• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Report: Intel officials confirm 'top secret' material in Clinton emails

Mr Person said:
Didn't the latest Benghazi committee, or at least its leader, also release classified documents? Should also be a trial for him, in that case.
Click to expand...

Nope. If he did then that would be interesting since he was posting Clinton emails. :roll:
 
Bob N said:
Indeed! And those Intel officials will have to testify at that trial and identify themselves for cross examination. Do it! ;)
Click to expand...

Sure, but if their identity is classified then that testimony wouldn't be made public. Are you hoping they'd be audited by the IRS as a result?
 
NonoBadDog said:
I think there is some teeth to this. My reasoning is this. The dissenting voices on this thread have all been, they don't believe it, the information was not top secret (well, maybe it was), the FBI hasn't said so yet, I don't care and it doesn't matter. Not one argument has been about right or wrong or offered any substantial argument in her defense.

If a person were to read the article they would note that the initial article came from Fox News. There wasn't one snarky remark about Fox News. That is pretty odd.

How will the left victimize themselves it comes out that the FBI thinks there should be charges? If there is a grand jury about the server, who is to blame? Will it be another Bush did it? The left really needs to throw this trash bag in the dumpster and go with Bernie. If they don't it is totally on the left.
Click to expand...

Well can we just hope together that if wrongdoing, worse, illegal behavior is proven that it happens before she becomes the nominee?
 
NonoBadDog said:
I think there is some teeth to this. My reasoning is this. The dissenting voices on this thread have all been, they don't believe it, the information was not top secret (well, maybe it was), the FBI hasn't said so yet, I don't care and it doesn't matter. Not one argument has been about right or wrong or offered any substantial argument in her defense.

If a person were to read the article they would note that the initial article came from Fox News. There wasn't one snarky remark about Fox News. That is pretty odd.

How will the left victimize themselves it comes out that the FBI thinks there should be charges? If there is a grand jury about the server, who is to blame? Will it be another Bush did it? The left really needs to throw this trash bag in the dumpster and go with Bernie. If they don't it is totally on the left.
Click to expand...


Man, are you kidding me? You were just lecturing me (and other posters) on how I don't have any business forming a personal opinion about the probable guilt of William Porter on involuntary manslaughter of Freddie Gray because I only have access to news reports about trial testimony, but I didn't actually sit through the entire trial as is my right as a member of the public.

What business do you have speculating as to how much "teeth" - indications of guilt - are in this? You have even less access to the Benghazi committee materials than I do to Porter trial testimony because some of the former is classified and there hasn't been a trial!










MolonLabe said:
Everyone knew that Lerner nor anyone else at the IRS was ever going to be charged by the Obama DOJ. Probably because it would have come out just how far up the chain the corruption went. She made 155 visits to the White House. Far more than any other head of the IRS. I don't think they were discussing college football.
Click to expand...

I don't know what the statute of limitations is on whatever charges they might consider, but I'd be generally willing to bet that it's long enough that an incoming R - or even an incoming D who'd want to distance themselves from Obama - could charge her.

We may yet see.
 
Soho gator said:
Yes about 99% of govt documents that are marked secret should not be. There are well over 1M people who have security clearance. Completely ridiculous .

yes a
Click to expand...
Do you have a source for that claim?
 
jmotivator said:
Sure, but if their identity is classified then that testimony wouldn't be made public. Are you hoping they'd be audited by the IRS as a result?
Click to expand...
No. But are you saying that Hillary does not have the right to face her accusers?
 
TheDemSocialist said:
So convict someone who did not break the law?
Click to expand...
We/re not talking convictions here but supporting someone who is an obvious liar, an incompetent and careless to the point of endangering her country. Does she have to be convicted by a jury of her peers and spend time in the slammer before you recognize her obvious character and intelligence flaws?
 
BrewerBob said:
If the Republican party hadn't turned into such a circus over the recent years I would say Hillary is in trouble. But they did and she isn't.
Click to expand...

that SO sums up today's political reality

hoping Obama will do the right thing and assure prosecution is fair and impartial so that the trial will not be seen as a politically motivated GOP vendetta ... thereby opening the door of the white house to Bernie
 
MolonLabe said:
Heck lets not stop there. Lois Lerner and numerous other culprits at the IRS need to be up on charges as well.
Click to expand...

for what, exactly?
 
