Some Clinton Emails 'Too Damaging' to Release

originally posted by: IAMTAT

www.washingtonexaminer.com...

The president's top spokesman said he sees no reason for Democrats to find an alternative presidential candidate in case Hillary Clinton is indicted over her mishandling of classified material on her private email server.

"That's not something I'm worried about," White House press secretary Josh Earnest told reporters Friday.

ROFLOL

Now the White House is saying it would be OK to vote for an international bandit !!!!

a reply to: xuenchen

In an alternate reality, imagine this were any, of the top three Republican candidates Josh was talking about.

I firmly believe the same folks now defending, supporting or planning to vote for Hillary Clinton would be organizing a march on Washington demanding INDICTMENT, if not a public hanging.

Total and complete hypocracy that is!!!

originally posted by: Phoenix
a reply to: xuenchen

In an alternate reality, imagine this were any, of the top three Republican candidates Josh was talking about.

I firmly believe the same folks now defending, supporting or planning to vote for Hillary Clinton would be organizing a march on Washington demanding INDICTMENT, if not a public hanging.

Total and complete hypocracy that is!!!

Yes, your belief would be a hypocrisy, but that is not what is happening.

You're so angry and need to cry foul that you invented a scenario and screamed hypocrisy. That's not healthy, and no, I cannot stand the woman either.

a reply to: IAMTAT

Great thread, IAM! There's all the veritas required in black
and white (ALL blacked out) that Hillary had super classi-
fied materials on her server. The mere fact the emails are
restricted from publishing means they were indeed also
inappropriate to keep "at home".

I said this before. If nothing comes of this now, the whole
intel community will be outed for being its own joke in
green stamping her required security clearance for the
Presidency. I can't see it happening at all, and I'm a life-
long Rod Serling fan... this is too schitzo for black and
white television now, much less super HD.

a reply to: spinalremain

That is one of the top 5 most rediculous responses I have ever gotten on ATS in 13 years here.

Look in mirror lately?

The comparison is entirely fair and has much to back it up.

Liberals or whatever label comes to mind have a very large sense of outrage when it comes to a conservative politician having even a wisp or taint to their action and are entirely happy to ruin lives and careers over it.

Let a liberal commit much worse and we get what we have with Clinton.

originally posted by: xuenchen

The decision to withhold the documents in full, and not provide even a partial release with redactions, further undercuts claims by the State Department and the Clinton campaign that none of the intelligence in the emails was classified when it hit Clinton's personal server

We need to realize why "classifications" are being made AFTER the State dept people see the emails.

They don't even know what's "classified" and what isn't because they don't see every email or text message or hear every conversation in real time.

All the press about the stuff not being classified at the time is coming from one source....

The Hillary Clinton for President Campaign

The SD has to go through all the messages now because they are under court order to release them to the public because of FOIA requests.

Even Congress can't get all the real top secret stuff.

This scandal is very deep.

I would be quietly aggravated over being this right about Hil
this often, X. Not this time.
If the story can gets out we will see worm signs the likes of
which even Everett would go "good God" all over. Dune DIS.

a reply to: xuenchen

The basement spoke!

Clinton campaign claims the 22 emails are innocuous and says upset they are not released.

Two things,

1. Clinton did all of State department business on private server that had nothing but unclassified inocuous emails showing she did nothing as Secretary of State and wasted millions in taxpayer funds in that position.

2. Hillary is guilty of multiple and continued felonies by having classified material on an unsecured server.

That's it, that's the choices.

Now why in the Sam hill would anyone support her nomination or vote for her?

originally posted by: Phoenix

Clinton campaign claims the 22 emails are innocuous and says upset they are not released.

They are Sooo clever.

The Campaign knows those emails will probably never be released.

The old double negative divided by 1 tactic.

a reply to: Phoenix


Wrong.

You cried foul over a completely made up, invented scenario.

Not only are there no Hillary defenders in this thread, but I have a hard time finding any on this forum.

You have a burning need for hypocrisy, so much so that you rushed to the keyboard, invented a situation and spelled it wrong.

That's mental illness in some circles. This is why no one takes the right wing seriously. The incessant disregard toward reality is not only common and tolerated within itself, it is ENCOURAGED!

