Slashdot Mirror
US Gov't Confirms Clinton Emails Contained Top-Secret Information (thenextweb.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Just days before candidates begin primary season with caucuses in Iowa and New Hampshire, the Obama administration confirmed for the first time that Hillary Clinton's emails did contain sensitive information. The Associated Press reports that seven of these email chains, are being withheld from the press because they contain information deemed to be "top secret" and that 37 pages included messages described by intelligence officials as "special access programs" — meaning, highly restricted and closely guarded government secrets.
She already confirmed they didn't.
This is yet another irrational attack by the Republicans.
"The American People are sick and tired of hearing about [her] damn emails."
I'm not voting for her in the primaries, and she probably did fuck up w/operational security big-time. I don't think it was with malice-- I'm sure it is not anything beyond the usual hyprocritical fuckery from high up national security and diplomatic executives (didn't Clapper or someone just get their email hacked by a high schooler? guess so).
The real scandal in this arena is her simultaneous misinformed condemnation of Snowden, not this email "bombshell" three days before the first caucus. Seriously, who gives a shit? There are important issues like who does and doesn't get massive financial support from wall street to complain about.
I swear, Clinton lives in her own little reality. Her husband was impeached. She was caught lying soooooo many times. People generally don't like and distrust her. She got caught in like a dozen scandals. Now she's in the middle of possible federal charges and she's running for president! In fact, she got endorsed by Planned Parenthood and even their turbo-liberal base started lashing out at her and them. On what planet does she think she's going to win the election? The fact that she's still running is incontrovertible proof of mental illness and I don't think that's a great qualification for president of the USA.
Hillary for Prison 2016!
And vote for Donald Trump! :-)
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
Nobody cares!
There, I fixed your headline for you.
Vote for Chuthulu. The ultimate evil and skip all these wannabees.
We would be in jail by now . . . .
What time is her perp walk scheduled?
The people voting for her don't care.
The problem with democracy is that you can't keep people from voting badly.
...other 15. It is pretty obvious that googletagmanager.com must be blocked, the same goes with sharethrough.com. I'm pretty certain that goroost.com is up to no good as well. You always have to consider the source and it appears that neither of these sites can be trusted since they are both more interested in serving up malware than they are in delivering non-biased untainted news.
Time is what keeps everything from happening all at once.
Until the details come out of who sent them, when they were classified, and who should have known it was problem material, there is not much use in speculating at this point.
Also note that the "regular" office server she allegedly should have been using was NOT designed for classified info either. The same issue would still exist: classified stuff winding up on the wrong equipment. Whether anybody would then still know or care in that case is another matter.
Table-ized A.I.
And I really don't care. Gov servers had coded back doors being exploited this whole time. So pick your poison
I wish news organizations would press her harder with followup questions. I was listening to a NPR (my main source of news) doing a question and answer with Hillary.
NPR: Did you send or receive classified e-mails?
Hillary: I did not receive or send e-mails marked classified.
NPR should have followed up with: Did you discuss with anyone over your private unsecured e-mails system anything that should have been classified? (To have done that would would have been illegal)
During this Q&A with Hillary, she laughed and said that one of the e-mails that is now being classified was of someone sending her a New York Times article. How could it be classified if it was in the newspaper?
(I spent a year in Iraq supporting the US Army. At one point, a co-worker gave a google earth picture to me (by hand) of area around us. He pointed out that the picture originally was not classified because it came from google earth. But then he pointed out that he had made some markings on the picture and now it was classified.)
NPR should have followed up with Hillary: In this e-mail did the person have classified knowledge about the subject of the newspaper article, and did he make comments about the article. (As in my example above, if someone with classified knowledge made any comments about the article and sent it over a non secure e-mail system, it would be illegal)
(disclaimer: I am a Bernie Sanders supporter)
here's what i'm gathering from all this: the government has not secured its email system. if you are sending sensitive information outside of intranets you control, you have lost control of the information. so the question is, why will their email system send any information anywhere if it handles highly sensitive information? why aren't they using an encrypted email system? why does their security rely on the users? why is their system so damn insecure?!
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
... and still be elected, and people care about Hillary Clinton's emails? Isn't this political system a bit messed up??
We are all cows who have no future. Moo.
