Trump,Kushner sued to prevent destruction of official Gov't. records.

She claimed there was no classified documents on her server. Lie

She claimed that none of the documents were classified at the time. Lie

She claimed that none of the documents had classified markings. Lie.

 

You can't prove she lied. Whoever told you she is lying is pushing hearsay...remember that word during the impeachment? Very popular on the right duing that time but now...not so much.

 

It is not illegal to destroy official documents per se.

 

Accurate and precise words are important and significant in political and judicial arenas. I'll repeat it again, in bold caps so that it might get through: NOBODY EXONERATED HILLARY FOR ANYTHING.

 

Fishy isnt the word I would use. Stupid. Ignorant. Incompetent. I think those are better words.

She never said she didn't know what classified meant. Where are you getting your info? You may want to shop around for news sources...or prove me wrong and I will eat crow.

 

Close enough - the SoS of the USA should be extremely well versed on classification.

 

We can certainly agree that she should have known what the "C" was. Was she ignorant? Did she just not care? Did she simply not notice? Who knows...except Hillary, and unless it can be proven otherwise, we have to take her word for it.

 

They were not true. If she did it intentionally, she lied. If she did not do it intentionally, then she was extremely stupid.

As far as that "c" is concerned, after you read a few dozen classified documents, you see "u", "c", "s" or "ts" preceding each paragraph in a classified document, most people very quickly figure out what it means.

 

She was certainly stupid and their is a reasonable chance she lied. It is what can be proven however, not what is likely.

 

In that case the lawsuit is prudent.

 

I don't care that much about the judicial arena. But in the political arena.... The fact that she has been investigated so many times, that her political enemies have tried for almost 30 years to find some criminal misdeed, and in endless investigations that take years, ... and they have failed to do that, means she has been politically exonerated.

I don't like Hillary's political views at all. I also think that she has acted recklessly in many instances. But I think that what all these investigations have proven is that she is a very honest human being.

The "legal arena" is not just one of laws and precedent. It's one in which logic and rational thought also apply. And from that point of view also she has been exonerated.

 

Huh? You don't think that bit of knowledge is given during confidential-information school? How does the person most likely to be needing confidential documents not know how they will be marked?

Answer: They do know.

Mrs Clinton, how did you know if the information you were handling was confidential?
Clinton: I didn't think any of it was!

LMAO

 

Doesn't our current secretary of state use a private server???

 

Under the espionage act and other laws people are responsible for mishandling confidential information whether they consciously knew it was confidential, whether she saw the "C" or not, or whether it was marked or not

 

Comey testified under oath that Hillary lied to congress under oath.

 

Get off that dead horse. There is nothing illegal or against federal policy about using a private server.

 

A very honest human being? Did any of these investigations conclude that she did nothing wrong?

 

Yeah - Nobody can say she's an honest person with a straight face.

 

Thanks for your supposition.

 

Link please.

 

Are you seriously suggesting that the US Secretary of State would be going about her job, completely unaware of what confidential looks like?

Yeah, sure, perhaps the surgeon was telling the truth and didn't know what a suture is.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dax8KvfPXPI

 

No. What I am saying is a court of law can't prove it and they prosecute based on fact, not feelings.

https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/p...-clinton2019s-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system

"All the cases prosecuted involved some combination of: clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice. We do not see those things here."

As ridiculous as their conclusion may sound to you, I think it pales significantly to how ridiculous it is that people are still bringing up Hillary's emails. How long has it been? It is easy to use as a crutch when defending Trump but it is over. It may be time to just let it go.

 

LOL. Please point to any post of mine where I defend Trump. Go ahead; I'll wait.