BoatShoes;1799496 wrote:Hillary's best accomplishment IMHO was working to get the state children's health insurance program established with hard fought compromise with Republicans after getting worked on HillaryCare which has been hugely beneficial to scores of children in southeast Ohio.

like_that;1799504 wrote:Do you or ever did work for the government? In a classified environment?

QuakerOats;1799536 wrote:I'm tearing up .............gosh she should be president.

BoatShoes;1799554 wrote:I have mentioned previously that I was in the Navy Reserve with security clearance.

BoatShoes;1799554 wrote:I have mentioned previously that I was in the Navy Reserve with security clearance.

BoatShoes;1799555 wrote:Mitt Romney will secretly vote for her over Donald Trump. Hope that helps.

QuakerOats;1799573 wrote:No it doesn't. Nor do I believe Romney will vote for anyone who is under FEDERAL CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION. And you shouldn't either.

majorspark;1799562 wrote:Then you should know that no matter how ridiculous anything deemed classified is it should be treated as such.

gut;1799576 wrote:Romney has already more or less said he is voting Gary Johnson

like_that;1799567 wrote:Was this pre email being used as a regular form of communication? If not, then I don't know how you can actually believe the bullshit you are typing. Either that or you are lying. I have a security clearance too and I know plenty of people (including a few friends who work at the State Department) who have security clearances much higher than me. They all know damn well you can't do what Hillary did without being cryptic and going out of your way to get help to set up a private server to receive government emails. Even for non sensitive emails, it would be near impossible to have them forwarded to my private account, not to mention I could be in serious trouble for doing so. I can't even walk in a SCIF with my own phone. It has to be locked up once you are in a SCIF. If you truly worked for the Navy with a security clearance, then you know damn well the deflection Hillary's team is spewing is 100% bullshit. You also know damn well if you did the same thing as she did you would be in serious trouble.

BoatShoes;1799579 wrote:I 100% agree...as I have seen written on this matter is that what Hillary did disrespects all the rank and file people who bend over backwards to respect classified designations.

BoatShoes;1799579 wrote:All I said was that the public could see how overbroad the usage is

majorspark;1799585 wrote:She did more than disrespect the rank and file. She broke the law. We all sign government documents under penalty of law just not as important as the one she signed.



Perhaps the judge could take this into consideration at her sentencing.

BoatShoes;1799616 wrote:Plenty of prosecutors do not think her ignorance arouse to criminality so far e.g. Anne Tompkins who prosecuted Petraeus.

Personally, what is sad is that millions of Americans will be convinced that whatever the decision to prosecute her or not that it is corrupt.

BoatShoes;1799616 wrote: IMHO we need a fourth branch of government with elite public servants schooled at institutions like the military academy to investigate and prosecute government officials because so manybpeople have no faith in fair prosecution of government agents at the federal, state and local levels for prosecutors to overcome institutional biases whether it is Loretta Lynch prosecuting Hillary or Tim McGinty prosecuting the Cleveland police.

queencitybuckeye;1799632 wrote:Interesting concept, fixing something horribly broken though more of it.

Apple;1799671 wrote:Kind of what I was thinking...

Government's answer to most problems is to create some-sort of additional government entity that oversees the problems of a failing entity of government.

Making government bigger is not the option I would choose.

gut;1799674 wrote:Well, and the suggestion is really what the courts are supposed to be for. Except now both sides have taken to stacking the courts with political activist judges. That's the real problem and why checks and balances are failing (especially when a POTUS goes around Congress with Exec Orders that are unconstitutional).

Otherwise, I'd say Congress works quite well. You need some level of agreement/compromise among 60% of the Senate to get much done....and if you can't get that, it's probably not a very good idea. The problem is a lack of good ideas, not one party or the other obstructing.

Heretic;1799676 wrote:Well, to me, the obstructing is a problem, but a subtle one where you'll have something that's a good idea, but it gets sabotaged because someone will add extra crap

CenterBHSFan;1801681 wrote:Waiting to see Hillary's regimented salad tossers explain away the release of the House committee's finalized report.

Even with expecting a final release from the current administration, which I'm hoping that they are not holding their collective breaths for that to happen, I'm suspecting that some people might be unpleasantly suprised.