United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: Criminal Inquiry Is Sought in Clinton Email Account
Source:
CNBC
URL Source: http://www.cnbc.com/2015/07/23/crim ... ary-clintons-use-of-email.html
Published: Jul 24, 2015
Author: Michael S. Schmidt and Matt Apuzzo
Post Date: 2015-07-24 13:54:29 by redleghunter
Ping List: *2016 The Likely Suspects* Subscribe to *2016 The Likely Suspects*
Keywords: None
Views: 12690
Comments: 111
WASHINGTON — Two inspectors general have asked the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation into whether sensitive government information was mishandled in connection with the personal email account Hillary Rodham Clinton used as secretary of state, senior government officials said Thursday. The request follows an assessment in a June 29 memo by the inspectors general for the State Department and the intelligence agencies that Mrs. Clinton's private account contained "hundreds of potentially classified emails." The memo was written to Patrick F. Kennedy, the under secretary of state for management. It is not clear if any of the information in the emails was marked as classified by the State Department when Mrs. Clinton sent or received them. But since her use of a private email account for official State Department business was revealed in March, she has repeatedly said that she had no classified information on the account. The initial revelation has been an issue in the early stages of her presidential campaign. Poster Comment: 
Subscribe to *2016 The Likely Suspects*
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-39) not displayed.
.
.
.
#40. To: buckeroo (#37)
Another dodge by you. You're not being honest. You just don't want to hurt your bff's feelings. Pete thinks you're a bigot because you don't support pretend "fag marriage".
Then it will be the fault of some secretary or clerk that retyped it and handed it to her without telling her. NOTHING is EVER going to be her fault. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
In Pete's defense, he has only demonstrated that Sanders is just about as capable of any politician to destroy America. He is correct, too. GWBush was a lamb coming into office and destroyed America while destroying the ME, all for nothing. So, Sanders might just be another good candidate as well.
Not if Hillary or your commie Hero Sanders wins. Trump on the other hand and Hillary is off to jail.
lol. Have a great day Buck.
You have to give him a break. He has spent his whole adult life sucking up to various police chiefs and other authority figures,and now that he is retired he is reduced to sucking up to a web site owner in order to get his "authority fix". If anything we should feel sorry for him. He is rudderless in a sea of confusion without a master to tell him what to think and what to do. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Once again you are lying about me,and I haven't even been back all day. I am NOT a "fag lover". Unlike you,I am a Bill of Rights lover. And I have never once said that Bernie Sanders is the "best candidate" and "a conservative". What I wrote was "Sanders is more conservative than any of the alleged Republicans currently running when it comes to American jobs. If you believe Trump is serious,you HAVE to believe that pro-wrasslin is not fixed. Trump is Randy "Macho Man" savage without the muscles. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Are you going back to Sunday school to pray for us? Don't forget to have some water sprinkled on us and put a good word in for Donald Trump and my dead dawg "scruffy."
What I wrote was "Sanders is more conservative than any of the alleged Republicans currently running when it comes to American jobs. You just added the part about American jobs. You may have thought that but you never said that. You said he was the most consrvative of anyone running. Ted Cruz is pretty much pure conservative. So your statement is incorrect. Despite your new spin (when it comes to American jobs)
Gay marriage isn't in the bill of rights. It was never mentioned by any founder. Ever. Freedom of religion and the free exercise thereof is. Do you like freedom of religion? Since you consider them cults. Let me rephrase in sneakyspeak. Do you support freedom of "cults" and the free exercise of "cults"?
And yet another lie about me on the same thread. Guess what,Bucko? There are plenty of people who support traditional marriages that aren't obsessed with homosexuals as you are,and that have the odd notion that homosexuals have the same rights as every other citizen. And there is no THINK that drones like you discriminate against faggots. You do,and you think doing so makes you holier. I have no problem with that. You,like everyone else in a free country,are free to think anything you want to think. What you are NOT allowed to do is pass laws that discriminate against others that disagree with your superstitious beliefs. After all,nobody died and made YOu God. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
ROFLMAO! Will that be before or after he asks for the money back that he donated to her earlier election campaigns? Will it also mean that he won't invite her to any more parties? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
You said I and others were bigots and anti American because we didn't support you and the faggots trying to redefint marriage. It isn't a lie. You said that. So you're lying.
No,I did NOT. That was the key reason I made the post I made ON THE THREAD about his speech on bringing manufacturing and jobs back to America. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Before. Because he isn't going to ask for the money back. It was chump change.
No. Several times you just said he is the most conservative. I will give you that that is what you were thinking in your head. You didn't put it in words though. Not the several comments I read.
