The AP in deep doo-doo for it's misleading Hillary Clinton "Clinton Foundation" Exposé.

[Ernie S.]

We DO know a lot of what hillary clinton sent. According to the FBI Director, some of it was classified.
So, we really can't say what Powell sent, can we. Let's suppose he did send a classified document or 2. Does that make hillary sending secrets OK? THAT was the question you are avoiding, idiot.
Cain slew Abel. Did that make murder OK for everyone else? Or just for Democrats?

Most of the emails sent by top government officials are replies and forwards. Typical an undersecretary, or someone on the staff would send an email with attached emails and documents for the boss to review or make a decision as to disposition. The boss would reply or forward, with a message. When you reply or forward all messages and attachments in the chain are sent. The FBI never made it clear whether the classified information in the Clinton emails were written by her or were just part of the chain attached to her message. If they were part of the chain, then I can understand why Clinton might say that she did not send any classified information because the classified information may have not been in the email she wrote but rather in the attached emails and documents which she may have not even read.

I can't really see someone at her level creating or attaching classified documents to her emails. It seems much more likely that classified documents were sent to her in email chains and she either replied or forwarded them.

Just like in this message chain there are 6 or 7 messages, the only message I read is one I'm replying to. I have no idea what is the other messages, yet when I rely they will all be sent with my reply.

It makes little difference whether she originated the email or not. Most likely, if she didn't, the document was sent from a secure server. Had it been in turn forwarded to the same secure server, there would be no, or infinitesimally small chance of classified information getting into the wrong hands.
Once the document left a secure server and landed on a sever in a basement bathroom in Chappaqua, national security was put at risk.

Oh, so now it doesn't make any difference. Got it!

If she "forwarded" an email with classified information, she did, in fact, send email with classified information, did she not?
At interest here is protecting sensative information from getting into the wrong hands. RULES are in place to prevent that. hillary clinton violated the rules. It is irrelevant who originated an email chain or whether or not previous Secretaries of State used non government email servers. What IS relevant, is the fact that hillary clinton sent and received classified and other sensitive documents via an unsecured, non-government email server that she attempted to wipe clean once the story came out.

It's not reasonable to expect that a Secretary of State that receives tens of thousands of emails a year is going to check every email in a chain along with all attachments.

It's very reasonable that she would have, along with staff, review sent, received and forwarded emails once the scandal broke and before lying about it.

 

[Flopper]

Most of the emails sent by top government officials are replies and forwards. Typical an undersecretary, or someone on the staff would send an email with attached emails and documents for the boss to review or make a decision as to disposition. The boss would reply or forward, with a message. When you reply or forward all messages and attachments in the chain are sent. The FBI never made it clear whether the classified information in the Clinton emails were written by her or were just part of the chain attached to her message. If they were part of the chain, then I can understand why Clinton might say that she did not send any classified information because the classified information may have not been in the email she wrote but rather in the attached emails and documents which she may have not even read.

I can't really see someone at her level creating or attaching classified documents to her emails. It seems much more likely that classified documents were sent to her in email chains and she either replied or forwarded them.

Just like in this message chain there are 6 or 7 messages, the only message I read is one I'm replying to. I have no idea what is the other messages, yet when I rely they will all be sent with my reply.

It makes little difference whether she originated the email or not. Most likely, if she didn't, the document was sent from a secure server. Had it been in turn forwarded to the same secure server, there would be no, or infinitesimally small chance of classified information getting into the wrong hands.
Once the document left a secure server and landed on a sever in a basement bathroom in Chappaqua, national security was put at risk.

My point is that if she did not write an email that contained classified information but rather just forwarded or replied to what was sent to her, then her statement that she didn't send classified information is reasonable if she didn't read the emails or attachments that were classified in the chain. For example, I might say I did not send anything to you about Powell or Rice, but if you look back to one of the earlier messages in this chain, you'll see their names mentioned.

The private email server was a mistake which she has admitted and apologized. Unlike her opponent, she does make mistakes and she acknowledges them and apologizes. Admitting your mistakes is a sign of strength not weakness, something Trump never learned.

One of the few things I admire about George Bush was his statement, "I thought it was more important to topple Saddam Hussein quickly than to prepare for the post-occupation. Clearly I was wrong, and I am sorry”.

She acknowledges them after lying about them for months, or she "can't recall" making them or finds a few at a time, never really complying with subpoenas... She is corrupt. You know it, but you will vote for her like the other Progressive pieces of shit that figure the ends justify the means.
I don't know what disgusts me more; her husband lying, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman..." or her telling parents and wives of her victims in the Benghazi fiasco that there loved ones died as a result of a video. You sir are beyond help and unworthy of more effort.

It is very likely that a person that handles tens of thousands of emails a year is not going to remember much of anything about emails sent 3 to 7 years ago. Saying Clinton is lying because she doesn't recall seeing a "C" in a heading of some of the emails in email chains is just stupid. I can't recall anything about emails I sent 7 years ago and I doubt anyone reading this can either.

She had ample time to check what she had sent. She KNEW she had sent classified info, but was confident at that point that she had destroyed all evidence, or could hide the truth by not conforming to court orders and subpoenas until she controlled the Justice Department.

By the way: What is it with the bold text all the time. Are you really so full of yourself that you consider all of your vomitus important enough to emphasize? It's not.

How do you know how much time she had to check embedded emails and attachments? Saying she knew she was sending classified information is your opinion. It's impossible to know what she thought. You accuse her of destroying evidence with no proof. In fact, you have no proof of anything except her admission that she should not have used a private email server.

 

[Ernie S.]

