Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!
Hillary couldn't get her talking points from the White House fast enough so (according to the emails) she instructed one of her aids to remove all security markings from the documents and send them with normal traffic.
Of course that's what criminals do. Then you have Bernie Sanders diluting the whole Email issue. If you ask me it was all done by design.
Hillary couldn't get her talking points from the White House fast enough so (according to the emails) she instructed one of her aids to remove all security markings from the documents and send them with normal traffic.
Talking points for Susan Rice isn't really classified information now is it? Come on JD you can't do any better than this. By the way JD what happened to your girl Carly? She got demoted to happy hour debate. The repubtards have tuned her out even faster than they did Ron PAUL.
Talking points for Susan Rice isn't really classified information now is it? Come on JD you can't do any better than this. By the way JD what happened to your girl Carly? She got demoted to happy hour debate. The repubtards have tuned her out even faster than they did Ron PAUL.
well one of the last of libtards posts. you are a dying breed boi. what does this do for ya?
2 Former Federal Prosecutors: Criminal Charges Likely in Clinton Server Probe
Two former U.S. Attorneys predict that FBI has developed a strong case in its investigation of Hillary Clinton's email server that will result in criminal charges, The Washington Free Beacon reports.
"I expect the FBI to conclude the investigation within 60 to 90 days and make a recommendation to the Justice Department, and I believe they will recommend a series of charges involving the classified information," Joseph diGenova, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia during Ronald Reagan's presidency, tells the Free Beacon.
Matthew Whitaker, the former U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of Iowa in the George W. Bush administration agreed that the public evidence so far indicates "serious legal violations" have been uncovered by the FBI's look at whether classified information was mishandled by Clinton’s use of private email while she was Secretary of State, the Free Beacon reports.
"There’s got to be more that we don’t know," added Whitaker, who runs a watchdog group that has criticized Clinton. "I think that could be really incriminating evidence, if it's like anything we’ve already seen.
Talking points for Susan Rice isn't really classified information now is it? Come on JD you can't do any better than this. By the way JD what happened to your girl Carly? She got demoted to happy hour debate. The repubtards have tuned her out even faster than they did Ron PAUL.
My girl? Isn't that kind of sexist? I like Carly, I have given money to Carly (in a professional manner) but she is not my current candidate. Maybe you haven't kept up like the Old Tampon himself. He, you, and so many democrats think that politics are written in stone. If you support something now, then you will always support something. What is stone is what I believe in. Politicians come and go (please go away Hillary forever). I have been watching Trump, Cruz, Carson, and Fiorina. Who am I going to vote for? Ask when it's time.
The Little Rock Hag will have a special prosecutor and push it on down the road...
The current "revelations" and "report" to Congress will paint the Democrats and the Administration into a corner .... prosecuting a respected General and former Cabinet member ... and not prosecuting Hillarious ... will be a blight on the sterling legacy being created by the rewriting of history by the current inept occupier of the People's House.
"It is against the law to remove classification markings from classified information and enter it into an unclassified system — which is the only way this information could have found its way into more than 1,300 emails on Clinton’s personal server. There is no way to “accidentally” send classified information by unclassified email. Senior officials have separate computers in their offices for classified and unclassified information. The two systems are not connected. The only way information from the classified system can make it onto an unclassified system is for someone to intentionally put it there — either by taking a document that is marked classified and typing the information without markings into an unclassified email"
"So Clinton’s defense that the information was not “marked” classified does not absolve her of wrongdoing. Quite the opposite, it puts her in greater legal jeopardy."
"One way would be to download it to a portable medium, like a thumb drive. Leaving aside that you can’t bring a thumb drive anywhere near a SCIF, the USB ports on the computers are likely deactivated. You would need a technician to somehow work around that, which is in itself horrifying. The easier way would be to print the material out so you could take it somewhere else and either type or scan it into a new file on an unclassified system."
"Of course, printing classified material and taking it out of the SCIF are themselves huge violations even before you get to not only reproducing it but introducing it to an unclassified system. So now the minion has contaminated the unclassified system, but there are still more steps to take and rules to break.
