DescentBB

Well there was talk of perhaps Obama instructing Loretta "Get Back" Lynch not to prosecute when the FBI indicts Hillary. Now it may seem otherwise:

"The Obama administration confirmed for the first time Friday that Hillary Clinton's unsecured home server contained some of the U.S. government's most closely guarded secrets, censoring 22 emails with material demanding one of the highest levels of classification."
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/ ... 9-14-48-31

No longer can Hillary claim ignorance as there is no way one can confuse SAP files with not being secret. There is the off chance that Hillary can get one of her underlines to take the heat but she would have to be awfully persuasive for someone to take 20 years to life in prison. Of course being a democrat they could be that stupid. Time will tell but it is starting to look grimmer and grimmer for Hillary Clinton as more and more people on the left are starting to view her and Bill as scumbags. If she is tried and convicted it couldn't happen to a nicer person.

Guess we know who the admin. wants to be the nominee...

Spidey, there is some talk that if Hillary gets indicted and is forced out of the race, that Joe "Gaffer" Biden will enter the race.

Didn’t he miss some deadline?

Spidey wrote:Didn’t he miss some deadline?

for the primaries, yes. Not to run for office, and there is no legal obligation limiting party selection processes for either party, that I know of. Technically, they could run primaries and then, if agreed to by the rules committee and voted in on the floor, could pull names from a hat.

callmeslick wrote:

Spidey wrote:Didn’t he miss some deadline?

for the primaries, yes. Not to run for office, and there is no legal obligation limiting party selection processes for either party, that I know of. Technically, they could run primaries and then, if agreed to by the rules committee and voted in on the floor, could pull names from a hat.

Except they'll be pulled from Obama's lower orifice in this case.

State Department officials also said the agency's Diplomatic Security and Intelligence and Research bureaus are investigating if any of the information was classified at the time of transmission, going to the heart of Clinton's defense of her email practices.

That's actually quite important information to consider there woodchip. Clinton might have mishandled very sensitive information, that's absolutely possible, but isn't that above paragraph maybe, just even the slightest bit possible? I mean, if it's bad then it's bad and you were right, but could you also possibly be wrong? That maybe a then Secretary of State, a person that knew full well at the time that they were going to eventually run for president, would intentionally store secret info on their home email server for what possible gain? There's no motive in any of this. Is it the mere sloppiness of it?

z, as I read it, the super sensitive SAP information has no ambiguities about its classification. In addition I believe there is a email from Clinton instructing someone to remove the classified label so they could send the info. In either case it is a big time felony. It will be interesting to see how all this plays out. If the FBI finds justification to charge, will the DOJ follow up and indict? If not what will the fall out be. Some say the FBI head would resign in protest along with others. At that point what happens?

All that you said woodchip is reasonable and within the realm of possibility. But it's not the only outcome, and you have to be willing to accept the flip side of that if that's what happens. There is the potential for some serious wrongdoing here, but let's see how it plays out first. How can you possibly make a concrete determination already with a tremendous lack of actual content to go on. "I've heard" and "some say" is not concrete evidence. Some say the US govt brought down the twin towers, but we know how ridiculous that is don't we?

I’m going to point this out once more…it does not matter if there was classified content on her server or not…the fact that she used a private server for state department business was the wrongdoing in the first place, and everyone is being sidetracked by all of these “possibilities”.

See how that works?

Spidey wrote:I’m going to point this out once more…it does not matter if there was classified content on her server or not…the fact that she used a private server for state department business was the wrongdoing in the first place, and everyone is being sidetracked by all of these “possibilities”.

not everybody. I said as much within hours of this fact becoming public. Not so much wrong, in the strict legal sense, but in the spirit of entitlement that went into the decision.

Z.. wrote:All that you said woodchip is reasonable and within the realm of possibility. But it's not the only outcome, and you have to be willing to accept the flip side of that if that's what happens. There is the potential for some serious wrongdoing here, but let's see how it plays out first. How can you possibly make a concrete determination already with a tremendous lack of actual content to go on. "I've heard" and "some say" is not concrete evidence. Some say the US govt brought down the twin towers, but we know how ridiculous that is don't we?

Most of the damming information comes from a report by the Intelligence Inspector General. If the FBI finds no wrong doing I'll accept that considering who heads up the Dept.

I have my doubts that you'll accept a conclusion that does not indict Clinton woodchip. Spidey, it was allowed and is not illegal, so your point is entirely moot and invalid. It's sloppy for certain, but sloppiness isn't a crime.

Clinton had nothing to gain from hosting sensitive info on her server. There's no gain, no one would stand to benefit from it. It makes no sense as to why she'd have it unless it was classified after already being stored there. My guess is as good as yours, and that's all anyone has here. Guesses.

Nobody said it was a crime.

But it does seem to be against state department policy…that’s why the ★■◆● hit the fan in the first place…duh.

Z.. wrote:My guess is as good as yours, and that's all anyone has here. Guesses.

True, and this whole thing is convoluted by inter-department strife. There are a lot of unknowns here that the public will likely never know, mixed with a lot of legal grey areas for why this situation exists in the first place.

It hit the fan in the first place because her correspondence related to the Benghazi attack was sought. That started the whole snowball effect and led to this today. Wasn't like her server got hacked and Russia is sitting there with a trove of documents. I'm fairly certain that at the beginning of all this it was stated that having a private server, or the process in which she did this, wasn't all that uncommon, i.e. previous occupants of that job had done the same thing.

Spidey wrote:Nobody said it was a crime

All but one person I know of who either has a clearance or understands the process for handling classified documents thinks it's VERY likely there were several crimes committed. Not necessarily out of malice, but still serious.

Ok, let me clarify..."I" never said it was a crime.