I don't think Trump will invite Hillary to any parties. I also don't think the owner/ceo of Macys will be invited to any more parties. John McCain is definately off the list.
Are you really THAT simple-minded? Where is heterosexual marriage mentioned in the Bill of Rights? Freedom of religion and the free exercise thereof is. Do you like freedom of religion? Since you consider them cults. Yes,even nutcases have a right to live their lives according to their beliefs,as long as they aren't infringing on the rights of others. Let me rephrase in sneakyspeak. Do you support freedom of "cults" and the free exercise of "cults"? Don't blame ME for designating your cult a cult,Bucko! It was the Catholic Church that first called all non-Catholic forms of Christianity cults,and since then all the Protestant cults have called competing Protestant relgigions cults,also. I didn't create that,I just repeated it to highlight you hypocrisy. But to answer your question,"YES,cults DO have as much right to practice their faith as anyone else in this country. If you needed my approval it wouldn't be a right,it would be a privilege. You just don't have the right to force others to share your views and values against their will,and you damn sure don't have the power to demand that government does it for you. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
It isn't. Marriage isn't a role for the federal government. Unless we the people decide we need the feds to fight the faggots. Then we can have an amendment or legislation. Marriage was already defined prior to the adoption of the constitution. So they saw no need to redefine it. Or they would have done such.
It isn't a lie. You said that. So you're lying. I apologize. I keep forgetting how truly ignorant you really are. "Marriage" is a big word that is defined many ways,but the general sense of the word is defined as "joining two as one". Like in manufacturing,when they join plastic and steel. Or in your world,where you unite male and female as one. Or in the homosexual world,where they unite whatever with whatever as one. Nobody is demanding you marry the man of your dreams,so deal with it. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Are you really THAT simple-minded? Where is heterosexual marriage mentioned in the Bill of Rights? Then why do you say that you aren't a "fag lover" and say that you support the bill or rights and I don't? Implying that fag pretend marriage is in the bill of rigths. That is kind of deceptive and dishonest.
Yeah, a couple of grand here,a couple of grand there,it's almost like it never happened,right? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I think, and sincerely hope, that McLunatic is off the list of US Senators after the next election. Unfortunately,Trump may have helped him out by attacking his courage as a Navy pilot. Draft Dodging trust fund children have no standing to question the courage of anyone that actually wore a uniform and risked their life,and that is the kind of thing that could get veterans and their families to rally around that senile old SOB again. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I agree with you on that,but it IS a matter that concerns states. Marriage was already defined prior to the adoption of the constitution Who defined it,the Big Guy in the Sky? The same guy that according to YOUR instruction manual impregnated another man's wife? Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I'm not a rich guy. But a couple of grand doesn't seem like that much to me. It must be like a nickel or penny to Trump. I understand as a business man of his magnitude. You have to play the political game or you will not be able to do business. So he gave them some chump change. It doesn't bother me in the least. Now if Jeb, or Graham, or Cruz gave her money. There would be hell to pay. Because there giving would be for different reasons. That is how I see it. I suspect that is how millions of others see it. Am I a bit hypocritical on this? Maybe but I don't think so. I'm telling you this so you can understand my thinking and perhaps lots of others. Trump is going to be able to get away with stuff others in the field wouldn't. And that is ok with me. Because I and others can see that he isn't a typical politican. He is there to solve serious problems with our debt, border etc. I won't agree with everything he does. But I respect him. He isn't going to get tied up in the kinds of debates you and I have about gay marriage or abortion. He may not be as against those as I am. But that is ok because unlike a Hillary or typical politican that isn't his main focus. He will be a good President. And like Reagan I expect you to come around. You're just so cynical from your experinces with being lied to for so may years. So your cynicism is to be expected. Hope that helps you understand where I and I think many others are coming from.
I have never ONCE said that homosexual marriage was in the Bill of Rights. The Bill of Rights GUARANTEES ALL Americans they have the same rights as all other Americans. Including the right to marry who they wish if that person wants to marry them. If homosexuals don't have that right,neither do heterosexuals. Or even asexuals,who marry for companionship or to other personal reasons. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
It's not,and I am sure that just like everyone else he found a way around election laws and donated more. If there is one thing that Trump loves as much as himself,it is money. He is not going to give a dime to anyone unless he thinks he will benefit from it. Good to see you don't care about him contributing to the Clinton,Kennedy,and NYC manorial campaigns,though. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
The Bill of Rights GUARANTEES ALL Americans they have the same rights as all other Americans. Including the right to marry who they wish Ok let me disect your sentence. You first say you "I have never ONCE said that homosexual marriage was in the Bill of Rights." Then you say"The Bill of Rights GUARANTEES ALL Americans they have the same rights as all other Americans. Including the right to marry who they wish" So it includes it but doesn't include it. You're talking out of both sides of your sperm receptor.
