quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Officials: Scant evidence that Clinton had malicious intent in handling of emails (from yesterday)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/federal-prosecutors-in-virginia-assisting-in-clinton-email-probe/2016/05/05/f0277faa-12f0-11e6-81b4-581a5c4c42df_story.html?postshare=6211462486857748&tid=ss_tw

Prosecutors and FBI agents investigating Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal email server have so far found scant evidence that the leading Democratic presidential candidate intended to break classification rules, though they are still probing the case aggressively with an eye on interviewing Clinton herself, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

FBI agents on the case have been joined by federal prosecutors from the same office that successfully prosecuted 9/11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui — and who would handle any Edward Snowden case, should he ever return to the country, according to the U.S. officials familiar with the matter. And in recent weeks, prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Eastern District of Virginia and their FBI counterparts have been interviewing top Clinton aides as they seek to bring the case to a close.

CNN reported Thursday that longtime Clinton aide Huma Abedin was among those interviewed. A lawyer for Abedin did not immediately return an email seeking comment.

The involvement of the U.S. Attorney’s Office is not indicative that charges are imminent or even likely. One official said prosecutors are wrestling with the question of whether Clinton intended to violate the rules, and so far, the evidence seemed to indicate she did not.

In the US the mere fact that you didn't mean for the classified information to fall in the wrong hands is not a legitimate defense for not properly protecting it. It is like if you leave a gun on the shelf in a grocery store, just because you didn't mean for someone to get hurt does not absolve you of criminal negligence.

quote:

ORIGINAL: itsSIRtou

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Officials: Scant evidence that Clinton had malicious intent in handling of emails (from yesterday)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/federal-prosecutors-in-virginia-assisting-in-clinton-email-probe/2016/05/05/f0277faa-12f0-11e6-81b4-581a5c4c42df_story.html?postshare=6211462486857748&tid=ss_tw

Prosecutors and FBI agents investigating Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal email server have so far found scant evidence that the leading Democratic presidential candidate intended to break classification rules, though they are still probing the case aggressively with an eye on interviewing Clinton herself, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

FBI agents on the case have been joined by federal prosecutors from the same office that successfully prosecuted 9/11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui — and who would handle any Edward Snowden case, should he ever return to the country, according to the U.S. officials familiar with the matter. And in recent weeks, prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Eastern District of Virginia and their FBI counterparts have been interviewing top Clinton aides as they seek to bring the case to a close.

CNN reported Thursday that longtime Clinton aide Huma Abedin was among those interviewed. A lawyer for Abedin did not immediately return an email seeking comment.

The involvement of the U.S. Attorney’s Office is not indicative that charges are imminent or even likely. One official said prosecutors are wrestling with the question of whether Clinton intended to violate the rules, and so far, the evidence seemed to indicate she did not.

In the US the mere fact that you didn't mean for the classified information to fall in the wrong hands is not a legitimate defense for not properly protecting it. It is like if you leave a gun on the shelf in a grocery store, just because you didn't mean for someone to get hurt does not absolve you of criminal negligence.

OHHHH.... I guess that explains the lack of prosecution of gop parties when there were no signs of WMD's in Iraq..... they didn't mean to start a war in a region we're still mired in.

so by ur logic: its alright to say there's a (WMD) gun on the (Iraq) shelf, and just because you didn't mean to be wrong... its alright for thousands to die and absolves you of criminal negligence because you call it a war?

(gee.....I wonder who said "mission accomplished". opps!....he didn't mean to be wrong then too.)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: itsSIRtou

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Officials: Scant evidence that Clinton had malicious intent in handling of emails (from yesterday)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/federal-prosecutors-in-virginia-assisting-in-clinton-email-probe/2016/05/05/f0277faa-12f0-11e6-81b4-581a5c4c42df_story.html?postshare=6211462486857748&tid=ss_tw

Prosecutors and FBI agents investigating Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal email server have so far found scant evidence that the leading Democratic presidential candidate intended to break classification rules, though they are still probing the case aggressively with an eye on interviewing Clinton herself, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

FBI agents on the case have been joined by federal prosecutors from the same office that successfully prosecuted 9/11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui — and who would handle any Edward Snowden case, should he ever return to the country, according to the U.S. officials familiar with the matter. And in recent weeks, prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Eastern District of Virginia and their FBI counterparts have been interviewing top Clinton aides as they seek to bring the case to a close.

