AP: Clinton's private email may have compromised CIA names

[JRP1994]

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/1a737240cf144c728b45ef64e181f19d/experts-clinton-emails-could-have-compromised-cia-names

[Orthogonian Society Treasurer]

Endangering the lives of the men and women who serve the United States is nothing new for Crooked Hillary.

[Shameless Lefty Hack]

Biden/Warren 2016

[RFayette]

Biden/Warren 2016

lmao

[Taco Truck 🚚]

A lot of "coulds" and "mays" in that "article".

Has someone actually proven that any classified information in Clinton's possession fell into enemy hands?  I mean we all know tons of information on the State Department servers she allegedly was supposed to use was handed free of charge to terrorists (ie, Snowden).

It's amazing to me the overlap between the population of Snowden lovers and the people calling foul over Clinton's email server... unless of course they are just upset that server wasn't available for Snowden to dump on the internet.

[Ebsy]

There's no actual evidence in that piece, just suggestion and innuendo. Classic scandalmongering.

[SillyAmerican]

Endangering the lives of the men and women who serve the United States is nothing new for Crooked Hillary.

[Ljube]

Endangering the lives of the men and women who serve the United States is nothing new for Crooked Hillary.

[MK]

There's no actual evidence in that piece, just suggestion and innuendo. Classic scandalmongering.

The FBI could arrest her tomorrow and the left wing hacks would still support her.  We could still have debates from the penitentiary.

[President Johnson]

She's so guilty.

[136or142]

There's no actual evidence in that piece, just suggestion and innuendo. Classic scandalmongering.

The FBI could arrest her tomorrow and the left wing hacks would still support her.  We could still have debates from the penitentiary.

Only if Rapist Trump is finally sent to prison for his myriad should-be crimes.

[136or142]

Endangering the lives of the men and women who serve the United States is nothing new for Crooked Hillary.

Were you similarly outraged when the Bush Admin leaked the name of the CIA Agent Plame even though the release could have endangered the lives of men and women who serve in the United States?

Were you similarly outraged when the Bush Admin had 4,000 American soldiers die in Iraq fighting a war based on lies?

[Gustaf]

There is no substance in that article, just speculation.

[JRP1994]

Endangering the lives of the men and women who serve the United States is nothing new for Crooked Hillary.

Were you similarly outraged when the Bush Admin leaked the name of the CIA Agent Plame even though the release could have endangered the lives of men and women who serve in the United States?

Were you similarly outraged when the Bush Admin had 4,000 American soldiers die in Iraq fighting a war based on lies?

Yes.

[Seriously?]

Endangering the lives of the men and women who serve the United States is nothing new for Crooked Hillary.

[Seriously?]

There's no actual evidence in that piece, just suggestion and innuendo. Classic scandalmongering.

The FBI could arrest her tomorrow and the left wing hacks would still support her.  We could still have debates from the penitentiary.

Only if Rapist Trump is finally sent to prison for his myriad should-be crimes.

LMAO. Rapist Trump. As opposed to Bill Clinton, a paragon of virtue in the running for becoming the white version of Bill Cosby. Only about 17 women accused him of rape or sexual assault. But of course, he's a Democrat, so he gets a pass.

Why didn't "Pedophile Island" Bill finish the Fullbright program at Oxford again? Oh yeah, he got asked to leave for allegedly raping a fellow coed.

[Ebowed]

While there is little doubt that Clinton committed legal violations in her never-ending effort to evade wider scrutiny, we have to keep in mind just how unlikely a prosecution is.  President Bush fabricated intelligence so that we could invade Iraq, ordered the illegal surveillance of citizens and the torture of enemy combatants ("enhanced interrogation techniques" anyone?!) and not only did he not get in any trouble for it, we moved towards a national discourse where violating the Geneva Conventions is apparently no longer considered inappropriate.

So the idea that Clinton, with her incredible wealth and political influence, is going to be held accountable for this security breach seems quite unlikely, all things considered.

