CIA: Trey Gowdy Altered Documents To Frame Hillary Clinton

[Wry Catcher]

1. 1st of all, Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) is a Lying,

Your desperation is showing. This has nothing to do with Cummings. Gowdy lied and the CIA proved it.

So what are you defending?

Has he been charged?

Charged with lying? Lying isnt a crime. He Lied.

What are you defending?

Kinda like when Hillary lied when she got that child molester off, when he was guilty?

Kinda like where is the background to your allegation? You're either a liar or have evidence to prove your allegation. Which is it?

Gee, on second thought, did Hillary defend Dennis Hastert? ...Oh, of course not, former speaker and serial molester Hastert was sentence to prison!

Judge sentences 'serial child molester' Hastert to 15 months

 

[jknowgood]

"Cummings went on to accuse Gowdy of making the false claims against Clinton in an attempt to diffuse controversy surround Republican Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s admission that the purpose of the Benghazi hearings was to discredit Clinton."

Rightwing partisan scum - there's no other way to describe it.

Character assassination like Reid did when he said a friend of his said Romney didn't pay taxes? He later admitted he lied to discredit Romney, I guess you call that left wing partisan scum? Right?

 

[jknowgood]

1. 1st of all, Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD) is a Lying,

Your desperation is showing. This has nothing to do with Cummings. Gowdy lied and the CIA proved it.

So what are you defending?

Has he been charged?

Charged with lying? Lying isnt a crime. He Lied.

What are you defending?

Kinda like when Hillary lied when she got that child molester off, when he was guilty?

Kinda like where is the background to your allegation? You're either a liar or have evidence to prove your allegation. Which is it?

It is known, even when there was a thread about it, you stupid liberals stu k up for her. There is even video of Hillary laughing about it.

 

[jknowgood]

Your desperation is showing. This has nothing to do with Cummings. Gowdy lied and the CIA proved it.

So what are you defending?

Has he been charged?

Charged with lying? Lying isnt a crime. He Lied.

What are you defending?

Kinda like when Hillary lied when she got that child molester off, when he was guilty?

Kinda like where is the background to your allegation? You're either a liar or have evidence to prove your allegation. Which is it?

Gee, on second thought, did Hillary defend Dennis Hastert? ...Oh, of course not, former speaker and serial molester Hastert was sentence to prison!

Judge sentences 'serial child molester' Hastert to 15 months

Well actually he should've been hung by a tree, but he got off easy. See I won't defend one of my own like you will.

 

[easyt65]

Your desperation is showing. This has nothing to do with Cummings. Gowdy lied and the CIA proved it.

So what are you defending?

Has he been charged?

Charged with lying? Lying isnt a crime. He Lied.

What are you defending?

Kinda like when Hillary lied when she got that child molester off, when he was guilty?

Kinda like where is the background to your allegation? You're either a liar or have evidence to prove your allegation. Which is it?

Gee, on second thought, did Hillary defend Dennis Hastert? ...Oh, of course not, former speaker and serial molester Hastert was sentence to prison!

Judge sentences 'serial child molester' Hastert to 15 months

"Gee, on second thought, did Hillary defend Dennis Hastert?"

No, but she sure as hell defended her life-long , sexually assaulting, sexually harassing, raping, adulterous, pedophile-practicing husband WHIL demonizing, intimidating, and threatening his victims.

 

[NightFox]

I'd love for the right, people like you, to be honest, forthright and eschew character assassination. Of course if forced to do so you would be effectively silenced.

ROFLMAO! Pot meet Kettle.. the empirical evidence strongly suggests you're both black.

It's a strange election. It was painful to see TeamObama nail a pretty decent guy as a plutocrat who only cared for himself. Mitt's probably become a plutocrat, but he's never been just about himself. Although, Mitt created the narrative himself with that bs about the 47%.

The Clinton machine is the Clinton machine, but going after Donald on his lack of character is hardly being dirty. It's simply being truthful. It may be the only thing HRC is truthful about, beyond appointing judges who will keep Roe and get rid of Citizens United

Strange election season indeed, possibly with a silver lining though; it just might be that the base electorate is finally waking up to the fact that both parties are nothing more than vast criminal enterprises whose sole focus is gaining, retaining and enhancing the power of the political class and their pals.