CNN reported Thursday that longtime Clinton aide Huma Abedin was among those interviewed. A lawyer for Abedin did not immediately return an email seeking comment.

The involvement of the U.S. Attorney’s Office is not indicative that charges are imminent or even likely. One official said prosecutors are wrestling with the question of whether Clinton intended to violate the rules, and so far, the evidence seemed to indicate she did not.

In the US the mere fact that you didn't mean for the classified information to fall in the wrong hands is not a legitimate defense for not properly protecting it. It is like if you leave a gun on the shelf in a grocery store, just because you didn't mean for someone to get hurt does not absolve you of criminal negligence.

OHHHH.... I guess that explains the lack of prosecution of gop parties when there were no signs of WMD's in Iraq..... they didn't mean to start a war in a region we're still mired in.

so by ur logic: its alright to say there's a (WMD) gun on the (Iraq) shelf, and just because you didn't mean to be wrong... its alright for thousands to die and absolves you of criminal negligence because you call it a war?

(gee.....I wonder who said "mission accomplished". opps!....he didn't mean to be wrong then too.)

Hum...after nearly eight years of Obama, it's still Bush's fault. Lol. Hillary can run on that.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Well, someone without any more brains than an ice cube, a typical nutsucker can recognize something like third grade, so high above his intellect.

But now we have another nutsucker for the felch refelch of nutsuckerisms.

And its Wilbur.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Well, someone without any more brains than an ice cube, a typical nutsucker can recognize something like third grade, so high above his intellect.

But now we have another nutsucker for the felch refelch of nutsuckerisms.

And its Wilbur.

Lol, I kinda get a kick out of the fact that when I say something you become irrational. Have at it boy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: itsSIRtou

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Officials: Scant evidence that Clinton had malicious intent in handling of emails (from yesterday)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/federal-prosecutors-in-virginia-assisting-in-clinton-email-probe/2016/05/05/f0277faa-12f0-11e6-81b4-581a5c4c42df_story.html?postshare=6211462486857748&tid=ss_tw

Prosecutors and FBI agents investigating Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal email server have so far found scant evidence that the leading Democratic presidential candidate intended to break classification rules, though they are still probing the case aggressively with an eye on interviewing Clinton herself, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

FBI agents on the case have been joined by federal prosecutors from the same office that successfully prosecuted 9/11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui — and who would handle any Edward Snowden case, should he ever return to the country, according to the U.S. officials familiar with the matter. And in recent weeks, prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Eastern District of Virginia and their FBI counterparts have been interviewing top Clinton aides as they seek to bring the case to a close.

CNN reported Thursday that longtime Clinton aide Huma Abedin was among those interviewed. A lawyer for Abedin did not immediately return an email seeking comment.

The involvement of the U.S. Attorney’s Office is not indicative that charges are imminent or even likely. One official said prosecutors are wrestling with the question of whether Clinton intended to violate the rules, and so far, the evidence seemed to indicate she did not.

In the US the mere fact that you didn't mean for the classified information to fall in the wrong hands is not a legitimate defense for not properly protecting it. It is like if you leave a gun on the shelf in a grocery store, just because you didn't mean for someone to get hurt does not absolve you of criminal negligence.

OHHHH.... I guess that explains the lack of prosecution of gop parties when there were no signs of WMD's in Iraq..... they didn't mean to start a war in a region we're still mired in.

so by ur logic: its alright to say there's a (WMD) gun on the (Iraq) shelf, and just because you didn't mean to be wrong... its alright for thousands to die and absolves you of criminal negligence because you call it a war?

(gee.....I wonder who said "mission accomplished". opps!....he didn't mean to be wrong then too.)

Hum...after nearly eight years of Obama, it's still Bush's fault. Lol. Hillary can run on that.