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
The people here defending her are a clear example of what's wrong with, not only this country, but the world in general. They put politics in before character. She's a liberal Democrat and the many people that strongly identify with liberal Democrats, such as the indoctrinated college students who feel more enlightened and sophisticated than the rest of the commons they pretend to protect, will ignore the crimes she's committed, the lies she's said, and the overall elitist, privileged people and special interest groupa she really represents. The evidence doesn't matter, they'll do all they can to dismiss or discredit it, no matter how ridiculous the efforts are needed to do so. They really are no different than those people that are religious zealots, whether it be radicalized Muslims or Christians or Jews. Those that follow politics this blindly (left or right - liberal or conservative) are dangerous as they will allow any violent, crazy, lying sociopath to hold ultimate power and, not only ignore crimes and atrocities that are committed, but actually defend them, whether it's online bullying like you see here in the comment section with insults thinly veiled as "discussion" or "fact", or picketing and protesting, or even violent, illegal actions that extremists commit whether it's eco terrorists, Black Lives Matter, Oregan militias, both pro and anti-abortionists, or radicalized Islamists. The list of groups you could discuss are thousands in numbers. Groups. Organizations. All for the good of the people, so they claim. They are all returning people to tribal violence in some form or another. The followers turned community leaders, disseminating their propaganda . They're all claiming it's for the better of humanity in some way, shape, or form. Just as the people of Germany were manipulated by Hitler and his Nazi party to believe they were doing the right thing. They were told it was for a greater good. These people were the judge and jury, the guiding light. And, not supporting them meant you represented all that was wrong. You were shamed, bullied, and dismissed. If only they could get rid of you, the world would be a better place. And so the hypocrisy of this rant is made visible here at the end... and you thought you had me. Welcome to the club.
How is she going to control the world's most powerful country when she can't even control her own husband?
Treason has specific legal meaning...What she did was criminal, but doesn't come close to treason.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/us...
Just another day in Paradise
Correct. She "did not receive or send e-mails marked classified" because she directed her aides to strip all the markings and send it via non-secure means.
She had a home email server and knew how to use it. We should elect this uber geek. It'll be a win for tech circles everywhere!
A lot of you seem to have completely lost your morals, and it's frankly disgusting.
If Hillary Clinton is actually found guilty of something, then yes she should be held accountable. We can throw her in jail, right after Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and any one else involved in what happened at Gitmo and elsewhere. Until all those assholes are behind bars, you can all shut the fuck up. Compared to torturing people who may not have done anything wrong (after all, they never had a trial), I DON'T GIVE A FUCK ABOUT THIS STORY.
Because no ex post facto law means that since the emails were not classified and were on a government owned server for unclassified emails and documents at the time means that Clinton isn't guilty of squat, any more than the entire US government is guilty because they owned the servers that these "classified" documents resided that was meant for only unclassified material.
I merely see this as karma for what the Clinton campaign (with the willing and likely leading help of the mainstream media who don't want to see billions in political ads and the billions in viewer ratings to drop when money is taken out of politics) did to scupper and silence Bernie Sanders.
That still doesn't make Clinton a criminal on this issue, though.
If I did this. I really, really don't understand how she did this, pretended it didn't matter. I held a clearance and my expectation is that I'd be making plans for my family to live without me for a bunch of years.
The main problem is that in this fucked up political system you don't vote for someone or something, you vote against someone or something. If one of the possible candidates and his or her position is so unthinkable that you cannot stomach the idea of it becoming reality, it doesn't matter what the alternative is. It could be a mass rapist and murderer and you'd still have to vote for this option.
Just ponder how much Trump has to alienate voters who consider themselves, as you put it, "enlightened and sophisticated" that they think this bitch is the BETTER alternative.
Sorry: The less horrible one.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
And if so, who is it?
Correct. She "did not receive or send e-mails marked classified" because she directed her aides to strip all the markings and send it via non-secure means.
Any other American that is not a Limousine Liberal Elite would be in JAIL right now.
So America, are you going to condone the diseased actions of, and lick the anus of the equivalent of, Royalty on your shores? The time has come to decide.
Hint: George Washington turned down the proposal to make him King at the time. He said there should never be a King in America.
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin.
