SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
No man, just the parts where Comey said material was classified SCI/NatSec material (110), the material classified below that (~2000+ Confidential), and what was marked (3, all Confidential) and where you may have disagreed with any of that beforehand.You mean on the content where you, among many others claimed since at least Jaunary that "everyone must agree" that there was no explaining away 2000+ emails yet I over and over assert that what was marked as classified for FOIA request and was inappropriately communicated in email were two different things. You know all the times that you argued that the judgment of a FOIA clerk superseded that of the Secretary pf State? Yep that was a win for the "everyone must agree" crowd and lost for me.
You mean where I was stating stuff that had too be dismissed as wrong because it "wasn't being reported anywhere" that only information that originated outside of State would be relevant because information inside of State's status was completely at Hillary's discretion? Another lose for me!
Maybe you mean where I stated that ultimately the question for "mishandling" seems to be whether or not there is an email or emails which contained information that "anyone trained in handling classified information" should have recognized as classified. That remains an open question....
That's it. That conversation is over. You win on intent or at least I will hang my hat on Comey's conclusions FTSOA, hopefully you will too.
Let's split the baby, and have the cake but not try to eat it too.
Last edited by a moderator:
and the precise quote in context.