...aaaaaand byby Hillary

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by smallcoffee, Jan 29, 2016.

  1. smallcoffee macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2014
    Location:
    North America
    #1
    Hello Bernie Sanders :)

    She's going to be indicted when everything is said and done. Sanders v. Trump 2016. Most ridiculous presidential campaign in a long time. Kind of glad though because it's better than just having two boring establishment candidates.

    Link

     
  2. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #2
    My question is, could she be indicted for holding onto classified emails. And will she be indicted for it? Is there enough there to warrant the justice department throwing the book at her?
     
  3. Jess13 Suspended

    Jess13

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2013
    #3
  4. smallcoffee thread starter macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2014
    Location:
    North America
    #4
  5. LIVEFRMNYC macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    #5
    Support Snowden, Fry Hilary ........ Support Hypocrisy. :p
     
  6. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #6
    How is supporting a whistle blower the same thing as wanting a criminal brought to justice?
     
  7. LIVEFRMNYC macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    #7
    You proved my point. ;)
     
  8. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #8
    Good, so we agree that Snowden deserves a full pardon while Hillary deserves to rot in prison.
     
  9. maxsix Suspended

    maxsix

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2015
    Location:
    Western Hemisphere
    #9
    There's an overabundance of evidence. But that still doesn't mean much. The Clinton Machine is highly skilled in the art of bribery corruption and intimidation. If they were going to go after her in earnest she'd already be in jail. But this the Queen of Corruption, she's more Teflon than Bubba.
     
  10. anonymouslurker macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 16, 2012
    #10
    For breaking the same laws re: handling classified information?
     
  11. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #11
    Totally different situations, despite being superficially similar. Snowden leaked classified information to the press, while Hillary is allegedly guilty of being sloppy concerning the responsibilities of her position.
     
  12. LIVEFRMNYC macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    #12
    If that's the hypocrisy you want to embrace, then sure.
     
  13. fitshaced macrumors 68000

    fitshaced

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2011
    #13
    And you might believe either one is wrong and the other is not so wrong. You could be on either side of that fence and feel you have the moral higher ground. I'd be on the side of Snowden doing a good thing. That's not to say I believe Hilary is the 'Queen of Corruption', that's plain silly.
     
  14. Renzatic Suspended

    Renzatic

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2011
    Location:
    Gramps, what the hell am I paying you for?
    #14
    I could argue that neither one of them deserve to be in prison. But if the allegations against Hillary are true, I don't know if I'd trust either with a high end government position ever again.
    --- Post Merged, Jan 29, 2016 ---
    So would I. But we're comparing Snowden's apples to Hillary's oranges on the basis that both are fruit. The better comparison would be to Petraeus.
     
  15. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #15
    Snowden was exposing a corrupt system, Hillary was just careless. Now Hillary should have known better while Snowden was just doing what he thought was right.
     
  16. LIVEFRMNYC macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    #16
    Considering over 60 thousand Federal government emails were compromised by cyber attacks recently, and no attacks on Hilary's server. Just a slap on the wrist is doable.
     
  17. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #17
    But who had access to Hillary's server and still have those classified emails stored away somewhere.

    Isn't this just another example for stronger encryption not less.
     
  18. anonymouslurker macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 16, 2012
    #18
    Absolutely correct... one of them had intent.
     
  19. LIVEFRMNYC macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    #19
    Not Swonden :p

    I agree.
     
  20. MacNut macrumors Core

    MacNut

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2002
    Location:
    CT
    #20
    Agreed, Hillary intended to be president. :D
     
  21. DakotaGuy macrumors 68040

    DakotaGuy

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    South Dakota, USA
    #21
    I predict if Clinton is indicted Joe Biden once again enters the picture. The DNC knows darn well that although Bernie might be a good guy, his nomination guarantees a GOP win in November. Now if that Republican is Marco Rubio or John Kasich I don't really have an issue with it, but if it's Trump or Cruz I hope the Democrats run someone other then Bernie.
     
  22. diazj3 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2008
    #22
    Careless?

    More like CORRUPT... the reason she set that home server up was to hide and control anything that might compromise her 2016 run. But all communications as State Department secretary are not hers to hide and pick for her own political gain. I assume they are official communications of the US Government, and therefore, property of its citizens.
     
  23. LIVEFRMNYC macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    #23
    And the actual content she's supposedly hiding that's going to compromise her is ........................ ????????
     
  24. diazj3 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2008
    #24
    Doesn't matter the content... would it be acceptable to you that your bank executive used his personal email account - instead of the banks - to conduct business? would you trust him/her?

    However, some issues have risen, but nothing clear, since she and her lawyers had a very nice chance to scrub anything that might compromise her. I would guess destroying any information of the state department would be against the law.

    The simple fact that she did that should be prosecuted. Imagine if every government employee or official did the same...?

    She was working for the american people, not herself. There's a reason she was paid a salary.
     
  25. LIVEFRMNYC macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    #25
    If you are that passionate about it, you should advocate prison time for Karl Rove too. He did the same, and even worst was years of emails unaccounted for.

    Same with Sarah Palin, which I believed used a freaking Yahoo account to conduct official govt business. LOL

    Then you have jolly ol' Chris Christie who also did the same, which by the way is running of POTUS too. :eek:
    Let's lock his ass up!!!!

    Pretty sure a google search will produce a whole lot more.
     

Share This Page