Grant said:
We/re not talking convictions here but supporting someone who is an obvious liar, an incompetent and careless to the point of endangering her country. Does she have to be convicted by a jury of her peers and spend time in the slammer before you recognize her obvious character and intelligence flaws?
Click to expand...

So she has not been found have done anything illegal with emails, but we should yell and scream about them just cuz.....
 
TheDemSocialist said:
So she has not been found have done anything illegal with emails, but we should yell and scream about them just cuz.....
Click to expand...
Yes, just cuz she lied and top secret documents were involved. If your response is to yell and scream it wouldn't surprise me.
 
MolonLabe said:
Everyone knew that Lerner nor anyone else at the IRS was ever going to be charged by the Obama DOJ. Probably because it would have come out just how far up the chain the corruption went. She made 155 visits to the White House. Far more than any other head of the IRS. I don't think they were discussing college football.
Click to expand...

lerner was not the irs commissioner
 
justabubba said:
that SO sums up today's political reality

hoping Obama will do the right thing and assure prosecution is fair and impartial so that the trial will not be seen as a politically motivated GOP vendetta ... thereby opening the door of the white house to Bernie
Click to expand...

We can dream. :)
 
:roll: we knew this already. Yes, Hillary and/or her staff broke multiple federal laws and put our national security at risk while doing so. Yes, her supporters will point out that she hasn't been formally charged by The Obama Administration as though that were somehow exculpating. Yes, Hillary is going to get away with it Because Hillary.
 
Grant said:
Yes, just cuz she lied and top secret documents were involved. If your response is to yell and scream it wouldn't surprise me.
Click to expand...

So I should condemn her for lying? Ok, I condemn her for lying about one or two emails that were classified. :party
 
Montecresto said:
Well can we just hope together that if wrongdoing, worse, illegal behavior is proven that it happens before she becomes the nominee?
Click to expand...

That is what I am thinking. It would be good for the Republicans but not good for the Democrats.
 
Mr Person said:
Man, are you kidding me? You were just lecturing me (and other posters) on how I don't have any business forming a personal opinion about the probable guilt of William Porter on involuntary manslaughter of Freddie Gray because I only have access to news reports about trial testimony, but I didn't actually sit through the entire trial as is my right as a member of the public.

What business do you have speculating as to how much "teeth" - indications of guilt - are in this? You have even less access to the Benghazi committee materials than I do to Porter trial testimony because some of the former is classified and there hasn't been a trial!












I don't know what the statute of limitations is on whatever charges they might consider, but I'd be generally willing to bet that it's long enough that an incoming R - or even an incoming D who'd want to distance themselves from Obama - could charge her.

We may yet see.
Click to expand...

Where did I say she was guilty?
 
NonoBadDog said:
That is what I am thinking. It would be good for the Republicans but not good for the Democrats.
Click to expand...

What do you mean, it would be great for democrats, it would mean Sanders was the nominee!
 
Montecresto said:
What do you mean, it would be great for democrats, it would mean Sanders was the nominee!
Click to expand...

Not if it happened after the primaries. That has never happened before. There might be arguments that Bernie couldn't step in as the nominee. I haven't studied up on it however so I might be totally off the track.
 
NonoBadDog said:
Not if it happened after the primaries. That has never happened before. There might be arguments that Bernie couldn't step in as the nominee. I haven't studied up on it however so I might be totally off the track.
Click to expand...

But I just said let's hope it's before. :shrug:
 
TheDemSocialist said:
So I should condemn her for lying? Ok, I condemn her for lying about one or two emails that were classified. :party
Click to expand...
Actually there were hundreds, there were many other lies, and this demonstrates why LIVs will vote for Hillary Clinton.
 
TheDemSocialist said:
Doubt anything is going to happen from this
Click to expand...

I agree.

This woman could murder someone in the middle of Times Square at rush hour, in front of thousands and on video and still walk away scott free...and still get 50% in the next poll.
 
Montecresto said:
Well can we just hope together that if wrongdoing, worse, illegal behavior is proven that it happens before she becomes the nominee?
Click to expand...

If the Democrats nominate her at this point they have nobody to blame but themselves if the investigation blows up in their face.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom