Report: Intel officials confirm 'top secret' material in Clinton emails

[jmotivator]

Didn't the latest Benghazi committee, or at least its leader, also release classified documents? Should also be a trial for him, in that case.

Nope. If he did then that would be interesting since he was posting Clinton emails. :roll:

 

[jmotivator]

Indeed! And those Intel officials will have to testify at that trial and identify themselves for cross examination. Do it!

Sure, but if their identity is classified then that testimony wouldn't be made public. Are you hoping they'd be audited by the IRS as a result?

 

[Montecresto]

I think there is some teeth to this. My reasoning is this. The dissenting voices on this thread have all been, they don't believe it, the information was not top secret (well, maybe it was), the FBI hasn't said so yet, I don't care and it doesn't matter. Not one argument has been about right or wrong or offered any substantial argument in her defense.

If a person were to read the article they would note that the initial article came from Fox News. There wasn't one snarky remark about Fox News. That is pretty odd.

How will the left victimize themselves it comes out that the FBI thinks there should be charges? If there is a grand jury about the server, who is to blame? Will it be another Bush did it? The left really needs to throw this trash bag in the dumpster and go with Bernie. If they don't it is totally on the left.

Well can we just hope together that if wrongdoing, worse, illegal behavior is proven that it happens before she becomes the nominee?

 

[Mr Person]

I think there is some teeth to this. My reasoning is this. The dissenting voices on this thread have all been, they don't believe it, the information was not top secret (well, maybe it was), the FBI hasn't said so yet, I don't care and it doesn't matter. Not one argument has been about right or wrong or offered any substantial argument in her defense.

If a person were to read the article they would note that the initial article came from Fox News. There wasn't one snarky remark about Fox News. That is pretty odd.

How will the left victimize themselves it comes out that the FBI thinks there should be charges? If there is a grand jury about the server, who is to blame? Will it be another Bush did it? The left really needs to throw this trash bag in the dumpster and go with Bernie. If they don't it is totally on the left.

Man, are you kidding me? You were just lecturing me (and other posters) on how I don't have any business forming a personal opinion about the probable guilt of William Porter on involuntary manslaughter of Freddie Gray because I only have access to news reports about trial testimony, but I didn't actually sit through the entire trial as is my right as a member of the public.

What business do you have speculating as to how much "teeth" - indications of guilt - are in this? You have even less access to the Benghazi committee materials than I do to Porter trial testimony because some of the former is classified and there hasn't been a trial!

Everyone knew that Lerner nor anyone else at the IRS was ever going to be charged by the Obama DOJ. Probably because it would have come out just how far up the chain the corruption went. She made 155 visits to the White House. Far more than any other head of the IRS. I don't think they were discussing college football.

I don't know what the statute of limitations is on whatever charges they might consider, but I'd be generally willing to bet that it's long enough that an incoming R - or even an incoming D who'd want to distance themselves from Obama - could charge her.

We may yet see.

 

[Jack Fabulous]

Yes about 99% of govt documents that are marked secret should not be. There are well over 1M people who have security clearance. Completely ridiculous .

yes a

Do you have a source for that claim?

 

[Bob N]

Sure, but if their identity is classified then that testimony wouldn't be made public. Are you hoping they'd be audited by the IRS as a result?

No. But are you saying that Hillary does not have the right to face her accusers?

 

[Grant]

So convict someone who did not break the law?

We/re not talking convictions here but supporting someone who is an obvious liar, an incompetent and careless to the point of endangering her country. Does she have to be convicted by a jury of her peers and spend time in the slammer before you recognize her obvious character and intelligence flaws?

 

[justabubba]

If the Republican party hadn't turned into such a circus over the recent years I would say Hillary is in trouble. But they did and she isn't.

that SO sums up today's political reality

hoping Obama will do the right thing and assure prosecution is fair and impartial so that the trial will not be seen as a politically motivated GOP vendetta ... thereby opening the door of the white house to Bernie

 

[justabubba]

Heck lets not stop there. Lois Lerner and numerous other culprits at the IRS need to be up on charges as well.

for what, exactly?