The downside is that having come to that realization they're doing the exact opposite of what's needed to begin to address the situation, nominating a demagogue clown and a career criminal with a court jester socialist thrown into the mix just for fun? Does anybody really think that's going to help cure what ails the Republic?

 

[Wry Catcher]

I'd love for the right, people like you, to be honest, forthright and eschew character assassination. Of course if forced to do so you would be effectively silenced.

ROFLMAO! Pot meet Kettle.. the empirical evidence strongly suggests you're both black.

It's a strange election. It was painful to see TeamObama nail a pretty decent guy as a plutocrat who only cared for himself. Mitt's probably become a plutocrat, but he's never been just about himself. Although, Mitt created the narrative himself with that bs about the 47%.

The Clinton machine is the Clinton machine, but going after Donald on his lack of character is hardly being dirty. It's simply being truthful. It may be the only thing HRC is truthful about, beyond appointing judges who will keep Roe and get rid of Citizens United

Mitt created the comment about himself (as a plutocrat) with his honest statement about his opinion on the 47%, IMO. He simply did so to what he thought were people who all felt the same and held (and still hold) the 47% in disdain.

Supporting the law (Roe) and working to repeal the decisions in CU and McCutcheon (past by five activist and partisan justices) are good things, if one supports democracy in America.

 

[Wry Catcher]

"Cummings went on to accuse Gowdy of making the false claims against Clinton in an attempt to diffuse controversy surround Republican Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s admission that the purpose of the Benghazi hearings was to discredit Clinton."

Rightwing partisan scum - there's no other way to describe it.

Character assassination like Reid did when he said a friend of his said Romney didn't pay taxes? He later admitted he lied to discredit Romney, I guess you call that left wing partisan scum? Right?

I might if you had posted evidence of this alleged behavior. Both, BTW, are Mormons (if that has anything to do with left or right leanings).

 

[daws101]

Your desperation is showing. This has nothing to do with Cummings. Gowdy lied and the CIA proved it.

So what are you defending?

Has he been charged?

Charged with lying? Lying isnt a crime. He Lied.

What are you defending?

Kinda like when Hillary lied when she got that child molester off, when he was guilty?

Classic toss shit around a see what sticks manuever!

But man did THAT one sure stick.

Only in your delusions of grandeur.

 

[daws101]

Your desperation is showing. This has nothing to do with Cummings. Gowdy lied and the CIA proved it.

So what are you defending?

Has he been charged?

Charged with lying? Lying isnt a crime. He Lied.

What are you defending?

Kinda like when Hillary lied when she got that child molester off, when he was guilty?

Kinda like where is the background to your allegation? You're either a liar or have evidence to prove your allegation. Which is it?

It is known, even when there was a thread about it, you stupid liberals stu k up for her. There is even video of Hillary laughing about it.

"It is known" is another way of saying it's total bullshit but I'm ignorant and desperate enough to believe it.

 

[PredFan]

So, Hillary destroys evidence and the investigators can't find enough to bring charges so that makes it a GOP boondoggle? Only a democrat would be so brazenly dishonest.

 

[daws101]

So, Hillary destroys evidence and the investigators can't find enough to bring charges so that makes it a GOP boondoggle? Only a democrat would be so brazenly dishonest.

That's one way to look at it.
Reality might be another.

 

[PredFan]

So, Hillary destroys evidence and the investigators can't find enough to bring charges so that makes it a GOP boondoggle? Only a democrat would be so brazenly dishonest.

That's one way to look at it.
Reality might be another.

Hey idiot!

The reality is that Clinton destroyed evidence.

 

[daws101]

So, Hillary destroys evidence and the investigators can't find enough to bring charges so that makes it a GOP boondoggle? Only a democrat would be so brazenly dishonest.

That's one way to look at it.
Reality might be another.

Hey idiot!

The reality is that Clinton destroyed evidence.

False the reality is that all emails get tossed in a box in no particular order and are stored for a time and then distroyed so more files can be added.
It's called limited shelf life.



Hillary would not know what files were distroyed or when they were.

 

[Dragonlady]

It's being investigated by the FBI. If they haven't made a determination yet, how can the CIA? Hillary has all her emails sent to her private server, how is it possible none were classified? And why did she delete most of them?

