• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Crooked hillary

RJKarl said:
Irony- Jason Chaffetz, the king of this kangaroo court, handles many classified documents. On his business card is his PRIVATE email address.

EDIT: Members of Congress are allowed to have personal servers, multiple devices, multiple email addresses.
Click to expand...

That really isn't ironic in the least, nor does any of that give them permission to discuss or disclose or discuss classified info outside proper channels.
 
Multiple Republicans have attacked the no charges being suggested. Most have been nothing but a political kangaroo court. One told Comey that anyone would see that charges should have been made. Comey coolly replied, "No, they shouldn't."

With all your threads and insults towards Hillary, it seems you are auditioning to be Bob#3.
 
Chaffetz just snarkily attcked Comey. Chaffetz is such a scumbag.

THREE emails out of 30,000. None were properly marked.

EDIT: Chaffetz is trying to expand the scope to include the Clinton Foundation, but this isn't 100% a political kangaroo court/McCarthy-esque misadventure.
 
Last edited:
RJKarl said:
Multiple Republicans have attacked the no charges being suggested. Most have been nothing but a political kangaroo court. One told Comey that anyone would see that charges should have been made. Comey coolly replied, "No, they shouldn't."

With all your threads and insults towards Hillary, it seems you are auditioning to be Bob#3.
Click to expand...

Hillary is on the Mount Rushmore of most hated politicians in the history of this country. Her negligence caused American deaths. It'll be difficult to find a safe space where you can avoid anit-Hillary rants. HRC is a fugly cunt.
 
Last edited:
Towards the end of the hearing, Gowdy asked Comey if Hillary allowing her lawyers and the guy who set up the server (all clearly without the proper clearance level) to have access to her e-mails, and thus classified information, was illegal. Comey sort of danced around the question by saying it wasn't reasonable to assume the server person would read the e-mails, and then was a little dodgy when it came to the lawyers. Gowdy never really pressed him for more information. Anyone here care to weigh in? Obviously to avoid something like this, Hillary would have either had to have been appointed a lawyer with proper clearance, chosen from a pool of lawyers with proper clearance, or had her lawyers some how obtain the proper clearance. None of those seem particularly practical, but I did think it was an interesting point. I guess what I'm asking is, where does confidentiality meet classified information?
 
Last edited:
Chaffetz: We Will Refer Hillary Clinton to the FBI for Perjury
Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT), chair of the House Committee on Government Oversight and Reform, told FBI director James Comey during his testimony on Thursday morning that the committee would refer former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for investigation for perjury, given that she lied under oath before the House Select Committee on Benghazi in October.
Click to expand...
 
RJKarl said:
Chaffetz just snarkily attcked Comey. Chaffetz is such a scumbag.

THREE emails out of 30,000. None were properly marked.

EDIT: Chaffetz is trying to expand the scope to include the Clinton Foundation, but this isn't 100% a political kangaroo court/McCarthy-esque misadventure.
Click to expand...

What are you saying? That there were only 3 e-mails that included confidential info and that even those were not properly marked? Doesn't that conflict with what was reported? I haven't read or listened to every word of coverage but I was under the impression it was over a hundred e-mails containing confidential info, some at the highest level of secrecy, and that even for the ones that were not marked, it would have been clear to anyone that they were confidential.

Also, wasn't it true that many of the e-mails had to be copied from the secure system to her non-secure system, since the two systems were not connected, and that markings were removed at that point - by people under her direction? Don't yell at me if that is not true - but that is what I read and it seemed to make sense.
 
Demonwolverine said:
Towards the end of the hearing, Gowdy asked Comey if Hillary allowing her lawyers and the guy who set up the server (all clearly without the proper clearance level) to have access to her e-mails, and thus classified information, was illegal. Comey sort of danced around the question by saying it wasn't reasonable to assume the server person would read the e-mails, and then was a little dodgy when it came to the lawyers. Gowdy never really pressed him for more information. Anyone here care to weigh in? Obviously to avoid something like this, Hillary would have either had to have been appointed a lawyer with proper clearance, chosen from a pool of lawyers with proper clearance, or had her lawyers some how obtain the proper clearance. None of those seem particularly practical, but I did think it was an interesting point. I guess what I'm asking is, where does confidentiality meet classified information?
Click to expand...

You'd think there would be some consequences for the lawyers, handling and deleting information (at least some of which was classified and they weren't authorized to handle), and trying to make sure what they deleted could never be recovered. But Comey didn't seem particularly bothered by what they did. So I guess it's another case of no consequences.
 
scooter84 said:
What are you saying? That there were only 3 e-mails that included confidential info and that even those were not properly marked? Doesn't that conflict with what was reported? I haven't read or listened to every word of coverage but I was under the impression it was over a hundred e-mails containing confidential info, some at the highest level of secrecy, and that even for the ones that were not marked, it would have been clear to anyone that they were confidential.

Also, wasn't it true that many of the e-mails had to be copied from the secure system to her non-secure system, since the two systems were not connected, and that markings were removed at that point - by people under her direction? Don't yell at me if that is not true - but that is what I read and it seemed to make sense.
Click to expand...

