Knicks · Where the heck is Hillary Clinton? (page 17)

BRIGGS wrote:

Papabear wrote:Papabear Says

I plan to vote for Hillary but I do not think she will win. The South and red necks will vote for him because they think Trump will put minority s in place. But you remember that Trump want his legacy will be for him to try to be the best president ever. He wont get there if he thinks racists will get him to support them but there is no hero in that He is using the right wing republican party.

What is a Red Neck?

Papabear Says

Look it up. If you don't know already I wont tell you.

Papabear wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Papabear wrote:Papabear Says

I plan to vote for Hillary but I do not think she will win. The South and red necks will vote for him because they think Trump will put minority s in place. But you remember that Trump want his legacy will be for him to try to be the best president ever. He wont get there if he thinks racists will get him to support them but there is no hero in that He is using the right wing republican party.

What is a Red Neck?

Papabear Says

Look it up. If you don't know already I wont tell you.

That is like calling a Hispanic a spic or an Asian a chink? Am I wrong?

BRIGGS wrote:

Papabear wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Papabear wrote:Papabear Says

I plan to vote for Hillary but I do not think she will win. The South and red necks will vote for him because they think Trump will put minority s in place. But you remember that Trump want his legacy will be for him to try to be the best president ever. He wont get there if he thinks racists will get him to support them but there is no hero in that He is using the right wing republican party.

What is a Red Neck?

Papabear Says

Look it up. If you don't know already I wont tell you.

That is like calling a Hispanic a spic or an Asian a chink? Am I wrong?

No... White people can be called any names.. because they deserved it...
Also as a majority, owners of most of the wealth, and holders of most of the powers they do not care.

nixluva wrote:

WP76 wrote:

martin wrote:

WP76 wrote:^^^ Read the FBI report and the Congressional testimony by the Director of the FBI; it's all there. I'm out.

how about you cite a source that says exactly what you seem to think you are writing about. Dip in, lay down some opinion, but skirt out? That's not how informed discussion works.

I wanted to be done with this discussion but, since you asked, here you go (from the FBI Director's James B. Coney's Congressional testimony on July 5, 2016)

"From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were “up-classified” to make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the e-mails were sent."

Source: https://www.fbi.gov/news/pressrel/press-releases/statement-by-fbi-director-james-b-comey-on-the-investigation-of-secretary-hillary-clinton2019s-use-of-a-personal-e-mail-system

This is what you came back with? This is basically a lot of fluff. More important info was lost in the KNOWN hack of government servers. There is no evidence of harm to U.S. Security from this Email witch hunt. NONE!!! This has been the most overhyped fake scandal. Just like most of the stuff they try to get Hillary on. It always ends in a big fat dud.

At his July 5 press conference, FBI Director James Comey said a “very small number” of emails sent and received by Hillary Clinton over her private server “bore markings indicating the presence of classified information” — contradicting Clinton’s claims that she “never received nor sent any material that was marked classified.”

But now we are learning more about those emails from Comey, who testified before the House Oversight Committee on July 7, and State Department spokesman John Kirby, who addressed these emails at press briefings on July 6 and 7:

Comey said three emails had “portion markings” on them indicating that they were classified, but they were not properly marked and therefore could have been missed by Clinton. He said the emails were marked as classified with the letter “C” in the body of the email.

Kirby said the State Department believes that at least two of the emails were mistakenly marked as confidential. He could not speak to the third email, saying ​the department didn’t have​ “all of the records and documents that the FBI used in their investigation.”

Comey told the committee he is “highly confident” that FBI investigators consulted with the State Department about the marked emails. But he said he did not know that the department believes that any of them were marked in error.

The issue is a bit complicated, but important, because it provides Clinton with a stronger defense against claims that she sent and received material that was marked as classified over her private server when she was secretary of state.

