Hillary: ‘It’s Not About Emails Or Servers, Either. It’s About Politics’

Posted by | August 15, 2015 10:00 | Filed under: Politics

Republish
Reprint


Hillary Clinton addressed Benghazi and her email problems to a receptive Iowa crowed. She reminded them that the Citizens United decision was about her.

“Before the 2008 presidential election, a group of right-wing operatives made a hit-job film with the goal of stopping a Democrat from taking the White House, and then used shadow money to promote it. That film was called Hillary: The Movie. I can tell you, it was no Field of Dreams or Bridges of Madison County.”

This, coughing fit aside, was the bent of Clinton’s speech here on Friday: intense, dramatic, and focused almost entirely on Republicans and what she cast as one big witch-hunt into her candidacy — be it through the investigation into the terrorist attack in Benghazi, or the inquiries into the personal email account she kept as secretary of state. She dismissed it all as a sequel to Hillary: The Movie.

“They took aim at me, but they ended up damaging our entire Democracy,” she told the crowd of 2,100. “We can’t let them pull that same trick again.”

“They’ll try to tell you that this is about Benghazi. But it’s not. Benghazi was a tragedy.” Clinton went on. “But let’s be clear: Seven exhaustive investigations — including by the Republican-controlled Armed House Services Committee and the Republican-controlled House Intelligence Committee — have already debunked all the conspiracy theories. It’s not about Benghazi.”

“You know what,” she added, almost as an aside, “It’s not about emails or servers either. It’s about politics.”

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2015 Liberaland
By: Alan

Alan Colmes is the publisher of Liberaland.

123 responses to Hillary: ‘It’s Not About Emails Or Servers, Either. It’s About Politics’

  1. Buford2k11 August 15th, 2015 at 10:04

    I am tired of the gop using my taxes as a way to attack HRC…The corruption must stop…

    • William August 15th, 2015 at 10:06

      I am tired of the gop using my taxes as a way to attack HRC

    • The Original Just Me August 15th, 2015 at 11:25

      I think I will just go ahead and speak for several of the folks here. We are with you.

  2. William August 15th, 2015 at 10:05

    What was your first clue Madam Secretary? Was it the fact that any and all improprieties by the Republican Candidates (including actual indictments) are completely ignored, by right wing media, or is it because the most investigated event in the history of our nation (even more intense and thorough than the 911 commission) has still found nothing.

    • Mann T. August 15th, 2015 at 17:19

      I lived in Benghazi for two years. Now when I hear the name it is always this Fox Republican obsession and not the city. Strange. Used to be a city in my mind. And much of it now destroyed.

    • Lefty August 15th, 2015 at 22:05

      The reason this didn’t go away is probably because she blamed a YouTube video for the attack,, even though she knew it was a terrorist attack. When she was questioned about it, she doubled down and said, ‘at this point, what difference does it make?’

      • Jack E Raynbeau August 15th, 2015 at 23:31

        There was rioting throughout the area due to the video. The attack was well masked by the riots.

      • Dwendt44 August 16th, 2015 at 13:02

        One of the terrorists that attack the compound said that it was about the video.

    • Hugh Everett August 16th, 2015 at 00:41

      It’s not about emails or servers. It’s about the Obama Administration ending Hillary’s political career.Perhaps you’re unaware that the DOJ and FBI don’t answer to Trey Gowdy and John Boehner.

      • whatthe46 August 16th, 2015 at 00:49

        ok, please tell me how our President ended her political career. i’m so waiting to hear this one.

        • Hugh Everett August 16th, 2015 at 00:57

          Your nominee will be Al Gore, unless enough Republicans can cross over and support Hillary in the primaries.We certainly don’t want to lose an opponent who is so highly unlikeable, unfavorable, unattractive, aged and corrupt.

          • whatthe46 August 16th, 2015 at 02:10

            that meth you’re smoking, does it has an expiration date?

            • Hugh Everett August 16th, 2015 at 02:30

              Wait a minute……you think Hillary is likeable, attractive, healthy, and honest?

