Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

It will take us SEVENTY FIVE YEARS to release the emails on Hillary Clinton...Obama State Department STONEWALLING

5 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Markle

Markle

Obama State Department STONEWALLING...still.


It will take us SEVENTY FIVE YEARS to release the emails on Hillary Clinton....

State Dept.: 75-year wait for Clinton aide emails

By Tom LoBianco and Laura Koran, CNN

Washington (CNN)The Republican National Committee would have to wait 75 years for the State Department to release emails from top aides to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, according to a recent court filing.

State Department lawyers argue in a filing made last Wednesday that gathering 450,000 pages of records requested for former Clinton aides Cheryl Mills and Jacob Sullivan and top State Department official Patrick Kennedy would take three-quarters of a century.

"Given the Department's current FOIA workload and the complexity of these documents, it can process about 500 pages a month, meaning it would take approximately 16-and-2/3 years to complete the review of the Mills documents, 33-and-1/3 years to finish the review of the Sullivan documents, and 25 years to wrap up the review of the Kennedy documents -- or 75 years in total," the State Department argued in the filing.

State Department spokeswoman Elizabeth Trudeau declined Monday to comment on the RNC lawsuit specifically, but said that requests have tripled since 2008 and staff has been spread thin.

[...]

http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/06/politics/clinton-emails-75-years/index.html

This, from who promised that this would be the most TRANSPARENT ADMINISTRATION IN HISTORY.

2seaoat



Duh.....double Duh. Do you suppose emails might have state secrets.

Wordslinger

Wordslinger

Poor Markle .... no trial, no jail time .... LOL

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

Wordslinger wrote:Poor Markle .... no trial, no jail time .... LOL

He said he was looking forward to seeing her frog-marched to jail in an orange jumpsuit before the election. I wonder how much real money he would bet someone that this will actually happen?

It will take us SEVENTY FIVE YEARS to release the emails on Hillary Clinton...Obama State Department STONEWALLING Laughi11

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Markle

Markle

2seaoat wrote:Duh.....double Duh.   Do you suppose emails might have state secrets.

Proven to date, over 1,000 of Hillary Clinton's emails contained Top Secret information with 22 containing ABOVE TOP SECRET classification. That means so secret even most members of congress could not even read redacted versions in a special room.

But you already knew all that.

Markle

Markle

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:
Wordslinger wrote:Poor Markle .... no trial, no jail time .... LOL

He said he was looking forward to seeing her frog-marched to jail in an orange jumpsuit before the election. I wonder how much real money he would bet someone that this will actually happen?

It will take us SEVENTY FIVE YEARS to release the emails on Hillary Clinton...Obama State Department STONEWALLING Laughi11

I never made that but it does demonstrate your desperation.

2seaoat



.......and who sent the emails to a private server? duh.....double duh.

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

Markle wrote:
ZVUGKTUBM wrote:
Wordslinger wrote:Poor Markle .... no trial, no jail time .... LOL

He said he was looking forward to seeing her frog-marched to jail in an orange jumpsuit before the election. I wonder how much real money he would bet someone that this will actually happen?

It will take us SEVENTY FIVE YEARS to release the emails on Hillary Clinton...Obama State Department STONEWALLING Laughi11

I never made that but it does demonstrate your desperation.

Oh, you said it, all right. It is somewhere in the forum's history.......

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Guest


Guest

Why don't y'all want a responsive and accountable federal govt that's limited by the constitution?

2seaoat



Why don't y'all want a responsive and accountable federal govt that's limited by the constitution?


The federal government needs to be efficient and fair in providing for our common defense and general welfare. It is a work in progress, but progress it will be.........

gatorfan



2seaoat wrote:Why don't y'all want a responsive and accountable federal govt that's limited by the constitution?


The federal government needs to be efficient and fair in providing for our common defense and general welfare.  It is a work in progress, but progress it will be.........

It's apparent that the Feds are slowly walking away from the intent of Constitution.....aided by an increasingly powerful court system.......

2seaoat



It's apparent that the Feds are slowly walking away from the intent of Constitution.....aided by an increasingly powerful court system.......


Your statement is confusing. You have an interpretation of what you think is the intent of the constitution, yet our founding fathers gave that role to the courts, which has always been a powerful role in our checks and balance system. I do not understand how the courts have increased in power when each of the branches of the government ebb and flow in regard to power, but that is the beauty of what our founding fathers created. America and our constitution have never been doing better.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum