quote:

Originally posted by oddball:
Now Hil is out on the campaign trail rallying against funny money-

“We have to end the flood of secret, unaccountable money that is distorting our elections, corrupting our political system and drowning out the voices of too many everyday Americans”

Like this secret, unaccountable money?

The Clinton Foundation accepted millions of dollars from seven foreign governments during Hillary Rodham Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state, including one donation that violated its ethics agreement with the Obama administration, foundation officials disclosed Wednesday.

and

Clinton Foundation Failed to Disclose 1,100 Foreign Donations

Just put her picture in the dictionary under Hillpocrisy

When you have libs in the NYT cracking jokes about how Hillary 4.0 will compare to Hillary 3.0 or 2.0, you know she's in deep trouble.

Maybe she's like MicroSoft, where you always wait for the first big Service Pack before you take the risk of upgrading, and every-other-release is a dog regardless of how much they try and fix it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09...tons-email.html?_r=0

A special intelligence review of two emails that Hillary Rodham Clinton received as secretary of state on her personal account — including one about North Korea’s nuclear weapons program — has endorsed a finding by the inspector general for the intelligence agencies that the emails contained highly classified information when Mrs. Clinton received them, senior intelligence officials said.

the special review — by the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency — concluded that the emails were “Top Secret,” the highest classification of government intelligence, when they were sent to Mrs. Clinton in 2009 and 2011.

the Clinton campaign disagreed with the conclusion of the intelligence review and noted that agencies within the government often have different views of what should be considered classified.

quote:

the special review — by the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency — concluded that the emails were “Top Secret,” the highest classification of government intelligence, when they were sent to Mrs. Clinton in 2009 and 2011.

the Clinton campaign disagreed with the conclusion of the intelligence review and noted that agencies within the government often have different views of what should be considered classified.

I believe it has been already mentioned in this thread, but the Clinton campaign can disagree all they want, the originating agency determines classification.

Bitch can't go down fast enough.

quote:

the Clinton campaign can disagree all they want, the originating agency determines classification.

I believe that is correct.

If the State Dept thought the Intelligence community had over classified the info, they could contact the original classifiers and initiate a dialog. However, State would still have to treat the material at the original classification until the intel community changed their mind .

There is no indication that State Dept ever initiated such a dialog. State just went ahead and treated the info as unclassified.

quote:

The Clinton campaign disagreed with the conclusion of the intelligence review and noted that agencies within the government often have different views of what should be considered classified.

This is what really tics me off the most. I have dealt, and do deal with classed info. My opinion on the classification does not matter one bit. It is or it isn't. The way her campaign puts this out there makes uninformed voters think "Well maybe it wasn't really too secret."

As I told my mom, a big Hilary supporter and MSNBC watcher, if I had done one tenth of what she had done I would already be in jail pending investigation. That actually got her attention.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09...tons-email.html?_r=0

A special intelligence review of two emails that Hillary Rodham Clinton received as secretary of state on her personal account — including one about North Korea’s nuclear weapons program — has endorsed a finding by the inspector general for the intelligence agencies that the emails contained highly classified information when Mrs. Clinton received them, senior intelligence officials said.

the special review — by the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency — concluded that the emails were “Top Secret,” the highest classification of government intelligence, when they were sent to Mrs. Clinton in 2009 and 2011.

the Clinton campaign disagreed with the conclusion of the intelligence review and noted that agencies within the government often have different views of what should be considered classified.

This is specifically the mark my fellows and I were waiting for. Certification that there were emails on the server that were classified at the time they were received and done so by an agency external to the State Department. The Originating authority is a big deal in this matter, and much harder to wave off.

The rub; it is tending towards the hard technicalities of the classification process, and the bulk of the populace may soon check out. Regrettably, we need something classified that will also inspire an emotion reaction. Either attach it to Bengahzi or a similar problem.

quote:

Originally posted by domcintosh:


The rub; it is tending towards the hard technicalities of the classification process, and the bulk of the populace may soon check out. Regrettably, we need something classified that will also inspire an emotion reaction. Either attach it to Bengahzi or a similar problem.

Moreover, whatever the Intel which is classified is, we can't know what it is, no matter how juicy, scandalous, inflammatory, or mindnumbingly boring.

quote:

Originally posted by domcintosh:
The rub; it is tending towards the hard technicalities of the classification process, and the bulk of the populace may soon check out. Regrettably, we need something classified that will also inspire an emotion reaction. Either attach it to Bengahzi or a similar problem.

