It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: network dude
I understand that the government was perfectly ok with people haveing private servers for a decade + before deciding to swap to government servers..
I know that hillary’s Server predated that time period..
I know at that point it is a procedural error, not malfeasance..
I know that no senator in American history has EVER been prosecuted for a procedural error..
The question is why would they make a SPEACIAL EXCEPTION and prosecute hillary..
...so...where are the indictments? The GOP has all the goodies, and they can't make anything stick? And yet they go on and on about the candidate that lost the last election. Folks...been well over a year. Maybe it's time to put up or shut up?
originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: JoshuaCox
Had the investigation been conducted properly there would have been a much different outcome.
In fact that investigation was handled so badly the director of the fbi was fired.
"In a case such as this, it is usually handled internally within the various departments and is not taken to criminal court, unless specific criteria are met. Such as...intent."
messages were found on Anthony Weiner's laptop
Then-FBI Director James Comey testified earlier this year that "Somehow, her emails were being forwarded to Anthony Weiner, including classified information by (Clinton's) assistant, Huma Abedin," he said.
originally posted by: JoshuaCox
When was the last time we prosecuted a bigwig politician for a clerical error???
Because that’s what the “hillary’s Private server” stuff is.. a clerical error, not a moral crime...
All hillary actually did was fail to swap to a government server when whatever memo to do so was put out..
originally posted by: RickinVa
Look the bottom line is this:
Hillary Clinton signed a legal agreement with the US Government saying that she had been briefed and understood fully the laws and regulations concerning safe storage, safe guarding and dissemination of classified information, whether it was marked or unmarked.
This is a 100% undeniable fact.
She then proceeded to violate damn near every law and regulation concerning classified information.
And people claim there was no intent.
She either falsely signed a government document, or she was lying when she said she didn't know information was classified because it wasn't marked.
Spin it all you want, but that is how the cookie crumbles.
Edit to please the cherrypickers