(1) The first sentence of the article straight up says she denies doing what you've accused her of.
(2) The article explains that it is completely normal to remove the classified parts of a document in order to declassify the rest of it. As someone who has held several clearances I did this on a regular basis as part of my job in order to get debug logs of classified computers out to support engineers at the manufacturer.
(3) The Washington Times is owned by the Moonies - they are not a reputable news organization. You've put your trust in them because they confirm your biases, not because they do trustworthy reporting.
Hilly started her public career coming out of college and working (I believe as an intern) on the commission investigating Watergate, yet nobody (as far as I'm aware) has drawn the obvious parallel to her release of 50000 emails (which we all know have been pre-culled; the "top secret" emails being mentioned here are the ones that slipped through that process) and the release of Nixon's Watergate tapes with 18 minutes missing.
-Styopa
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
You are welcome on my lawn.
The Clintons are royalty and nothing will happen to them. Jail and penalties are reserved for mere mortals like you and I.
I'm sure I'm missing something but why do they actually have to find TS emails? It might not be illegal but it should be: if you have a reasonable expectation that you'll be receiving classified materials you should be responsible for ensuring you are prepared for securing them. She did the equivalent of having a PO box at a local FedEx and telling people to send her documents there. That alone should be illegal.
She is not charged yet.
Zerohedge has multiple sources that 100 FBI agents are investigating the e-mails, the handling of her private server (that was insecurely configured), and bribes (us donations) to the Clinton foundation from foreign entities.
This will come out, if there is no justice dept. action, there will be a revolt by the security operatives and FBI as they see a double standard, and letting a criminal off the hook for political reasons.
The real issue is why she did it, running the un-offical private server to avoid FOIA investigations for her possibly nefarious activities. In violation of records retention she deleted thousands of e-mails with her people doing the judgment instead of a federal archivist.
The whole thing stinks, and she is unsuitable for president as a result.
Somebody sent to me an on-line order confirmation including your name, e-mail address, billing address, date of birth, social security number and credit card number with 3-digit security code.
I forwarded it to Slashdot.org, a public forum.
I cannot be indicted for conspiracy to commit identity theft because It was not ``marked as private information at the time'' and there is no direct evidence that anyone has used it for any unauthorized purchases.
Yeah, right.
Capisci?
Error: NSE - No Signature Error
If you actually bothered to look into the DETAILS, usually it's right-wing spin.
I have heard her say, with her own voice, "There was no classified information on my e-mail server".
So, now we know for sure there was...
She is lying... That isn't spin, that is a fact.
Lying is knowingly saying something that's not true. If she honestly thought that there was no classified information, then she was not lying, she was just wrong. Mens rea and all that.
This doesn't make what she did IT-/procedural-wise any better, but it doesn't (necessarily) make her a liar. I highly doubt she has the detailed knowledge to set up an Exchange server herself, and so trusted (mistakenly, in hind-sight) someone else to do it for her.
this is an attempt to get her emails so they can leak 'em during a court hearing and create another scandal. The Republicans knew some of the docs would be reclassified to prevent that and then they could cry out "See!See!". It's a win-win either way, or to quote a fark-wit: truly this is Hilary's Benghazi.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
State Department at 8:02 CST , Saturday Jan, 30th, 2016
John Kirby spokesman.
No documents at the time identified as Classified were sent. .....
So the Hillary haters will say ... but later they were.
You may be right, you may be wrong.
But at the time they were created and sent - and possibly read - they were not.
If you have that level of knowledge of the future - would you tell me who is going to win the Super Bowl ?
Fuck off troll.
They were not classified when she dealt with them. Why do you post false information?
Republican desperation at the unstoppable Hillary Sanders ticket.
The State Department gets stuff that eventually becomes classified. First contact on Einstein's famous letter to FDR war with the State Department through Belgium's ambassador. Took a while to catch on that it was important.
"Just ponder how much Trump has to alienate voters who consider themselves, as you put it, "enlightened and sophisticated" that they think this bitch is the BETTER alternative."
You assume they vote for her because they think she is the "BETTER alternative". Just the opposite, they vote for her because of the political party she represents. It has nothing to do with character, as the previous post pointed out. That is the problem. Their opinions on who is better is worthless anyways, as they're morons.