She didn't delete "most of them". She deleted 30,000 "personal" emails. She turned over 60,000 emails to State. So no, she did not delete most of them.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

CIA: Trey Gowdy Altered Documents To Frame Hillary Clinton

and it keeps getting better over benghazi read it a weep repub-lie tards

“Despite claims that the Committee would be run with integrity, Republicans have engaged in a series of selective leaks of inaccurate and incomplete information in an effort to attack Secretary Clinton with unsubstantiated or previously debunked allegations,” the Democrats wrote.

On October 7, 2015, Gowdy sent a response to ranking minority member Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD), stating that he was “disheartened at the nature and tone of Monday’s letter from your Democrat colleagues and you.”

In the letter, Gowdy referred extensively to Sidney Blumenthal, a long-time confidante and adviser to the Clintons, who served as assistant and senior adviser to Bill Clinton from August 1997 until January 2001.

In addition to Sidney Blumenthal’s business interests, Secretary Clinton also apparently received classified information from Blumenthal- information she should have known was classified at the time she received it. In one email, Blumenthal writes “Tyler spoke to a colleague currently at CIA, who told him the agency had been dependent for intelligence from [redacted due to sources and methods].”1 This information, the name of a human source, is some of the most protected information in our intelligence community, the release of which could jeopardize not only national security but also human lives. Armed with that information, Secretary Clinton forwarded the email to a colleague–debunking her claim that she never sent any classified information from her private email address.1 There may be other instances as well where Secretary Clinton passed on classified information she received from Sidney Blumenthal. [emphasis added]





However, as Newsweek reported on Sunday, the CIA informed the House Select Committee on Benghazi on Saturday that Gowdy’s claims were false:

Indeed, according to committee correspondence reviewed by Newsweek, the CIA did tell the panel on Saturday that it had reviewed 127 emails between Clinton and her close friend and outside adviser, Sidney Blumenthal, and none of it was deemed classified.

“The CIA reviewed the material in question and informed State that it required no redactions,” the agency informed Susan Sachsman Grooms, staff director and general counsel for the panel’s Democrats, on October 17.

On Sunday, Cummings sent a letter to Gowdy to correct the public record in light of the fact that the CIA had debunked Chairman Gowdy’s accusations.

Cummings began, writing that: “On October 7, 2015, you sent me a 13-page letter making a grave new accusation against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Specifically, you accused her of compromising national security and endangering lives,” adding that, “The problem with your accusation—as with so many others during this investigation—is that you failed to check your facts before you made it, and the CIA has now informed the Select Committee that you were wrong. I believe your accusations were irresponsible, and I believe you owe the Secretary an immediate apology.”




Cummings went on to accuse Gowdy of making the false claims against Clinton in an attempt to diffuse controversy surround Republican Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s admission that the purpose of the Benghazi hearings was to discredit Clinton.

It appears that your letter was rushed out to the press to counter the public firestorm caused by Republican Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s stark admission that Republicans are using millions of taxpayer dollars to damage Secretary Clinton’s bid for president. However, your letter only provided further evidence of this fact.

Speaking directly to Gowdy’s accusations against Clinton, Cummings wrote:

In your letter on October 7, 2015, you stated that Secretary Clinton received an email from Sidney Blumenthal on March 18, 2011, that included the name of someone who purportedly provided information to the CIA. You asserted that this information was classified, arguing that Secretary Clinton “received classified information from Blumenthal—information she should have known was classified at the time she received it.” You then alleged:

Armed with that information, Secretary Clinton forwarded that email to a colleague—debunking her claim that she never sent any classified information from her private email address.

In your letter, you went to great lengths to highlight the gravity of your accusation, stating:

This information, the name of a human source, is some of the most protected information in our intelligence community, the release of which could jeopardize not only national security but human lives.

Cummings then dropped the bomb – accusing Gowdy of altering documents in an effort to frame Clinton:

To further inflate your claim, you placed your own redactions over the name of the individual with the words, “redacted due to sources and methods.” To be clear, these redactions were not made, and these words were not added, by any agency of the federal government responsible for enforcing classification guidelines.

Cummings continued, emphasizing the fact that the CIA had thoroughly debunked Gowdy’s false claims against Clinton:

Contrary to your claims, the CIA yesterday informed both the Republican and Democratic staffs of the Select Committee that they do not consider the information you highlighted in your letter to be classified. Specifically, the CIA confirmed that “the State Department consulted with the CIA on this production, the CIA reviewed these documents, and the CIA made no redactions to protect classified information.”

