Posted on 07/27/2015 7:00:01 AM PDT by george76
MSNBC host and NBC News Chief Foreign Affairs Correspondent Andrea Mitchell stated that when she spoke to intelligence officials at a security conference, “nobody can give an explanation for why a cabinet secretary would have a private email system other than to thwart inquiries, FOIAs” on Monday’s broadcast of MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”
Mitchell said that it’s possible that the impact of Clinton’s emails on her campaign has been underestimated. She continued, “Look, you have two inspectors general, and they are referring to this to the Justice Department. Now, you can try to confuse it, and there’s been a lot of misdirection. There’s been inaccurate reporting significantly, on Thursday night by the New York Times, it’s not a criminal referral, not at this stage. It could become, and it could become nothing. But, what they are suggesting is that there were classified — four out of the 40 randomly selected, had classified information, and it was not information that was later upgraded to be classified. It was information that was classified as ‘secret,’ which is a level of classification, at the time. This gets very confusing. And it can be confused further by statements on all sides. That said, the original sin, if you will, is having a private email system.”
Mitchell added, “I was at a security conference speaking to intelligence officials on all sides, and the attorney general, we’ll talk about that later. But nobody can give an explanation for why a cabinet secretary would have a private email system other than to thwart inquiries, FOIAs, and
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Well that is an interesting question
Why? What was she trying to hide?
Her personal relationships?
She did travel extensively with her body woman
Was that it? Or was it the money deals?
Welcome to today's exciting episode of "News of the obvious."
What's so confusing? Hilary Clinton violated 18 US Code 798. She willfully allowed transmission of, and transmitted, classified information. How she did it, why she did it, whether she was aware that she was doing it--all irrelevant. The fact is that she did it. She is guilty of a serious crime. She will never be indicted, let alone convicted, however.
She was trying to hide her influence peddling.
Interesting that this is on MSNBC—I wonder if the Party word is to prepare the way for a Hillary alternative.
For this to come from Andrea Mitchell is astounding in my opinion. It bespeaks of trouble on the Hillary! front.
INDICT HER NOW!
“That said, the original sin, if you will, is having a private email system...nobody can give an explanation for why a cabinet secretary would have a private email system other than to thwart inquiries...”
Precisely. She was up to no good, and then criminally covered her tracks.
There can be no doubt this was criminal behavior. None whatsoever.
Occam’s Razor—The simplest explanation is the most likely. Hillary wanted to hide her activities from scrutiny and, being a Clinton, she assumed that laws don’t apply to her.
The Clintons are guilty of something big in Washington. They were greedy and didn't share. They kept it all to themselves. That has bad Ju-Ju.
Hey genius, how about to engage in illegal/illicit activities (corruption) without the risk of detection?
When a liberal has lost MSNBC, they have lost...
MSNBC fact checks Clinton false statements on Classified Emails
She's supposed to conduct official business using government-controlled lines of communication.
I think that's a good working assumption. Once they get far enough up the food chain, they are immune.
Trading cash to their Foundation in trade for political deals.
Time to re-read what was said about Hillary during the Watergate Hearings:
Jerry Zeifman, a lifelong Democrat, supervised the work of 27-year-old Hillary Rodham on the committee. Hillary got a job working on the investigation at the behest of her former law professor, Burke Marshall, who was also Sen. Ted Kennedy’s chief counsel in the Chappaquiddick affair. When the investigation was over, Zeifman fired Hillary from the committee staff and refused to give her a letter of recommendation – one of only three people who earned that dubious distinction in Zeifman’s 17-year career.
Why?
“Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said in an interview last week. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”
This isn’t exactly news. When her lachrymose performance arguably won her New Hampshire, Zeifman tried to tell people about Hillary’s duplicity. Patterico noticed the effort, but few others picked it up. Zeifman wrote at his website:
After hiring Hillary, Doar assigned her to confer with me regarding rules of procedure for the impeachment inquiry. At my first meeting with her I told her that Judiciary Committee Chairman Peter Rodino, House Speaker Carl Albert, Majority Leader “Tip” O’Neill, Parliamentarian Lou Deschler and I had previously all agreed that we should rely only on the then existing House Rules, and not advocate any changes. I also quoted Tip O’Neill’s statement that: “To try to change the rules now would be politically divisive. It would be like trying to change the traditional rules of baseball before a World Series.”
Hillary assured me that she had not drafted, and would not advocate, any such rules changes. However, as documented in my personal diary, I soon learned that she had lied. She had already drafted changes, and continued to advocate them. In one written legal memorandum, she advocated denying President Nixon representation by counsel. In so doing she simply ignored the fact that in the committee’s then most recent prior impeachment proceeding, the committee had afforded the right to counsel to Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas.
(*) The message is, of course, ‘Step aside. We want someone from our mob to run. It would be unseemly for us to appear to the LIV base not to support you so we need you to do the deed yourself.’ Hillary, in fact, knows this to be the message but like a moth attracted to a flame she cannot turn herself away from the gleam of total power even while aware it means her destruction.
The Clintons have been doing this scam: selling out the US to Chinese Communists, Arab Moslem dictators, etc. for a long time.
“This gets very confusing”
Not really.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.