• Personally I’m more bothered by her mishandling of classified documents, selling access to the state department thru her sham charity and then illegally deleting emails to avoid FOI requests. Her actually being a lawyer in her youth is the least of my worries.

    • All of which is proven false. So do not keep repeating false information to try and validate your position for not liking her.

      • Proven false by whom? How is this false information? And seriously, we don’t need to “validate” to you why she is “not liked”.. Additionally, had you bothered to read the remainder of Shtetl G’s reply .you would have noticed something- it was relevant to the original post. Or perhaps you did read, and just didn’t think it remarkable that someone on the right was defending her.

  • You mean, an accused rapist that wasn’t her husband, yes?

    In all seriousness, I don’t have a problem with a defense attorney doing their job. Everybody in this country has the right to a defense in court.There is plenty of illegalities, shady acts and downright lies to blame on Sir Hillary- this is not one of them.

  • msboop68,

    Not being charged is not the same as being proven false. Wake up and smell what is being shoveled.

  • So is there actually an intent requirement? It was my understanding that access to classified material came with strict liability. That’s what both the Marine Corps and the DVA told me anyway… It would be lots easier to forward my VA email to my home account/computer than to check it via VPN. That is not a serious statement, for the record, and yes, there are things that shouldn’t even be thought, more less said even in jest.

  • I’m really surprised this discussion of Secretary Clinton on a discreet issue ended up being a discussion far beyond what the post contemplated.