Bush was still blaming stuff on Carter through his occupancy of the White House, so whyever not?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Officials: Scant evidence that Clinton had malicious intent in handling of emails (from yesterday)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/federal-prosecutors-in-virginia-assisting-in-clinton-email-probe/2016/05/05/f0277faa-12f0-11e6-81b4-581a5c4c42df_story.html?postshare=6211462486857748&tid=ss_tw

Prosecutors and FBI agents investigating Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal email server have so far found scant evidence that the leading Democratic presidential candidate intended to break classification rules, though they are still probing the case aggressively with an eye on interviewing Clinton herself, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

FBI agents on the case have been joined by federal prosecutors from the same office that successfully prosecuted 9/11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui — and who would handle any Edward Snowden case, should he ever return to the country, according to the U.S. officials familiar with the matter. And in recent weeks, prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Eastern District of Virginia and their FBI counterparts have been interviewing top Clinton aides as they seek to bring the case to a close.

CNN reported Thursday that longtime Clinton aide Huma Abedin was among those interviewed. A lawyer for Abedin did not immediately return an email seeking comment.

The involvement of the U.S. Attorney’s Office is not indicative that charges are imminent or even likely. One official said prosecutors are wrestling with the question of whether Clinton intended to violate the rules, and so far, the evidence seemed to indicate she did not.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Officials: Scant evidence that Clinton had malicious intent in handling of emails (from yesterday)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/federal-prosecutors-in-virginia-assisting-in-clinton-email-probe/2016/05/05/f0277faa-12f0-11e6-81b4-581a5c4c42df_story.html?postshare=6211462486857748&tid=ss_tw

Prosecutors and FBI agents investigating Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal email server have so far found scant evidence that the leading Democratic presidential candidate intended to break classification rules, though they are still probing the case aggressively with an eye on interviewing Clinton herself, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

FBI agents on the case have been joined by federal prosecutors from the same office that successfully prosecuted 9/11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui — and who would handle any Edward Snowden case, should he ever return to the country, according to the U.S. officials familiar with the matter. And in recent weeks, prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Eastern District of Virginia and their FBI counterparts have been interviewing top Clinton aides as they seek to bring the case to a close.

CNN reported Thursday that longtime Clinton aide Huma Abedin was among those interviewed. A lawyer for Abedin did not immediately return an email seeking comment.

The involvement of the U.S. Attorney’s Office is not indicative that charges are imminent or even likely. One official said prosecutors are wrestling with the question of whether Clinton intended to violate the rules, and so far, the evidence seemed to indicate she did not.

Its not surprising that you don't understand the purpose of this news story.

Its called a conditioning piece. The times et.al run pieces to make this look normal, to float balloons to see how issues fly - focus group testing where the focus group is the general populace.
They are conditioning several big ideas: Normal, nothing to see here. That intent is what matters. That's its no big deal


Just as a comparison.

Christie's aides shut down one of the lanes of a bridge. People alleged political payback. No evidence Christie knew anything about it - yet the leftie papers went on and on calling for his impeachment.
Here it is incontrovertible that Clinton and her aides exposed top secret information to possible enemy exposure, any one of 22 methods and sources emails would be a minimum of ten years if given to the enemy.
It is inctrovertible that she violate FOIA and archive requires. And its incontrovertible that she did these things - the best you can spin it - for her convenience.

Yup .. top secret protocols. We don't need all that fancy encryption crap. Who cares about the rules...

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Well, someone without any more brains than an ice cube, a typical nutsucker can recognize something like third grade, so high above his intellect.

But now we have another nutsucker for the felch refelch of nutsuckerisms.

And its Wilbur.

Lol, I kinda get a kick out of the fact that when I say something you become irrational. Have at it boy.

speaking the truth is like a cattle prod to vile critter parts.

but oh---there doesn't really seem to be any "becoming irrational"---its the default position.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shandirra

~FR~

Wait... This isn't about aliens abducting and using deep, unlubed instruments on Hilary??
Nevermind. I return you all to your regularly scheduled chat...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: itsSIRtou

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Officials: Scant evidence that Clinton had malicious intent in handling of emails (from yesterday)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/federal-prosecutors-in-virginia-assisting-in-clinton-email-probe/2016/05/05/f0277faa-12f0-11e6-81b4-581a5c4c42df_story.html?postshare=6211462486857748&tid=ss_tw

Prosecutors and FBI agents investigating Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal email server have so far found scant evidence that the leading Democratic presidential candidate intended to break classification rules, though they are still probing the case aggressively with an eye on interviewing Clinton herself, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

FBI agents on the case have been joined by federal prosecutors from the same office that successfully prosecuted 9/11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui — and who would handle any Edward Snowden case, should he ever return to the country, according to the U.S. officials familiar with the matter. And in recent weeks, prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Eastern District of Virginia and their FBI counterparts have been interviewing top Clinton aides as they seek to bring the case to a close.

