As usual, you don't know what you're talking about.
They know that she deliberately Erased 30,000 emails that had been SUBPOENAED, which that alone, anybody else would be in prison for.
First of all, the subpoena wasn't issued until March 4, 2015... AFTER Clinton's lawyers had already provided the e-mails they said were relevant to the Benghazi investigation on December 5, 2014. At that point, the Benghazi committee only asked for e-mails relevant to the investigation... They were actually specific about that. So that's what Clinton provided. The Platte River Network was then told to set a retention policy on the remaining e-mails, which is a standard procedure for most typical corporate and government e-mail systems for operational and security reasons, (something I have direct experience with). This particular policy was to automatically delete any e-mail older than 60-days unless the e-mail is flagged for archiving.
This was all done in December of 2014. The subpoena wasn't issued until three months later. So if Platte River Network did it's job those e-mail would have already been gone because they were all older than 60 days, but they messed up and forgot to set the retention policy. There's no way of really knowing if Clinton or her lawyers knew about the mistake until after the company used bleachbit to delete the old e-mails that should have already been deleted. This erasing happened during the last week of March 2015.
So, the accusation that Clinton intentionally deleted e-mails under subpoena is entirely without proof. Were e-mail's deleted AFTER the subpoena? Yes. Did Clinton know about it? We simply don't know... There is no clear proof that she did and you CAN'T prove someone guilty without proof.
The problem with people like you Steve, is that you so desperately WANT her to be guilty that you simply CAN'T be objective. You are exactly the kind of person that courts weed out of a jury because of bias opinions. And BTW, I'm not saying Clinton is innocent. I'm just saying there is no proof that she's guilty as Comey had concluded quite clearly.
The deep state and our shadow government is more powerful than the presidents
I gotta say though... Your vague references to "deep state" and "shadow government" cracks me up. It's called a plutocracy Steve and they hide in plain site. The only reason why they appear to be so shadowy to you is that you aren't really paying attention. You're far too distracted with the circus acts in the other rings.
and they protect their own (the liberals/globalists) or Hillary, Obama, Eric Holder
as well as Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Rice... The plutocracy isn't biased Steve... they protect their liberal/globalist interests no matter which party they come from.
and others would have suffered the death sentence for treason.
'Hate to tell you this but deleting e-mails older than 60 days is NOT an act of treason.
BE SURE To SEE The VIDEO At The END Of This POST That You Ignored Before
Thing is Steve... I've seen sooo many of these conspiracy theories. After a while, the trash dumpsters all start to smell the same. Maybe I'll have a look, on the off-chance there's something worthwhile, but... maybe not. I'll tell you the same thing I tell eagle... If there's a point, make it... Links should only be for verification, not as a substitute for literacy.
You just can't help being an idiot, can you?
Insults don't make up for your inability to be objective Steve.
The only thing there wasn't concrete evidence about is what was in those emails.
Which is the one thing a court would need to pass any judgement on this case.
(Lots of evidence indicate, for one thing, that Ben Ghazi was probably an Obama administration implicated plot to take Amb. Stevens as a hostage in order to make a big hero out of Obama just before the election by getting him back by trading the blind Sheikh for him.
Conjecture doesn't qualify as evidence, Steve. It was also pointed out that House Republicans denied the requests that Clinton and Obama had made to increase funding for the security of State Department assets including embassies... on several occasions. Remember this was a time when House Republicans were shutting down the government to get their way on defunding healthcare. They were denying EVERYTHING Obama asked for. But to imply the connection is also conjecture... there is no hard evidence that increased funding would have saved those Americans.
I'm sure there are many things we would both like to say are evident... we are after all, passionate about politics. But let's try to keep our pants on OK? Let's understand the difference between hard evidence and conjecture and I'll look forward to smarter conversations with you.
What her not being indicted proves is how the left-wing deep state shadow government protects its own. That crazy corrupt bitch should be in jail and you damn well know it.
Ugh... really Steve? ..."left-wing deep state shadow government"? ..."crazy corrupt bitch"? I gotta say, you get really worked up... Do you think you're capable of objective reasoning when you're like this?
Those 30,000 emails that had been SUBPOENAED is only the very beginning.
I've already invalidated that claim, so I guess your beginning is a big zero.
But of course you don't give a damn because like every other liberal the ends justify the means when it comes to the acquisition of power by the left.
Yeah, Steve... all liberals are alike.
And Clinton wasn't running for president in 2014 when the Benghazi investigation started and I was forming my opinions (which haven't changed). Innocent until proven guilty is my unchanging rule of thumb. The day the courts find what they need to convict her will be the day I accept the conviction. I am not a neoliberal Steve... I'm not even a Democrat, and I've told you this before. I just don't go for witch hunts, that's all.
BTW, I feel the same way about the Russia investigation in case you think I'm being hypocritical. As much as I dislike the creep and as much I would NOT be surprised if he WERE guilty I refuse to jump to that conclusion until proof is found.
Your mind has been being molded and your opinions manipulated by the deceitful deliberately slanderous left wing fake news organizations that are no different than 'Provda' of old Soviet Russia.
More conjecture. You're sitting there telling me that my mind is being molded by deceitful media companies and you don't even know what I read or listen to. You seem to be grasping at unfounded theories because my opinion is different than yours.
Take a listen to this video and you will see and hear one of CNN's top executive state that the Russian collusion delusion thing is all bull shit, but it sure is good for ratings. Go ahead and watch this video and see Many other examples also that indicate the extent to which you are constantly being lied to in order to dumb you down and believe Marxist propaganda:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXWOKJtdjRI
If that's the point being made in the video, I don't need to watch it... I already know that media companies are in the business of making money Steve. I'm not the idiot you think I am. I know that media companies make money by selling advertising space and they sell for more if they can draw an audience, so ratings are paramount to their business. I also know that long-running stories like investigations are very popular and translate to sales in the business of broadcasting. So of course the Russia investigation is good for their business. That's what I call a no-brainer... I certainly don't need YouTube to explain it to me.
I also know that the most successful example of this media business model is Fox News, which made it's mark by shifting priority from the low returns on expensive journalism to the high returns on cheap, provocative commentary, then winning their court case to allow them to bill it as news.
So, save your "American Left = Marxist Conspiracy" bullshit for the morons.