Many Republicans asked about these THREE emails that the ( c) marking -there is no space, but if I didn't put the space it would become the copyright symbol. By the way it was only part of these emails marked like this and none of any of the email streams were marked as confidential, Secret or Top Secret were marked in the Subject as they were supposed to be.

I don't disagree that Hillary was arrogant and careless here. But this hearing was a total witchhunt. The Republicans were pissed off that they couldn't get Comey to budge.
 
CreamyGoodness said:
Hillary is on the Mount Rushmore of most hated politicians in the history of this country. Her negligence caused American deaths. It'll be difficult to find a safe space where you can avoid anit-Hillary rants. HRC is a fugly cunt.
Click to expand...

If you are talking about Benghazi, something like NINE reports have your assertion to be totally false. No matter how many times Rwers want tell that lie. It will never be true.

The fact is the State Department's Security arm told him it was too dangerous to try to go there. But don't let things like facts get in your way.
 
I wonder if Hillary, like so many others before her, will be prosecuted for lying under oath. Or will she once again skate and be treated as if she's above the law.
 
Last edited:
It is on now. Anonymous has a new target.

"Speaking directly to Clinton, the mysterious figure in the video states, “It appears that lying has become second nature to you,” and “You are backed by the same dark suits that have supported every other past president.”

"The video continues, “Remember the 30,000 emails you deleted? Remember the countless times you've lied under oath? Remember your shady weapons deals that helped arm ISIS? Because we remember it all, as we do not forget, and we do not forgive.”

"The figure also states that they plan to “expose everything”, and “the truth is about to catch up with you.”

http://trustmeimanexpert.com/international-hacker-just-gave-a-terrifying-message-to-hillary-clinton/
 
Who to believe, Comey or Crooked Hillary's campaign.
Comey: Clinton gave non-cleared people access to classified information
Hillary Clinton granted non-cleared people access to classified information, FBI Director James Comey testified Thursday.

But he could not definitively confirm that those with access, in this particular instance, her attorneys, had actually read the classified material, and a spokesman for Clinton sharply contested the assertion.

“Did Secretary Clinton's attorneys have the security clearances needed?” Oversight Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) asked Comey, who responded, “They did not.”

Asked whether that concerned him, the FBI director said, “Oh yeah, sure.”

But Clinton spokesman Brian Fallon tweeted, “To be clear, the lawyers who sorted through Clinton's emails had Top Secret-level clearance."

Clinton’s personal attorney David Kendall said last August that he received Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information clearance from the Justice Department in November 2013 and a Top Secret clearance from State in the year that followed. In the same letter, Kendall said that his law partner, Katherine Turner, received State clearance in September 2014.

“These State Department security clearances remain active. We obtained them in order to be able to review documents at the Department of State, to assist former Secretary Clinton in preparing to testify before the House Select Committee on Benghazi,” Kendall wrote in the letter to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), who wrote to Secretary of State John Kerry to say that Kendall's clearance was inadequate.

As far as criminal consequences for an attorney “rifling through … Hillary Clinton’s emails without a security clearance,” as Chaffetz characterized it, Comey said those were not in play.

“But there's a great deal of concern about an un-cleared person not subject to the requirements we talked about in the read-in documents potentially having access,” Comey said. “That's why it's very, very important for us to recover everything we can back from attorneys.”

Chaffetz pressed, “is there no criminal prosecution of those attorneys?” asking if, for example, they would be disbarred.

“If they acted with criminal intent or they acted with some malintent,” Comey responded.

“What you're telling us is, it doesn't matter if they have a security clearance or not, because I may be innocent enough, ‘hey I’m just an attorney, I like the secretary, I’m trying to help Hillary Clinton, I'm not trying to give it to the Chinese or the Russians, I'm just trying to help her,’” Chaffetz said. “ So there's no intent? It doesn't matter if these people have security clearances?

Comey shot back, “Of course it matters.”

“But there’s no consequence, director,” Chaffetz repeated. “There’s no consequence.”

“Well I don’t know what consequence you’d have in mind,” Comey responded.

“Prosecute ‘em!” Chaffetz exclaimed.

Asked whether he knew if Clinton’s attorneys saw classified information, Comey said he did not know the answer.

Chaffetz was more certain. “It has to be yes, director,” he said. “You came across 110 and they said they went through all of them.”

Comey referred Chaffetz to his statement Tuesday in which he said Clinton’s attorneys sorted the emails for classified information using headers and search terms.

“Did Hillary Clinton give non-cleared people access to classified information?” Chaffetz asked.

“Yes,” Comey said, repeating, “Yes.”

Chaffetz asked, “What do you think her intent was?”

“I think that was to get good legal representation and to make the production to the State Department,” Comey responded. “I think it would be a very tall order in that circumstance, if I don't see the evidence to make a case that she was acting with criminal intent in her engagement with her lawyers.”
Click to expand...
http://www.politico.com/blogs/james-comey-testimony/2016/07/comey-clinton-classified-information-225245
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top