I agree and this is why I detest her campaign's "opinion" defense. It is put out soley to sway voters who know nothing about classification process or procedure. I just hope the FBI sticks to the law "offense."

There are some months left and I do believe the FBI will act with "Fidelity, Bravery, Integrity" and issue a report that is impartial and shows her criminal acts. Regardless of what one thinks of the current administration, they are not all reaching and all powerful as too effect an outcome suitable to their wishes.

quote:

Originally posted by mbinky:

quote:

Originally posted by domcintosh:
The rub; it is tending towards the hard technicalities of the classification process, and the bulk of the populace may soon check out. Regrettably, we need something classified that will also inspire an emotion reaction. Either attach it to Bengahzi or a similar problem.

I agree and this is why I detest her campaign's "opinion" defense. It is put out soley to sway voters who know nothing about classification process or procedure. I just hope the FBI sticks to the law "offense."

There are some months left and I do believe the FBI will act with "Fidelity, Bravery, Integrity" and issue a report that is impartial and shows her criminal acts. Regardless of what one thinks of the current administration, they are not all reaching and all powerful as too effect an outcome suitable to their wishes.

Help me understand. When the FBI finishes it's investigation will the findings be made public, or can the Government refuse to release them?

Hillary is toast, and she knows it

It's now being reported that in a pre-taped interview she did for ABC News that likely will air tonight, she is saying she's sorry but it isn't clear what she's sorry for or what kind of question prompted her reply. The obvious impetus is tanking poll numbers, donors standing by looking at Uncle Joe and the just overall recognition that there will be no coronation as long as she dances her current little jig.

Pigs fly.

In regards to her personal server Clinton tells ABC News today: "That was a mistake. I’m sorry about that. I take responsibility,”

This is one day after refusing to apologize, stating "what I did was allowed".

She's in deep doo doo, and she knows it. Something in the last 24 hours may have changed her moxie.

I would hedge my bets that she's sorry ONLY that she got caught. Beyond that, she has no soul, which prevents her from having feelings of remorse about anything else.

quote:

Originally posted by erj_pilot:
I would hedge my bets that she's sorry ONLY that she got caught. Beyond that, she has no soul, which prevents her from having feelings of remorse about anything else.

Of course, and now she is trying to save her candidacy, or at least the Clinton influence.

quote:

Originally posted by EmpireState:
Its realy sad how government works. One investigative branch wants emails and another department thinks its ok to stall for years. Years!!!!! When will these people learn that they work for US! Give up the damn emails, now! This has got to be the most criminal administration I've seen. Constant deleted emails, stalled investigations, pleading the fifth, etc.

Until her protectors and advocates start going to jail for hindering prosecution, destroying evidence, perjury, just to name a few, none of them will cooperate. Pick one, offer immunity if they really come clean and get on with it.

This case is simply another glaring example of the total ineptitude of our gubbermint.

quote:

Originally posted by domcintosh:

quote:

Originally posted by erj_pilot:
I would hedge my bets that she's sorry ONLY that she got caught. Beyond that, she has no soul, which prevents her from having feelings of remorse about anything else.

Of course, and now she is trying to save her candidacy, or at least the Clinton influence.

Not to mention all that nice cash which she will be able to keep. How many millions has she raked in from big donors, already? As I understand it, she gets to keep any "left overs"

quote:

Originally posted by wcb6092:
Help me understand. When the FBI finishes it's investigation will the findings be made public, or can the Government refuse to release them?

If a criminal indictment is going to be issued, weather the facts are secret or not, we will know.

The core facts surrounding the email and server issues haven't changed since day one. Not a single fact has changed but what has changed, as the investigations and suits progress, are the varied expressions of culpability.

It's gone from, "It's all good bc the Secret Service was guarding the door" to "It was permissible" to "Nothing was classified" to "Nothing was marked classified" to "I'm sorry for the confusion" to "I'm sorry for the server."

Nothing has changed except her slow walking the excuses with greater non-admissions of fault as time goes on. It's a slow death of one thousand cuts and she knows it.

My best guess is that they have connected sources in Justice who told them about the second intel review and how, to overcome that panel finding, she's have to argue that the CIA and the other agency who I can't remember, didn't do their jobs right but she, as Sec of State was in the prime spot to know better.

That's a tough sell in Iowa and New Hampshire and now to CNN, Politico and other liberal news outlets. Also recall that over the weekend the FBI expressed anonymous confidence that they'd be able to recover the deleted date bc deletion for private uses isn't the as wiping to government standards and that overall, their investigation was progressing.

She's toast and knows how the game has played her good.