@UNIranch wrote:
I get a kick how Trey Gowdy is getting all excited about these emails when he has his own private server as well..are we sure .his emails are secure...most of the Emails from Bengahzi would have been to officials in the State Dept whose emails have already been viewed by investigators... this is a other dog and pony show...these clowns are gonna phluck themselves right out of 2016...
The trouble with Hillary is she is old and mean. The press loves Bubba but they can't stand Hillary. They dislike her as much as Nixon. Oh they'll put up with her if it means they get to take a shot at repubs but most of the left wing media want her to go away. She's a greedy piece of crap and they know it. She makes them look bad and they won't stand for that.
snip-
Via the Right Scoop, if you’re following the Hillary e-mail saga you already know which form he means. It’s OF-109, which, per former DOJ lawyer Shannen Coffin, requires the employee to declare under penalties of perjury that she’s turned over all relevant records to the Department before leaving her position. Work-related e-mails, which Hillary didn’t turn over until two years after she stepped down as secretary, are relevant records. Which means, if she signed the form, she’s presumably guilty of perjury. If she didn’t sign the form, she’s guilty (or guiltier) of following irregular procedures to avoid the sort of accountability that’s routinely required of lesser mortals. You would think someone in State’s HR department could find the form and answer this question in 15 minutes but we’ve waited nearly a week for an answer. And we’ll have to keep on waiting, per Jen Psaki when she was asked about it again today. Which, actually, is bad news for Democrats: The longer this drags on, the more of a headache it is for Hillary. Better for her and for State if the Department just tells us the answer and tries to move on.
The fact that reporters keep asking means Psaki will probably have to tell us eventually, which means we can go ahead and start gaming out Hillary’s spin when she does. My guess is State will come back and say that Clinton never signed OF-109 (or that State’s archivist has misplaced the form), whether that’s actually true or not and even though she was supposed to under law. State’s already copped to horrible record-keeping practices; no one will blink if they further admit to having screwed up in failing to follow separation procedures for departing officials to the letter. If State can’t find the form then Hillary’s not guilty of perjury. If State can find the form then perjury is back in play, but remember that perjury is a crime of intent. You have to knowingly and willfully falsify facts to be guilty; an honest or pretend-honest mistake isn’t actionable. My guess is Hillary will claim that she told her aides shortly before she stepped down to turn over her work e-mails to State and the aides “forgot,” unbeknownst to our heroine. So she’ll have to make a new statement apologizing for the oversight and admitting that she should have supervised her staff more closely to make sure they had complied, and the press will treat that as some sort of noble “buck stops here” statement of fake-accountability by an obvious liar and we’ll all have a good laugh and then we’ll elect her president. It’s a great time to be alive.
http://hotair.com/archives/2015/03/16/ap-reporter-to-psaki-why-is-it-so-hard-to-find-out-whether-hil...
