Posted on May 13, 2016
Watch Judge Jeanine Offer The DEFINITIVE Criminal & Political Case Against Hillary Clinton
686
4
2
2
2
0
Let's make a real effort here and put politics aside. Those of us who oppose Hillary Clinton's nomination, let alone her election to the Presidency, have already vented our spleen innumerable times. Those who support her in spite of her scandals have defended her with equal vigor. Can we, instead, focus on the implications for security? On the statement that this case makes to all of us who handle or have handled classified materials? How do you feel knowing that despite all the care you took to protect your nation and its secrets, a high-ranking official distributed them without regard for the law? To be honest, as the operations officer in a strategic communications center for a major Army command center, I saw many of our nation's highest secrets published in the New York Times before the heat of my fingers left the papers. I long suspected that members of Congress liked to impress people with their access and handed them out just to prove their personal importance. But this case rankles. How do you feel?
Security
Justice
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 2
2
2
0
I consider myself "Conservative" and have voted for the following for President:
1984 - Reagan
1988 - GHW Bush
1992 - Perot
1996 - Clinton
2000 - GW Bush
2004 - GW Bush
2008 - McCain
2012 - Romney
This time it's a no brainier, I can not and will not support/vote for someone that has mishandled classified information in such a way that if I did it while I was on AD (I had the clearance, access and ntk to messages of the same classification she did, with the exception of SAP), I would still be in prison for.
Those without military service, and those with, that don't have reason or clearance to be involved with or handle classified material are under the disillusion that:
a) it is the marking that make a message classified
b) she had the authority to declassify any/all messages
c) she had the option to have a "private" email server for gov't work
d) since she wasn't the primary recipient of some of these messages, she can't be held responsible
e) since some of these were allegedly "retro-actively" classified, she is in the clear.
My vote for Trump is more of a vote against Hell-ary.
1984 - Reagan
1988 - GHW Bush
1992 - Perot
1996 - Clinton
2000 - GW Bush
2004 - GW Bush
2008 - McCain
2012 - Romney
This time it's a no brainier, I can not and will not support/vote for someone that has mishandled classified information in such a way that if I did it while I was on AD (I had the clearance, access and ntk to messages of the same classification she did, with the exception of SAP), I would still be in prison for.
Those without military service, and those with, that don't have reason or clearance to be involved with or handle classified material are under the disillusion that:
a) it is the marking that make a message classified
b) she had the authority to declassify any/all messages
c) she had the option to have a "private" email server for gov't work
d) since she wasn't the primary recipient of some of these messages, she can't be held responsible
e) since some of these were allegedly "retro-actively" classified, she is in the clear.
My vote for Trump is more of a vote against Hell-ary.
(2)
(0)
0
0
0
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google