Only thing more absurd, of course, is this idea that she would be replaced with a candidate who didn't even stand in the primaries.  Ridiculous.

[Ebsy]

While there is little doubt that Clinton committed legal violations in her never-ending effort to evade wider scrutiny, we have to keep in mind just how unlikely a prosecution is.  President Bush fabricated intelligence so that we could invade Iraq, ordered the illegal surveillance of citizens and the torture of enemy combatants ("enhanced interrogation techniques" anyone?!) and not only did he not get in any trouble for it, we moved towards a national discourse where violating the Geneva Conventions is apparently no longer considered inappropriate.

So the idea that Clinton, with her incredible wealth and political influence, is going to be held accountable for this security breach seems quite unlikely, all things considered.

Only thing more absurd, of course, is this idea that she would be replaced with a candidate who didn't even stand in the primaries.  Ridiculous.

Sad!

[IceSpear]

While there is little doubt that Clinton committed legal violations in her never-ending effort to evade wider scrutiny, we have to keep in mind just how unlikely a prosecution is.  President Bush fabricated intelligence so that we could invade Iraq, ordered the illegal surveillance of citizens and the torture of enemy combatants ("enhanced interrogation techniques" anyone?!) and not only did he not get in any trouble for it, we moved towards a national discourse where violating the Geneva Conventions is apparently no longer considered inappropriate.

So the idea that Clinton, with her incredible wealth and political influence, is going to be held accountable for this security breach seems quite unlikely, all things considered.

Only thing more absurd, of course, is this idea that she would be replaced with a candidate who didn't even stand in the primaries.  Ridiculous.

I must say I find the cognitive dissonance of some amusing:

"Hillary Clinton is omnipotent and the most powerful person in America and rigged all the primaries and will be installed as president by the corporatists and Wall Street Fatcats and Goldman Sachs and the NWO and the Illuminati and the establishment's fix is in"

"BUT DON'T WORRY! She'll be indicted any day now by the sole remaining beacon of truth and justice in the world, the noted anti-establishment haven of the Federal Bureau of Investigations "

[SillyAmerican]

While there is little doubt that Clinton committed legal violations in her never-ending effort to evade wider scrutiny, we have to keep in mind just how unlikely a prosecution is.  President Bush fabricated intelligence so that we could invade Iraq, ordered the illegal surveillance of citizens and the torture of enemy combatants ("enhanced interrogation techniques" anyone?!) and not only did he not get in any trouble for it, we moved towards a national discourse where violating the Geneva Conventions is apparently no longer considered inappropriate.

So the idea that Clinton, with her incredible wealth and political influence, is going to be held accountable for this security breach seems quite unlikely, all things considered.

Only thing more absurd, of course, is this idea that she would be replaced with a candidate who didn't even stand in the primaries.  Ridiculous.

Yes. This is a historic election cycle: this is the first time that a sitting president has endorsed someone under criminal investigation by the FBI.

[IceSpear]

While there is little doubt that Clinton committed legal violations in her never-ending effort to evade wider scrutiny, we have to keep in mind just how unlikely a prosecution is.  President Bush fabricated intelligence so that we could invade Iraq, ordered the illegal surveillance of citizens and the torture of enemy combatants ("enhanced interrogation techniques" anyone?!) and not only did he not get in any trouble for it, we moved towards a national discourse where violating the Geneva Conventions is apparently no longer considered inappropriate.

So the idea that Clinton, with her incredible wealth and political influence, is going to be held accountable for this security breach seems quite unlikely, all things considered.

Only thing more absurd, of course, is this idea that she would be replaced with a candidate who didn't even stand in the primaries.  Ridiculous.

Yes. This is a historic election cycle: this is the first time that a sitting president has endorsed someone under criminal investigation by the FBI.

(Hopefully this can eventually become the new DeanChambers.jpg)

[SillyAmerican]

The latest on the ongoing saga of EmailGate:

You must be logged in to read this quote.