              • whatthe46 August 16th, 2015 at 02:35

                answer my question first.

                • Hugh Everett August 16th, 2015 at 02:49

                  Go to the 4 minute mark of this clip for a perfect answer to your question.

                  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9rkePKQR7M4

                  • Dwendt44 August 16th, 2015 at 13:01

                    Karl Rove? really? Ruddy baby? really? Those two do know how to spread in on thick so considering it’s FakeNews, I’m not surprised.

              • whatthe46 August 16th, 2015 at 03:05

                she is all of the above. and why on earth would you include attractiveness as a reason to vote or not vote for a canidate. of all the adjectives you could have posted, you decided to include looks. talk about shallow.

              • William August 16th, 2015 at 09:45

                Despite years of investigations, months of hearings and millions of wasted taxpayer dollars you idiots still have zero.
                Be sure to chime in when you actually have an indictment.
                https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/6cd615f4321650dedb907da1dd5a111bb7cdd63076b739772060993b968d3829.jpg

              • Dwendt44 August 16th, 2015 at 12:59

                Healthy? Yes, While I don’t have access to her medical records, she’s healthy enough to run, she’s healthy enough to serve.
                Attractive? Not that it matters, but at her age she’s at least OK. I’ve seen a lot worse looking.
                Likable? Probably she is when you’re not throwing darts,lies, and smears at her.
                Honest? About as honest as any politician is. There’s no abundance of truth telling in political circles generally and national politics in particular.
                So on the scale you ask, she’s doing pretty good overall.

      • William August 16th, 2015 at 09:39

        It’s about the Obama Administration ending Hillary’s political career.
        so….?
        What else did the radio tell you today? https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/5ad4d21ca03eba6571b4ee408344698c98a70a17d314412d941f7001e2a83dcd.jpg

  3. The Original Just Me August 15th, 2015 at 11:29

    This IS a prime example of why Hilary needs to be President for the next two terms. She has the guts, backbone, strength, and COURAGE to stand up to the Filthy Mob called the Republicans.

  4. Budda August 15th, 2015 at 12:03

    I would like to ask the Republicans exactly what are you looking for? If not a specific than it is nothing more than a witch hunt ( at tax payers expense )

    • Talibandrew Breitbot August 15th, 2015 at 12:47

      “I would like to ask the Republicans exactly what are you looking for?”

      Opposition research. Even if it is bogus.

    • Hugh Everett August 16th, 2015 at 04:23

      “I would like to ask the Republicans exactly what are you looking for?”

      You talkin’ to me?
      This is a DOJ investigation, approved by President Obama, and conducted by the FBI. It has nothing to do with Republicans.

      • Budda August 16th, 2015 at 09:37

        Yes, I am talking to you and others like yourself . I do know who, what and where these ‘investigations’ are about and that is why it is political and pushed by Republicans.

  5. Merlin August 15th, 2015 at 12:21

    It’s about the dirtiest lying and cheating politics in our generation!

    • Robert Kennedy August 15th, 2015 at 18:57

      There have been other eras of that though, see “Blaine, Blaine, James G Continental Liar from the State of Maine,”. for example.

  6. Author R A Knowlton August 15th, 2015 at 12:29

    I am neither Repub nor Dem, but I can read. As far as I see it is the FBI who is doing the email investigation. So my question to all you who follow party lines no matter what. I ask, if a person (any person) wipes their server clean after being asked to hand over the information on it, are you not at least a little suspicious? If you are not, you are not a good candidate to sit on a jury. Think for yourselves, not what the media or sites like this tell you. I will wait to see what the investigation reveals before I make any decisions. I think that is the wisest choice. After all, if your life depended on it, would you say she is 100% honest about this email thing?

    • Talibandrew Breitbot August 15th, 2015 at 12:44

      “if a person (any person) wipes their server clean after being asked to hand over the information on it, are you not at least a little suspicious?”

      No.