At a State Department briefing on July 6, Kirby addressed a report in the New York Times that Comey was “evidently referring to two emails that one of Mrs. Clinton’s close aides, Monica R. Hanley, sent to prepare her for telephone calls with foreign leaders.” The Times report was based on interviews with anonymous State Department officials.

New York Times, July 5: One email, dated Aug. 2, 2012, noted that Kofi Annan, the former secretary general of the United Nations, was stepping down as special envoy trying to mediate the war in Syria. A second one, sent in April 2012, discussed Mrs. Clinton’s call to the newly inaugurated president of Malawi.

Each was marked with a small notation, “(C),” indicating it contained information classified as “confidential.”

Other paragraphs in the note about Mr. Annan’s resignation were marked “(SBU),” for “sensitive but unclassified.” That designation appears in more than 1,000 of the 30,000 work-related emails that Mrs. Clinton turned over to the State Department, including some later “upgraded” to higher levels of classification. The official said that the notations were part of “a standard process” when preparing a phone call, which would be “confidential” until it occurred and then considered unclassified.

Kirby confirmed the Times report but then said it appears that in both instances the markings were the result of “human error” during the development of “call sheets,” which are memos that contain information that can be used when talking to foreign leaders. The department marks a portion of the call sheets as “confidential” — the lowest level of classified information — until the secretary makes a decision whether or not to call the foreign leaders. He explained that this is done to give the secretary time to make a decision and to avoid potential embarrassment if it turns out that the secretary decides not to call the foreign leader.

Kirby said based on the email traffic, it appears that Clinton had already made the decision to call then Malawi President Joyce Banda and Annan, so the “confidential” markings should have been removed when Hanley sent the emails. (He made his remarks at about the 12-minute mark.)

http://www.factcheck.org/2016/07/revisit...

I do not think Hilary had any criminal or malicious intent.
But it is obvious from the e-mail story that she is technically dumb, irresponsible, and arrogant.
This makes her a perfect candidate for American President.
Unless Trump will prove that he is even more dumb, irresponsible, and arrogant he has no chances in this elections.

Jesus people. Learn some History.

REDNECKS

The origins of this term Redneck are Scottish and refer to supporters of the National Covenant and The Solemn League and Covenant, or "Covenanters", largely Lowland Presbyterians, many of whom would flee Scotland for Ulster (Northern Ireland) during persecutions by the British Crown. The Covenanters of 1638 and 1641 signed the documents that stated that Scotland desired the Presbyterian form of church government and would not accept the Church of England as its official state church.

Many Covenanters signed in their own blood and wore red pieces of cloth around their necks as distinctive insignia; hence the term "Red neck", (rednecks) which became slang for a Scottish dissenter*. One Scottish immigrant, interviewed by the author, remembered a Presbyterian minister, one Dr. Coulter, in Glasgow in the 1940's wearing a red clerical collar -- is this symbolic of the "rednecks"?

Since many Ulster-Scottish settlers in America (especially the South) were Presbyterian, the term was applied to them, and then, later, their Southern descendants. One of the earliest examples of its use comes from 1830, when an author noted that "red-neck" was a "name bestowed upon the Presbyterians." It makes you wonder if the originators of the ever-present "redneck" joke are aware of the term’s origins - Rednecks?

*Another term for Presbyterians in Ireland was a "Blackmouth". Members of the Church of Ireland (Anglicans) used this as a slur, referring to the fact that one could tell a Presbyterian by the black stains around his mouth from eating blackberries while at secret, illegal Presbyterian Church Services in the countryside.

CRACKER

Another Ulster-Scot term, a "cracker" was a person who talked and boasted, and "craic" (Crack) is a term still used in Scotland and Ireland to describe "talking", chat or conversation in a social sense ("Let’s go down to the pub and have a craic"; "what's the craic"). The term, first used to describe a southerner of Ulster-Scottish background, later became a nickname for any white southerner, especially those who were uneducated.

