Ex-Mueller team members suggest they knew outcome of Clinton email probe in advance

The rules are different for service personnel, look it up. I'll wait.

 

No need to wait. It is illegal for anyone, in government / military to expose US intel, or share, store, transmit it improperly.

 

There is a need because you are intentionally try to create a false equivalence between military personnel and civilians and with that false comparison you are intentionally conflating two different things for partizan purposes. You are the one that brought up the General. Try harder.

 

Look professor ... Patraeus wasn't charged under UCMJ ... RETIRED general Patraeus, CIA director Patraeus, plead guilty to 1 count of mishandling classified material, in US federal court. The same statute, and jurisdiction applies to Clinton ... m'kay?

 

What's funny is you actually think that is true.

 

No.

All classified information resides on a classified network system separated from all outside access, or in a locked facility that can only be accessed by those with the appropriate security clearance.

That means any classified information in Clintons emails was intentionally and illegally retrieved from a classified network and placed on an unclassified network.

There is no other possibility.

 

They knew information was classified. ANY communication with or about a foreign leader or foreign policy is classified AT BIRTH. Comey testified there was classified information in the emails and that they knew it was classified.

 

Nope, it confirm Huma violated the law and that the Obama administration endangered our national security.

 

In barry's defense he did tell the Russians to "cut it out".

 

The OP is about Clinton and her merry band of felons. Posting in wrong thread or is that the leftness go to response?

 

How would you like me to prove it? Post every prosecution in history? Post one that didn't occur?
The RW media was searching for an example to disprove this when Comey first made that case and thy found nothing.

 

I'm not the ignorant fool who can't explain why trump has also failed to charge her. If it's as simple as you claim they could have indicted her last January.

 

The difference is proving she lied. Again, why hasn't she been charged yet? Is Sessions part of the deep state conspiracy?

 

So where are the charges?

 

That's not relevant, one way or another. What it means is the fix was in. FBI minions knew it well in advance...............well before any Clinton interview. Telling, isn't it?

 

.So you're saying the trump admin is derelict in their duty to uphold the law by not charging her?

 

Then where are the charges?

 

You can prove it by demonstrating where intent is a key element in prosecuting any crime. Clinton has demonstrated consciousness of
guilt by destroying evidence and lying about her actions. If intent is needed there it is.

 

Thanks. That's interesting, I did not know that. Wow..........remember a time when Democrats said "coverups" were worse than deeds?

 

Nah, the real purpose is another pathetic attempt to discredit the Mueller investigation, which really makes it about Trump. That should be obvious.

 

I bet you're still insisting on a definition call on the word "is", huh? Proving doesn't seem to be the critical point here, for you. You seem to infer that until charges are brought that you won't accept the evidence of the crime. Ok, Given that, why is there a Mueller investigation at all? No charges have been brought. So?

 

Where were the charges against Capone before the IRS got involved?

 

I knew it too, I guess I'm part of the deep state lol

 

Even a Republican should be able to figure what this is really about.

 

Then why hasn't the trump admin charged her with perjury or obstruction?
Stop making excuses for the failure in the WH.