      Wiping hard drives is a standard business, military, AND government best-practices security procedure when a computer is permanentlytaken out of service, and that is what the government advises even those who are covered by “.gov-only” email policy to do when a server is being taken out of service after an archival backup has been rendered.

      If you were actually familiar with the issue, you would know this.

      If Hillary Clinton and DoS had not seen to it that hard drives were wiped, there would be serious and justified questions about her competence.

      • Dwendt44 August 15th, 2015 at 13:03

        Do really think the ‘Clinton Haters’ care about facts?

        • StoneyCurtisll August 15th, 2015 at 19:45

          Of course not..

      • dave-dr-gonzo August 15th, 2015 at 13:04

        Pity poor Author!1!! RA Knownothing.

        • Mike August 15th, 2015 at 13:28

          I’m gonna give him the benefit of the doubt and say he’s not a troll, just not curious nor well informed or educated as to the nature of data transfer.
          It’s actually a great example of Republican v Democrat tactics…The intelligent members of the right know what you, I, and TalibanAndrew do, however they plead a sort of ignorance and perpetuate myths knowing the base is neither curious nor well read. The 3 of us are too curious to ever accept an explanation like this so our psyche forces us to delve deeper and educate ourselves when we are ignorant. The right is happy to let others do their thinking for them. (No different than the Planned Parenthood video)

          The dems do similar things but they’re a bit more cerebral, hence why the right never fully grasps the intricacies of many political arguments.

          (7 Investigations into Benghazi and nothing, yet we need another…???)

          • Jack E Raynbeau August 15th, 2015 at 23:36

            This bears repeating:

            “…however they plead a sort of ignorance and perpetuate myths knowing the base is neither curious nor well read.”

    • Mike August 15th, 2015 at 12:45

      First, it would depend who did the wiping…if Hillary personally did, then everything that she wiped can easily be retrieved (which seems to be the case) If she hired an expert to wipe it (like me) you would never be able to retrieve a thing. (that is not the case)
      Let’s not forget an Email doesn’t go from one computer to another but rather through many where a copy is left behind, so it is possible to get copies from a number of places if you look hard enough

      In the first scenario, the server was wiped before any demands were made upon her to produce the records, so it would be logical to assume she acted no differently than you would if you were getting rid of an old piece of hardware (you would opt for a factory reset) But if she had hired an expert to wipe it clean that would have been very suspicious…but she didn’t.

      We can speculate all day about motives, but it’s probably more prudent to wait for some sort of empirical evidence pointing towards guilt or innocence. JMO

      • Dwendt44 August 15th, 2015 at 13:01

        No no, we should smear first, make up phony scenarios, make wild eyed accusations and worry about accuracy latter when no one is looking. /s

      • ChrisVosburg August 15th, 2015 at 18:19

        First, it would depend who did the wiping…if Hillary personally did, then everything that she wiped can easily be retrieved (which seems to be the case) If she hired an expert to wipe it (like me) you would never be able to retrieve a thing.

        I wondered about this myself, because the term “wiped” has been tossed around carelessly for weeks to describe what was done with the server, and as you say, it means different things to different people.

        According to this WaPo piece from a couple days ago, the server has been collecting dust since 2013 at Platte River Networks, Inc., which now handles the Clintons’ email (they transferred all email stores, etc. from the old server to a new server).

        Barbara J. Wells, a Denver lawyer who represents Platte River, told the WaPo that the old server’s hard drive is blank and has no useful data.

        I’m guessing Platte River techs at least did a low level format of the drive in the old server, effectively “zeroing it out,” as we say, in the interest of tidying up loose ends (all secure!)– I would have.