It makes little difference whether she originated the email or not. Most likely, if she didn't, the document was sent from a secure server. Had it been in turn forwarded to the same secure server, there would be no, or infinitesimally small chance of classified information getting into the wrong hands.
Once the document left a secure server and landed on a sever in a basement bathroom in Chappaqua, national security was put at risk.

My point is that if she did not write an email that contained classified information but rather just forwarded or replied to what was sent to her, then her statement that she didn't send classified information is reasonable if she didn't read the emails or attachments that were classified in the chain. For example, I might say I did not send anything to you about Powell or Rice, but if you look back to one of the earlier messages in this chain, you'll see their names mentioned.

The private email server was a mistake which she has admitted and apologized. Unlike her opponent, she does make mistakes and she acknowledges them and apologizes. Admitting your mistakes is a sign of strength not weakness, something Trump never learned.

One of the few things I admire about George Bush was his statement, "I thought it was more important to topple Saddam Hussein quickly than to prepare for the post-occupation. Clearly I was wrong, and I am sorry”.

She acknowledges them after lying about them for months, or she "can't recall" making them or finds a few at a time, never really complying with subpoenas... She is corrupt. You know it, but you will vote for her like the other Progressive pieces of shit that figure the ends justify the means.
I don't know what disgusts me more; her husband lying, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman..." or her telling parents and wives of her victims in the Benghazi fiasco that there loved ones died as a result of a video. You sir are beyond help and unworthy of more effort.

It is very likely that a person that handles tens of thousands of emails a year is not going to remember much of anything about emails sent 3 to 7 years ago. Saying Clinton is lying because she doesn't recall seeing a "C" in a heading of some of the emails in email chains is just stupid. I can't recall anything about emails I sent 7 years ago and I doubt anyone reading this can either.

She had ample time to check what she had sent. She KNEW she had sent classified info, but was confident at that point that she had destroyed all evidence, or could hide the truth by not conforming to court orders and subpoenas until she controlled the Justice Department.

By the way: What is it with the bold text all the time. Are you really so full of yourself that you consider all of your vomitus important enough to emphasize? It's not.

How do you know how much time she had to check embedded emails and attachments? Saying she knew she was sending classified information is your opinion. It's impossible to know what she thought. You accuse her of destroying evidence with no proof. In fact, you have no proof of anything except her admission that she should not have used a private email server.

She dribbled them out a few at a time... WTF else was she doing with the ones she held back. Look Flipper, we know you know she's crooked as hell, but to you and your other Progressive dirt bag friends, the ends justifies the means.
She could pull out a gun at the debates and shoot Trump in the knee and your kind would say Trump shouldn't become POTUS due to disability.

 

[Flopper]

My point is that if she did not write an email that contained classified information but rather just forwarded or replied to what was sent to her, then her statement that she didn't send classified information is reasonable if she didn't read the emails or attachments that were classified in the chain. For example, I might say I did not send anything to you about Powell or Rice, but if you look back to one of the earlier messages in this chain, you'll see their names mentioned.

The private email server was a mistake which she has admitted and apologized. Unlike her opponent, she does make mistakes and she acknowledges them and apologizes. Admitting your mistakes is a sign of strength not weakness, something Trump never learned.

One of the few things I admire about George Bush was his statement, "I thought it was more important to topple Saddam Hussein quickly than to prepare for the post-occupation. Clearly I was wrong, and I am sorry”.

She acknowledges them after lying about them for months, or she "can't recall" making them or finds a few at a time, never really complying with subpoenas... She is corrupt. You know it, but you will vote for her like the other Progressive pieces of shit that figure the ends justify the means.
I don't know what disgusts me more; her husband lying, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman..." or her telling parents and wives of her victims in the Benghazi fiasco that there loved ones died as a result of a video. You sir are beyond help and unworthy of more effort.

It is very likely that a person that handles tens of thousands of emails a year is not going to remember much of anything about emails sent 3 to 7 years ago. Saying Clinton is lying because she doesn't recall seeing a "C" in a heading of some of the emails in email chains is just stupid. I can't recall anything about emails I sent 7 years ago and I doubt anyone reading this can either.

She had ample time to check what she had sent. She KNEW she had sent classified info, but was confident at that point that she had destroyed all evidence, or could hide the truth by not conforming to court orders and subpoenas until she controlled the Justice Department.

By the way: What is it with the bold text all the time. Are you really so full of yourself that you consider all of your vomitus important enough to emphasize? It's not.

How do you know how much time she had to check embedded emails and attachments? Saying she knew she was sending classified information is your opinion. It's impossible to know what she thought. You accuse her of destroying evidence with no proof. In fact, you have no proof of anything except her admission that she should not have used a private email server.

She dribbled them out a few at a time... WTF else was she doing with the ones she held back. Look Flipper, we know you know she's crooked as hell, but to you and your other Progressive dirt bag friends, the ends justifies the means.
She could pull out a gun at the debates and shoot Trump in the knee and your kind would say Trump shouldn't become POTUS due to disability.

No, I don't know she is crooked, at least no more so than most of Washington. I do know that she has been a major player in Washington politics for over 20 years, has been on the side of many issues such as women's rights, abortion, gun control, and healthcare, which has marked her as a target by Republicans. Having this women praised by the media for years, picked as the most influential, most admired, and most powerful women in the world drives republicans insane. Being the wife of one of the most popular modern day presidents and being the most qualified nominee for president in many years makes her truly dangerous to Republicans. Mercifully for Republicans, her long list of achievements are certainly marred by mistakes which provides them with fertile soil to grow scandals and accusation, most of which are nonsense.