2016 Postmortem

jeff47

(26,549 posts)

9. Defense against attacks would require it.

Sat Jul 25, 2015, 02:14 PM

Jul 2015

Republican Super-PAC Accusation in the general election: "This classified document was stored on Clinton's sever. That is against 'the rules'". Heavy implication that she broke the law without actually saying it. "All sorts of evil people could have read our secrets!!" Show pictures of Kim Jong-Un and ISIS fighters here.

Now, how do defend against that without getting into the weeds about the handling of classified information?

Perhaps if you could show that there were in fact some significant national secrets that got out, then maybe you'd have something

Because accusations during a political campaign must be based in reality to work?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

11 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Regarding Classified State Dept. Documents and Candidate Clinton [View all] MineralMan Jul 2015 OP

Snowden's a hero for hacking govt computers, but... JaneyVee Jul 2015 #1

Yes. Ironic. Her private server MineralMan Jul 2015 #2

Incidentally, the leaked cables weren't from Snowden. MineralMan Jul 2015 #3

A smart country wouldn't make public that they gained access to the SOS's private email. TwilightGardener Jul 2015 #4

Because Hillary's "leaks" weren't made in the interest of public knowledge? marble falls Jul 2015 #5

Yeah, right... MineralMan Jul 2015 #6

It's not about leaks. It's about poor judgement. jeff47 Jul 2015 #7

How exactly did Hillary get down in the weeds here? JoePhilly Jul 2015 #8

Defense against attacks would require it. jeff47 Jul 2015 #9

Truth doesn't matter when stakes are high MineralMan Jul 2015 #10

In sports terminology it's an unforced error on Clinton's part Fumesucker Jul 2015 #11