    • Obewon August 15th, 2015 at 13:33

      Bach in reality the FBI criminal investigation is completed: “Two government inspectors general have referred issues related to Clinton’s email server to the Department of Justice for potential investigation. The department said Friday, however, that the the referrals were not for a criminal investigation, contradicting earlier reports.”-NBC News, NYT, Alan.com, etc. http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/justice-department-probe-hillary-clinton-email-use “The New York Times Rewrote their (debunked) Headline.” <-Didn't FNC, WND et al update you?
      A: Nope! http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/08/12/myths-and-facts-on-hillary-clintons-email-and-r/204913

    • ChrisVosburg August 15th, 2015 at 17:59

      if a person (any person) wipes their server clean after being asked to hand over the information on it, are you not at least a little suspicious?

      Objection, assumes facts not in evidence, your honor.

      To restate something I pointed out to another commenter earlier today:

      Here is what we know: The FBI’s request was prompted by an Intelligence community’s Inspector General’s nagging concerns in July of this year that there might yet be some sort of sensitive gummint data on the aging server (which has been long retired, and according to its current custodian, Platte River Networks, wiped long ago).

      We can’t have an IG losing sleep, so the FBI asked Hill, can we has looksee and Hill replied, sure why not ur welcome, and instructed Platte River to dust it off and release it to them.

      It’s important to note that the server was not “seized.” This was accomplished without subpoena, demand, or formal coercional document. See, these people are all grownups.

      You can wise up by acquainting yourself with the unexciting details at this WaPo article about the breathlessly boring handoff. The article also explains how and why the server wound up at Platte River Networks, in a completely unextraordinary added backstory.

      You’ll love it. It won’t allay your suspicions, because you’re sort of drawn that way, and no amount of patient and factual refutation will ever change that, but still, read it anyway.

  7. amongoose August 15th, 2015 at 13:46

    All documents from her time as secretary of state were supposed to have been vetted and cleared by records officials at the time of separation according to:

    http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/89251.pdf

    5 FAH-4 H-217.2 Removal Procedures

    .
    This section clearly states the procedure, and it is not turning over documents a year after leaving, but upon separation.

    • Obewon August 15th, 2015 at 14:07

      Simpleton, you lack any ongoing DOJ-FBI criminal investigation, or indictable “evidence” of HRC e,g, Issa / Gowdy’s “0 indictments.”

    • Mike August 15th, 2015 at 14:26

      Those directives apply to the DOJ servers, not someone’s personal server.
      You’re conflating the two solely to support a failed narrative since both the FBI and the Investigating committee agree this is not a criminal investigation but rather an investigation into procedure…
      Right now the only thing they have on her is “possibly” sending an Email that contained info that was later classified (not when she sent it) which would be a bit like me accusing you of speeding because you drove 40 MPH on a road last year, that this year has a 25 MPH speed limit…

      • amongoose August 15th, 2015 at 14:47

        It covers govt. documents.
        Did you read the statutes?

        • rg9rts August 15th, 2015 at 15:33

          AAAAHHH the sin of wanna classify

        • rg9rts August 15th, 2015 at 15:34

          When I was in the war…I saw newspaper articles classified….thanx for your input

        • Mike August 15th, 2015 at 20:12

          I did, did you…???
          Again, it concerns documents which have been classified (in any of 22 classifications) and not a single piece of evidence fits that criteria.
          It bears repeating…according to both the FBI and the Investigative Committee Ms Clinton at no time made reference to or sent any information that had been classified…6 such documents were later classified, but not until months after they were sent.

          • amongoose August 15th, 2015 at 20:45

            Yes I did.
            It specifically states that ALL records will be reviewed by records personnel when the official leaves office.
            They are the ones who decide which documents must stay in government custody.

            • Mike August 15th, 2015 at 20:50

              And that was done…now what…???

              • whatthe46 August 15th, 2015 at 23:11

                now it’s wash, rinse, repeat.

                • Mike August 15th, 2015 at 23:37

                  He’ll be back…

                • trees August 15th, 2015 at 23:46

                  Fact, Hillary kept all official government correspondence in a personal account.

                  Fact, Hillary deleted over half of all these records without any official review.

                  Fact, these records were subpoenaed.

                  Fact, classified material was contained in her account.

