The final shot at Hillary, just like the others, was a blank.

And Ivanka?

Lil’Precious Princess who only got security clearance because of Daddy

 

Were they classified and on her own illegal private server?

 

Your link specifically states.... "The three-year-long investigation by State’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security concluded that 38 individuals committed a total of 91 security violations involving emails sent to or from Clinton’s private server."

......and because your source gave it a positive sounding headline, you honestly think that this report exonerates Hillary. LOL.....91 documented security violations with some involving classified documents is a big deal ( not to mention the 30,000 missing emails). 38 individuals being involved in those violations is a big deal. Just because you took it from a friendly source that chose to give it the friendly sounding yet meaningless headline of "no systemic violations" does not erase the seriousness of that number of offenses. Extreme partisans are REALLY easy to fool. Hillary could commit murder, and a headline of "she wasnt involved in a systemic pattern of murders" would be all that you would need to start bragging about her innocence.

 

Sticking your **** in an intern's mouth, at work, is abuse of power

 

Certainly you or I would be

 

Carelessness, .....bullshit.

 

Who knows?

SHE has not been investigated

Funny that

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/11/28/18116326/ivanka-trump-emails-hillary-clinton-gma

And a year on she was still at it

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politi...-private-emails-texts-raise-security-concerns

 

Explain why the Trumps are doing the same thing they accused Hillary of

 

In other words: zilch.

 

I must have left my decoder ring at home. Can you explain in detail what it is that you are asking? Are you implying that the Trump's have been using a private server to transmit classified information and even some with the highest level of classification which is titled top secret information? I would need a link to back up that claim.

 

One thing back at you the stat department has been so awful for so long that it has inspired at least one sci fi parody. See Keith Laumer's Retief series.

 

It was 91 documented cases of classified information that ended up on Clinton's server by the 38 people in question (this report was about those 38 people not Clinton specifically). Surely there were far more classified documents amongst the 30,000 missing emails, but 91 in and of itself is extremely serious. In all, it found 588 violations relating to information then or now deemed to be classified that ended up on her server. 22 were TOP SECRET. How many TOP SECRET documents in the 30,000 missing emails is hard to determine, but logic would dictate that the ones that were conveniently lost likely held far higher number of TOP SECRET. 22 is enough to establish an extremely serious breach of protocol. But hey, the left wing blogosphere came up with an innocuous sounding headline...so all is good apparently.

https://www.apnews.com/14b14afc5d8647858489a2cf5385c28d

 

You're not being "unrealistic". That would be too kind a term. More appropriate terms for what you say come to mind: "bigotry", "chauvinism", "misogynism", .... There are many much more appropriate terms to describe the belief that when a husband is unfaithful, the wife should be punished.

And if you're wondering why I didn't quote the rest of your sentence, there are two reasons: one, I would be re-posting yet another right-wing lie. And second, what I wrote applies to anybody.

 

Yet another broken promise by Trump.

 

Oh... I see what you're doing. You think that if we repeat the word "rapist" as many times as you have heard it on your wingnut media, we'll be stupid enough to believe it.

Be aware though, that the Goebels tactic of repeating a lie over and over so many times that you end up believing, though it's a big hit on the right, it doesn't work so well on the left.

 

If one believes that the 30k missing emails were truly missing and not hidden, then yes, I suppose you could say "maybe" there were far more. If however, one believes that the 30k were hidden, then those purposefully hidden emails were hidden for a reason, and they "surely" contain far more. Personally, I believe when you consider it was washed with Bleach Bit, the odds of it being a simple mistake and not purposefully hidden, are next to nothing.

I think it is great that you say that you are not defending Hillary while actively defending by while pointing out that there is no proof that it was compromised, but I fail to see why that is relevant. That is like excusing away drunk driving because there doesn't exist 100% proof that they hit anyone. Hitting someone is not a requirement for a drunk driving charge, and mishandling classified information does not require it being compromised. Nobody is claiming that she deserves the death penalty, but she surely deserves a very harsh drunk driving sentence like anyone else. She faced nothing. Not even a charge. You or I would surely not be given the same courtesy.

 

"In the end, State Department investigators found 38 current or former employees “culpable” of violating security procedures — none involving material that had been marked classified — in a review of roughly 33,000 emails that had been sent to or from the personal computer system Clinton used."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...339446-f1dc-11e9-8693-f487e46784aa_story.html

Washington (CNN)A former US official who left the State Department in 2012 received a letter in August informing him that dozens of his emails sent to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton were now being recategorized as classified.

The letter marks one instance of what the Washington Post reported Saturday as a wide-scale reclassification of emails sent to Clinton's private email by as many as 130 current and former senior State Department officials.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/29/poli...ails-state-department-reclassified/index.html
.........................................................................................................................................................
You must not have received the memo. You can stop now. The false accusations served their purpose. Keven McCarthy let the cat out of the bag years ago. The fruitless investigations were never about finding any substantive wrongdoing. They were about a professional character assassination carried out by congressional Repubs and right wing media. Relax. It worked. The Orange Man got elected. Now it's time to flog the new bullshyte being spewed about Don's next prospective opponent.

 

Hillary was a great first lady. Right up there with Martha Washington, Eleanor Roosevelt and Jackie Kennedy. Course Michelle was the best.

 

That is a rather silly remark. It was her responsibility to classify them. Information does not become classified with time. It is usually the opposite. Over time the need for classification becomes less. The information is the most sensitive when it is first created.

 

People with no standards behave accordingly.

Best to avoid hiring people who give such behavior a total pass.

 

Why should she be serving a life sentence?

 

You have to dodge the over projection in this thread like a ricocheting bullet...

 

It is hilarious how the washington Post very carefully phrased that in reference to the 38 employees( not Hillary), so that it looked like there were not any instances of classified documents being found on her server. After all these years, how can you possible believe that? This information has literally been out there for years. Here is an AP link to the exact same story that does not use the same level of slight of hand with the exact same story..........

https://www.apnews.com/14b14afc5d8647858489a2cf5385c28d

"The investigation covered 33,000 emails that Clinton turned over for review after her use of the private email account became public. The department said it found a total of 588 violations involving information then or now deemed to be classified but could not assign fault in 497 cases."





Its funny how the EXACT SAME STORY can spawn such a preposterously misleading conclusion. It was purposefully phrased to be confusing so that people like yourself that simply surf for headlines are able to then go forward and continue your seemingly nonstop crusade of misinformation. You see, this particular investigation in the articles, was not an investigation into Hillary at all. It was an investigation into the specific actions of those 38 employees that were found culpable of violating security procedures, and whether they knew what they were doing and should lose their security clearance. The distinction of whether it was at that time marked classified speaks directly to the culpability of those that put those emails onto a private server. It says nothing to the actions of the person that set up that server and whether or not doing so constituted a gross violation of due diligence in handling highly classified and even top secret information. We already know that hundreds of those emails were classified and some of them literally TOP SECRET. Even one is a gross violation of the law. This information has been known for years, and all it took was for a misleading headline for you to entirely forget the entire crux of the well publicized issue. The only conclusion that can logically be drawn is that you aren't in pursuit of answers; you are only in pursuit of pushing your preconceived notions, and you dont care how much you have to twist reality in order to do it.