And while not an exclusively Southern term, but rather referring in general to all Americans, the origins of this word are related to the other three.

http://www.scotshistoryonline.co.uk/redn...

nixluva wrote:Jesus people. Learn some History.

REDNECKS

The origins of this term Redneck are Scottish and refer to supporters of the National Covenant and The Solemn League and Covenant, or "Covenanters", largely Lowland Presbyterians, many of whom would flee Scotland for Ulster (Northern Ireland) during persecutions by the British Crown. The Covenanters of 1638 and 1641 signed the documents that stated that Scotland desired the Presbyterian form of church government and would not accept the Church of England as its official state church.

Many Covenanters signed in their own blood and wore red pieces of cloth around their necks as distinctive insignia; hence the term "Red neck", (rednecks) which became slang for a Scottish dissenter*. One Scottish immigrant, interviewed by the author, remembered a Presbyterian minister, one Dr. Coulter, in Glasgow in the 1940's wearing a red clerical collar -- is this symbolic of the "rednecks"?

Since many Ulster-Scottish settlers in America (especially the South) were Presbyterian, the term was applied to them, and then, later, their Southern descendants. One of the earliest examples of its use comes from 1830, when an author noted that "red-neck" was a "name bestowed upon the Presbyterians." It makes you wonder if the originators of the ever-present "redneck" joke are aware of the term’s origins - Rednecks?

*Another term for Presbyterians in Ireland was a "Blackmouth". Members of the Church of Ireland (Anglicans) used this as a slur, referring to the fact that one could tell a Presbyterian by the black stains around his mouth from eating blackberries while at secret, illegal Presbyterian Church Services in the countryside.

CRACKER

Another Ulster-Scot term, a "cracker" was a person who talked and boasted, and "craic" (Crack) is a term still used in Scotland and Ireland to describe "talking", chat or conversation in a social sense ("Let’s go down to the pub and have a craic"; "what's the craic"). The term, first used to describe a southerner of Ulster-Scottish background, later became a nickname for any white southerner, especially those who were uneducated.

And while not an exclusively Southern term, but rather referring in general to all Americans, the origins of this word are related to the other three.

http://www.scotshistoryonline.co.uk/redn...

There are not much of this "original" red-necks left to affect the US elections.
The term developed a new life in 20th century to apply to many more people.
In general US is a new Babylon where all nations of the world are mixed and re-mixed rapidly and violently.
This is a model of what will inevitably happened with all world population.
With huge new waives of emigration from India, China, Latin America, and many more countries the current ethno-rasial society will be changing very fast and very soon.
So called whites will be soon a minority and some current minorities will became very little and irrelevant in big political picture.
I see USA more of Asian-Hispano country in 30-50 years from now.
Think about it - just India and China alone have more that 3 billions of people.
The families are big so using US emigration laws the relatives can be legally moved to US very easy.
So I think this cultures will have more and more influence on life in US.
I think it is a good thing. We need fresh blood and fresh ideas.

DrAlphaeus wrote:

holfresh wrote:

nixluva wrote:

DrAlphaeus wrote:You folks that watched the forum last night: how do you think Hillary did? Heard that 1/3rd of her time was spent on the email controversy. To BRIGGS original "where is Hillary" post — maybe if she wasn't hiding from press conferences, she wouldn't constantly have to address this now. Unforced errors, man.

I watched some recap videos from my usual lefty YouTube sources — looks like Matt Lauer is getting called out for not being very journalistic with lack of follow ups to low hanging fruit. Hopefully gets future moderators to up their game.

The format of the Forum was a bit to blame too. Lauer was very concerned about time and since Hillary was giving full in depth answers it ate into the time and he feared he wouldn't get to all of his questions. With Trump he was just talking nonsense and wasn't showing any depth of knowledge. He often didn't answer the question at all. Lauer let him get away with lame answers and lies. Moderators have to do a better job of pinning Trump down, cuz he squirms our of answering all the time.

