When will Hillary Clinton give up her candidacy ? Part 2

Meaning you applaud the fact that she wipes her feet on the constitution of the United States of America.

The server is what contained the information subpoenaed. The printouts were whatever she wanted to be seen.

If you don't understand the difference, maybe you need an education in legal terms?

When did you ever serve as Secretary of State or Defense or were you ever a member of the Joint Chiefs? Trump might defeat Hillary, but it won't be because she is actually corrupt, but because the opposition is willing to perpetuate slurs to keep her out of office. If Trump actually prevails, I hope the republicans have a way to keep him corralled. Because so far he thinks he can have a blind trust if his children run the business (or scam) that's a good one. He plans to sue the women he molested if he becomes president (lofty goal) and let's not pretend we only heard about these assaults when he decided to run for emperor, thse stories have been around since way before he was excusing Bill Clinton for randiness.
If any of the A2K members have ever been a staff member at Cabinet level HQ, you know the Sec. Or Agency Director has a huge staff that winnow thru all the correspondence to keep the Chief free for important meetings and operations. They simply don't have the time to read all of the msgs generated by every employee in their org as well as all the other orgs that correspond with the Chiefs org. You can't be the executive if you are the fact checker, there simply aren't enough hours in the day.

Are you being deliberately obtuse? I have already posted the U.S. Code concerning classified information. Why are you pretending that I didn't? Perhaps you would care to point out the nonexistent "intent" clause that you apparently believe is in there. And when you fail to do so, perhaps you will refrain from using the word "purposely" as a way to imply that it is in the Code. The Code that she violated is not an opinion. Neither was the Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement she signed simply an opinion.

And Comey was lying when he said that no reasonable prosecutor would bring a case . . . Bryan Nishimura did the same thing as Clinton and was charged and convicted even though the FBI found no malicious intent on his part.

Clinton

Why do you think that people who disagree with you should also share your same reality, ideology theology?

Quote Blickers:


Quote Glenn:


Who's burying? This thread absolutely has to do with Hillary Clinton's candidacy, which at this point is directly connected to her fitness to serve as Commander In Chief in comparison to Donald Trump's fitness to serve as Commander In Chief. And Donald Trump has repeatedly announced that he wants to change America's policy from containing Russian totalitarian expansion, to one where the US and Russia will deal with each other from the point of "mutual shared interests". No defending freedom from Russian tanks. No working together with our NATO allies who have helped us defend Europe from totalitarian takeover for over 60 years. Just Putin and Don, talking things over and reaching an agreement what's best for the US-or what Donald thinks is best for the US-no muss, no fuss.

Russia sends tanks into Poland, Donald asks what's in it for us. Russia takes over Hungary, Donald wants Vladimir to tell him what he's going to do for him in return. Russia takes over the Czech Republic, Donald accepts a piece of the Czechs and calls it even. That's foreign policy under Trump. Don says, let's just get the deal done, screw everyone else in the world, and move on to the next thing. NATO? Eat my shorts.

That's what's going to be running the damn country. Got any answers, Glenn? Nope. You and the rest of the Trump brigade are moving away from discussing this so fast your tires are leaving skidmarks.

How about an answer on REAL national security issues, that haven't already been settled? Remember, your boy Trump didn't even know Russia invaded Ukraine.

Here's a little reminder of what we can enjoy reliving if Trump gets elected:

Hungary 1956:




Czechoslovakia 1968:




If Hillary is president, a replay of this does not happen, since NATO will be strong and Russia dares not enter these countries now. If Trump is President, a replay of this absolutely happens, since NATO will be disbanded at worst, weakened by disunity at best, giving Putin the green light to take back what he feels belongs to Russia-which is just about everything in Europe east of Germany. Wait-he might take back part of Germany too, just for old times' sake.

These are real national security issues, and so must be faced before if we are going to decide whose candidacy is best for President.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/jul/06/hillary-clinton/fbi-findings-tear-holes-hillary-clintons-email-def/

I was never a cabinet secretary or member of the Joint chiefs, though I am well acquainted with several eminent gentlemen who were. I have been the CEO of several companies and am a Board member on others. I'm not sure what any of this has to do with the matters you cite. Indeed your rant looks a bit like guerilla dust meant merely to distract attention from Hillary's unfolding lies and deception..

I do know that in such a position many of the assistants and sycophants surrounding people in authority like to think they are thinking for the man or woman they serve and controlling his/her information, but that a wise leader never allows them to control the information he/she gets or the priorities they establi8sh for the organizations they lead. That is rather basic stuff for anyone who has exercised such authority.

I'll readilly acknowledge Trump's intemperate statements and occasional vulgarity. However compared to the persistent criminal behavior exhibited by the Clintons - in events that far eclipse anything of which Trump has been accused - and the character assasinations and damage they have inflicted on the lives of many rather powerless accusers, and the long-term pattern of misuse of public office for personal enrichment and blatant lies that both have exhibited, I think that the equivalence you are trying so hard to suggest is truly laughable.

Why don't you just pontificate about Australia? You are anxious to believe everything the alt-right wants to shove down the throats of American voters, but you can't vote here because you're not an American, you are a citizen of a foreign country. And as tolerant as American are over foreign critiques of our country, we don't care who you want to see as our President. I'm not surprised you favor Trump (and please don't try to say you don't) you send us Rupert Murdoch, apparently the creme of Australian culture. I will be happy to continue to suffer that Austrailian wart if you agree to take Donald Trump off our hands. If this doesn't appeal to you, we will pack up Rupert and his wife and send them back to the warm arms of Austrailia. And I like Austrailia, but if you continue to meddle in our politics, please understand there is only so much meddling from outsiders we will tolerate.

