I’ve been watching the Clinton email scandal closely, because I not only have been in and out of law enforcement and security for much of my early life, but also was an internal auditor for IBM and one of the leading email experts in the 1990s. I think this is the only time I’ve seen an investigator channel a prosecutor in making a recommendation, and give someone a pass without addressing why crimes were committed. For instance, if a child were injured and the parent could be charged, the investigator might recommend leniency because the parent intended no harm.
My issue with Hillary Clinton is not her server because it's obvious she is obsessed with reasonable denial if something goes wrong. People don't violate rules unless they mean too for their own benefit. What bothers me more is she continues to lie about the emails even after evidence points to at least 100 plus classified documents that were stored on a questionably non secure server not controlled by the government. She cannot claim ignorance because she has had plenty of government service and she sign a security agreement pertaining to the handling of documents. What is even more disturbing is how many Democrat's don't seem to mind the significance of her failure controlling classified material. When your political views cloud reasonable additions of wrong doing. You become too obsessed with politics which prevents you from accepting that someone did wrong. We can assume with a good degree of confidence that as Secretary Of State Hillary Clinton would have been a target for foreign governments and people wanting to gain inside access to confidential material. Government systems are attack daily, so why would we believe any less with Clinton's server? Sadly we have very few in government with a strive for justice over political biased. Maybe it's time to rethink how we appoint people to run agencies like the FBI and Justice Department.
Loading ...
Parsing the Clinton Email Scandal
Posted by: Rob Enderle July 11, 2016 09:57 AMI’ve been watching the Clinton email scandal closely, because I not only have been in and out of law enforcement and security for much of my early life, but also was an internal auditor for IBM and one of the leading email experts in the 1990s. I think this is the only time I’ve seen an investigator channel a prosecutor in making a recommendation, and give someone a pass without addressing why crimes were committed. For instance, if a child were injured and the parent could be charged, the investigator might recommend leniency because the parent intended no harm.