Hillary may be flawed but at least she actually knows what she's talking about and you know she can do the job. We know she can negotiate with foreign leaders and understand the very serious issues. Her depth of knowledge is vast compared to Trump. Trump was cracking under the pressure last night and putting out word salads. When he did have a clear thought it was often frighteningly wrong.

Matt Lauer isn't good in this particular medium..Trump took advantage of him..Also Trump was able to listen to Hilary's questions an rebut once it was his turn for questioning..So clearly the evening didn't favor Hillary although I thought she had much more depth and command of the topics...

Lauer missed a lot of opportunities..

-With the audience of military personnel and Commander in chief/foreign policy..How could Lauer not ask about Trump's comments about John McCain being captured..

-When sexual harassment came up in the military..Lauer never asked about Roger Ailes advising his campaign who was accused of sexual harassment..

-Trump was hinting at contents of his classified briefings..Which didn't turn out to be true but unheard of..I have never seen that..

-Trump said Putin was a better leader than Obama..Lauer pointed out the bad things Putin has done..Trump said do you want me to tell you the stuff that Obama did, seemingly defending Putin accusing Obama of illegal activities which Lauer never followed up...

Good point about not bringing up the McCain quote. When his campaign survived that "I like people who weren't captured" we entered a new fun house mirror of politics. Issues that took down previous candidates like the Swift Boat Vets against Kerry or Dean's scream look like pattycake compared to that. I will never understand what about Trump let's him get away with that.

Hahaha..Yeah..Remember Swift Boat Vets??..What ever happened to those cats??..Koch brothers stopped funding then after the campaign...How about he is a "flip flopper"...How about Trump praising a Russian leader and dissing the US President in the same breath...Nothing..

I just want to see Trump's taxes before the election..His taxes are done along with his business taxes...I want to see the interest write off claims owed to Russian Banks...Putin probably has him by the scrotum but we may never find out...The media is only focused on emails...

nixluva wrote:Jesus people. Learn some History.

REDNECKS

The origins of this term Redneck are Scottish and refer to supporters of the National Covenant and The Solemn League and Covenant, or "Covenanters", largely Lowland Presbyterians, many of whom would flee Scotland for Ulster (Northern Ireland) during persecutions by the British Crown. The Covenanters of 1638 and 1641 signed the documents that stated that Scotland desired the Presbyterian form of church government and would not accept the Church of England as its official state church.

Many Covenanters signed in their own blood and wore red pieces of cloth around their necks as distinctive insignia; hence the term "Red neck", (rednecks) which became slang for a Scottish dissenter*. One Scottish immigrant, interviewed by the author, remembered a Presbyterian minister, one Dr. Coulter, in Glasgow in the 1940's wearing a red clerical collar -- is this symbolic of the "rednecks"?

Since many Ulster-Scottish settlers in America (especially the South) were Presbyterian, the term was applied to them, and then, later, their Southern descendants. One of the earliest examples of its use comes from 1830, when an author noted that "red-neck" was a "name bestowed upon the Presbyterians." It makes you wonder if the originators of the ever-present "redneck" joke are aware of the term’s origins - Rednecks?

*Another term for Presbyterians in Ireland was a "Blackmouth". Members of the Church of Ireland (Anglicans) used this as a slur, referring to the fact that one could tell a Presbyterian by the black stains around his mouth from eating blackberries while at secret, illegal Presbyterian Church Services in the countryside.

CRACKER

Another Ulster-Scot term, a "cracker" was a person who talked and boasted, and "craic" (Crack) is a term still used in Scotland and Ireland to describe "talking", chat or conversation in a social sense ("Let’s go down to the pub and have a craic"; "what's the craic"). The term, first used to describe a southerner of Ulster-Scottish background, later became a nickname for any white southerner, especially those who were uneducated.

And while not an exclusively Southern term, but rather referring in general to all Americans, the origins of this word are related to the other three.

http://www.scotshistoryonline.co.uk/redn...

Nixluva--its a derogatory word used towards white people--no?