Unfortunately, you sent your letter on October 7 without checking first with the CIA. Now that we have done so, we have learned that your accusations were incorrect.

Cummings concluded his letter, writing that Gowdy’s actions have “brought discredit” on the Benghazi investigation and has “undermine[d] the integrity” of the committee and the House of Representatives itself:

Unfortunately, the standard operating procedure of this Select Committee has become to put out information publicly that is inaccurate and out of context in order to attack Secretary Clinton for political reasons. These repeated actions bring discredit on this investigation and undermine the integrity of the Select Committee and the House of Representatives.

Mountain out of molehill.

Guess what?

There is enough evidence to send her off to the pokey for a long time.

Had it been you, you would this very day be being poked in the pokey.

False! You need to learn the difference between evidence and allegation.

Then you have nothing with which to be concerned.

 

[daws101]

CIA: Trey Gowdy Altered Documents To Frame Hillary Clinton

and it keeps getting better over benghazi read it a weep repub-lie tards

“Despite claims that the Committee would be run with integrity, Republicans have engaged in a series of selective leaks of inaccurate and incomplete information in an effort to attack Secretary Clinton with unsubstantiated or previously debunked allegations,” the Democrats wrote.

On October 7, 2015, Gowdy sent a response to ranking minority member Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD), stating that he was “disheartened at the nature and tone of Monday’s letter from your Democrat colleagues and you.”

In the letter, Gowdy referred extensively to Sidney Blumenthal, a long-time confidante and adviser to the Clintons, who served as assistant and senior adviser to Bill Clinton from August 1997 until January 2001.

In addition to Sidney Blumenthal’s business interests, Secretary Clinton also apparently received classified information from Blumenthal- information she should have known was classified at the time she received it. In one email, Blumenthal writes “Tyler spoke to a colleague currently at CIA, who told him the agency had been dependent for intelligence from [redacted due to sources and methods].”1 This information, the name of a human source, is some of the most protected information in our intelligence community, the release of which could jeopardize not only national security but also human lives. Armed with that information, Secretary Clinton forwarded the email to a colleague–debunking her claim that she never sent any classified information from her private email address.1 There may be other instances as well where Secretary Clinton passed on classified information she received from Sidney Blumenthal. [emphasis added]





However, as Newsweek reported on Sunday, the CIA informed the House Select Committee on Benghazi on Saturday that Gowdy’s claims were false:

Indeed, according to committee correspondence reviewed by Newsweek, the CIA did tell the panel on Saturday that it had reviewed 127 emails between Clinton and her close friend and outside adviser, Sidney Blumenthal, and none of it was deemed classified.

“The CIA reviewed the material in question and informed State that it required no redactions,” the agency informed Susan Sachsman Grooms, staff director and general counsel for the panel’s Democrats, on October 17.

On Sunday, Cummings sent a letter to Gowdy to correct the public record in light of the fact that the CIA had debunked Chairman Gowdy’s accusations.

Cummings began, writing that: “On October 7, 2015, you sent me a 13-page letter making a grave new accusation against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Specifically, you accused her of compromising national security and endangering lives,” adding that, “The problem with your accusation—as with so many others during this investigation—is that you failed to check your facts before you made it, and the CIA has now informed the Select Committee that you were wrong. I believe your accusations were irresponsible, and I believe you owe the Secretary an immediate apology.”




Cummings went on to accuse Gowdy of making the false claims against Clinton in an attempt to diffuse controversy surround Republican Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s admission that the purpose of the Benghazi hearings was to discredit Clinton.

It appears that your letter was rushed out to the press to counter the public firestorm caused by Republican Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s stark admission that Republicans are using millions of taxpayer dollars to damage Secretary Clinton’s bid for president. However, your letter only provided further evidence of this fact.

Speaking directly to Gowdy’s accusations against Clinton, Cummings wrote:

In your letter on October 7, 2015, you stated that Secretary Clinton received an email from Sidney Blumenthal on March 18, 2011, that included the name of someone who purportedly provided information to the CIA. You asserted that this information was classified, arguing that Secretary Clinton “received classified information from Blumenthal—information she should have known was classified at the time she received it.” You then alleged:

Armed with that information, Secretary Clinton forwarded that email to a colleague—debunking her claim that she never sent any classified information from her private email address.

