monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

I just asked you two questions that have to do with our government. Not with Clinton (who has never been found guilty by any court of law I'm familiar with).

You don't want to answer two simple questions? Why?

That's funny.

Wow, maporsche, your hypocrisy is stunning. There have been countless questions asked of you that you have avoided.

1) Do you think the government (in general) over-classifies information, under-classifies it, or has the perfect amount of classification?

2) Do you think there exists the possibility that two departments could have disagreements over what should or should not be classified?

You claimed that the contents of those emails were in the public domain. So why haven't you produced them yet? When you do (which you can't) it'll all become clear that you know what you're talking about.

LOL! You sound like a lawyer trying to get a client off by using some logic that only makes sense to you . . . and Clinton.
_______________________________________________

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.
__________________________________________________________________________

She received training on how, and how not, to handle sensitive material. What baseless excuse would you like to make for her now?

Clinton is being protected because she is Clinton. That has little to do with justice, let alone equal justice. There are too many facts that show that, no matter how they are spun. The coverup is also a crime.

I don’t want to take the time and I’ll liekly lose interest in you again in a few minutes. I’ve got work to do today.

Sorry, you lost me at "Hildabeast". How sophomoric.

So you have NO opinion on this question? I’m talking right now, today, not 2009.

Really, none?

And nothing on question 2?

Show me where I used the term "Hildabeast." When you can't, consider what it is that caused you to believe I did.

So you really have no answer to the question of what was in those classified emails. I'm talking to you right now, today, not 2009.

Really, no?

Are you really sure about that?

That is a very telling remark, maporsche. It is, sadly, how far too many of the "liberals", "open minded people", "rational" people on this board operate.

You are right. "Killary" is much better.

Oh look, you got three thumbs up for misrepresenting me. You have some truly devoted fans.

The outright murder of Muammar Khadaffi and the assault on Libya amounted to the same kind of international gangsterism which Franklin Roosevelt accused Hitler and other Nazi bosses of. The same tribunal which sat in judgment of German Nazis at Nurenberg would most likely sentence Bork Obunga, the Hildabeast, Soros, and everybody else involved in that bullshit to be executed for war crimes.

I’m sure that I’ve lost interest in you for today Glenn.

You win. Happy?

you might not want to talk about people dodging questions

People have been asking you for years what country you're from, what country you're in.

You're a pretty good dodger yourself (though you occasionally forget to check your posts for regional idioms ).

I avoid Camlok as much as I can.

He can consider that a victory, I know I sure do.

That is how lies are invented and then perpetuated by repetition and group think. The sole purpose is to end conversations before they begin.

Sure. That's what we'll call it. You lost . . . interest.