                  Fact, the FBI is investigating……

                  • whatthe46 August 16th, 2015 at 00:00

                    FACT: you’re a dumbass.

                  • Dwendt44 August 16th, 2015 at 12:41

                    So, none fact is fact is the dense forest of trees.

                  • OldLefty August 17th, 2015 at 11:00

                    Fact, Hillary kept all official government correspondence in a personal account.
                    _____

                    So did EVERYONE else, including most of those running for president now.
                    Either you didn’t know or you didn’t care.

                    Fact, Hillary kept this account on her own server for the purpose of secrecy, to keep her activities from any government oversight.

                    _________

                    So did EVERYONE else.
                    Either you didn’t know or you didn’t care.

                    Fact, Hillary deleted over half of all these records without any official review.

                    ________

                    So did EVERYONE else. (Colin Powell deleted ALL of them.
                    Either you didn’t know or you didn’t care.

                    Fact, these records were subpoenaed.

                    ______

                    How is that different from all other records that were subpoenaed in EVERY administration?

                    Fact, classified material was contained in her account.

                    ______

                    As it was in Powell’s accounts.

                    Either you didn’t know or you didn’t care.

                    Fact, the FBI is investigating……

                    ________

                    Law enforcement officials have said that Mrs. Clinton, who is seeking the 2016 Democratic nomination for president, is not a target of the investigation, and she has said there is no evidence that her account was hacked. There has also been no evidence that she broke the law, and many specialists believe the occasional appearance of classified information in her account was probably of marginal consequence.

                    Clinton Rule #1;
                    If you can blow enough smoke, you can say there’s fire.

                    Clinton Rule No. 2 ;
                    What is business as usual for every politician since Cato is a work of dark magic when practiced by either Clinton.

                    Clinton Rule No. 3:
                    If you have blown enough smoke, you then can claim that there is a “climate” of fire.

    • rg9rts August 15th, 2015 at 15:32

      Thank you Mr. FAUX

      • amongoose August 15th, 2015 at 16:07

        I guess the answer to did you read it is no.
        Because it covers government and personal communications while in office.

        • rg9rts August 15th, 2015 at 16:22

          You, as a gopee mouthpiece, are still waiting for the results from Ohio..I really have no time for fantasy

          • amongoose August 15th, 2015 at 16:44

            Guess that means you aren’t even going to read it.

            And since you can’t/won’t reply with anything but insults I guess you have no ability to actually defend your candidates actions.
            Hard to argue a point if you don’t have information.
            And you need some, badly.

            Have a nice day.

            Bye.

            • whatthe46 August 15th, 2015 at 19:03

              what part of nothing she did wasn’t against the law until 2 years after her service of SOS? just exactly what does that mean to you. NOT LAW AT THE TIME? does it means so what?

              • amongoose August 15th, 2015 at 20:50

                Read the statutes. All documents were to have been cleared by records officials WHEN she left office.
                They decide what she keeps.

                • whatthe46 August 15th, 2015 at 20:53

                  you’re seriously hopeless.

              • Lefty August 15th, 2015 at 21:51

                Not so sure about what laws she may have broken. Here are some to consider:

                At issue are four sections of the law: the Federal Records Act, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), the National Archives and Records Administration’s (NARA) regulations and Section 1924 of Title 18 of the U.S. Crimes and Criminal Procedure Code.

                In short:

                The Federal Records Act requires agencies hold onto official communications, including all work-related emails, and government employees cannot destroy or remove relevant records.

                FOIA is designed to “improve public access to agency records and information.”

                The NARA regulations dictate how records should be created and maintained. They stress that materials must be maintained “by the agency,” that they should be “readily found” and that the records must “make possible a proper scrutiny by the Congress.”

                Section 1924 of Title 18 has to do with deletion and retention of classified documents. “Knowingly” removing or housing classified information at an “unauthorized location” is subject to a fine or a year in prison.