So when we are losing money to China in trade. And to Mexico in trade. Trump will see we are losing money and it is no benefit to us. Sounds awesome. Thank for making me like Trump even more. :) You're telling us he will get rid of NAFTA and have better trade deals with China, Japan etc. Awesome.
I see why you like Bernie. He gives out money. Trump isn't a socialist so why do you think he owes anyone any money? You're part of the give me give me Bernie Fagade.
It didn't but it does now. But given the contortions the court had to go through to find this protected right, it opens the door to marriages between ANY two or more people.
No,I am telling you he will never be elected,and even if he is,he won't have the authority to any of that on his own and nobody in either the DNC or the RNC is going to back him if he tries. Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
He already got the first sanctuary cityu legislation passed. He isn't even President yet. He will use the bully pulpit better then anyone has. He will call them stupid and dumb then they will cave when he is President. He is going to win Pete. You can thank me in a few years when you realize you were wrong.
Just so you know, Stone drinks the cup of water for his opinions fron some far off planet called "bullshite"; it isn't all his fault; he was brought up by CIA propaganda. Give the poor man a bit of tyme to fall off his roof again. Sonner or later he will "get it."
You and the other kooks keep bitching about how evil both the RNC and DNC is... and now you're bragging about how they won't play nice with Trump. Seems like anything the RNC & DNC hates, you should endorse. You are more confused that Bruce Jenner. I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
Talk about yourself about being a socialist living off the fat o' the land, such as yourself; it would be more apropos. I know, it is not all your fault ... you didn't plan your path as a free American; you weren't educated; you were trained like a dawg. You allowed the government to grab your balls to restrain your existence.
Ha ha... let the libtards boil in anger. No more socialist Dems, no more weak filthy RINO's. Now they gotta a real problem... A RICH INDEPENDENT THAT CANT BE BOUGHT.
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
Is Rand still your first choice? He seems to have disappeared. He is fighting to defund planned parenthood, which is good in my view.
Is Rand still your first choice? He seems to have disappeared. He is fighting to defund planned parenthood, which is good in my view. I like Rand... and if Rand and Trump were equally viable, I'd probably vote Rand because I'm a little more confident in his desire to never shit on the bill of rights, more so than Trump. However, if Trump is the best chance at a non (D) win, I'll gladly vote for him in a New York second. I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
Sorry, Charlie - Of this, $612,083 are to candidates or parties identifiable either as Republican or Democratic. Of that amount, $320,300 of that have been to the Democratic Party and Democratic candidates; $291,783 to Republican committees and candidates. That’s 52% of his giving to identifiable political giving to Democrats. Perhaps more illuminating: In 2010, he made $102,200 in political donations, $83,400 were to Republicans, including a $50,000 check in October to American Crossroads, a PAC cofounded by Karl Rove. Before 2010, when we could infer he was less serious about running for the Republican nomination, 59% of his political donations were to Democrats (again, setting aside donations not identifiable with either party). Who are his favorites? On the left side of the aisle: $20,350 to Charles Rangel, the Harlem-based Congressman $9,900 to Chuck Schumer $9,400 to Harry Reid $9,000 to various Kennedys, mainly Ted. $5,500 to John Kerry On the right side of the aisle: $13,200 to John McCain (excluding any McCain affiliated PACs) $8,300 Arlen Specter, former Republican Senator who eventually turned Democratic to salvage his career. $9,500 to Mark Foley, the disgraced former Florida politician $8,250 to south Jersey Congressman Frank LoBiondo $6,500 to Sue Kelly, a former congressperson from upstate New York. Of the $131,950 donations to organizations not identified as affiliated with a party by OpenSecrets and non-affiliated candidates: $4,800 went to Charlie Crist, the former Florida governor who ran for Senate as an independent. $1,000 to independent candidate Joe Lieberman (who also received Trump donations when a Democrat) $50,000 went to the Trump NY Delegate Committee in 1999, presumably in connection with the effort to draw a political convention to New York City. See the data yourself at OpenSecrets.org Trump certainly appears to be drawing unusual backers. As I previously reported, a left-leaning PAC that previously backed Obama, John Kerry and Howard Dean is mulling back a candidate Trump. GrandIsland - you have too much tyme on your hands ... why not go out and be that street crossing guard that you once were? You were best at that sort of thing.
Comments (81 - 111) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestDo you agree with your good friend Pete that people who support Traditional marriage (marriage) are bigots and discriminate against faggots? Your question makes no sense.
