Hillary Clinton told FBI investigators last month that she did not have a personal computer inside the area within her home designed for viewing classified information known as a SCIF.
But three different witnesses told the FBI Clinton did indeed use personal computers inside the SCIFs at her Washington, D.C., and Chappaqua, N.Y., homes.
The contradiction in Clinton's statements was just one of many that was exposed in the scathing 58 pages of notes released by the FBI Friday from its investigation of Clinton.
More
Those of us that have actually been in a SCIF understand how major Hillary's flaunt of security was. Many though have no idea and can accept Government being over zealous in pursuing her violations.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a head of state of any nation around the world, I'd not look forward to having to deal with this woman, as I'd never know when she was telling the truth.
ReplyDelete....not only THAT, but other world leaders would not be able to have ANY confidence that any secrets they shared wouldn't be on the internet next week.
ReplyDeleteI'll ask again --- just what in the hell does she have to be caught doing to get prosecuted???
I'm beginning to think they could catch her on film shooting someone in the head and the FBI would say "the video is too grainy to identify her with 100% certainty".
Without question, her carelessness lead directly to the deaths of our informants, spies, and collaborators. It is PROVEN (by testimony and evidence provided by her own staff and by the FBI) that she lied, destroyed evidence, obstructed a CRMINAL investigation, tampered with evidence, ignored subpoena's, conspired to hinder a criminal investigation, ignored all security protocols and then tried to hide those actions (felonies), and generally thumbed her nose at the law.
Prison for you and me. Not jail, but PRISON.
But 40% think she's a straight up angel and it's ALL lies. For thirty years, everybody be lyin' on her. About everything.
Keep cheering.
That there is no video or audio of the FBI's Clinton "interview" still amazes me. Isn't this standard operating procedure, and isn't a record of the conversations considered to be evidence?
ReplyDelete