The minion could type text into the email, but that seems unlikely. More likely is that the minion opens the PDF of the classified document, which still retains all the classification markings. The minion then cuts and pastes some or all of the classified material, sans classification header, out of the PDF and into the body of an email, then sends it, unsecure, to Clinton’s unsecure server. This was an unsecure system where, it is important to note, she stored over a thousand documents containing classified material. And those are just the documents she didn’t delete."
even worse is the reported fact that Obama can't stand the Hildebitch and if so she stands little chance of getting help from Obama. no pardons. and he'll look pretty bad if he attempts to influence the DOJ from prosecuting her once the FBI finishes its investigation which should have well before the nominating begins.
Of course, if it is ever determined that US interests were damaged, or an intelligence source died because of her actions....then again. Donald Trump said that he could "shoot" someone on 5th Avenue and not hurt his campaign. So Hillary could get some jerk killed overseas without hurting her campaign. She already did it with some Americans.
The FBI is ready to indict Hillary Clinton and if its recommendation isn't followed by the U.S. attorney general, the agency's investigators plan to blow the whistle and go public with their findings, former U.S. House Majority leader Tom DeLay tells Newsmax TV.
"They're ready to recommend an indictment and they also say that if the attorney general does not indict, they're going public."
Clinton is under FBI investigation for her use of a private server to conduct confidential government business while she was secretary of state. But some Republicans fear any FBI recommendation that hurts Clinton will be squashed by the Obama administration.
DeLay, a Texas Republican and Washington Times radio host, said:
"One way or another either she's going to be indicted and that process begins, or we try her in the public eye with her campaign. One way or another she's going to have to face these charges."
Last week, Clinton's press secretary Brian Fallon accused intelligence Inspector General Charles McCullough of colluding with Republicans to damage Clinton's campaign for president.
The charge came after a report that McCullough sent a letter to two GOP lawmakers that some of Clinton's emails sent from her private server when she was secretary of state should have been marked with classifications even higher than "top secret."
Drip, Drip, Drip... Here's What a Former AG Thinks
Clinton’s Emails: A Criminal Charge Is Justified
Hillary’s explanations look increasingly contrived as evidence of malfeasance mounts day by day.
By MICHAEL B. MUKASEY
Jan. 21, 2016 6:32 p.m. ET
While the State Department and intelligence agencies finish picking through messages recovered from the private email server Hillary Clinton used to conduct public business as secretary of state, the contents of the periodic document dumps have become increasingly sensitive. State has been referring any email that appears to contain sensitive information for further consideration by the agency with jurisdiction over the relevant data. Thus the most problematic emails are dribbling out last.
As the number of disclosed classified messages from Mrs. Clinton’s server has climbed above 1,300, her explanations have come to look increasingly improvisational and contrived. Recall that last summer—even after abandoning the claim that she maintained a private email account for convenience and because she was too busy solving the world’s problems to navigate the intricacies of a government account—she insisted that, “I did not send classified information and I did not receive any material that was marked or designated classified, which is the way you know that something is.”
When asked whether she had her server “wiped,” she assumed an air of grandmotherly befuddlement: “What, like with a cloth or something?” she said. “I don’t know how it works digitally at all.”
The current news, reported in the Journal and elsewhere, is that her server contained information at the highest level of classification, known as SAP, or Special Access Program. This is a level so high that even the inspector general for the intelligence community who reported the discovery did not initially have clearance to examine it.
The server also contained messages showing her contempt for classification procedures. This was bred at least in part by obvious familiarity with exactly “how it works”—such as when, an email shows, she directed a staff member simply to erase the heading on a classified document, converting it into “unpaper,” and send it on a “nonsecure” device.
Information disclosed by the State Department also reflects that in August 2011, when the State Department’s executive secretary suggested that he could provide Mrs. Clinton with a BlackBerry that would keep her identity secret but might generate communications that would be discoverable under the Freedom of Information Act, Huma Abedin, Mrs. Clinton’s closest aide, intervened and said the idea “doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.”
