FBI Has 'Overwhelming' Evidence to Indict and Convict Hillary

That is mkt the measure of the crime. The crime was complete when she stored and transmitted classsified information through her personal private shadow server. When she did so and the server did jot even have basic encryption. When she handed data files containing that classified information to her attorney. When she turned over to a private company. And on and on and on.

 

Irrelevent to the crime or the wrongdoing.

 

What evidence does or would mitigate what she did? We know lots of evidence as the Judge points out so what is it you are hoping gets her off?

- - - Updated - - -

Why do you assert the investigation is complete?

 

Just out of curiosity, would you respect the opinion of a person who has held two top-secret security clearances?

The letter of the law? She not only broke the law, she pulled down her pants and (*)(*)(*)(*) all over it. Even the dimmest-bulb Libocrat Hillary defenders know this, and that's why they're sending up all these trial balloons about how nobody can prove INTENT, and so let's just forget about the whole thing.... . Hint: somewhere in hell, Adolf Hitler is protesting his innocence, saying he didn't INTEND to start World War II....

Oh, nobody really thinks dumb-ass Hillary was selling secrets to the North Koreans or anything, but think for just a minute (I'm talking to you Hillary defenders)... do you really want someone as STOOPID, negligent, and reckless as she is to have her "finger on the button"...? Do you really want someone so out of touch with the 21st-century as president that she thinks "wiping a server" is something you do with a (*)(*)(*)(*)ing CLOTH?!

 

Seems you need to look it up, his storing the notebooks in his desk was a violation and his autobiographer had security clearences.

Dis Cloning give copies of all the emails to her attorney? Did her IT guy have the clearances? Did the companies who handled her domain and to whom she sent the server have the clearances? Did everyone on her staff that went through ALL the emails and destroyed the ones she did not want released have the proper security clearances to view or most highly classified information?

 

Fair enough, but with all the anonymous sources you'd think we hear that alleged if it was the case

 

The Democrats won't do anything because they don't need to. The vast majority of Americans have never worked in a secure facility like a SCIF or a TCAE and also don't have an understanding of networking which would allow them to form their own opinion on Hillary's actions. For most Americans this may as well be an argument over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.

 

My understanding is that it is not relevant if she "knowingly" did it or not. In matters of National Security, you are required to KNOWINGLY keep it secure, which she obviously did not. You really need to know these fine points if you are going to discuss this. Other people have done time, for less than what she's allegedly done. Unless you are OK with endowing royalty upon American politicos, you really need to support and uphold the law, regardless of your political affiliation.

 

King Obama has spoken , time for the lefties to step in tune.

 

As long as the same law is applied to Colin Powell and Rice's aides.

 

Technically yes, but precedent suggests you don't get prosecuted without intent

 

Espionage is real, sorry to burst your bubble.

 

Why do us simple folks have to live with premise, "Ignorance of law is not excuse"?

 

Oh she wasn't ignorant. I'm sure she pushed the envelope up to the what she thought she could get away with and avoid being charged.

 

Neither of them used a private unsecure server,, did they??

Poor Old Ugly Hillary asked her staff to remove classification markings so that the documents could be sent as if she didn't know that they were classified. That is a serious crime on both ends. POUH was the ****ing SoS so she had sworn an oath to make damn sure that she didn't expose our national security to the threats evolved with her using a private server.

 

Sounds like a good strategy. Human nature, etc.

 

So it is just a question now of "what she thought she could get away with", and not following policy, or concern for national security ? I happen to agree with you. The difference may be that I feel that she thought that she could get away with a whole lot more than you may, and as such, pushed way beyond concerns for legality ............ because she thought she could get away with it ......

- - - Updated - - -

As you have been a Hillary defender, you now admit that she "pushed the limit", and now must trust that she was sure to stop at a line where things became illegal. What makes you assume that ?

 

I am sure it is a top government priority, at this point, to measure her for the lethal injection gurney at the Federal pen in Terre Haute, Indiana.

It is never to early to plan.

 

The Democratic Party is not a police force. The party is under no obligation to do anything, nor should it. This will be left to the FBI to investigate, and the Justice Department to prosecute, if it gets that far.

Nixon was never prosecuted. He was 'urged' to resign. This would be the best course for HRC as well, but it will never happen until the FBI investigation is finished.

 

Did they send classified information over a private account? Yes. Is this legal. No. If you want to enforce the law then do so equally.

 

And you want to elect her President?

 

Sure, if someone set up a private server and stored and transmitted classified information through it then prosecute them. If someone acted with gross negligence in the handling of classified information prosecute them. And if someone did either of those yet they did not cross that bar to prosectue them then at the least they should never be placed in a position to handle classified information ever again.

Do you agree?

 

Without access to all the evidence such determination is not possible.

My only desire is that justice be done if a crime has been comitted. The judge made an absolute assessment based upon incomplete evidence. Only the biased jump to an absolute conclusion based upon incomplete evidence.

 

Yesl indeed. Does not stop her from pleading ignorance, though

 

You would of course agree that NO action should be taken until the investigation is complete and the FBI makes a recommendation. ...yes?