[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
Corrupt Government Title: Hillary Clinton could face jail time as email scandal sparks legal challenges The Obama administration will soon find itself in court having to explain to federal judges why it never told anyone former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton used a secret email address, potentially spoiling dozens of open records requests, experts said Wednesday. And Mrs. Clinton could face up to three years in prison per message if she is found to have broken her word and handled classified information on the secret account, one open records expert told The Washington Times. The legal challenges have already begun, with The Associated Press filing a federal lawsuit saying the State Department has foiled five years’ worth of requests for Mrs. Clinton’s emails, but never told them or the court that she kept her own server — meaning that her emails weren’t being searched. Meanwhile, the White House tried to keep Mrs. Clinton at arm’s length, insisting she alone can answer questions about what she did, and saying that none of Mr. Obama’s aides were involved in helping her decide which emails to turn over to the State Department and which to delete. Mrs. Clinton’s office remained silent a day after the former first lady and potential 2016 presidential candidate held a press conference admitting she kept a private email server out of “convenience,” belatedly went through and found public records among her emails and then deleted nearly 32,000 emails she and her lawyers deemed private. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Hillary Clinton could face jail time The day that HELL freezes over ... to use a popular and over-used cliché.
#2. To: Pridie.Nones (#1) The day that HELL freezes over ... to use a popular and over-used cliché. Regardless. Her chances have gone way down. She looked terrible at that press conference. When she launches her campaign. This is all they are going to talk about. They can drip this stuff out for a long time.
#3. To: A K A Stone (#2) (Edited) I suppose you are attempting to become a soothsayer with your predictions and opinions. I wager you don't see how the political machine works, at all; let me put it this way, Hillary is a "shoe-in" as a Democratic nominee and because her political position has advantages over and above mere buzz-feed, gossip, rumour, or chit-chat.
#4. To: Pridie.Nones (#3) Hillary is a "shoe-in" She was a "shoe-in" in 2008 also. She still has the best shot of the D's. But she is beatable in the primaries and in the General. Just looking at her performance yesterday, it wasn't pretty.
#5. To: A K A Stone (#4) Just looking at her performance yesterday, it wasn't pretty. You mean to say someone's silly "publick opinion poll" at this early stage of a campaign? Most American's only go by name recognition and therefore they automatically and robotically side with a candidate based on personal experiences. America is doomed because of the lockstep monotone actions of the voters within the two party system, as a result.
#6. To: Pridie.Nones, A K A Stone (#3) let me put it this way, Hillary is a "shoe-in" as a Democratic nominee and because her political position has advantages over and above mere buzz-feed, gossip, rumour, or chit-chat. Hillary has her greatest advantage in fund raising. Challengers have difficulty finding enough money to do anything substantial. Her disadvantage is that she is a poor campaigner. Bill Clinton is a likeable rogue, Hillary is just tone deaf and not likeable. Her Democratic foes may derail her before she gets near a nomination.
#7. To: Pridie.Nones (#5) You mean to say someone's silly "publick opinion poll" at this early stage of a campaign? No this is what I'm saying. I have good insight into these things. I mean I thought Romney was going to win. Anyway. What I am saying is that her performance wasn't good. If she keeps looking like she looked yesterday. People will be turned off. She didn't look presidential at all. She looked old. She looked like she was dishonest. Say she dodges the legal axe which she probably will. The majority of people are still going to have a perception that she was covering something up and lying. That is setting in stone now. People may choose to block that out and vote for her anyway. But there will be that knowledge in the back of their mine. It is something that low info people can be made to understand easily. You know secret emails in her basement. What was she hiding.
#8. To: A K A Stone (#7) (Edited) I have good insight into these things. I mean I thought Romney was going to win. You failed your own perspective. I can't argue that position as you contradicted yourself.
Anyway. What I am saying is that her performance wasn't good. If she keeps looking like she looked yesterday. People will be turned off. She didn't look presidential at all. She looked old. She looked like she was dishonest. So what. Democrats find a way to remake a "hair day" for a popular candidate just like the Republicans.
