obviously they haven't been made public, I am only talking about the fact the FBI decided to investigate and have possibly assigned over 100 agents to the case.

Originally Posted by MrG

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Originally Posted by Humbert

BUSTED: The Smoking Gun! Republicans Caught Altering Documents To Frame Hillary Clinton

In yet another bombshell revelation, the CIA confirmed to Democrats serving on the current committee for the eternal quest for “the truth” about Benghazi, that committee Republicans altered documentation provided to the committee regarding Hillary Clinton. You know, because when the first 6 committees don’t find anything, its time to just make stuff up...

BUSTED: The Smoking Gun! Republicans Caught Altering Documents To Frame Hillary Clinton | If You Only News

So what do you have to say about the current FBI investigation of Hillaries classified emails?

Why don't you respond to Humbert's post before changing the subject.

What is there to comment, if this is true they should be investigated and prosecuted if they falsified information. Not to hard to figure that one out eh.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Originally Posted by Humbert

Originally Posted by RPETER65

So what do you have to say about the current FBI investigation of Hillaries classified emails?

OK Repeater, you're pivoting off a post from October I see but I'll indulge you by asking if the results of the investigation have been made public or are you talking about new leaks coming out of the Gowdy witch hunt?

I am talking about the current FBI investigation of the e-mails Hillary claimed weren't classified. The results of the investigation are on going so obviously they haven't been made public, I am only talking about the fact the FBI decided to investigate and have possibly assigned over 100 agents to the case.

But what's your point?

She's running for President. Do you think they should have ignored the issue?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Originally Posted by Humbert

Originally Posted by RPETER65

So what do you have to say about the current FBI investigation of Hillaries classified emails?

OK Repeater, you're pivoting off a post from October I see but I'll indulge you by asking if the results of the investigation have been made public or are you talking about new leaks coming out of the Gowdy witch hunt?

I am talking about the current FBI investigation of the e-mails Hillary claimed weren't classified. The results of the investigation are on going so obviously they haven't been made public, I am only talking about the fact the FBI decided to investigate and have possibly assigned over 100 agents to the case.

But what's your point?

She's running for President. Do you think they should have ignored the issue?

My point is, you libtards have protected Hillary for her entire political life, and she has lied her way out of one scandal after another, it appears it has finally reached the point of going beyond your so called non corroborated scandals.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

you libtards have protected Hillary for her entire political life

Hillary Clinton has been protected by libtards? What has protected Hillary Clinton is the the absence of facts in all the partisan accusations made against her. The fear and hate driven tactics used by her political enemies have only served to make her stonger.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Originally Posted by Humbert

Originally Posted by RPETER65

So what do you have to say about the current FBI investigation of Hillaries classified emails?

OK Repeater, you're pivoting off a post from October I see but I'll indulge you by asking if the results of the investigation have been made public or are you talking about new leaks coming out of the Gowdy witch hunt?

I am talking about the current FBI investigation of the e-mails Hillary claimed weren't classified. The results of the investigation are on going so obviously they haven't been made public, I am only talking about the fact the FBI decided to investigate and have possibly assigned over 100 agents to the case.

But what's your point?

She's running for President. Do you think they should have ignored the issue?

My point is, you libtards have protected Hillary for her entire political life, and she has lied her way out of one scandal after another, it appears it has finally reached the point of going beyond your so called non corroborated scandals.

But she hasn't has she?

Much like your fake "Benghazi" scandal, your fake "IRS" scandal, your fake "Birth certificate" scandals and the rest too numerous to mention (and all of which deserve the epithet of "bullshit" rather than "scandal"), the real lies are the ludicrous accusations launched by Republicans in an attempt to divert attention from their failed policies and political cretinism.

No-one needs to protect Hillary. As she showed when she pissed all over Gowdy's kangaroo court for 11 hours, she is more than capable of looking after herself.

And unsurprisingly, given their track record, none of the feeble-minded mud the Republican retards are throwing over their contrived "email scandal" appears to be sticking.

This must infuriate silly, conservative, old fools like yourself.

Originally Posted by Humbert

Originally Posted by RPETER65

you libtards have protected Hillary for her entire political life

Hillary Clinton has been protected by libtards? What has protected Hillary Clinton is the the absence of facts in all the partisan accusations made against her. The fear and hate driven tactics used by her political enemies have only served to make her stonger.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Originally Posted by Humbert

OK Repeater, you're pivoting off a post from October I see but I'll indulge you by asking if the results of the investigation have been made public or are you talking about new leaks coming out of the Gowdy witch hunt?

