How many Dopers have changed their minds per the OP’s admonition?
Let’s have a show of hand. (Mine ain’t up.)
Good. So if she does get indicted, you’re sure she did nothing wrong and she will remain the candidate of the Democratic Party.
Only until she gets hit by the asteroid. Got to think of all the eventualities.
Indictment is just a bit more likely. If it was a slam dunk that there would be no indictment, there wouldn’t be an investigation in the first place. Betting markets place the odds at 23%
Oh? What’s the betting markets’ odds on the asteroid strike?
You set a daunting standard, addy. But I gotta admit, she is most likely not a virgin.
Don’t worry, if she does die, you can replace her on the ticket.
Sorry, it appears she will remain on the ticket. And win. Probably twice.
Now, tell us about Your Guy’s good points.
I’m not worried. I don’t get a vote anyways. But really, there is no reason to value the betting markets opinion on this matter.
Should be easy money for you, then.
Yeah, a 22% gain on a sure thing. The stock market certainly won’t give you that.
This doesn’t logically connect to the post you’re responding to.
It does sound like a safe bet to me but I never said there’s a zero percent chance of an indictment. I said a random bunch of people have little to no insight on what the FBI has found or what it will do.
New reporting on the focus of the investigation today: Emails in Clinton Probe Dealt With Planned Drone Strikes - WSJ
It seems that our nation’s diplomats don’t have access to secure email at home or while traveling–which is fucking nuts. Even if operational details weren’t given, talking about imminent military strikes over insecure networks is stupid. Before this, has there been any reporting on that problem? Does anyone know if Congress has been asked to fund better communications systems?
One pet peeve about all this report (among many), is the implicit suggestion that if someone intercepted or read these emails that there would be evidence of this. That’s not how it works, especially on an amateur server. It is entirely possible that one or more entities intercepted these emails without leaving any evidence that can now be discovered.
So, IOW, blaming Clinton for non-secure emails is like blaming her for air pollution because she drives a car.
Okay.
Say, is this a scandal yet?
You think the Secretary of State is to the State Department as a car owner is to the design of automobiles.
Okay.
haven’t changed my mind at all. it was a non “scandal” to start and has remained so. she has released tens of thousands of the emails… hundreds of people and news outlets have poured over everything and found no wrong doing.
Based on the last report she didn’t do anything different than the previous Sec of States… hell Colin Powell just flat out refused to turn over paper copies of his emails… its a witch hunt, nothing more.
The only good thing that should come out of this is a revamp of how our govt. communicates internally and how data is stored. That wont happen… but it would be nice to think it might.
Well, as you said…
I just don’t see how Hillary is to blame for that, all by her lonesome.
She shares some of the blame because she was in charge, she was specifically informed about the problem of senior diplomats including herself communicating on insecure networks, and what she did to attempt to solve it was equal parts inadequate and inappropriate. I’m not sure what other required elements there are for “blame.”
Naturally, people want to argue about all kinds of other issues, like whether this means Trump is better, whether the GOP actually cares about the security issues or is just playing politics, whether any of the vulnerable data actually led to security compromises, whether this rises to the level of “scandal,” blah blah blah. But that’s mostly side-show. Not every criticism of a politician has to be handled as some kind of zero-sum partisan slugfest. It is possible to think a criticism raises a serious and important issue without changing your party registration.