You're disingenuous and quite wrong. Hildabeast set up a system that was guaranteed to "bleed" intelligence, because, as the record shows, e.g., Powell and Rice, accidents do happen. Thus when Hildabeast set up a system without safeguards, it was guaranteed to fail, because even systems with the proper safeguards fail. Hildabeast intentionally invited a breach in security for her own crass and petty political agenda.
Originally Posted by I B Hankering
Do you have any non-circumstantial evidence that it wasn't accidental for Clinton? Do you have any non-circumstantial evidence that it was accidental for Powell and/or Rice?
Rice did not use email at all. And your argument is stupid. It's like a lawyer defending his client saying, "Sure my client robbed a bank. But those other guys robbed a bank and didn't get caught, so my client shouldn't be prosecuted." If Powell and Rice broke the law, prosecute them, too. But Hillary shouldn't be allowed to skate just because someone else got away with a crime.
Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy
I explicitly said that it doesn't prove she didn't commit a crime. I certainly never said she should be allowed to get away with it if she did. Kindly don't put words in my mouth.
What I said is that we don't have enough information for any of them to say whether or not they committed a crime. We have virtually the same evidence for both: private emails that contained now classified information. The only additional thing we have for Hillary is a request to remove an "identifying heading" and to have something to have it sent on unsecure channels. We have no idea whether or not what that was referring to is actually classified or not.
And if you can't see the difference in magnitude of the crime, followed by Hillary's massive attempt at covering it up, and Hillary's long history of lies and corruption, you're an idiot.
No one here has shown me any even remotely convincing evidence that any of them have committed a crime. If accepting the reality that I don't have enough information to assume they did break the law makes me an idiot, I'll happily wear the label "idiot."
Better read closer...Powell denies that there any classified emails
Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn
No, Powell does not deny that there were classified emails. He said they weren't marked classified at the time, which is the same claim Hillary is making. He is also making the claim that they shouldn't be classified now. The same argument Hillary is making. He wants them released. As does Hillary. It's virtually the same argument.
and we're talking about a dozen total whereas the Rice story (which you wisely but dishonestly glossed over) is that it was her staffer and not her.
So what about the number? If having non-classified information in your private email is evidence of a crime, it is a crime for all of them. If we accept that we don't have enough information to assume one is guilty of a crime, we have to extend the same benefit to all. There is no "well, 12 now-classified pieces of information is not evidence of a crime, but once you cross the 15 threshold. . . CRIME!"
By "zero argument" do you mean SOLELY on the issue of someone setting up their own private server system? So, you think this boils down to whether or not "Joe Citizen" (or "Hillarious Citizen") can set up his or her own server?
Originally Posted by LexusLover
No. At the time, there was nothing illegal or against regulation for her to set up her own email server. It was stupid that it was ever allowed, but the question isn't whether or not she broke the law by setting up a server (I've seen no one reasonable make the argument that she did), but whether or not the classified emails on her server represent gross negligence or intentional mishandling of classified information.