 

[TheDemSocialist]

We/re not talking convictions here but supporting someone who is an obvious liar, an incompetent and careless to the point of endangering her country. Does she have to be convicted by a jury of her peers and spend time in the slammer before you recognize her obvious character and intelligence flaws?

So she has not been found have done anything illegal with emails, but we should yell and scream about them just cuz.....

 

[Grant]

So she has not been found have done anything illegal with emails, but we should yell and scream about them just cuz.....

Yes, just cuz she lied and top secret documents were involved. If your response is to yell and scream it wouldn't surprise me.

 

[justabubba]

Everyone knew that Lerner nor anyone else at the IRS was ever going to be charged by the Obama DOJ. Probably because it would have come out just how far up the chain the corruption went. She made 155 visits to the White House. Far more than any other head of the IRS. I don't think they were discussing college football.

lerner was not the irs commissioner

 

[Skeptic Bob]

that SO sums up today's political reality

hoping Obama will do the right thing and assure prosecution is fair and impartial so that the trial will not be seen as a politically motivated GOP vendetta ... thereby opening the door of the white house to Bernie

We can dream.

 

[cpwill]

:roll: we knew this already. Yes, Hillary and/or her staff broke multiple federal laws and put our national security at risk while doing so. Yes, her supporters will point out that she hasn't been formally charged by The Obama Administration as though that were somehow exculpating. Yes, Hillary is going to get away with it Because Hillary.

 

[TheDemSocialist]

Yes, just cuz she lied and top secret documents were involved. If your response is to yell and scream it wouldn't surprise me.

So I should condemn her for lying? Ok, I condemn her for lying about one or two emails that were classified. arty

 

[NonoBadDog]

Well can we just hope together that if wrongdoing, worse, illegal behavior is proven that it happens before she becomes the nominee?

That is what I am thinking. It would be good for the Republicans but not good for the Democrats.

 

[NonoBadDog]

Man, are you kidding me? You were just lecturing me (and other posters) on how I don't have any business forming a personal opinion about the probable guilt of William Porter on involuntary manslaughter of Freddie Gray because I only have access to news reports about trial testimony, but I didn't actually sit through the entire trial as is my right as a member of the public.

What business do you have speculating as to how much "teeth" - indications of guilt - are in this? You have even less access to the Benghazi committee materials than I do to Porter trial testimony because some of the former is classified and there hasn't been a trial!












I don't know what the statute of limitations is on whatever charges they might consider, but I'd be generally willing to bet that it's long enough that an incoming R - or even an incoming D who'd want to distance themselves from Obama - could charge her.

We may yet see.

Where did I say she was guilty?

 

[Montecresto]

That is what I am thinking. It would be good for the Republicans but not good for the Democrats.

What do you mean, it would be great for democrats, it would mean Sanders was the nominee!

 

[NonoBadDog]

What do you mean, it would be great for democrats, it would mean Sanders was the nominee!

Not if it happened after the primaries. That has never happened before. There might be arguments that Bernie couldn't step in as the nominee. I haven't studied up on it however so I might be totally off the track.

 

[Montecresto]

Not if it happened after the primaries. That has never happened before. There might be arguments that Bernie couldn't step in as the nominee. I haven't studied up on it however so I might be totally off the track.

But I just said let's hope it's before. :shrug:

 

[NonoBadDog]

But I just said let's hope it's before. :shrug:

Me too. It would be a catastrophe if the Republicans won by default regardless of who's fault it was.

 

[Grant]

So I should condemn her for lying? Ok, I condemn her for lying about one or two emails that were classified. arty

Actually there were hundreds, there were many other lies, and this demonstrates why LIVs will vote for Hillary Clinton.

 

[Roadvirus]

for what, exactly?

Perjury
Withholding evidence
Destruction of evidence

 

[Roadvirus]

Doubt anything is going to happen from this

I agree.

This woman could murder someone in the middle of Times Square at rush hour, in front of thousands and on video and still walk away scott free...and still get 50% in the next poll.

 

[jmotivator]

Well can we just hope together that if wrongdoing, worse, illegal behavior is proven that it happens before she becomes the nominee?

If the Democrats nominate her at this point they have nobody to blame but themselves if the investigation blows up in their face.