#41. To: TooConservative (#23)
A SoS has classification rights over documents they write, but they can't reclassify a classified Pentagon or CIA document on a whim.
#42. To: A K A Stone, sneakypete (#38)
#43. To: sneakypete (#41)
NOTHING is EVER going to be her fault.
#44. To: buckeroo (#42)
In Pete's defense,
#45. To: buckeroo, GrandIsland (#32)
(Edited)
Your comment above is a perfect example of an idiot POM-POM girl that wasn't even involved but begs to get her nose rubbed in it.
#46. To: A K A Stone, buckeroo (#36)
Do you agree with your bestest bud Pete, that Bernie Sanders is the best candidate and is a conservative?
#47. To: A K A Stone (#44)
#48. To: sneakypete (#46)
And I have never once said that Bernie Sanders is the "best candidate" and "a conservative".
#49. To: sneakypete (#46)
I am NOT a "fag lover". Unlike you,I am a Bill of Rights lover.
#50. To: A K A Stone (#36)
Do you agree with your good friend Pete that people who support Traditional marriage (marriage) are bigots and discriminate against faggots?
#51. To: A K A Stone (#43)
Trump on the other hand and Hillary is off to jail.
#52. To: sneakypete (#50)
Do you agree with your good friend Pete that people who support Traditional marriage (marriage) are bigots and discriminate against faggots? And yet another lie about me on the same thread.
#53. To: A K A Stone (#48)
You just added the part about American jobs.
#54. To: sneakypete (#51)
Will that be before or after he asks for the money back that he donated to her earlier election campaigns?
#55. To: sneakypete (#53)
You just added the part about American jobs. No,I did NOT. That was the key reason I made the post I made ON THE THREAD about his speech on bringing manufacturing and jobs back to America.
#56. To: sneakypete (#51)
Will it also mean that he won't invite her to any more parties?
#57. To: A K A Stone (#49)
(Edited)
Gay marriage isn't in the bill of rights. It was never mentioned by any founder. Ever.
#58. To: sneakypete (#57)
Where is heterosexual marriage mentioned in the Bill of Rights?
#59. To: A K A Stone (#52)
You said I and others were bigots and anti American because we didn't support you and the faggots trying to redefint marriage.
#60. To: sneakypete (#57)
(Edited)
Gay marriage isn't in the bill of rights. It was never mentioned by any founder. Ever.
#61. To: A K A Stone (#54)
Before. Because he isn't going to ask for the money back. It was chump change.
#62. To: A K A Stone (#56)
John McCain is definately off the list.
#63. To: A K A Stone (#58)
(Edited)
It isn't. Marriage isn't a role for the federal government.
#64. To: sneakypete (#61)
Yeah, a couple of grand here,a couple of grand there,it's almost like it never happened,right?
#65. To: A K A Stone (#60)
Then why do you say that you aren't a "fag lover" and say that you support the bill or rights and I don't? Implying that fag pretend marriage is in the bill of rigths.
#66. To: A K A Stone (#64)
'm not a rich guy. But a couple of grand doesn't seem like that much to me.
#67. To: sneakypete (#65)
I have never ONCE said that homosexual marriage was in the Bill of Rights.
#68. To: sneakypete (#66)
If there is one thing that Trump loves as much as himself,it is money. He is not going to give a dime to anyone unless he thinks he will benefit from it.
#69. To: sneakypete (#66)
He is not going to give a dime to anyone unless he thinks he will benefit from it.
#70. To: A K A Stone (#67)
"So it includes it but doesn't include it."
#71. To: A K A Stone (#68)
You're telling us he will get rid of NAFTA and have better trade deals with China, Japan etc.
#72. To: sneakypete (#71)
No,I am telling you he will never be elected,and even if he is,he won't have the authority
#73. To: sneakypete, A K A Stone (#71)
(Edited)
#74. To: sneakypete (#71)
he will never be elected,and even if he is,he won't have the authority to any of that on his own and nobody in either the DNC or the RNC is going to back him if he tries.
#75. To: GrandIsland (#74)
#76. To: GrandIsland (#74)
#77. To: A K A Stone (#76)
#78. To: GrandIsland (#77)
#79. To: A K A Stone (#78)
#80. To: GrandIsland (#77)
No more socialist Dems, no more weak filthy RINO's. Now they gotta a real problem... A RICH INDEPENDENT THAT CANT BE BOUGHT.
According to electoral cycle donations via OpenSecrets.org which I examined this morning, Trump has donated a net $744,033 to political candidates and committees since 1989 (the extent of the online database).
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]