In your letter, you went to great lengths to highlight the gravity of your accusation, stating:

This information, the name of a human source, is some of the most protected information in our intelligence community, the release of which could jeopardize not only national security but human lives.

Cummings then dropped the bomb – accusing Gowdy of altering documents in an effort to frame Clinton:

To further inflate your claim, you placed your own redactions over the name of the individual with the words, “redacted due to sources and methods.” To be clear, these redactions were not made, and these words were not added, by any agency of the federal government responsible for enforcing classification guidelines.

Cummings continued, emphasizing the fact that the CIA had thoroughly debunked Gowdy’s false claims against Clinton:

Contrary to your claims, the CIA yesterday informed both the Republican and Democratic staffs of the Select Committee that they do not consider the information you highlighted in your letter to be classified. Specifically, the CIA confirmed that “the State Department consulted with the CIA on this production, the CIA reviewed these documents, and the CIA made no redactions to protect classified information.”

Unfortunately, you sent your letter on October 7 without checking first with the CIA. Now that we have done so, we have learned that your accusations were incorrect.

Cummings concluded his letter, writing that Gowdy’s actions have “brought discredit” on the Benghazi investigation and has “undermine[d] the integrity” of the committee and the House of Representatives itself:

Unfortunately, the standard operating procedure of this Select Committee has become to put out information publicly that is inaccurate and out of context in order to attack Secretary Clinton for political reasons. These repeated actions bring discredit on this investigation and undermine the integrity of the Select Committee and the House of Representatives.

Mountain out of molehill.

Guess what?

There is enough evidence to send her off to the pokey for a long time.

Had it been you, you would this very day be being poked in the pokey.

False! You need to learn the difference between evidence and allegation.

Then you have nothing with which to be concerned.

Never said or implied I was concerned .
I just enjoy watching you assholes rationalizing and running around like beheaded chickens.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

CIA: Trey Gowdy Altered Documents To Frame Hillary Clinton

and it keeps getting better over benghazi read it a weep repub-lie tards

“Despite claims that the Committee would be run with integrity, Republicans have engaged in a series of selective leaks of inaccurate and incomplete information in an effort to attack Secretary Clinton with unsubstantiated or previously debunked allegations,” the Democrats wrote.

On October 7, 2015, Gowdy sent a response to ranking minority member Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-MD), stating that he was “disheartened at the nature and tone of Monday’s letter from your Democrat colleagues and you.”

In the letter, Gowdy referred extensively to Sidney Blumenthal, a long-time confidante and adviser to the Clintons, who served as assistant and senior adviser to Bill Clinton from August 1997 until January 2001.

In addition to Sidney Blumenthal’s business interests, Secretary Clinton also apparently received classified information from Blumenthal- information she should have known was classified at the time she received it. In one email, Blumenthal writes “Tyler spoke to a colleague currently at CIA, who told him the agency had been dependent for intelligence from [redacted due to sources and methods].”1 This information, the name of a human source, is some of the most protected information in our intelligence community, the release of which could jeopardize not only national security but also human lives. Armed with that information, Secretary Clinton forwarded the email to a colleague–debunking her claim that she never sent any classified information from her private email address.1 There may be other instances as well where Secretary Clinton passed on classified information she received from Sidney Blumenthal. [emphasis added]





However, as Newsweek reported on Sunday, the CIA informed the House Select Committee on Benghazi on Saturday that Gowdy’s claims were false:

Indeed, according to committee correspondence reviewed by Newsweek, the CIA did tell the panel on Saturday that it had reviewed 127 emails between Clinton and her close friend and outside adviser, Sidney Blumenthal, and none of it was deemed classified.

“The CIA reviewed the material in question and informed State that it required no redactions,” the agency informed Susan Sachsman Grooms, staff director and general counsel for the panel’s Democrats, on October 17.

On Sunday, Cummings sent a letter to Gowdy to correct the public record in light of the fact that the CIA had debunked Chairman Gowdy’s accusations.

Cummings began, writing that: “On October 7, 2015, you sent me a 13-page letter making a grave new accusation against former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Specifically, you accused her of compromising national security and endangering lives,” adding that, “The problem with your accusation—as with so many others during this investigation—is that you failed to check your facts before you made it, and the CIA has now informed the Select Committee that you were wrong. I believe your accusations were irresponsible, and I believe you owe the Secretary an immediate apology.”




