This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
No, it can't. The same reason that the Democrats can't just dump Hillary - they have a large base of supporters and you'll lose a large percentage of them if you snatch the nomination away. You'd need some major event to dislodge either of them at this point - its just not going to happen.
That's connecting dots about which you have no idea. We've no idea what was in those classified emails and won't for quite some time.
So when Hillary is elected, will the House Republicans (Cause they will probably keep the house) start having endless special committees' about Hilary's Emails? Just like Benghazi?
And the people acting like Hillary committed double homicide would be apologizing for Trump and acting like it was no big deal. It's a two-way street.
Once the FBI concluded that the deletions were not criminal in nature, it meant that "obstruction of justice" was no longer on the table.
It's not as big, no. However anything corporate, Foundation or Teneo could cause problems for her. However IMO there is zero chance the FBI would go back and investigate her again stemming form any of this.
Makes sense and rational. It is interesting that Heather Samuelson was in the final interview with Hillary though, she handled the first round of the deletions.
Any Congressional investigation will be just as partisan and just as worthless as the Benghazi ones. They won't effect her chances, though it would be sweet if Democrats offered up a bipartisan committee in exchange for some reasonable gun laws.
From occasionally perusing this thread, I would have thought that they would've found copious amounts of obstruction.
Wouldn't be surprised. - However I think we can be sure Hillary or Bill will do something else entirely newly dumb and the GOP will drive it over a cliff whatever it is and we will be wrapped up in more dysfunction.
The citizenry is a result of its leadership. So no.Captain Cranks said:
I was responding to your saying: " None of the emails were marked classified at the time."
- Comey (and small number could be a handful or a small percentage which could be quite a bit).
Yeah there were a few hundred that were classified, but that doesn't mean they were "marked" classified. My point was that many of them were emails that her aides forwarded, she never even saw them. In government it is common practice that aides will handle a significant number of email traffic, the Secretary of State reads only a fraction of incoming emails every day. I'm not sure people understand that. Doesn't excuse it either BTW, those emails should have never been on a non secured server.
"And she's completely scandal-free, ladies and gentleman, as of a couple hours ago!"
Wait stop - I misread your post: yes, Comey has said that some were MARKED classified.
Yes some were marked, we're not in disagreement here I was just trying to illuminate the tidbit about the aides.
The definitions in multiple legal dictionaries seem to run totally contrary to your experience.
Comey's statement is somewhat vague about how the emails were marked. He said that some emails "bore markings indicating the presence of classified information". But what does that mean? Were they marked "classified" in the subject line? Did they have one of those red flags next to them? Or did the sender put a