                • whatthe46 August 15th, 2015 at 22:00

                  SHE BROKE NO LAWS. they will spend as much of the tax payers until there’s nothing left to get nothing. at what point do you just say fk it? we have nothing. it didn’t become a law until 2 yrs after she left. HOW MANY DAMN TIMES MUST THAT BE REPEATED? go after the GOPissers then come talk to me.

                • whatthe46 August 15th, 2015 at 22:09

                  wow. you came up with that all by yourself. don’t you think inquiry after inquiry, that all these fk heads couldn’t have possibly read everything they could have to find something to lay claim to criminal charges? man, they should hire you.

                  • Lefty August 15th, 2015 at 22:21

                    I don’t think there has been an inquiry after inquiry. The FBI is looking into it, so if she did nothing wrong it will be revealed soon enough.

                    • whatthe46 August 15th, 2015 at 22:23

                      there not looking into if she did anything illegal dumbass! you’re starting to piss me off. nothing she did was illegal at the time, thus nothing criminal happened.

                    • Lefty August 15th, 2015 at 22:42

                      What is the FBI looking into? According to the NYT there is an active investigation. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/15/us/fbi-tracking-path-of-email-to-hillary-clinton-at-state-department.html?_r=0
                      Perhaps you have an insider who feeds you information that the FBI isn’t privy to.

                    • whatthe46 August 15th, 2015 at 22:56

                      nytimes this… B.S. read this instead: http://www.alan.com/2015/07/24/igs-clarify-no-criminal-referral-for-clinton/

                      and this: curtesy of William: “Funny how keeping a private
                      email server to bypass federal record keeping laws and guidelines means absolutely nothing to you republicans. Scott Walker facilitated a secret E-mail system for political fundraising. Marco Rubio deleted his e-mails after the
                      media asked him for them. Chris Christie used private e-mails and texts to avoid public disclosure. Huckabee ordered the destruction of Government owned hard drives before he left office. The Bush administration used e-mail servers owned by the RNC and claimed 22 million e-mails were “accidently” deleted. Secretary Powell used a private e-mail server.”

                    • Lefty August 16th, 2015 at 00:37

                      The article I posted was from yesterday and you rebuked it with an article from last month. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/15/us/fbi-tracking-path-of-email-to-hillary-clinton-at-state-department.html?_r=0

                    • Obewon August 16th, 2015 at 00:30

                      Comprehension: “They were not marked as classified, the State Department has said, and it is unclear whether its employees knew the origin of the information.”-NYT debunked you long ago too.

                    • Lefty August 16th, 2015 at 00:39

                      Not as of yesterday

                    • Obewon August 16th, 2015 at 00:41

                      As of last month the FBI & NYT confirmed you’re an misinformed fool. The department said (July 24, 2015), however, that the the referrals were not for a criminal investigation, contradicting earlier reports.”-NBC News, NYT, Alan.com, etc. http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/justice-department-probe-hillary-clinton-email-use “The New York Times Rewrote their (debunked) Headline.”

                    • whatthe46 August 16th, 2015 at 00:51

                      i told that dummy that already. but, noooo he won’t listen. maybe he’ll listen to you. (me thinks not though)

                    • Obewon August 16th, 2015 at 00:57

                      They’re so proud of W’s 80+ convicted Felons cementing their 5 of 6 past popular POTUS vote losses!

                    • Obewon August 16th, 2015 at 00:17

                      Nope! Reality> “Two government inspectors general have referred issues related to Clinton’s email server to the Department of Justice for potential investigation. The department said (July 24, 2015), however, that the the referrals were not for a criminal investigation, contradicting earlier reports.”-NBC News, NYT, Alan.com, etc. http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/justice-department-probe-hillary-clinton-email-use “The New York Times Rewrote their (debunked) Headline.” <-Didn't FNC, WND et al update you?

        • Robert Kennedy August 15th, 2015 at 18:49

          And She followed the law which didn’t apply to her at the time. And Condi Rice shredded everything and turned over nothing, so if you want to pollute the conversation, at least go after Rice first or lose whatever sliver of rationality you have.

