Latest Breaking News

TM99

(8,352 posts)

69. For a supposed lawyer and law professor

Sun Apr 10, 2016, 06:04 PM

Apr 2016

of some repute, I am disappointed that Obama would comment at all on this matter.

There is an ongoing investigation by the FBI that will eventually involve the DoJ. It is not his place to comment on whether he believes Clinton jeopardized security or not. And tacking on the 'I guarantee there is no political influence' after doing so tells those who pay attention that indeed there likely will be inappropriate political influence.

Cannot edit, recommend, or reply in locked discussions

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

70 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Obama: Clinton�s Email Server Did Not Jeopardize National Security [View all] MariaThinks Apr 2016 OP

Where exactly does he say what your headline indicates? revbones Apr 2016 #1

This is LBN, where the subject line MUST match the article title. To wit... Hekate Apr 2016 #17

It's in the video. The email discussion starts about 8 minutes in. pnwmom Apr 2016 #25

Thank you Obama passiveporcupine Apr 2016 #67

Meaning you're hoping for the opposite? n/t Designit Apr 2016 #58

Misleading. He said she didn't "intend" to jeopardize national security. Still a crime. leveymg Apr 2016 #2

Angry armchair lawyer extremists are going to be so disappointed ConservativeDemocrat Apr 2016 #12

She signed a security agreement, "classified info is marked or unmarked classified info"> leveymg Apr 2016 #23

Wrong. He also said he believes "she has not jeopardized national security." pnwmom Apr 2016 #28

He said "intentionally jeopardize" and a minute later said "jeopardize" Doesn't matter, because leveymg Apr 2016 #45

Law professor -- who wrote a manual on classification -- explains why Hillary won't be indicted. pnwmom Apr 2016 #54

Different statute, 798 isn't 793. If he discussed 793, let me know, and I'll take a look at that leveymg Apr 2016 #56

Read his whole article and you will learn a lot more than you know now. pnwmom Apr 2016 #60

As I thought, he doesn't even mention the statute that's most referenced in her security oath. leveymg Apr 2016 #61

Nice headline but Obama never said that awake Apr 2016 #3

Yes Obama did. The headline isn't in quotes but all you have to do is listen to the video. pnwmom Apr 2016 #24

When asked he Said "I have to be carful... awake Apr 2016 #36

The interview kept going. Why did you stop listening at that point? pnwmom Apr 2016 #40

That is not the same as the headline awake Apr 2016 #50

Obama was asked another question after he said that he had to be careful. Why do you keep avoiding pnwmom Apr 2016 #55

Yes I watch it live as well as your video awake Apr 2016 #64

misleading headline but I guess azurnoir Apr 2016 #4

It was Sanders who got 3 Pinnochios for only reading the headline a few days ago riversedge Apr 2016 #32

yep he did from Jonathan Capehart's employer no less azurnoir Apr 2016 #34

she said it artfully Kokonoe Apr 2016 #51

K & R most enthusiastically. Surya Gayatri Apr 2016 #5

Next .... FarPoint Apr 2016 #6

KNR Lucinda Apr 2016 #7

The title of the HuffPo piece being cited is... yallerdawg Apr 2016 #8

Of course it is SCantiGOP Apr 2016 #43

Mr President: in that case, don't forget to add Guccifer to the cc line on each email you write. DisgustipatedinCA Apr 2016 #9

huffpo shilling once again. that is not what pres o said. restorefreedom Apr 2016 #10

Yes, he did say that. The email discussion begins at about 8 minutes into the interview. pnwmom Apr 2016 #33

Yep, he said it SharonClark Apr 2016 #11

Ding Ding Ding!!! 2naSalit Apr 2016 #19

AND THE TRUTH COMES OUT riversedge Apr 2016 #35

why would it take this long Kokonoe Apr 2016 #65

which would be meaningless if she knowingly/willingly created conditions where some could stupidicus Apr 2016 #13

HA HA. Pres. Obama as a law professor trumps your opine. riversedge Apr 2016 #39

meaningless garbage stupidicus Apr 2016 #47

K&R! DemonGoddess Apr 2016 #14

KnR. Clinton Derangement Syndrome strikes out -- again Hekate Apr 2016 #15

I wish we could put the email issue behind us... Silver_Witch Apr 2016 #16

Remember General Petraeus..... Mustellus Apr 2016 #18

She wasn't even a journalist 2naSalit Apr 2016 #21

Petraeus was originally charged w/felony Sec. 793. He was allowed to plead down. leveymg Apr 2016 #29

Yes shenmue Apr 2016 #20

K&R 2naSalit Apr 2016 #22

A big REC --all need to see riversedge Apr 2016 #26

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. onecaliberal Apr 2016 #27

Putting the accuracy of your statement aside, beastie boy Apr 2016 #44

When the truth hurts the other side 2naSalit Apr 2016 #30

that's what appalls me too MariaThinks Apr 2016 #41

Most who have CDS to that extent are not Democrats BlueMTexpat Apr 2016 #59

Yeah, I suspect that 2naSalit Apr 2016 #66

K&R livetohike Apr 2016 #31

Actually, it did. But not in the way the right wingers and Sandernistas may want you to believe. beastie boy Apr 2016 #37

And drunk drivers don't mean to kill people with their cars dragonfly301 Apr 2016 #38

Then stop prosecuting her before you catch her. beastie boy Apr 2016 #46

and Obama should stop weighing in before the investigation is completed dragonfly301 Apr 2016 #52

This calls for a negotiation between you and Obama. beastie boy Apr 2016 #57

If you are unaware of a mountain of evidence against her, you haven't been paying attention. leveymg Apr 2016 #63

what slayed me the most, and the enamored ones are completely overlooking stupidicus Apr 2016 #53

K&R ismnotwasm Apr 2016 #42

well, that's all cleared up! Javaman Apr 2016 #48

Grrrrr! Grrrrr! Heads gotta be poppin' BIG TIME in the He-Man Wimmin Haters Club!!! MADem Apr 2016 #49

Obama Dodging the issue Ferd Berfel Apr 2016 #62

Um, no. Obama doesn't BELIEVE it jeopardized the US or Natl security magical thyme Apr 2016 #68

For a supposed lawyer and law professor TM99 Apr 2016 #69

Locking after a review by forum hosts Omaha Steve Apr 2016 #70