Eh. I think Comey was within his rights to say what he did in announcing that the FBI would not be recommending that Hillary be indicted. If he hadn’t, Hillary’s campaign would’ve spun it as a big win and the FBI’s de facto seal of approval. Comey made sure that wouldn’t happen, and in doing so, also sent an important signal to other public officials who might be tempted to follow in her footsteps.
There you go again, defining terms incorrectly.
She mishandled classified information - fact. Reckless - opinion. Not knowing a particular fact - ignorant of that particular fact. Ignorant in the general sense you’re trying to expand it to - opinion, and clearly unsupported opinion at that. Dishonest about that particular issue - fact. Dishonest as a general application, once again, as you’re trying to make it - opinion.
Are you honest? Have you ever told a lie, lied by omission, or exaggerated/understated? (If the answer to any of those is no, you’re an even bigger liar.) Therefore you are dishonest according to your own standard.
Spare us all the self-righteous bullshit that is logical only so far as it supports your point and ideology.
If it had been one lie, that would be something. She told numerous lies, all in the interests of trying to put an end to the controversy. She should have come clean from the beginning. We’re STILL finding new stuff out because she won’t tell the truth.
Question: Are all statements either the truth, or a lie?
We’re still finding out new incredibly mundane stuff that has no relevance to anything. Actual revelations haven’t come out for a while.
So Assange is still saying that he has something so damaging on Clinton that it will be a game changer. I think he over estimates his own importance. Unless he has a video of Clinton ordering someone killed or something else just as serious the public is going to shrug and mostly say “still better than Trump”. Also I think most of the public is just burnt out on scandals and controversies at this point.
Unless he’s completely bluffing most likely Wikileaks has hard evidence that as The Secretary of state, Clinton ordered weapons sold to ISIS in an attempt to use them to topple Assad. Or it’s something else shady connected to the Clinton Foundation. My gut feeling is that if those are Wikileaks big damaging info most of the voting public will just shrug and ignore it. Of course the Trump supporters will incoherently blather about locking her up again, but I don’t see it changing many voters minds.
Clinton lying about turning over all her work emails sounds pretty significant to me.
The big story isn’t what any particular email says: it’s the Russian government releasing classified emails from Clinton’s server that damage American security. That would mean she got hacked due to her own “reckless” behavior. And would pretty much end the debate on whether she’s fit for the Presidency. At that point, she stops being superior to Trump and becomes just like him in the ways that matter.
How do other people get hacked? Or do we have your word, as an expert in computer security, that “recklessness” is the only way it happens?
I’m sure that will be the campaign’s primary talking point. “It could have happened to anyone!” But if it happened to her, with her unusual, unauthorized, less secure setup, then it’s over. Trump could be swapped out for Charles Manson and he’d win 40 states.
Besides, she said she didn’t handle classified info on the server, and she turned over all work related emails. Therefore, the Russians can’t possibly have any surprises of that nature. So rest easy. YOu trust her, right?
First, Russia can lie about hacking her server including generating fake confidential documents to insert into real emails. So the Clinton team can at least somewhat plausibly just say that whatever is released is fake. Second the public has already indicated that they don’t really give a crap about Clinton’s emails. You’re delusional if you think this would convince many people to change their votes when Trump would be so much more reckless with National Security because he’s a big mouth who can’t control his temper and loves insulting people.
I trust Clinton more than I trust Putin’s preferred candidate. This issue is not a winner for Your Guy.
If it’s fake, sure. If it’s not, then that’s a huge risk, because if she got caught in that kind of outright lie she’d be impeached. The public furor would pretty much require it.
That’s why it’s better not to lie. As you say, a lot of people don’t care if she got hacked. They don’t care if she gets hacked again. They don’t care if she sells national secrets to the Koreans as long as the money gets plugged into health care.
There is simply no evidence, or lack of it, capable of getting your consideration regarding Ms. Clinton, is there? You already *know *The Truth, don’t you?
Well, OK, how do you propose that the Pubies inform us of the desperately important info in those ©-marked documents? They are confidential, yes? Admittedly, the lowest possible form of secret, but still. Luckily, almost miraculously, the actual facts of those © marked communications have not been leaked! Signs and wonders!
So, either no Republican ever found out what terrifying secrets are there to be revealed, or stern duty demanded that they refrain from seizing such an advantage. However tempting it might have been, they resolutely abstained from such sleaze, for the good of the country!
You are welcome to regard that second option as plausible. The third option is that they do, in fact, know. And are pretending that they don’t know, because the info contained therein is trivial and insignificant, as implied by the © designation. And further, they would rather not have that info revealed, because it might reveal that they are raising a hue and cry over the seating arrangements at a State reception in Upper Volta.
Of course, just as I said, they might know, and refused to take huge political advantage because of their, ah, ethics and civic responsibility. That’s certainly possible! Sorta. Kinda.
Cookie?
“Passed”! Third grade, here I come!
Just to inject some facts here, the recently-released FBI documents said:
Pretending it was just “the seating arrangements at a State reception in Upper Volta” doesn’t seem to square with reality.
Trump Mocks Clinton Classification Mistake, Makes Mistake Himself
Well, boy, is my face red! Orange. Whatever. i kinda thought (c) meant “classified”, but turns out it means “confidential”, which is the category for nuclear launch codes and the precise GPS coordinates for Bill Clinton’s coke-smuggling airstrip.
Always good form to include the actual source when offering a citation.