LOL....thanks for the note from Fairy Land. She's committed many, many crimes and may only be saved by the fact that the entire Obama DOJ will be dragged under with her as accessories to her crimes should Trump decide to prosecute. This in no way means however she should not be held to account in a supposed land ruled by laws everyone is expected to obey.
You do know there is an ongoing investigation into the emails and the Clinton Foundation and the Clinton Initiative (which they have suddenly and mysteriously shut down). You do know the next AG and DOJ could file charges tomorrow based on what the FBI discovered and her testimony before Congress.
The problem with this assesmment, while Comey himself did not elaborate, is the fact you, Comey, or anyone else elaborated on who actually did the labeling. So labeling is very important. In other words, gross negligence by who? Hillary could have examined every single email, and didn't label or send any herself, classified or unclassified because of protocol. Think about the logic. Trump was asking about the 30,000 emails buy Hillary for example. 30,000 emails? If Clinton filled out 30,000 emails and stopped to evaluate each to see if they were classified or unclassified, labeled them all herself, the woman would have never slept. Sending that many emails out without help from her staff, is just a physical impossibility.
Did you forget the grand jury did not indict Nixon. Yes the Republicans did the right thing with Nixon and forced him out to spare us the impeachment. Too bad the Democrats didn't have the same respect for the law and the Constitution and the country when it came to Clinton.
If she committed many, many crimes you would have already proven those crimes. You have not, which means you just fabricated this post of yours.
Who in the Office of Cyber Security and the Office of Legal Counsel at the State Department approved of her shadow server for all her official emails? Labeling matters not a twit. Did she have classified information in an unsecure location? Did she allow people without proper clearances to view that information? Yes to both, crimes both. She knew that type of information was classified and it was her legal duty to protect it. - - - Updated - - - Well when you have the AG colluding with her husband................ A President desperately trying to hide his involvment............ The ordained next Democrat president........................not
Nixon didn't run Watergate, which was nothing compared to dirty campaign tricks the Democrats were engaged in this cycle, or CREEP or the Haldeman/Liddy group or the Chapin/Segretti group and the dirty campaign tricks he was involved in the cover up.
Dream on. She hasn't been tried for any crimes so many of the legal tools used to decide her fate have never even been used. Another unrealistic defense of Hillary Clinton.
Labeling is unimportant: whether marked or unmarked. She discussed material that was classified at the time she discussed it and should have known as that was her job. Gross negligence by her and her staff. He says who did the gross negligence in his quote. Trump has nothing to do with what Hillary did. She used her own server without any ones permission, and Trump certainly wasn't involved in that. She is supposed to know, period. It comes with being SOS.
I don't think Trump does a thing to Hillary. He's probably advised her to lay low for the next four years. I'm sure it was message received.
She is guilty of espionage but again the president and AG had her back. Thats some pretty powerful allies especially when you add in the MSM
Everything you claim is utter nonsense. Labeling is everything because Hillary may not have been the one doing the final labeling due to the fact there were too many emails to handle from day to day. As to the classified emails from her private server, most of those were over classified. You're doing the same as all the rest. Chasing a ghost.http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...fact-sheet-hillary-clintons-email-controvers/
Okay, so you fabricated your claim because you have proved nothing. Thanks for letting us know you are not truthful.
Lol;! You just ignored everything I just said. You cannot formulate a legitimate argument about the importance of labeling, because we all know that is the key to understanding exactly what happened with the labeling. I just explained that importance, and you failed to challenge that importance. You can't argue the points I made because we are talking about 30,000 plus emails by Clinton. A physical impossibility to administer that many emails by herself.
Here's how things might go: Congress, the AG or a special prosecutor will open an investigation. They will claim Hillary probably violated the law and prosecution might be recommended. Trump will then pardon her before formal charges are brought. Hillary will be permanently tarnished but her supporters can still claim she's never been convicted. Trump can appear the statesman, claiming the pardon was to help unify the nation and put the conflict behind us.
Still hanging on to that thin thread? Don't you get it? That was all part of Trump's BS to get people to vote for him. It worked, people were fooled, now Trump and most of his supporters have moved on. Most of them knew she didn't do anything wrong, too, they were just playing the game to get the guy with the "R" next to his name. How long before people accept what suckers they were?
Perjury and destruction of evidence are criminal activities. Even if you are innocent of a crime, impeding an investigation into that crime is, in fact, a crime.
And where in the constitution does a presidential pardon need to be announce at the time it is issue? My bet is that there is a pardon in a safe deposit box that Hillary can pull out if needed at a later date. I see no reason that either Hillary or Obama would trust Trump enough to not have that sign and dated pardon if needed.
On this one point alone she is guilty... She admitted to destroying the documents after removing them from State Dept. custody by creating a private server - YES Comey stated they recovered government documents from those she destroyed on the private server. - YES The fact is she removed/destroyed public office documents in violation of U.S. Code, Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 101, Section 2071, Paragraph a&b which states the penalty for her admitted violations of as...Face a fine, not more than three years imprisonment and to be barred from ever holding any public office again.
According to Obama, he cannot pardon Snowden because he has not been charged or faced trial. "I can't pardon somebody who hasn't gone before a court and presented themselves, so that's not something that I would comment on at this point." http://www.spiegel.de/international...with-us-president-barack-obama-a-1122008.html Of course this is a complete lie... but without being a complete hypocrite it would be difficult at best for him to spit a pardon at a woman he hates, whom he knows was responsible for tarnishing his legacy.
This wasn't a claim it's a question to you. Who in the State Department Office of Cyber Security and Office of Legal Counsel approved her server and it's use for official business? Was she in possession of classified information in an unsecured location? Whether they are marked classified is of no bearing the information is what is classifed not the document and she was trained and acknowledged that training to know what was classified information and clearly what was in some of the emails was highly sensitive information. Merely having that information in an unsecured location is a crime, that she allowed others to view makes it an even higher crime.