I am talking about the current FBI investigation of the e-mails Hillary claimed weren't classified. The results of the investigation are on going so obviously they haven't been made public, I am only talking about the fact the FBI decided to investigate and have possibly assigned over 100 agents to the case.

But what's your point?

She's running for President. Do you think they should have ignored the issue?

My point is, you libtards have protected Hillary for her entire political life, and she has lied her way out of one scandal after another, it appears it has finally reached the point of going beyond your so called non corroborated scandals.

But she hasn't has she?

Much like your fake "Benghazi" scandal, your fake "IRS" scandal, your fake "Birth certificate" scandals and the rest too numerous to mention (and all of which deserve the epithet of "bullshit" rather than "scandal"), the real lies are the ludicrous accusations launched by Republicans in an attempt to divert attention from their failed policies and political cretinism.

No-one needs to protect Hillary. As she showed when she pissed all over Gowdy's kangaroo court for 11 hours, she is more than capable of looking after herself.

And unsurprisingly, given their track record, none of the feeble-minded mud the Republican retards are throwing over their contrived "email scandal" appears to be sticking.

This must infuriate silly, conservative, old fools like yourself.

I not one prone to become infuriated. If non of the e-mail violations appear to be sticking why is the FBI investigating, you might want to wait for the conclusion of thei investigation to count on the accuracy of your statement.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by RPETER65

I am talking about the current FBI investigation of the e-mails Hillary claimed weren't classified. The results of the investigation are on going so obviously they haven't been made public, I am only talking about the fact the FBI decided to investigate and have possibly assigned over 100 agents to the case.

But what's your point?

She's running for President. Do you think they should have ignored the issue?

My point is, you libtards have protected Hillary for her entire political life, and she has lied her way out of one scandal after another, it appears it has finally reached the point of going beyond your so called non corroborated scandals.

But she hasn't has she?

Much like your fake "Benghazi" scandal, your fake "IRS" scandal, your fake "Birth certificate" scandals and the rest too numerous to mention (and all of which deserve the epithet of "bullshit" rather than "scandal"), the real lies are the ludicrous accusations launched by Republicans in an attempt to divert attention from their failed policies and political cretinism.

No-one needs to protect Hillary. As she showed when she pissed all over Gowdy's kangaroo court for 11 hours, she is more than capable of looking after herself.

And unsurprisingly, given their track record, none of the feeble-minded mud the Republican retards are throwing over their contrived "email scandal" appears to be sticking.

This must infuriate silly, conservative, old fools like yourself.

I not one prone to become infuriated. If non of the e-mail violations appear to be sticking why is the FBI investigating, you might want to wait for the conclusion of thei investigation to count on the accuracy of your statement.

The FBI is investigating because the issue was raised by the Republican witch hunt, and because Hillary is running for President.

As for waiting for the conclusion of the investigation, that advice is probably better directed at Gowdy and Fox News, who continue to fabricate "unnamed sources" and invent imaginary emails.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

she has lied her way out of one scandal after another, it appears it has finally reached the point of going beyond your so called non corroborated scandals.

What lies?
All of the "scandals" involving Hillary were made up and officially disproven. In other words, they weren't scandals at all, they were shit thrown up on the wall that didn't stick.
Please reference one Republican made up scandal that she was found guilty of.
You can't. There aren't any.

Whitewater...? Investigated and found to be a big zero.
Vince Foster suicide. A truly remarkable bit of fantasy that was investigated and, guess what? found to be a big zero.

Yet statements that that pretend that she has been guilty of something keep dribbling out of your mouth like all the hand-puppets fed by the lies on Right Wing blogs.

Originally Posted by MrG

Originally Posted by RPETER65

she has lied her way out of one scandal after another, it appears it has finally reached the point of going beyond your so called non corroborated scandals.

What lies?
All of the "scandals" involving Hillary were made up and officially disproven. In other words, they weren't scandals at all, they were shit thrown up on the wall that didn't stick.
Please reference one Republican made up scandal that she was found guilty of.
You can't. There aren't any.

Whitewater...? Investigated and found to be a big zero.
Vince Foster suicide. A truly remarkable bit of fantasy that was investigated and, guess what? found to be a big zero.