Say she dodges the legal axe which she probably will. The majority of people are still going to have a perception that she was covering something up and lying. That is setting in stone now. People may choose to block that out and vote for her anyway. But there will be that knowledge in the back of their mine. It is something that low info people can be made to understand easily. Not at all. Only a minor fraction of people will consider the point as as important for a vote. here is why: email is cheap and easy. She setup her email account within her own controlled, personalized server, based on her own resources to ensure the integrity of her electronic transmissions. It may have NOT been surrepetious in nature; for the voting public, there is no admission of any wrong-doing irrespective of any Congressional fact finding. Nope, she is going to get off the hook. I wager 0bama shall suggest he personally gave her the permission to so as a publick officer.
You know secret emails in her basement. What was she hiding. Nope. So far, no admission of "guilt" or any serious fact finding.
#9. To: Pridie.Nones (#8) Nope, she is going to get off the hook. I wager 0bama shall suggest he personally gave her the permission to so as a publick officer. Maybe Obama is the one leaking and taking her out.
#10. To: Pridie.Nones (#8) Well you have good insight politically in my view. You may be right. I think she is damaged goods.
#11. To: nolu chan (#6) Hillary has her greatest advantage in fund raising. Too cool that American politicians are reduced to being highly paid actors on a political stage, correct? It is ironic that Americans want truth in political perspective and all they get are mere puppets mouthing a political machine that is completely disconnected from "truth," isn't it?
#12. To: Pridie.Nones, A K A Stone (#8) It may have NOT been surrepetious in nature; for the voting public, there is no admission of any wrong-doing irrespective of any Congressional fact finding. Can there be an OF-109 that does not show criminal wrongdoing? It is a mandatory form at separation from State, so its absence would also indicate wrongdoing. OF-109 Separation Statement
1. I have surrendered to responsible officials all classified or administratively controlled documents and material with which I was charged or which I had in my possession, and I am not retaining in my possession, custody, or control, documents or material containing classified or administratively controlled information furnished to me during the course of such employment or developed as a consequence thereof, including any diaries, memorandums of conversation, or other documents of a personal nature that contain classified or administratively controlled information.
#13. To: Pridie.Nones (#11) Too cool that American politicians are reduced to being highly paid actors on a political stage, correct? It is ironic that Americans want truth in political perspective and all they get are mere puppets mouthing a political machine that is completely disconnected from "truth," isn't it? As long as they keep giving it their vote, they will continue to get the government they vote for. Independents outnumber R's or D's but generally have no realistic other candidates to vote for.
#14. To: nolu chan (#12) Who suggests that Hillary maintained "classified" documents on her server? So far, there is no evidence other than suspicion.
#15. To: A K A Stone (#0) Hillary Clinton could face jail time as email scandal sparks legal challenges That's true. It's also true that the smoking hot brunette babe from The Blacklist could come by my house and sexually molest me the day before I am the sole winner of the Power Ball Lottery. I strongly suspect all these things will happen on the 31st of Feb. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012) #16. To: Pridie.Nones (#5) (Edited) Most American's only go by name recognition and therefore they automatically and robotically side with a candidate based on personal experiences. I personally know of a couple of people who voted for Boy Jorge because they thought he was Poppy. Which pretty much gives me brain freeze. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012) #17. To: sneakypete (#16) I personally know of a couple of people who voted for Boy Jorge because they thought he was Poppy. You are not alone.
#18. To: Pridie.Nones (#14) Who suggests that Hillary maintained "classified" documents on her server? So far, there is no evidence other than suspicion. Read it again. OF-109 Separation Statement
2. I have surrendered to responsible officials all unclassified documents and papers relating to the official business of the Government acquired by me while in the employ of the Department or USIA. Somebody suggested that there were at least 32,490 unclassified documents that she did not surrender. Did she sign the mandatory OF-109 at separation saying she had surrendered all such official documents, or did she somehow avoid completing the mandatory OF-109? A false statement offense is a felony carrying up to five years, or eight for some information.
#19. To: Pridie.Nones (#14) Who suggests that Hillary maintained "classified" documents on her server? So far, there is no evidence other than suspicion. Actually, the Guccifer hack of the Blumenthal email provides evidence of classified intelligence documents that were sent to Hillary. It does not prove that that they were received. The server (if not the paper dump) should tell whether they are there or not.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|