Chelsea Clinton apparently is already laying the ground work for her own political career... with an eye to being president one day. Its all quite delightful.
The Bush Dynasty is also burning. Watching Jeb fail to get anywhere is delicious.
We've had enough of Clintons' and Bushs'. Let someone else run. If the democrats really can do no better than Bill Clinton's wife then apparently they have not taken the office seriously. More is the pity.
And really, Hillary could have perhaps had it if she had so much as taken her gimme job of Sec State seriously. But she did not. She went home early while her diplomats died. She was told to not permit old Sidney access to the State Department and she did it anyway. And the email server... and the lies... so many lies.
We'll see where this goes... The FBI is furious at the lack of prosecution... obstruction from the "Justice" Department is going to have long term consequences if it is understood that the law bends in the favor of any party in power.
Really... we're getting nearer and nearer the moment where we just rip each other's eyes out of our heads from spite. And all because some people have a hard time with democracy.
Oh well... We shall see where this goes. Regardless... I shall enjoy the fires.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
The impeachment was not about sex. Sex was not an article of the impeachment. James Carville and Paul Begalla et al helped the Democrats re-frame the issue as "about sex" in order to deflect the public and invalidate the mess to protect the Clinton presidency - and they succeeded. Gullible idiots like you who continue to carry the water for that highly-orchestrated political spin are why it still works.
Bill Clinton got elected, in part, by pretending to be a great advocate for women. Part of this was his support for a bill, which he eventually signed into law, that made it so any American man dragged into court and accused of sexual harassment could be forced to testify under oath about all details of his entire sexual history and be harshly punished for any perjury. Unfortunately for Bill Clinton, he had left a decades-long trail of women in his wake and one of them in particular decided to use his own law against him.
When Bill Clinton got dragged into court by Paula Jones and HIS OWN LAW was applied to him, he lied. By his own law, he was to be severely punished. This was the core of the problem. A President of the United States made himself above the very law he had signed, like some old pre-Magna Carta European monarch. As chief of the executive branch, who is responsible for throwing people into prison for lying under oath in court, he lied under oath in court.
Unlike Republicans in the Nixon era, who honorably joined with their political opponents to get rid of one of their own, the Democrats of the Clinton era joined circles and announce they would not get rid of Bill, no matter what. In doing so, they assured that no President of either party will ever again face impeachment since the GOP will never again be chumps who assume the Democrats are honorable.
Had the Democrats only upheld the rule of law and joined in impeaching Clinton:
1. Al Gore would have automatically become president
2. George W Bush would not have been elected in 2000
3. The Iraq war would not have happened
4. Had he done well, Gore would have served his second term from 2000 to 2004 and all subsequent political events would be different:
(4a) Sarah Palin would not have been John McCain's 2008 running mate and therefore would have remained a little-known Alaska governor with a good reputation for fighting corruption in both parties.
(4b) Impeachment would still be a check on all Presidents to keep them from going rogue
(4c) Obama would not have been elected in 2008, and therefore would not have destroyed any semblance of bipartisanship in Washington DC by announcing "I won, you lost" and ramming through healthcare and a doubling of the national debt and tens of thousands of pages of new regulations with NO Republican input.
(4d) The Democrats in Washington DC would still have honor and more Republicans would be willing to trust them in political deals
(4e) Trump would be planning more hotels and renewing his reality TV contracts
5. Race relations would be better because:
(5a) Obama would not have charged into every already dicey race-related police issue and boosted the racial issues for his own political benefit and without any positive contribution
(5b) Obama supporters would not have spent the past 7 years accusing everybody who disagrees with Democrat policies of being a racists who only opposes because Obama is black.
(5c) Black America might not have been so severely harmed by Obama's total disregard for the borders and the resulting crushing of the employment market for young minority AMERICAN CITIZENS in favor of cheap imported illegal aliens.
Other interesting things that would be different:
1. When the orbiter Columbia was lost, rather than deciding to replace the shuttles with a monster rocket and getting bogged-down in it, and then in a political fight to replace it with SLS (and Bush43 + Obama have done), the X-33 SSTO program championed by Gore would likely have been put on steroids.