Yet statements that that pretend that she has been guilty of something keep dribbling out of your mouth like all the hand-puppets fed by the lies on Right Wing blogs.

In fairness, the Faux News propaganda channel is aimed at silly old farts like him.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

I not one prone to become infuriated. If non of the e-mail

Calm down, rpeters . . . palpitations at your age are quite serious.

Here's a hint: She is being investigated because more accusations have been thrown around.
Note: Accusations are not FACTS

How would you react if she wouldn't be investigated?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

But what's your point?

She's running for President. Do you think they should have ignored the issue?

My point is, you libtards have protected Hillary for her entire political life, and she has lied her way out of one scandal after another, it appears it has finally reached the point of going beyond your so called non corroborated scandals.

But she hasn't has she?

Much like your fake "Benghazi" scandal, your fake "IRS" scandal, your fake "Birth certificate" scandals and the rest too numerous to mention (and all of which deserve the epithet of "bullshit" rather than "scandal"), the real lies are the ludicrous accusations launched by Republicans in an attempt to divert attention from their failed policies and political cretinism.

No-one needs to protect Hillary. As she showed when she pissed all over Gowdy's kangaroo court for 11 hours, she is more than capable of looking after herself.

And unsurprisingly, given their track record, none of the feeble-minded mud the Republican retards are throwing over their contrived "email scandal" appears to be sticking.

This must infuriate silly, conservative, old fools like yourself.

I not one prone to become infuriated. If non of the e-mail violations appear to be sticking why is the FBI investigating, you might want to wait for the conclusion of thei investigation to count on the accuracy of your statement.

The FBI is investigating because the issue was raised by the Republican witch hunt, and because Hillary is running for President.

As for waiting for the conclusion of the investigation, that advice is probably better directed at Gowdy and Fox News, who continue to fabricate "unnamed sources" and invent imaginary emails.

The FBI is investigating because Hillary's e-mails were finally released which exposed the fact that she lied about not sending classified e-mails, if you call that a witch hunt you are out of touch with reality. The e-mails also revealed she not only sent classified e-mails on a non secure server but she instructed a subordinate to send a classified fax on a non secure server.

Tell me again about this witch hunt.

Could you please show the content of these imaginary e-mails or are they only imaginary in your mind.

Originally Posted by MrG

Originally Posted by RPETER65

she has lied her way out of one scandal after another, it appears it has finally reached the point of going beyond your so called non corroborated scandals.

What lies?
All of the "scandals" involving Hillary were made up and officially disproven. In other words, they weren't scandals at all, they were shit thrown up on the wall that didn't stick.
Please reference one Republican made up scandal that she was found guilty of.
You can't. There aren't any.

Whitewater...? Investigated and found to be a big zero.
Vince Foster suicide. A truly remarkable bit of fantasy that was investigated and, guess what? found to be a big zero.

Yet statements that that pretend that she has been guilty of something keep dribbling out of your mouth like all the hand-puppets fed by the lies on Right Wing blogs.

If you believe all these scandals went away without outside influence you might be interested in some highly valuable property I have in the Sahara desert, just sayin.

Let's not forget her lies about not sending classified e-mails over a non secure sever.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

If you believe all these scandals went away without outside influence you might be interested in some highly valuable property I have in the Sahara desert, just sayin.

"Just sayin." Provide some proof and then you'd be more than 'Just sayin', you'd actually have proof and don't need to be 'just sayin', because 'just saying' is simply more bullshit emanating from the retarded mind of a cretin.

Just sayin

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by RPETER65

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Originally Posted by RPETER65

My point is, you libtards have protected Hillary for her entire political life, and she has lied her way out of one scandal after another, it appears it has finally reached the point of going beyond your so called non corroborated scandals.

But she hasn't has she?

Much like your fake "Benghazi" scandal, your fake "IRS" scandal, your fake "Birth certificate" scandals and the rest too numerous to mention (and all of which deserve the epithet of "bullshit" rather than "scandal"), the real lies are the ludicrous accusations launched by Republicans in an attempt to divert attention from their failed policies and political cretinism.

No-one needs to protect Hillary. As she showed when she pissed all over Gowdy's kangaroo court for 11 hours, she is more than capable of looking after herself.

And unsurprisingly, given their track record, none of the feeble-minded mud the Republican retards are throwing over their contrived "email scandal" appears to be sticking.