CNN reported Thursday that longtime Clinton aide Huma Abedin was among those interviewed. A lawyer for Abedin did not immediately return an email seeking comment.

The involvement of the U.S. Attorney’s Office is not indicative that charges are imminent or even likely. One official said prosecutors are wrestling with the question of whether Clinton intended to violate the rules, and so far, the evidence seemed to indicate she did not.

In the US the mere fact that you didn't mean for the classified information to fall in the wrong hands is not a legitimate defense for not properly protecting it. It is like if you leave a gun on the shelf in a grocery store, just because you didn't mean for someone to get hurt does not absolve you of criminal negligence.

OHHHH.... I guess that explains the lack of prosecution of gop parties when there were no signs of WMD's in Iraq..... they didn't mean to start a war in a region we're still mired in.

so by ur logic: its alright to say there's a (WMD) gun on the (Iraq) shelf, and just because you didn't mean to be wrong... its alright for thousands to die and absolves you of criminal negligence because you call it a war?

(gee.....I wonder who said "mission accomplished". opps!....he didn't mean to be wrong then too.)

Hum...after nearly eight years of Obama, it's still Bush's fault. Lol. Hillary can run on that.

Bush was still blaming stuff on Carter through his occupancy of the White House, so whyever not?

Please provide a quote from the last year of bush's presidency. Bush is famous for not disparaging previous presidents, so admit you're lying or back it up = ).

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: WhoreMods

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: itsSIRtou

quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

Officials: Scant evidence that Clinton had malicious intent in handling of emails (from yesterday)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/federal-prosecutors-in-virginia-assisting-in-clinton-email-probe/2016/05/05/f0277faa-12f0-11e6-81b4-581a5c4c42df_story.html?postshare=6211462486857748&tid=ss_tw

Prosecutors and FBI agents investigating Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal email server have so far found scant evidence that the leading Democratic presidential candidate intended to break classification rules, though they are still probing the case aggressively with an eye on interviewing Clinton herself, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.

FBI agents on the case have been joined by federal prosecutors from the same office that successfully prosecuted 9/11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui — and who would handle any Edward Snowden case, should he ever return to the country, according to the U.S. officials familiar with the matter. And in recent weeks, prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Eastern District of Virginia and their FBI counterparts have been interviewing top Clinton aides as they seek to bring the case to a close.

CNN reported Thursday that longtime Clinton aide Huma Abedin was among those interviewed. A lawyer for Abedin did not immediately return an email seeking comment.

The involvement of the U.S. Attorney’s Office is not indicative that charges are imminent or even likely. One official said prosecutors are wrestling with the question of whether Clinton intended to violate the rules, and so far, the evidence seemed to indicate she did not.

In the US the mere fact that you didn't mean for the classified information to fall in the wrong hands is not a legitimate defense for not properly protecting it. It is like if you leave a gun on the shelf in a grocery store, just because you didn't mean for someone to get hurt does not absolve you of criminal negligence.

OHHHH.... I guess that explains the lack of prosecution of gop parties when there were no signs of WMD's in Iraq..... they didn't mean to start a war in a region we're still mired in.

so by ur logic: its alright to say there's a (WMD) gun on the (Iraq) shelf, and just because you didn't mean to be wrong... its alright for thousands to die and absolves you of criminal negligence because you call it a war?

(gee.....I wonder who said "mission accomplished". opps!....he didn't mean to be wrong then too.)

Hum...after nearly eight years of Obama, it's still Bush's fault. Lol. Hillary can run on that.

Bush was still blaming stuff on Carter through his occupancy of the White House, so whyever not?

Please provide a quote from the last year of bush's presidency. Bush is famous for not disparaging previous presidents, so admit you're lying or back it up = ).