Further, Mrs. Clinton’s own memoir, “Hard Choices” (2014), apparently written at a time when she wished to stress how delicate were the secrets she knew, and how carefully she handled them, reports that she “often received warnings from Department security officials to leave our [BlackBerrys], laptops—anything that communicated with the outside world—on the plane with their batteries removed to prevent foreign intelligence services from compromising them.
“Even in friendly settings we conducted business under strict security precautions, taking care where and how we read secret material and used our technology,” Mrs. Clinton tells readers. She even read classified material “inside an opaque tent in a hotel room. In less well-equipped settings, we were told to improvise by reading sensitive material with a blanket over our head.”
The FBI’s criminal investigation of messages on the server initially related solely to Mrs. Clinton’s possibly unlawful mishandling of classified information. The investigation has now metastasized to include “the possible intersection of Clinton Foundation donations, the dispensation of State Department contracts and whether regular processes were followed” as Fox News’s Catherine Herridge reported Jan. 19, quoting an intelligence source.
Which is to say, the FBI wants to know whether those messages, combined with other evidence, show that donors to the Clinton Foundation received special consideration in their dealings with the agency Mrs. Clinton headed.
Whatever the findings from that part of the probe, intelligence-community investigators believe it is nearly certain that Mrs. Clinton’s server was hacked, possibly by the Chinese or the Russians. This raises the distinct possibility that she would be subject to blackmail in connection with those transactions and whatever else was on that server by people with hostile intent against this country.
No criminality can be charged against Mrs. Clinton in connection with any of this absent proof that she had what the law regards as a guilty state of mind—a standard that may differ from one statute to another, depending on what criminal act is charged.
Yet—from her direction that classification rules be disregarded, to the presence on her personal email server of information at the highest level of classification, to her repeated falsehoods of a sort that juries are told every day may be treated as evidence of guilty knowledge—it is nearly impossible to draw any conclusion other than that she knew enough to support a conviction at the least for mishandling classified information.
This is the same charge brought against Gen. David Petraeus for disclosing classified information in his personal notebooks to his biographer and mistress, who was herself an Army Reserve military intelligence officer cleared to see top secret information.
The simple proposition that everyone is equal before the law suggests that Mrs. Clinton’s state of mind—whether mere knowledge of what she was doing as to mishandling classified information; or gross negligence in the case of the mishandling of information relating to national defense; or bad intent as to actual or attempted destruction of email messages; or corrupt intent as to State Department business—justifies a criminal charge of one sort or another.
But will it be brought? That depends in part on the recommendation of FBI Director James Comey, a man described by President Obama, at the time the president appointed him, as “fiercely independent.” If no recommendation to charge is forthcoming, or if such a recommendation is made but not followed by the attorney general, what happens then?
Would the public stand for it? My guess is not. However, my guess is also that we won’t be put to that test because our public officials will do their duty.
Mr. Mukasey served as a U.S. district judge (1988-2006) and as U.S. attorney general (2007-09). He is an adviser to Jeb Bush on matters of national security.
.
corruption is endemic in every department of government
its not just the normal corruption of the lackadaisical attitudes and gold bricking and benefit mongering of the government union workers
its the extreme partisanship infused into the executive branch by Obama and his acolytes
its seen in the winnowing of the officer corp for not toeing the political correct line properly enough
its seen in the corruption of the irs attacking the first amendment rights of conservatives
its seen in the use of the epa and osha and offices of homeland security going after conservative who own businesses who dare speak up
there are plenty of examples but take Gibson guitar as one
its seen in the border patrol being run roughshod by junior civil rights attorneys
the department of justice is one of the most corrupt, from the Philadelphia black panthers to racially dubious made up charges against whole police departments and the irs case
now if the doj refuses to prosecute hildebeast...well who in the hell will obey any law for any reason as the law has repeatedly been held up for scorn time and again by obama
who will ever respect the central government as a source of justice?
Come on JD you can't do any better than this. 
By the way JD what happened to your girl Carly? She got demoted to happy hour debate.