This must infuriate silly, conservative, old fools like yourself.

I not one prone to become infuriated. If non of the e-mail violations appear to be sticking why is the FBI investigating, you might want to wait for the conclusion of thei investigation to count on the accuracy of your statement.

The FBI is investigating because the issue was raised by the Republican witch hunt, and because Hillary is running for President.

As for waiting for the conclusion of the investigation, that advice is probably better directed at Gowdy and Fox News, who continue to fabricate "unnamed sources" and invent imaginary emails.

The FBI is investigating because Hillary's e-mails were finally released which exposed the fact that she lied about not sending classified e-mails, if you call that a witch hunt you are out of touch with reality. The e-mails also revealed she not only sent classified e-mails on a non secure server but she instructed a subordinate to send a classified fax on a non secure server.

Tell me again about this witch hunt.

Could you please show the content of these imaginary e-mails or are they only imaginary in your mind.

Funny that, now you are saying that we don't need to wait for the FBI's investigation to produce its results but instead can rely on the innuendo you watch on Fox News.

The FBI are investigating because they found out that she hosted emails on a private server.

To date I have yet to see the FBI produce one email that she sent or received that has been shown to be classified at the time it was sent.

I look forward to you offering me evidence to the contradict that statement.

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

I look forward to you offering me evidence to the contradict that statement.

Good luck with that. Rpeter666 wouldn't recognize a fact if it reached up and smacked him in that dim bulb he calls a head.

Originally Posted by RPETER65

If you believe all these scandals went away without outside influence you might be interested in some highly valuable property I have in the Sahara desert, just sayin.

How convenient for you. Please tell m who that "outside influence" (imaginary conspiracy) is or how it operates. I'm not even asking for proof. Just a name or two, an agency that put the fix in, any idea of the mechanism of how it works.

So, just pull a made up conspiracy theory out of your sleeve and, shazamm--instant end-of-argument. You really think you got a handle on things, don't you?

Originally Posted by bsnub

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

I look forward to you offering me evidence to the contradict that statement.

Good luck with that. Rpeter666 wouldn't recognize a fact if it reached up and smacked him in that dim bulb he calls a head.

Hillary Caught Illegally Declassifying Documents. It's a Felony ...
conservative-daily.com › 2016/01/09 › h...

Fellow Conservative,

Oh my goodness… The State Department just released an email showing Hillary Clinton instructing a subordinate to remove the classification heading from a document and insecurely send it to her private email account. This is the end, folks.

This is a felony. It is a felony to remove the classification header from any document and it is a felony to instruct someone to do it for you. It comes with a maximum jail sentence of ten years.

One of her staffers, Jacob Sullivan, was trying to send her a talking points memo through a secure fax, but the system was down. A secure fax is one of the ways that classified and sensitive information is shared.

In the emails, Hillary Clinton instructs him to “turn [it] into nonpaper [with] no identifying heading and send nonsecure.”

She is instructing him to erase the document’s heading – which lists its classification status – and send it through a nonsecure email. The only reason to remove the heading is to hide it from prying eyes and cover their tracks. Hillary knew what she was asking was a felony.

As you might remember, there were reports back in August that Hillary’s inner circle was removing classification headings from documents before emailing them to her. That they were deliberately breaking the law to illegally send classified documents to Hillary Clinton’s email address.

So why isn’t she in prison? Why isn’t she behind bars and forcibly taken off the campaign trail?

It is clear as day. Hillary Clinton committed a felony and Obama is protecting her. Force Congress to appoint a Special Prosecutor to put her behind bars!

Those are really good questions. The evidence is now overwhelming. Not only did she have over 1300 classified emails on her email server, but she also actively instructed a subordinate to break the law and illegally share classified information with her.

Yet, the Department of injustice does nothing. There have been no charges filed at all. This is why Congress must act to appoint a Special Prosecutor.

We have gotten a lot of emails lately challenging whether Congress can even appoint a Special Prosecutor. They can. It all goes back to the Watergate scandal and when President Nixon ordered his Attorney General to fire the prosecutor that was investigating him. At that moment, it became clear that there needed to be a mechanism to investigate the Executive branch without allowing the administration to directly interfere. The power of the Executive branch was too great to rely on self-policing.

Senator John Cornyn (R-TX) is pushing for just that. He is leading the charge to get a Special Prosecutor appointed to investigate Hillary’s email crimes.

