Posted on 07/07/2016 6:36:13 AM PDT by SE Mom
Hillary Clinton Email Investigation FBI Director James Comey testifies before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee on the FBI’s investigation into Hillary…
(Excerpt) Read more at c-span.org ...
Perhaps Comey is also too unsophisticated, beyond a shadow of a doubt.
That’s the big takeaway as far as I’m concerned, that Hillary’s not capable of understanding classified communications. How in the hell is she supposed to be CIC if she can’t grasp the basics.
That's pretty much what I'm hearing. She didn't know any better. What ever happened to "ignorance of the law is no excuse"?
Basically, careless and stupid doesn't show "criminal intent". That's never ever worked for me.
Politicians will claim ignorance of the ,eaning of the term “air gap”
Yup.
Benghazi was a gun-running op flying in under the radar THEN and well as NOW. It’s a radioactive subject that a Mack truck cold be driven through that leads straight to the CF.
,eaning S/B meaning
IMO HRC decided to “go private” after rejection of the NSA and Obama’s consent. She knew classified messages would have arrived over an NSA server, and decided to risk this with her private server.
I agree: the classified info found on the server should be matched to the original document, and then the original sender should be investigated and asked: "where did you get this information?"
We have seen at least one public case where Confidential information with markings was pasted into an email. Where did the sender get that?
Frankly, I suspect that a LOT of information was copy/pasted into email on the insecure State Dept. system, and sent to Clinton's server. But, most of the time they remembered to remove the classification headers, and only a few slipped through.
Benghazi sure has been lost in all this
Hillary stooooopid, but don’t blame her. She’s just stupid.
Comey just said "No." sigh.
"YES, of course, you dumbazzes!" was not an option
I think the line following the quotes was not an option clearly points to the line as being rhetorical.
And I've been around a little longer than 05/19/16
Finally, someone asked that question!!!!
What was the answer?
http://www.wnd.com/2016/07/limbaugh-fbis-comey-eerily-similar-to-john-roberts/#PVUF7LoPTfguIiug.99
WASHINGTON – Analyzing the announcement by FBI Director James Comey not to recommend charges against Hillary Clinton in her email scandal, talk-radio megastar Rush Limbaugh said it “sounds very similar to what Chief Justice John Roberts did with Obamacare.”
Roberts famously rewrote the Obamacare law to find it constitutional, and former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy reacted to the Comey announcement with an article titled, “FBI rewrites federal law to let Hillary off the hook.”
(snip)
In making the comparison, Limbaugh noted, as did McCarthy, that Comey followed one statute that cited intent, but ignored one that did not.
“It’s taking the intent statute that does require intent, moving it over to the area in which she has transgressed and applying it where Congress doesn’t,” he noted.
That’s when Limbaugh observed, “This strangely sounds very similar to what Chief Justice John Roberts did with Obamacare.”
“So he (Comey) rewrote it in a sense,” concluded Limbaugh. “And it sounds eerily similar here to where they looked and looked and looked and tried to do everything they could to avoid charging her for what she did.”
Comey has worked to “stop the criminalization of negligence”
So, he indeed *DID* rewrite the law.
Or what happened to Gaddafi’s gold. Someone posted an email exchange between Hitlery and Blumenthal abouto that very topic, a while ago.
He said that wasn’t in the scope of the investigation at hand.
Good tagline.
Another Democrat, another speech
Why is that hearing room practically empty? Not important enough? What a joke.
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.