Cummings went on to accuse Gowdy of making the false claims against Clinton in an attempt to diffuse controversy surround Republican Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s admission that the purpose of the Benghazi hearings was to discredit Clinton.

It appears that your letter was rushed out to the press to counter the public firestorm caused by Republican Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s stark admission that Republicans are using millions of taxpayer dollars to damage Secretary Clinton’s bid for president. However, your letter only provided further evidence of this fact.

Speaking directly to Gowdy’s accusations against Clinton, Cummings wrote:

In your letter on October 7, 2015, you stated that Secretary Clinton received an email from Sidney Blumenthal on March 18, 2011, that included the name of someone who purportedly provided information to the CIA. You asserted that this information was classified, arguing that Secretary Clinton “received classified information from Blumenthal—information she should have known was classified at the time she received it.” You then alleged:

Armed with that information, Secretary Clinton forwarded that email to a colleague—debunking her claim that she never sent any classified information from her private email address.

In your letter, you went to great lengths to highlight the gravity of your accusation, stating:

This information, the name of a human source, is some of the most protected information in our intelligence community, the release of which could jeopardize not only national security but human lives.

Cummings then dropped the bomb – accusing Gowdy of altering documents in an effort to frame Clinton:

To further inflate your claim, you placed your own redactions over the name of the individual with the words, “redacted due to sources and methods.” To be clear, these redactions were not made, and these words were not added, by any agency of the federal government responsible for enforcing classification guidelines.

Cummings continued, emphasizing the fact that the CIA had thoroughly debunked Gowdy’s false claims against Clinton:

Contrary to your claims, the CIA yesterday informed both the Republican and Democratic staffs of the Select Committee that they do not consider the information you highlighted in your letter to be classified. Specifically, the CIA confirmed that “the State Department consulted with the CIA on this production, the CIA reviewed these documents, and the CIA made no redactions to protect classified information.”

Unfortunately, you sent your letter on October 7 without checking first with the CIA. Now that we have done so, we have learned that your accusations were incorrect.

Cummings concluded his letter, writing that Gowdy’s actions have “brought discredit” on the Benghazi investigation and has “undermine[d] the integrity” of the committee and the House of Representatives itself:

Unfortunately, the standard operating procedure of this Select Committee has become to put out information publicly that is inaccurate and out of context in order to attack Secretary Clinton for political reasons. These repeated actions bring discredit on this investigation and undermine the integrity of the Select Committee and the House of Representatives.

Mountain out of molehill.

Guess what?

There is enough evidence to send her off to the pokey for a long time.

Had it been you, you would this very day be being poked in the pokey.

False! You need to learn the difference between evidence and allegation.

Then you have nothing with which to be concerned.

Never said or implied I was concerned .
I just enjoy watching you assholes rationalizing and running around like beheaded chickens.

You are expressly concerned, lad. Now change your shorts please.

 

[PredFan]

So, Hillary destroys evidence and the investigators can't find enough to bring charges so that makes it a GOP boondoggle? Only a democrat would be so brazenly dishonest.

That's one way to look at it.
Reality might be another.

Hey idiot!

The reality is that Clinton destroyed evidence.

False the reality is that all emails get tossed in a box in no particular order and are stored for a time and then distroyed so more files can be added.
It's called limited shelf life.



Hillary would not know what files were distroyed or when they were.

Bull shit. She destroyed evidence, she even admitted it when she told the committee that the e-mails she destroyed were personal and she didn't want them aired. We have only her word on that. Clearly, she destroyed evidence.

 

[daws101]

So, Hillary destroys evidence and the investigators can't find enough to bring charges so that makes it a GOP boondoggle? Only a democrat would be so brazenly dishonest.

That's one way to look at it.
Reality might be another.

Hey idiot!

The reality is that Clinton destroyed evidence.

False the reality is that all emails get tossed in a box in no particular order and are stored for a time and then distroyed so more files can be added.
It's called limited shelf life.



Hillary would not know what files were distroyed or when they were.

Bull shit. She destroyed evidence, she even admitted it when she told the committee that the e-mails she destroyed were personal and she didn't want them aired. We have only her word on that. Clearly, she destroyed evidence.

Didn't watch the clip did you .