With Republican control of both chambers of Congress, this is easy. But the powers that be – in both parties – don’t want Hillary to go down. They are protecting her.

It is up to you. It is up to me. It is up to all of us to get this done.

And it isn’t going to happen by just sitting back. The only way Hillary gets thrown in prison is if you rise up right now and demand it!

We’ve got one prominent Senator on our side. Let’s take this all the way!

Hillary belongs in prison, not on the campaign trail! Tell Congress to appoint a prosecutor to put her there!

Sincerely,

Joe Otto

Conservative Daily

Banner

Share

Clinton email release brings classified total to 1,340 | TheHill
thehill.com › blogs › blog-briefing-room


The latest batch of emails from Hillary Clinton’s private server released Friday contains 66 messages deemed classified at some level, according to a State Department count, bringing the total to over 1,300.



Why Hillary Clinton's Email Shenanigans Matter - The Federalist
thefederalist.com › 2016/01/07 › why-hil...



What exactly Hillary Clinton may have done wrong regarding her email use while serving as secretary of State from 2009 to 2013 has been the subject of a numbing bureaucratic back-and-forth between the State Department and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) for most of 2015. The State Department recently released the seventh tranche of her emails in a batch of eight court-ordered releases before the end of January.

But that is only one of three separate legal issues that have arisen thus far relating to Clinton’s email use. First, Clinton set up a private email server and a personal email account to handle her government correspondence. A federal judge ruled in August that this violated government policy, which any first-year desk officer in the State Department could have told you. Clinton admitted it was a “mistake” and apologized, despite continuing to claim, falsely, that it was allowed. If the email server was allowed, it’s unclear what Clinton was apologizing for.


Second, some reports state that someone erased data or deleted emails from Clinton’s private email server before she handed it over to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Erasing or destroying evidence during an ongoing federal investigation is a textbook case of obstruction of justice. This is the crime for which articles of impeachment were drawn up against presidents Richard Nixon in 1974 and Bill Clinton in 1998.

Third: probably the most serious—and misunderstood—issue is that Clinton and her aides repeatedly sent classified information over a computer system not cleared for it. Last month, the inspector general of the intelligence community reaffirmed his previous ruling that Clinton had indeed mishandled classified information.

Erasing or destroying evidence during an ongoing federal investigation is a textbook case of obstruction of justice.
Despite earlier reports that only a small handful of emails had contained classified information, it is now clear that nearly 1,300 emails contained classified information, and the number is likely to rise. “Unauthorized removal or retention of classified information” is a serious offense and a federal crime—former National Security Advisor Samuel Berger and former Central Intelligence Agency Director David Petraeus both pled guilty to the charge and paid fines; the former lost his security clearance and latter his job.

The FBI, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, and the State Department have been jointly and independently investigating Clinton’s handling of classified information throughout 2015, driven by the State Department’s obligation to respond to a Freedom of Information Act request. However, only the FBI can bring charges. Unfortunately, the chances of an Obama-appointed federal prosecutor bringing charges against the front-runner for the Democratic Party’s nomination for president in an election year are zero.

Because of the obvious political issues involved, Sen. John Cornyn called for the attorney general to appoint a special prosecutor in September, and almost four dozen members of Congress joined him last month. Just as obviously, this will never happen for the same reason that no federal prosecutor is likely to file charges.

As for Clinton’s Response
Clinton and her supporters have generally dismissed the accusations about her email use. They claim that while maintaining a private server showed poor judgment, it was technically allowed. A federal judge has already ruled otherwise. This issue is settled: Clinton was wrong.

Her supporters argue that because the emails were on a private server, Clinton had the right to review them, delete “personal” emails, and only hand over work-related emails. This is, of course, probably one of the reasons Clinton set up the private server—to make it easier for her to conceal the content of her correspondence. It is also a perfect illustration of why personal email accounts and personal servers aren’t allowed.

Her supporters argue that because the emails were on a private server, Clinton had the right to review them, delete ‘personal’ emails, and only hand over work-related emails.
Allowing Clinton to decide which emails to hand over and which she can conveniently delete is allowing her to be judge and jury in her own cause, a blatant violation of basic principles of an independent and unbiased judiciary. It would also set a terrible precedent for all future public servants, enabling and even encouraging them to take action purposefully designed to make it harder for the American people to see what is going on inside their own government. Basic principles of transparency and accountability are at stake.