2. Global climate stuff championed by Gore would be better supported by the White House
The Democrats would vote for Satan, if he was running on the DNC ticket. Horns could literally be start growing out of her head, and she would still get 90%+ of the democratic vote.
unless she wanted to run as an independent ala Ralph Nader.
She has to be at or near the top of the list of potential VP choices for Sanders, however....
Remember "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters"? Help make it a reality again! http://soylentnews.org
None of the information was labeled as classified or classified when she received it. It later became classified. Prior to being classified, she could have put it on TV for all the world to see without breaking any rules or laws. Further, most of the information was distributed throughout the department so that hundreds of employees read the so-called classified information. It seems that people like the CIA and the military posted the information and forgot to control or label its release. Her enemies are trying to create another false issue just as they did with Obama's birth certificates. The right wing is ultra dangerous and are trying to overthrow the US government.
Why would you fuck yourself? Is that something you enjoy?
It is the whole package
Benghazi
Her "Charitable" foundation
Her questionable financial supporters
Her claims of doing the people's interest when she is obviously a right wing (republican?)
(I have always insisted that the left wing exists only to do the right wings dirty work)
Her obvious lying, She is a proven bull shit artist of collossal magnatude
Then you add the email crap which (whether or not it was treasonous) was a complete security violation.
Do not distract yourself arguing single components of top secret communications, look at the big picture and the mentality/attitude behind it.
Is this who you want steering the ship?
Rick B.
Yes and there we have it. The TRUTH burns, it burns so very badly. The absolute best the Liberal Intelligentsia can do is this:
Fuck off troll.
It happens every time these so-called elites are caught in their own non-logic and lies. For example, Hillary collecting and directing a team of degenerates to attack all the Bimbo Eruptions are quite the norm in their sad cognitive dissonance driven "world."
Bill Clinton proved that rape is perfectly okay with Ol' Bernie Sanders, and Liberals, as long as it is a liberal doing the raping.
> The impeachment (and subsequent acquittal) of her husband was clearly part of a smear campaign.
The impeachment was because he weaseled his way out of admitting to having sexual activity with interns in a sexual harassment lawsuit by one of the interns. He managed to finagle a definition of "sex" that may not include "shoving a cigar into Monica's pussy" by demanding to know exactly what sex means (and what "is" means, for that matter).
This was kinda relevant because it really appears that he was pressuring women under his command for sex (using the ordinary meaning of the word). But instead of becoming a monster of rape culture, he's a hero of the progressives because they blame the Republicans for sending him loose women or something? He got disbarred for that because even lawyers think that what he did in court, under oath was disreputable.
Sure, the impeachment was political, but that doesn't mean he did no wrong. And Democrats united to keep one of their own who pressures women under their command for sexual activities in the workplace. You can't tell me that if they didn't have self-interest in keeping him that he wouldn't have been a monster rapist for trying to use his position of power to push women down.
If you don't want the Times, fine. How about CNN?
I'm sorry, but very few, if any, of Hillary's supporters were not already Hillary supporters when Trump entered the race. Which means, they thought Hillary was a GOOD choice to be President before there were any other candidates.
The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. James Madison
If you had a family member working for the feds, and tried to have a real conversation with them about Edward Snowden, you wouldn't have asked that question.
The impeachment (and subsequent acquittal) of her husband was clearly part of a smear campaign. It is of no interest to anyone but Bill's wife into whose mouth he puts his cock.
(1) The impeachment was over lying to a judge in court while under oath. That it always illegal. It doesn't matter the topic.
(2) He was not acquitted. As part of the plea bargain he agreed to various terms including the surrendering of his license to practice law.
Two political gossip threads on the front page. *facepalm*
(1) The first sentence of the article straight up says she denies doing what you've accused her of.
Oh. Well, okay then! Yanno, Nixon said the same thing.
(2) The article explains that it is completely normal to remove the classified parts of a document in order to declassify the rest of it.
Sure, but nowhere in the discussion is there any mention of declassifying the document in question. She just told her minion to get rid of those pesky "TOP SECRET" markings and send it via gmail. Little bit of a difference there, sparky.
(3) The Washington Times is owned by the Moonies - they are not a reputable news organization.
Not especially relevant, since a simple Google search resulted in CBS as the first hit. Hardly a bastion of the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy.
