Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
2016 Postmortem
In reply to the discussion: I have two questions about the email controversy [View all]VulgarPoet
(2,872 posts)15. Caveat Emptor.
Such a nice person...
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
116 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
No, the issue is destroy Hillary, at any and all costs. Even if that means world war three
Jackie Wilson Said
May 2016
#14
Your response was funny. Destroying Hillary is what matters, I know.
Jackie Wilson Said
May 2016
#26
Yes, and Obama's FBI and DOJ are not going to destroy the Dem party and its . . .
brush
May 2016
#58
She may have allowed passage of sensitive material that wasn't marked. Marking is not the measure.
CentralCoaster
May 2016
#19
Remarkable, and it sounds real and sincere. The goal to make sure the Democrat does not occupy
Jackie Wilson Said
May 2016
#27
She ran the business of this country on personally owned equipment in the basement of her home.
CentralCoaster
May 2016
#32
I know you must really want Drumpf if you continually, repeatedly post stuff about how
Jackie Wilson Said
May 2016
#60
Calling me stupid wont change the fact there are people here who will work against
Jackie Wilson Said
May 2016
#67
No, "the worst" that you describe is less bad than the actual facts on the ground.
lumberjack_jeff
May 2016
#73
Lol! Just because you are oblivious and fail to even do a rudimentary search doesn't make you right.
NWCorona
May 2016
#40
Answer: she violated her security agreement that says classified is "marked or unmarked" classified
leveymg
May 2016
#56
Seems she conspired to spy on the CIA using the Clinton Foundation as a front to cover Blumenthal
HereSince1628
May 2016
#104
What she did was allowed her server to be a conduit for unauthorized swapping of classified info
leveymg
May 2016
#106
It seems she conspired to get him -paid- for doing that. That's beyond simply unauthorized swapping
HereSince1628
May 2016
#111
I'm just describing the charges most likely to be cited in the upcoming FBI report
leveymg
May 2016
#112
Yep. A nice warm office in which collect and communicate information from CIA leaks.
HereSince1628
May 2016
#116
declassify date codes indicate that several were born classified...you forgot the links
Bill USA
May 2016
#90
omg, this stuff is common knowledge to anybody who has been following the issue at all.
ContinentalOp
May 2016
#63
Think about that sentence "Well they were marked classified after the fact" Kind of redundant AGH
Joob
May 2016
#11
If you truly care about transparency, then I don't know why you want to defend secrecy so badly
ContinentalOp
May 2016
#44
Neither of your questions gets at the fact that Hillary blatantly and intentionally violated FOIA
Attorney in Texas
May 2016
#34
Plus the "was it classified at the time" argument is legally irrelevant, particularly since all her
JudyM
May 2016
#68
There are over three dozen lawsuits where State is going to get hugely fined because of Hillary's
Attorney in Texas
May 2016
#97
It is unclear what the evidence will show in the criminal cases, but the evidence is clear Hillary
Attorney in Texas
May 2016
#99
Classification level is not, as is often mistakenly stated here, based on marking, but on content.
JudyM
May 2016
#72
You are right. But she also had a legal duty to report this breach of security, and failed to do so
leveymg
May 2016
#64
I doubt she needed Blumenthal to access materials on the interagency classified system.
leveymg
May 2016
#83
And there is no evidence that she used her server to communicate with the Commander of USCC.
pnwmom
May 2016
#103
In what way does the article disprove the fact that Petraeus and Clinton corresponded insecurely?
lumberjack_jeff
May 2016
#109
So you are not going to read it. Your mind is made up so further discussion is pointless. n/t
pnwmom
May 2016
#110