mark francis
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2021
- Messages
- 18,499
It was a mistake which is why she wasn't chargedIf they were not incriminating, she was stupid for destroying them in violation of federal laws.
View attachment 7719
She had every right to delete personal emails duhShe destroyed incriminating emails she called irrelevant, according to her, even though she was not supposed to destroy any emails.
Oh Boo Hoo. Comey felt sorry for poor bawling Hillary crying her eyes out while explaining to him that she meant no harm by breaking multiple federal laws. So he took it upon himself to forgive her even though he did not have the legal right to do so.It was a mistake which is why she wasn't charged
BTW it had nothing to do with phones but you are too stupid to know that lol
I see what you are saying. Government leaders like former Senator Clinton and former President Trump should have the right to tell the government what documents the government can have back and what documents it cannot. House investigators subpoenaed all her email records stored on her government computer as a matter of law, but she decided which emails they would get, and which emails they would not get.She had every right to delete personal emails duh
Work related emails were subpoenaed and she did her best to provide them. I doubt you see thatI see what you are saying. Government leaders like former Senator Clinton and former President Trump should have the right to tell the government what documents the government can have back and what documents it cannot. House investigators subpoenaed all her email records stored on her government computer as a matter of law, but she decided which emails they would get, and which emails they would not get.
No, intent was not demonstratedOh Boo Hoo. Comey felt sorry for poor bawling Hillary crying her eyes out while explaining to him that she meant no harm by breaking multiple federal laws. So he took it upon himself to forgive her even though he did not have the legal right to do so.
By destroying emails she chose to destroy she effectively destroyed any evidence the House investigators might have considered incriminating. That is why she was not supposed to decide what emails to destroy and what emails to turn over. Like so many other crooks before her have demonstrated, destroying incriminating evidence is one of the best ways to avoid criminal charges.Work related emails were subpoenaed and she did her best to provide them. I doubt you see that
She was supposed to decide duhBy destroying emails she chose to destroy she effectively destroyed any evidence the House investigators might have considered incriminating. That is why she was not supposed to decide what emails to destroy and what emails to turn over.
See mark the idiot has no comprehension of what went on to make sureWas hecharged?
Yes or no?
She got away with itShe destroyed incriminating emails she called irrelevant, according to her, even though she was not supposed to destroy any emails.
She destroyed hundreds of e mail several phones and wiped her server clean.She was supposed to decide duh
She was asked for some emails and did her best to provide them duh
She was not asked for personal emails duh
She destroyed phones when migrating to new ones duhShe destroyed hundreds of e mail several phones and wiped her server clean.
The actions of a guilty or innocent person.
She got away because it wasn't intentionalSee mark the idiot has no comprehension of what went on to make sure
She got away with it
Let's refresh:She was supposed to decide duh
She was asked for some emails and did her best to provide them duh
She was not asked for personal emails duh
Poor Hillary. She did not mean to falsely accuse Trump before tens of millions of Americans of allegedly colluding with Russians to steal DNC emails and give them to Assange.She got away because it wasn't intentional
Unlike trump