They seem to be engaged in journalism.
Washington Times journalists win 10 Dateline Awards
Times staffers collect 21 local journalism awards
much of left-wing thought is a kind of playing with fire by people who don't even know that fire is hot - George Orwell
I understand your problem - you are badly confused.
Prisoners of War are not entitled to trials. The US didn't torture anyone. (It water boards its own pilots and special forces and that isn't torture.) Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and the rest will never go to jail for prosecuting a war against international terrorists making war against the US.
If you "DON'T GIVE A FUCK ABOUT THIS STORY" then go comment on one that you do. The rest of us are interested in it, so move along.
They were not classified when she dealt with them.
Why do you post false information?
A document isn't classified because it's mark as such. It's classified because of the material it contains. Please ask anyone who's ever dealt with it...you clearly haven't. I have.
Just another day in Paradise
Now there's an unimpeachable source: The Washington Times! I wonder what Fox News has to say on this point?
Hillary gave a press release somewhere (I can't find the link) shortly after that revelation where she said that cleaning the emails of their classified parts so that the unclassified portions could be distributed was a common practice, and her aide knew exactly what she meant. Her "remove heading" wording was merely shorthand, according to her, and that the aide was a fastidious person when it came to knowing how to clean per guidelines.
Table-ized A.I.
They were not classified when she dealt with them.
Why do you post false information?
Your lie has been debunked at least a thousand times on slashdot. Why do you keep reposting it?
SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling
Trump's hair is an insult to "straight white Christian males". His overall appearance is an insult. Every time I look at the clown, I want to either puke, or laugh. He doesn't have to say a damned word to insult me - he exists, and that is insult enough.
All the same, his blathering makes more sense than that of any other nominee.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
As much as I dislike Hillary (and the Clintons, in general), and with the experience I have with classified materials... *If* the information was classified long after the fact, I'm finding it hard to fault her (and this pains me to say). If it was classified at the time it was recorded, however, she should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law, as *anyone* read into a Secret, Top Secret, or any SCI (or higher) classification signs an NDA with the US Government, with serious consequences. Just look at Snowden, who has no political ties. Same consequences should apply if she knowingly let at-the-time classified data be stored on systems that weren't cleared for it...
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." --H.L. Mencken
They were not classified when she dealt with them.
Why do you post false information?
That is simply a LIE. Image that, coming from a Hillary campaign worker. She "shows the way" doesn't she.
Hillary striped the classified designations off the documents before sending them on to her private email server. You know, clintononline.com. Doing that alone is a federal crime. The investigation simply found these documents and now the squawking drones are claiming it's all "retroactive." Bull.
Admittedly, this only applied after 29-December-2009, so anything prior to that would need to be considered in light of EO 13292...
Nonetheless, there's not much discussion of the Secretary of State's responsibilities as a delegated classification authority.
Does being a delegated classification authority merely allow classification of information, or does it impose a requirement to classify information appropriately?
I suspect that the intent (and likely the wording) is the latter. In that case, when information has its classification upgraded after the fact, does that mean the responsible delegated classification authority was amiss in their responsibilities?
Finally, aren't some types of information "born classified", and aren't there general guidelines to this in EO 13292 and/or EO 13526?
Well?
I am at a loss, since it said in one report she received Top Secret emails. IF they were classified as Top Secret, then they would have to be on the SIPRNET, which cannot email NIPRNET or the Internet. So if that is the case, HOW did the emails get to her own server on the internet? If she was sending, and they were classified as Top Secret, who did she send to the SIPRNET? Not condoning her actions or anything else supporting or bashing her. I am merely curious how this connection worked, since they are defied as to NOT be connected.
To be fair, people are generally voting against the political party they fear altogether. If the mass rapist and murderer is the only candidate strong enough to oppose whomever the feared party will nominate, then that's who the voters must settle on.
Please, none of the emails were classified at the time they were sent. These "charges" are all just political noise by people who'd rather see the Republicans running against Bernie Sanders.
I'm sure I'm not the first to say this on this article...why the fudge isn't Hillary in jail? Average Joe Citizen does anything even remotely like this and he'd be disappeared in a hurry...
http://undecidedgames.blogspot.com