Originally Posted by Guest

Originally Posted by Guest View Post
Intent is not required for some crimes, such as mishandling of classified information. And her ignorance of the law is pretty hard to convince, being she is a lawyer and being as she was instructed by the State Dept prior to her taking on the duties of SecState. And I am sure she was exposed to classified information as First lady and as senator. So, any excuse of ignorance is hard to prove. She was also told by the White House NOT to use her private server. She did so regardless and that shows the intent to violate. She also shows intent when she instructed her staff to remove classification markings and transmit them to her on the Internet, a felony. Any first year law student could convict her in court. She is protected right now. She won't see a court room until after the election.

You know nothing. There are RULES, break them and you're guilty. Whomever removed the classified markings is guilty. If she told someone else to remove the classification, she is guilty. ONLY the originator of the classified can remove the classification. She IS guilty. She IS being protected. We DO live in a corrupt banana republic.

Read the post over again. You are saying I know nothing and then you agree with what I said. Are you on drugs?

Originally Posted by Guest

If you went back in back in time, theoretically, and my son was inserted into the Bengazi situation, I would want someone like Trump to be deciding whether or not help was to be sent immediately, because it would. Unfortunately we already know what Hillary would do.

He would send bombers to bomb the facility your son would be in, then crow about killing the enemy.

Originally Posted by Guest

He would send bombers to bomb the facility your son would be in, then crow about killing the enemy.

Do you know ANYTHING about the military's capabilities when it comes to responding to Benghazi-like situations. Google "Marine FAST Team', maybe you'll learn something.