          • amongoose August 15th, 2015 at 20:51

            Separation protocols did, and she violated them by not turning over documents when she left the state department.

            • Obewon August 15th, 2015 at 21:12

              So (R Ca) Issa / (R SC) Gowdy & the FBI are dimmer than you Limbaughtomized GOP TV drones, because they delivered “0 indictments.” And the DOJ FBI isn’t criminally investigating HRC.

              • amongoose August 15th, 2015 at 21:52

                I am looking at the statutes as written.
                Show me where I am wrong.

                • Obewon August 15th, 2015 at 21:54

                  Simple ‘0 indictments’ and no FBI-DOJ criminal investigation of HRC. Vs. indicted and disarmed Felon Perry’16~

                  • amongoose August 15th, 2015 at 23:01

                    Still didn’t answer the question (as usual), how was her removal of state department documents legal under the statutes posted?

                    • whatthe46 August 15th, 2015 at 23:06

                      how’s this for an answer: because it was “ILLEGAL” do you know the difference between illegal and legal? if not, google it. it will not only give you the definition, but it will also give you examples so simple minded idiots like you can comprehend. but, then again, maybe not.

                • Jack E Raynbeau August 16th, 2015 at 00:07

                  Share your brilliance with the FBI. They will be grateful for the information.

                  • amongoose August 16th, 2015 at 00:31

                    If you can’t answer the question deflect or attack the messenger.
                    I see your familiar with Alinsky’s work.

                    • Jack E Raynbeau August 16th, 2015 at 00:37

                      I didn’t attack you. I only suggested that you share your wisdom with the proper authorities. Perhaps you know something that they don’t.

                    • amongoose August 16th, 2015 at 00:45

                      I just read the statute as written. The FBI has just become involved because of confidential info in emails. It may be in their jurisdiction now, before their getting into the investigation it was the DOJ, and State Departments responsibility.
                      The FBI agent in charge of the investigation now is the one who prosecuted Gen. Petraus.

                    • Jack E Raynbeau August 16th, 2015 at 00:50

                      It appears that we’ll get to the bottom of things.

                    • Obewon August 16th, 2015 at 00:52

                      There is no FBI criminal investigation of HRC. You’re thinking Perry’16~

                    • whatthe46 August 16th, 2015 at 00:52

                      hehehehehe. you’re so funny.

                    • StoneyCurtisll August 16th, 2015 at 08:16

                      FBI agents dont prosecute…
                      They investigate.

                    • amongoose August 16th, 2015 at 10:48

                      You are correct.
                      I mistakenly referred to him as an FBI prosecutor. he is with the DOJ.

                    • whatthe46 August 16th, 2015 at 00:53

                      i said the same thing.

  8. No way out August 15th, 2015 at 14:40

    She’s spot on.

  9. rg9rts August 15th, 2015 at 15:31

    Like no one with a brain didn’t realize… So tell me has ANYONE stated what their ideas are for helping America???

    • Hirightnow August 15th, 2015 at 23:22

      Sadly, they think that this IS helping America…

  10. Warman1138 August 15th, 2015 at 19:32

    Mrs. Clinton is so very right. WTH! It’s been going nonstop since the 90’s.

  11. Lefty August 15th, 2015 at 19:42

    Just because you did it doesn’t mean you’re guilty. Don’t they know that she is representing the elite and she should be treated with more respect.

    • Obewon August 15th, 2015 at 20:49

      “doers.biblestudy@”Bogus. Bearing false witness sent you right to Hell.

      • Lefty August 15th, 2015 at 21:07

        ” Hillary Clinton “sent a memo” to all State Department staff that said “you should not do State Department business on personal email.”

        — Joe Scarborough on Monday, March 9th, 2015 in a broadcast of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe”

        ”

        Under the heading “What can you and your family members do?” the memo covered such familiar steps as changing your password and making sure you choose a strong one. It also said, “Avoid conducting official Department business from your personal email accounts.”

