Hellobee Boards

@Adira: yeah, that's the point where I agree. Trump is hopeless. But that doesn't mean I'm not uneasy about her, and the way she campaigns doesn't help with that perception. She needs to motivate people to go out and vote for her. Michelle Obama gave a great speech that didn't even give Trumps nonsense the time of day. And then Clintons campaign tries to tie some dubious link between Trump and Russia because she made a bad decision. The story would have died out, it was obv that Shultz favored Clinton, not the best ethics but she's got a down and dirty reputation, that part didn't phase me. But the woman's got to own her hard political side better better and not make random deflections that just make her look not like a hard politician but either naive or hiding something.

@Maysprout: I think part of her problem, and this is just my opinion of course, is that she's been in the spotlight for soooooo long and been attacked for soooooo long that her natural inclination now is to get defensive. I have no idea what she was thinking with the whole Schultz thing though! I know they are friends, but she shouldn't have offered her an honorary anything because it just looks bad and the American people already have trust issues with her!

@Mrs D: Negligence, yes, but "intentional" misconduct, no. I found the FBI Director's statement clarifying and also his testimony afterwards to the Congressional Hearing really helpful to understanding exactly what he (and the FBI) believed happen and why it wasn't a chargeable offense. If you haven't, you should read those two things when you have a minute!

As for her "consistent immoral and unethical behavior," I'll need some examples. You stated it like it was a fact, and I don't buy that at the moment.

@Adira: I found his testimony to further prove absolute intentional wrong doing. We'll have to agree to disagree.

While I do have several examples that come easily to mind it seems a pointless discussion - you have your opinions and view things one way and I have mine and view things another way. Its probably no good use of any of our time (nor is it the topic of this thread) to go down that path

Ugh. OK I really do not like to get involved in political debates and tend to keep to myself.
Here is what I can say about Hillary and the emails.
The director DID say what type of emails WERE found.
Let me just say that a handful of them, were very highly classified. That type of classification and information to MAKE IT THAT....happens from the get go. That type of sensitive material. Which is HIGHER than classified, HIGHER than Secret.....
Im not going to get into details and like to keep my experience and "Know how" in this area to myself. But I DO AND HAVE DEALT with all these levels.
If I ever, EVER, even accidentally, non-maliciously made a mistake....my you know what would be grass, and then some.
I have NO respect for her because of this. Its absolutely unacceptable and I am sorry its NOT just an "Ooops" mistake. Its hard to explain to those who haven't dealt with that level of things how bad what she did really was. And for those of us who have/do work in that level. What msg is that sending us that she was not held accountable? I have seen so many careers destroyed for FAR LESS. Its not taken lightly and its mind blowing how LARGE scale hers was and brushed off. I just cant even... people just see words, they don't realize how bad what she did was, accidental or not. The cost of her mistakes.....I just cant even....
I'm honestly so disappointed...

@Rescuemom10: I have experience with stuff like this too. Did you read the article that @sunny: linked? Here it is again:

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/07/how-did-classified-information-get-into-those-hillary-clinton-emails/

I've also dealt with the kinds of things this article talks about "Is this classified?" "Why is this marked classified?" "Can we get clarification on what this even means for classification purposes?" So yes, as someone who has experience with this, I CAN see how this can happen. Unfortunately, contamination spills happen (when classified information gets onto an unclassified system). Usually it's caught very quickly, but not always. Depending on the severity and the number of times it happens, the party responsible might get a security violation (something that goes into your record for a set amount of time), may have to be reported, may require additional training, and may even be fired. But unless you were doing something intentionally for the purposes of espionage, it's very unlikely you would be arrested.

Yes I did, and "contamination spills" do happen. Like I said I have seen far less serious things happen with much more significant consequences. A few were TS/SCI level emails. Now I understand those who haven't worked with that level of material may not understand the severity of it. Nor can they understand WHAT makes material that level. With those I can't even wrap my head around how that was dismissed as a mistake. Yes classification levels can change with material. I can see how something that once was not "confidential" is later reclassified, and even to a slight degree SOME secret levels. But THAT MANY? Then when you add on the handful of TS/SCI? That's where I stop believing you can pass this off as "just a mistake". Criminal intent or not, that kind of "spill" is pretty dang major and an offense regardless.

@Maysprout: I'd vote for Jack Sparrow!

@Maysprout: hahaha those are great!

@Mrs D: yeah. You mentioned that it was possibly intentional misconduct. What would her reason/end goal be?

@jedeve: I think this article puts together the concerns.
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/07/hillary-clinton-missing-emails-secretary-state-department-personal-server-investigation-fbi-214016

Basically the Clinton foundation receives lots of money from foreign govts and businesses. Is it all for charity, does it influence her decisions? No smoking gun evidence but people tend to follow money and get ideas, especially when there's other circumstantial evidence.

Kinda like with Cheney. I guess there's no smoking gun but Haliburton made billions off an Iraq war where they had 'misinformation' about chemical weapons. Do I think his financial ties skewed his thinking, absolutely.

@TemperanceBrennan: I feel the exact same way.

@TemperanceBrennan: Yes. While she has issues they arent in the same league I feel with the things he said and what he wants to do if elected.

It's like leaving the front door open. One person did it (bad). The other person stood there yelling, "come on in, thieves! Also we've got your back if you want to invade any other houses!"