Jesus, some people don't know WTF they're talking about. The expression "redneck" in the US came from farmers whose necks became sunburn from working in the fields all day.

We might have secretly given Iran $33 BILLION in cash and gold. Who approved that? And you're worried about Trump's taxes?

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/09/iran_may_have_received_as_much_as_33_billion_in_cash_and_gold.html

reub wrote:We might have secretly given Iran $33 BILLION in cash and gold. Who approved that? And you're worried about Trump's taxes?

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/09/iran_may_have_received_as_much_as_33_billion_in_cash_and_gold.html

33 billion dollars..Right..Becuase that kind of thing for that sum of money usually goes unnoticed..When I want my news I check American thinker blog first...

holfresh wrote:

reub wrote:We might have secretly given Iran $33 BILLION in cash and gold. Who approved that? And you're worried about Trump's taxes?

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/09/iran_may_have_received_as_much_as_33_billion_in_cash_and_gold.html

33 billion dollars..Right..Becuase that kind of thing for that sum of money usually goes unnoticed..When I want my news I check American thinker blog first...

Yeah, the same story is on another site. There the author refers to the President as "Hussein Obama"! He doesn't put President or Barack in front of it. It's just Hussein Obama! It gives you an idea of the people writing these stories.

Bonn1997 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

reub wrote:We might have secretly given Iran $33 BILLION in cash and gold. Who approved that? And you're worried about Trump's taxes?

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/09/iran_may_have_received_as_much_as_33_billion_in_cash_and_gold.html

33 billion dollars..Right..Becuase that kind of thing for that sum of money usually goes unnoticed..When I want my news I check American thinker blog first...

Yeah, the same story is on another site. There the author refers to the President as "Hussein Obama"! He doesn't put President or Barack in front of it. It's just Hussein Obama! It gives you an idea of the people writing these stories.

Typical...Thanks..

So Reub..You don't think it's important to check the personal/business taxes of a Presidential candidate who holds financial interest overseas, and because of his multiple bankruptcies, probably can't get financing in the good ole USofA??..You don't think we should know what entities/countries might be financing his many real estate ventures under his 500 pseudo and real companies??..Like that can't possibly be an important thing??

If a Dem candidate said a sitting republican president was a worse leader than Putin they'd probably be ousted from the race or would have calls from ever corner of the GOP to drop out. Trump says it and everyone yawns.

BRIGGS wrote:

nixluva wrote:Jesus people. Learn some History.

REDNECKS

The origins of this term Redneck are Scottish and refer to supporters of the National Covenant and The Solemn League and Covenant, or "Covenanters", largely Lowland Presbyterians, many of whom would flee Scotland for Ulster (Northern Ireland) during persecutions by the British Crown. The Covenanters of 1638 and 1641 signed the documents that stated that Scotland desired the Presbyterian form of church government and would not accept the Church of England as its official state church.

Many Covenanters signed in their own blood and wore red pieces of cloth around their necks as distinctive insignia; hence the term "Red neck", (rednecks) which became slang for a Scottish dissenter*. One Scottish immigrant, interviewed by the author, remembered a Presbyterian minister, one Dr. Coulter, in Glasgow in the 1940's wearing a red clerical collar -- is this symbolic of the "rednecks"?

Since many Ulster-Scottish settlers in America (especially the South) were Presbyterian, the term was applied to them, and then, later, their Southern descendants. One of the earliest examples of its use comes from 1830, when an author noted that "red-neck" was a "name bestowed upon the Presbyterians." It makes you wonder if the originators of the ever-present "redneck" joke are aware of the term’s origins - Rednecks?

*Another term for Presbyterians in Ireland was a "Blackmouth". Members of the Church of Ireland (Anglicans) used this as a slur, referring to the fact that one could tell a Presbyterian by the black stains around his mouth from eating blackberries while at secret, illegal Presbyterian Church Services in the countryside.