She never shared information with people who are unauthorized. What server she shared information with people who ARE authorized is comparatively minor. Now the real question is: Where do you stand on the major national security issues, such as Trump's stated aim to shift the US position regarding Russia from preventing Russia from expanding into Europe to take back its Eastern European Empire which now exists, to Trump's new aim of dealing with Russia from a position of "mutual shared interests", and sacrifice Europe and the rest of the world when Trump finds it convenient?

Understand that Russia-which LOVES them some Trump-has a number one foreign policy aim of dismantling NATO so it can take over Eastern Europe again and exert military and political pressure on Western Europe. Trump has plainly stated repeatedly that unless NATO pays more he will disband NATO. Such statements have already weakened the NATO alliance, which is now not as close as before. This is music to Vladimir's ears, since disunity soon leads to dissolution in alliances, and this NATO alliance has prevented Russia from expanding further for over 60 years.

LOL. She knew the protocol. Don't you understand the risks? She did.

I am. I've explained the connection, but I guess you're just not up to understanding it.

Are you just talking to hear yourself or do you have some evidence to back up your claim?

I Hope she did not share to much with Anthony's wiener.

I arrive at my choice from the last debate and factcheck on the honesty of these two candidates. Clinton had 35 lies or pants on fire. Trump had 131 lies or pants on fire. Politifact found Trump to lie over 70% of the time.

You really should review this thread before making a fool of yourself.

Douglas Cox, a law professor at City University of New York who studies records preservation said that the argument that Clinton complied with the letter and spirit of the law is unsustainable. He said that the fact that Clinton's staff--rather than a State Department federal records officer--chose which emails to destroy is "honestly breathtaking." Her private employees don't have the authority to decide what does or doesn't count as a federal record. Further, when she was making these choices, she was acting as a private citizen, not a government employee.
______________________________________

Like I said, wouldn't it be great if when you get pulled over by the cops, and they smell the wrong kind of smoke in your car, and they tell you to open your glove box, and you ask them if they would go back to their car so that you can first take everything out of your glove box that is personal stuff, and they say, "Sure"? Wouldn't that be great?

They weren't authorized! Do you understand what that means?

Asking you to acknowledge documented material (U.S. Code) is not me asking you to believe in ideology or theology. What in the hell are you talking about?

You are. And you just did it again. I have a cure for that.

Yes George, that was what I thought. I didn't have to be acquainted with such folks because I actually worked at a few of those orgs and know the principles, I don't have to share glory hounds stories about their so called experiences because I have actual not second and experience in the flesh. Not just listening to other folks war stories, actually working there myself, actual in the flesh experience. Do you understand the difference between cocktail party chatter and on the job? I'm sure you do, just don't hang your hat on outside chatter.

"Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information."

"There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton's position, or in the position of those with whom she was corresponding about those matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation."

"None of these emails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these emails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at agencies and departments of the United States government -- or even with a commercial email service like Gmail."

"Only a very small number of the emails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information. But even if information is not marked 'classified' in an email, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it." This is made clear in the Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement she signed when she became Secretary of State.

"We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial email accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account. We also assess that Secretary Clinton's use of a personal email domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent."

"She also used her personal email extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related emails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton's personal email account."
________________________________________

You honestly don't get it, do you?

I think you are very smart and I am not just saying it to be nice but rather it is my observation. My main study is behavior so at times I ask odd question and I have one for you.

Do you think you may know someone close to you who may have the right stuff?

http://www.ocdonline.com/the-right-stuff

Quote Builder:

Hillary absolutely understands risks. For instance, Hillary absolutely understands the risk of alienating the other members of the NATO alliance, the most successful military alliance the world has ever known. Russia took over all of Eastern Europe during WWII and stood poised to take over Western Europe at the end of it. Only the Western Allies prevented Stalin from pushing all the way to the Atlantic. The Western Allies formed NATO, and Russia's expansionism halted. Unfortunately, this left Eastern Europe in the grip of Russian domination and economic poverty, where conditions similar to the United States during the Great Depression would be considered good times in Eastern Europe. All because of Russia.

But NATO was so effective in sealing off Russian expansionism that Russia ended up collapsing in 1991 and was unable to afford to keep its Eastern Empire together. Those poor nations were finally able to wrest free of the Bear and wasted no time in applying for membership in the EU and NATO, so as to achieve prosperity and security from Russia taking them back. NATO was unified, NATO was powerful, and Russia knew better than to try NATO.

Now Trump comes along and because he likes Putin's authoritarian style, he wants to throw all this away and let Russia take what it wants, when it wants, as long as they throw a bone to the US to make it seem worth it. Poland, Hungary, and Czecholslovakia will soon see the Russian tanks moving in as they did on those fateful days in the 1950s and 60s. And 80s. After that, Russia will be in good position to use its new military position to exert political power on Western European nations to capitulate to Russians' demands bit by bit. We have seen this happen before. We cannot allow it to happen again.

That is why Hillary's candidacy must be successful in this election. Other elections, it might not have mattered so much which side won, but this is the first election where a Russian appeaser like Trump is running for office and might actually achieve the White House. The havoc this man Trump will wreak while holding wild parties with 13 year old girls for the raping will boggle the mind. Hillary must win for the good of the nation, and of Western Civilization.