        This memo had a bit of history. In 2005, a department manual covered transmitting information that is “sensitive but unclassified.” That is a broad category that covers anything from meeting schedules, to visa applications, to ordinary emails to other federal agencies. The manual basically said that department-related email should go through servers authorized by the department.”

      • MarkLevin_BelieveItOrNot August 16th, 2015 at 03:04

        Who are you trying to fool? That’s only for the preservation of emails, not for the use of a private server. Maybe she would’ve gotten away with it, but it turns out top-secret info was exposed by her lawlessness. The idea that she’s untouchable is beginning to fall apart. She might end up worse than Petraus, already sinking faster than the Titanic.

        • Obewon August 16th, 2015 at 06:49

          Lol!. You’re 100% wrong. You’re thinking of indicted and disarmed Felon Perry’16~

  12. Lefty August 15th, 2015 at 20:17

    “It would have been a violation of the NARA’s rules in the Code of Federal Regulations for Clinton to use personal email exclusively, The code requires federal agencies to make and preserve records that duly document agency activity, so that they are readily available when needed — such as for FOIA requests or congressional inquiries. Using personal email exclusively is contrary to proper record preservation.Had Clinton used a @state.gov email address, every email sent and received would have been archived in the State Department system. Clinton, who served from 2009 to 2013, has argued that her emails were archived in the system because she was in the habit of sending them to other government employees with .gov email addresses.

    However, experts said this defense is insufficient. Under this practice, the State Department records management system would have captured emails from Clinton to a State Department employee, but it would not necessarily capture emails from Clinton to government employees in other departments or non-government employees.”
    As SOS you would think she would be concerned with top secret info.

  13. Robert M. Snyder August 15th, 2015 at 20:36

    Relax. Hillary’s e-mail server was securely managed by her good friend, Beatrice.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJ0yD-9CDwI

  14. Angelo_Frank August 15th, 2015 at 21:45

    TS/SCI on a private server is a big no-no regardless.

    • whatthe46 August 15th, 2015 at 21:50

      were you crying about IT when the bush’s did it or rice or powell and the rest of the GOPissers?

  15. Lefty August 15th, 2015 at 22:46

    Bill’s contingency plan.

    • Jack E Raynbeau August 16th, 2015 at 00:10

      Prison? You’re crazier than you appear.

      • Lefty August 16th, 2015 at 00:20

        Hello, It’s a joke. Did you not get it.

        • Jack E Raynbeau August 16th, 2015 at 00:26

          I agree that it’s funny.

          Anybody that thinks she committed a crime is funnier.

      • Hirightnow August 16th, 2015 at 02:22

        No…Lefty is EXACTLY that crazy.

  16. FDRliberal August 16th, 2015 at 03:26

    It’s hilarious watching the Tea Rubes all sugared up over their latest Big Fake Scandal. According to the Tea Cultists, four years ago, Obama was going to be impeached for saying ‘act of terror’ instead of ‘terrorist act’. Two years ago Obama was going to be impeached for wearing a tan suit! Now their propagandized pea brains are focused on Hillary, hoping for the one scandal that will allow Ted Cruz to become President for Life. However this latest fake scandal, number 281, will fall apart like all the rest, once again crushing their little hopes…that is…until the Next Big Fake Scandal!

    • ANNG14 August 18th, 2015 at 11:48

      It is time (long overdue)that taxpayers stop paying for their fake scandals.

  17. jybarz August 16th, 2015 at 06:57

    It’s about DIRTY politics.
    That’s all repukes are good at.
    Good and honest governing…. not likely with repukes.

  18. Bob Waas Sr. August 16th, 2015 at 12:23

    It seems that scandals follow Hillary wherever she goes. You think they’re all made up just to knock her out as the president?

  19. toomanyidiots August 16th, 2015 at 15:06

    “You know what,” she added, almost as an aside, “It’s not about emails or servers either. It’s about politics.” …no no no…it’s about misdirection.

Leave a Reply