CRACKER

Another Ulster-Scot term, a "cracker" was a person who talked and boasted, and "craic" (Crack) is a term still used in Scotland and Ireland to describe "talking", chat or conversation in a social sense ("Let’s go down to the pub and have a craic"; "what's the craic"). The term, first used to describe a southerner of Ulster-Scottish background, later became a nickname for any white southerner, especially those who were uneducated.

And while not an exclusively Southern term, but rather referring in general to all Americans, the origins of this word are related to the other three.

http://www.scotshistoryonline.co.uk/redn...

Nixluva--its a derogatory word used towards white people--no?

No.
This is just a term for people who work hard under the sun.
It sounds as derogatory word only for people who think that hard physical labor is only for slaves.
Like for example professor cannot be red-neck...

arkrud wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Papabear wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Papabear wrote:Papabear Says

I plan to vote for Hillary but I do not think she will win. The South and red necks will vote for him because they think Trump will put minority s in place. But you remember that Trump want his legacy will be for him to try to be the best president ever. He wont get there if he thinks racists will get him to support them but there is no hero in that He is using the right wing republican party.

What is a Red Neck?

Papabear Says

Look it up. If you don't know already I wont tell you.

That is like calling a Hispanic a spic or an Asian a chink? Am I wrong?

No... White people can be called any names.. because they deserved it...
Also as a majority, owners of most of the wealth, and holders of most of the powers they do not care.

Wealth and power shouldn't hold more value then morals and justice. Its these out of wack priorities as to why the human race has been failing so drastically.

newyorknewyork wrote:

arkrud wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Papabear wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

Papabear wrote:Papabear Says

I plan to vote for Hillary but I do not think she will win. The South and red necks will vote for him because they think Trump will put minority s in place. But you remember that Trump want his legacy will be for him to try to be the best president ever. He wont get there if he thinks racists will get him to support them but there is no hero in that He is using the right wing republican party.

What is a Red Neck?

Papabear Says

Look it up. If you don't know already I wont tell you.

That is like calling a Hispanic a spic or an Asian a chink? Am I wrong?

No... White people can be called any names.. because they deserved it...
Also as a majority, owners of most of the wealth, and holders of most of the powers they do not care.

Wealth and power shouldn't hold more value then morals and justice. Its these out of wack priorities as to why the human race has been failing so drastically.

Morals and justice cannot be protected or even exist without wealth and power.
Wealth and power are just tools used by people for good or for evil depending on who this people are.
Without wealth and power we will descend back into the caves to collect mushrooms and hunt for wild animals.

arkrud wrote:

BRIGGS wrote:

nixluva wrote:Jesus people. Learn some History.

REDNECKS

The origins of this term Redneck are Scottish and refer to supporters of the National Covenant and The Solemn League and Covenant, or "Covenanters", largely Lowland Presbyterians, many of whom would flee Scotland for Ulster (Northern Ireland) during persecutions by the British Crown. The Covenanters of 1638 and 1641 signed the documents that stated that Scotland desired the Presbyterian form of church government and would not accept the Church of England as its official state church.

Many Covenanters signed in their own blood and wore red pieces of cloth around their necks as distinctive insignia; hence the term "Red neck", (rednecks) which became slang for a Scottish dissenter*. One Scottish immigrant, interviewed by the author, remembered a Presbyterian minister, one Dr. Coulter, in Glasgow in the 1940's wearing a red clerical collar -- is this symbolic of the "rednecks"?

Since many Ulster-Scottish settlers in America (especially the South) were Presbyterian, the term was applied to them, and then, later, their Southern descendants. One of the earliest examples of its use comes from 1830, when an author noted that "red-neck" was a "name bestowed upon the Presbyterians." It makes you wonder if the originators of the ever-present "redneck" joke are aware of the term’s origins - Rednecks?