I

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: gpols
a reply to: IAMTAT

What would Josh Ernst know about a criminal investigation against Hillary anyway?

Unless Josh Ernst and the White House have been tapping into the investigating officers electronics and getting an inside scoop.

Obama did come out and almost, ALMOST, gave Hillary an endorsement earlier this week so it might be the White House trying to save face.

The White House HAD to admit the stuff was 'classified'...so they could also be able to admit to the 18 Clinton-Obama email string they have to keep from being revealed under the bogus reasoning: "to protect the president's ability to receive unvarnished advice and counsel".

Obama can release the 22 emails hillary's people want released.

but she knows they can't due to security issues!

And even the FBI says obama is not getting regular updates on the investigation, which is still ongoing.

It does look like the WH is playing sides, which doesn't look good for them at all.

originally posted by: Leonidas
Haven't we already passed the point of enough damning evidence to discount her as a candidate? It baffles me Clinton continues to have such widespread support...but then I feel that way about a few candidates for both parties.

But when will people say "Enough"?

I like what Christie said about the emails and Hillary.

originally posted by: Phoenix
a reply to: xuenchen

The basement spoke!

Clinton campaign claims the 22 emails are innocuous and says upset they are not released.

Two things,

1. Clinton did all of State department business on private server that had nothing but unclassified inocuous emails showing she did nothing as Secretary of State and wasted millions in taxpayer funds in that position.

2. Hillary is guilty of multiple and continued felonies by having classified material on an unsecured server.

That's it, that's the choices.

Now why in the Sam hill would anyone support her nomination or vote for her?

Because Trump is a racist!

originally posted by: spinalremain
a reply to: Phoenix


Wrong.

You cried foul over a completely made up, invented scenario.

Not only are there no Hillary defenders in this thread, but I have a hard time finding any on this forum.

You have a burning need for hypocrisy, so much so that you rushed to the keyboard, invented a situation and spelled it wrong.

That's mental illness in some circles. This is why no one takes the right wing seriously. The incessant disregard toward reality is not only common and tolerated within itself, it is ENCOURAGED!

I

Remember when romney cut that kids hair in high school?

Remember when Rubio had all the moving violations 17 years ago?

Remember when palin said she could see russia from her house?

a reply to: spinalremain

Nope sorry you are mirroring your own bias,

I simply compared one groups treatment versus anothers and pointed out the difference as being hypocritical.

Try thinking Petraeus treatment vs Clintons treatment.

If you cannot or refuse that comparison then I recommend treatment.



Grammer freaks need help too!

I am so tired of the sensationalism.

That's pretty much all I have to say

originally posted by: Annee
I am so tired of the sensationalism.

That's pretty much all I have to say

Even after deep research and credible sources like the State Dept and White House.

No fun at all is it.

a reply to: IAMTAT

i have a fundamental question :

what is the imperative to " release "any of mrs clintons emails ?

the reason for this question is because - my understanding of the case is :

mrs clinton and or her office alledgedly operated a private email server in violation of govt regulations on official communications protocols

thats it -

there is therefore no need to " release " any emails to anyone

a reply to: ignorant_ape

Court ordered mandate.
DOCUMENT:
images.politico.com...

Judge orders Hillary Clinton email releases every 30 days

A federal judge issued an order Wednesday requiring the State Department to make public batches of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's emails every 30 days starting next month.

U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras also set particular targets for the agency to meet each month as it wades through the roughly 30,000 emails totaling about 55,000 pages. (The percentages set for each disclosure can be viewed in the judge's written order, posted here.)

The monthly disclosure essentially splits the difference between the State Department's most recent proposal of releases every 60 days and lawyers for Vice News reporter Jason Leopold, who proposed releases every two weeks.

The State Department initially proposed releasing the vast majority of the emails in a single batch by next January, but Contreras rejected that suggestion, citing the public interest in the materials.
Clinton, now a Democratic candidate for president, has said she wants the emails released by State as quickly as possible.

www.politico.com...

a reply to: IAMTAT

the question is WHY ?

a reply to: ignorant_ape

The suit was the result of a request filed under FOIA.