Supporters argue no emails were marked classified at the time they were sent or received. As I’ve noted before, this is false and based on a misleading—even deceptive—claim about how classified information works. This claim was explicitly contradicted by the inspectors general of both the State Department and the intelligence community, who wrote earlier this year, “These emails were not retroactively classified by the State Department; rather, these emails contained classified information when they were generated and, according to IC classification officials, that information remains classified today. This classified information should never have been transmitted via an unclassified personal system.”

Information is not “retroactively classified.” It is born classified. It may be improperly marked—that is, the originator might fail to mark it as classified—but that only means the author has negligently mishandled classified information, not that the information is not classified.

It sounds complicated, but it’s pretty basic stuff to anyone who has a security clearance and has worked in government. One of the Left’s favorite heroes, Edward Snowden—former National Security Agency contractor and self-confessed spy and traitor—rightly pointed out that any other government employee would be fired and prosecuted for doing what Clinton had done.

What’s At Stake
So why is this a big deal? Another defense Clinton supporters sometimes make—more implicitly than otherwise—is that this was a victimless white-collar slip-up that essentially hurt no one. We shouldn’t let some pencil-pushers derail the career of one of America’s finest public servants and, possibly, the first female president of the United States.

Unfortunately, this defense does not hold up, for three reasons.

Hillary Clinton has held one of the most powerful offices on the planet, is personally wealthy, and has an Ivy League law degree—all of which buys you exactly zero get-out-of-jail-free cards.
Fairness. If Sandy Berger and David Petraeus (and Scooter Libby) can have their careers derailed and legacies besmirched for similar infractions, there is no principled reason why Hillary Clinton should be immune. It is good to hold the elite to a high standard because (I can’t believe I’m going to say this), Snowden has a point. Lesser mortals would not enjoy the sort of immunity Clinton’s supporters assume she deserves because of her exalted status. That’s because….

The Rule of Law. The principle of the rule of law is at stake. It matters that the United States is a government of laws, not men (or women). That means—in case you or Clinton need a refresher—that even rulers are subject to the law. Law is king—lex rex—and, as the Supreme Court building proudly proclaims, we enjoy equal justice under law.

Hillary Clinton has held one of the most powerful offices on the planet, is personally wealthy, and has an Ivy League law degree—all of which buys you exactly zero get-out-of-jail-free cards. She should be held to the exact same standard as you or I.

National Security. Clinton showed exceptionally poor judgment in handling national security information. We simply do not know yet if any material damage was done—if Russian or Chinese hackers were able to access her information, for example. I assume they were, knowing how active and aggressive they are. But let’s assume for a moment they didn’t, and Clinton’s email usage caused no demonstrable harm to U.S. national security. What then?

We should still care, and we should still hold Clinton to account. Clinton is running for the highest office in the land and the most powerful office on the planet. She deserves to be held to the highest standard possible. This is especially the case because we are in the midst of an undeclared cyberwar with China—and we are losing. The next president must grasp with urgency the vital importance of protecting the United States’ digital infrastructure and its national security information.

This issue may come to overshadow terrorism, the war in Syria, and a host of other issues—yes, even climate change—as the major security challenge in the coming era. Is this the time to trust our nation’s defenses to someone with a track record of negligent handling of information technology and mishandling of classified information?

Paul D. Miller teaches public policy at The University of Texas at Austin. He is a research fellow at the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission. He previously served on the National Security Council Staff from 2007 through 2009. Follow him on Twitter.
classified information Clinton Email scandal FBI Hillary Clinton hillary clinton emails Intelligence rule of law Secretary of State

Yes, unfortunately posting opinion pieces off right wing nutjob blogs does not constitute "evidence".

But the powers that be – in both parties – don’t want Hillary to go down.

Could you post any more absurd bullshit?

Originally Posted by harrybarracuda

Yes, unfortunately posting opinion pieces off right wing nutjob blogs does not constitute "evidence".

But the powers that be – in both parties – don’t want Hillary to go down.

Could you post any more absurd bullshit?

But statements from the state department do show the reality of Hillaries lying, and sending classified information over a non secure computer.
If you only looked at the fact she said the e-mails she turned over to the state department were 100 percent of the e-mails on that server that pertained to government business, and now look at what has been gleaned from a,supposedly, wiped clean computer it is not hard to see the problem she has created for herself.