*Another term for Presbyterians in Ireland was a "Blackmouth". Members of the Church of Ireland (Anglicans) used this as a slur, referring to the fact that one could tell a Presbyterian by the black stains around his mouth from eating blackberries while at secret, illegal Presbyterian Church Services in the countryside.

CRACKER

Another Ulster-Scot term, a "cracker" was a person who talked and boasted, and "craic" (Crack) is a term still used in Scotland and Ireland to describe "talking", chat or conversation in a social sense ("Let’s go down to the pub and have a craic"; "what's the craic"). The term, first used to describe a southerner of Ulster-Scottish background, later became a nickname for any white southerner, especially those who were uneducated.

And while not an exclusively Southern term, but rather referring in general to all Americans, the origins of this word are related to the other three.

http://www.scotshistoryonline.co.uk/redn...

Nixluva--its a derogatory word used towards white people--no?

No.
This is just a term for people who work hard under the sun.
It sounds as derogatory word only for people who think that hard physical labor is only for slaves.
Like for example professor cannot be red-neck...

And that's how all these racial slurs started. Like Chink-Ching Dynasty and working on the railroads

martin wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

WP76 wrote:

holfresh wrote:

WP76 wrote:^^^ To anyone who's worked with classified material, I can tell you it's incredibly serious and hardly the "fluff" you seem to want to believe. As I stated earlier, such action--especially repeatedly--would have resulted in criminal conviction (at worst) or the loss of career for anyone else. It was her job to know about security classifications and to treat such documents in accordance with the law and federal statutes, just as it is the job of anyone who handles such documents.

Man I hate defending Hillary...

Ok..Doesn't "intent" have to be established before you can assess criminality??..The server was initially set up so that she can personally correspond with people outside of the state department, so those correspondence would not be part of government or public record. Obviously the account morphed into more than just that type of account. But highly sensitive information was not sent to that particulate email address. The documents labeled Classified or Confidential, etc which was boldly marked as a header, was sent to her state department email address. Thus the reason why criminality couldn't be established..Because of the 30k emails, only 100 or so had sensitive information in the body of the emails and just 3 was labeled with the small (c) on the side of the document..The share volume of emails alone versus the amount of sensitive emails establishes the account was not set up for that for sensitive governmental correspondence. What it establishes is that she and her people were careless to let sensitive information to be sent to that server. So 0.003% of the emails on that server were deemed sensitive...Criminality can't be established here...

I'm just so tired of the republican establishment latching on the the damn the emails for dear life, and it drowns of the substance of the campaigns...The uninformed aren't hearing the real issues...

I think the republicans are scheduled to have more hearings on emails in a few weeks...Waste of tax payer money...

Actually, in most military and civil service cases, intent is largely irrelevant. I found it interesting that the FBI Director brought "intent" into the discussion. I hadn't considered it but, I suppose, has to be considered with such a high ranking official. Democrats will say it's because of fairness and republicans will say it's pure politics. Pick an argument based on your political leanings.

However, in the military/civil service world of classified information--if you're careless or sloppy or don't perform your due diligence (especially in more than one instance) it's "game over" for your career, if not worse. People who haven't had to deal routinely with classification mechanisms and regulatory safeguards simply cannot know the amount of effort that's involved.

[I truly am walking away from this issue to go back to talking about the Knicks. I've been guilty of engaging in the biggest waste of time on the planet which is debating a political topic on a sports message board. Seriously, when has anyone ever changed their mind or changed anyone else's mind as a result of these particular discussions? I'm thinking the answer is pretty close to "never."]

lol especially true when you are arguing with the nixluvas. Which many of us learned a long long time ago is a complete waste of time

gunsnewing wrote:All you can do is state your opinions and let the pieces fall where they may

Guns, if you have anything to bring to the conversation, please do. State your opinion and also bring some information backed by sources the best you can. If the best you can do is drop the above and whine about someone else's post, it's not adding anything, no need.

Sorry Martin, had to say something to try to get Nix to stop whining and calling everyone but himself idiots.