ptown_trojans_1;1788347 wrote:I have no idea how it will turn out either. I've read so many conflicted stories on what is and what was not considered "classified" I just want a final answer.

majorspark;1788364 wrote: The only final answer we are waiting on is will the Justice department allow an indictment.

majorspark;1788364 wrote:As Secretary of State Hillary should have the competence to discern what is even remotely close to being considered "classified" and not place it in an unsecured location. At the very least she is grossly incompetent. Incompetence like a former national security advisor (Sandy Berger) stuffing classified documents down his pants was just "sloppy". At least Berger resigned as a national security advisor to John Kerry.

The only final answer we are waiting on is will the Justice department allow an indictment.

gut;1788366 wrote:Trump will say he has it "on good authority" she should be indicted.

Hillary will demand proof of that.

Trump will say he can't reveal his source, but "believe me, when I'm elected Hillary will be indicted....but, you know, we've been friends - maybe I'll pardon her at some point".

ptown_trojans_1;1788363 wrote:I do? Huh, ok.
No, I don't and neither do you.
The only people that know the final answer are the people doing the investigations. Everything else is speculation.

Apple;1788433 wrote:... it is strange that the Libyan president wanted to meet with the Clinton Foundation before meeting with HRC to discuss the 9/11/12 Benghazi attacks.

Belly35;1788789 wrote:Hillary and the Socialist Democratic Party individuals who protecting her all be on fast trac to court..jail

ptown_trojans_1;1788369 wrote:Largely agree. Also agree that the fact they had a private server, like previous SECSTATEs is a no-no and they should have known some of the details would be classified after the fact, as they have been. Still, not sure that equals jail. I'm waiting on the final answer from the DoJ.

ptown_trojans_1;1788369 wrote:Largely agree. Also agree that the fact they had a private server, like previous SECSTATEs is a no-no and they should have known some of the details would be classified after the fact, as they have been. Still, not sure that equals jail. I'm waiting on the final answer from the DoJ.



Ha. That's exactly how it will go, believe me....

fish82;1788823 wrote:Which other SECSTATEs had a private server?

ptown_trojans_1;1788369 wrote:Largely agree. Also agree that the fact they had a private server, like previous SECSTATEs is a no-no and they should have known some of the details would be classified after the fact, as they have been. Still, not sure that equals jail. I'm waiting on the final answer from the DoJ.

FatHobbit;1788838 wrote:The private email server is not new

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_White_House_email_controversy

Apple;1788845 wrote:The Wiki post seems to be lacking the names of GWB's SECSTATEs using the mentioned server, or maybe I wasn't reading it correctly. It also doesn't mention that classified/Top Secret intel was being funneled through the server. Maybe I am missing something? I am pretty sure I've heard that GWB's SECSTATEs minimally sent/received emails on their personal email accounts, however, these emails did not have Classified/Top Secret intel.

Even with the knowledge that there was a separate server used in the previous administration, it doesn't make what HRC was doing any less illegal.

like_that;1788825 wrote:Wrong.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/mar/09/hillary-clinton/hillary-clinton-said-my-predecessors-did-same-thin/

Just face it, your girl is a lying **** no matter how you much try to spin and deflect.

FatHobbit;1788839 wrote:Do you not think Obama is directing the DOJ to lay off Clinton?

FatHobbit;1788848 wrote:I agree, it doesn't make what Clinton did ok. But the obvious reason previous administrations have used separate unsecured servers is because they didn't want people to be able to read what they were emailing and they were trying to get around those laws.

ptown_trojans_1;1788863 wrote:Ok, so the previous ones had a private email, not server. Got it. Look man, I do think it is shady as hell, and am not for use of private email and servers, but I'm not as out for blood on her as you guys are. I'm more inclined to let the process play out.



No. I'm not one to buy into conspiracy theories of the sort.



Correct. That's the issue. That's the thing that needs to be really the focus. Clinton is just one part of a larger problem of now with everything online, FOIA is nearly impossible in order to gain access to the whole story on things. Congress does not to do several things, including updating the transparency laws as well as loosening the FOIA and classification law.

I do have a question:
Let's say the DOJ process plays out, nothing happens to Clinton, she is the D nominee, and she beat Trump in November. Will people here accept her as President, or will they think the Clinton's paid someone off and something really did go down?

I have a feeling some on her, no matter the DOJ outcome, will never accept anything less than her behind bars, no matter the facts.

ptown_trojans_1;1788863 wrote: I do have a question:
Let's say the DOJ process plays out, nothing happens to Clinton, she is the D nominee, and she beat Trump in November. Will people here accept her as President, or will they think the Clinton's paid someone off and something really did go down?

I have a feeling some on her, no matter the DOJ outcome, will never accept anything less than her behind bars, no matter the facts.

ptown_trojans_1;1788863 wrote: I do have a question:
Let's say the DOJ process plays out, nothing happens to Clinton, she is the D nominee, and she beat Trump in November. Will people here accept her as President, or will they think the Clinton's paid someone off and something really did go down?

I have a feeling some on her, no matter the DOJ outcome, will never accept anything less than her behind bars, no matter the facts.

ptown_trojans_1;1788863 wrote:Ok, so the previous ones had a private email, not server. Got it. Look man, I do think it is shady as hell, and am not for use of private email and servers, but I'm not as out for blood on her as you guys are. I'm more inclined to let the process play out.



No. I'm not one to buy into conspiracy theories of the sort.



Correct. That's the issue. That's the thing that needs to be really the focus. Clinton is just one part of a larger problem of now with everything online, FOIA is nearly impossible in order to gain access to the whole story on things. Congress does not to do several things, including updating the transparency laws as well as loosening the FOIA and classification law.

I do have a question:
Let's say the DOJ process plays out, nothing happens to Clinton, she is the D nominee, and she beat Trump in November. Will people here accept her as President, or will they think the Clinton's paid someone off and something really did go down?

I have a feeling some on her, no matter the DOJ outcome, will never accept anything less than her behind bars, no matter the facts.

sleeper;1788869 wrote:If anything, one of her low level employees will take the fall for her.

one of the few people who served prison time as a result of the Whitewater controversy although fifteen individuals were convicted of various federal charges. Her refusal to answer "three questions" for a grand jury about whether President Bill Clinton lied in his testimony during her Whitewater trial led her to receive a jail sentence of 18 months for contempt of court. This comprised most of the total 22 months she spent in incarceration. McDougal received a full Presidential pardon from outgoing President Clinton in the final hours of his presidency in 2001.