09-14-2015, 07:41 PM
(09-14-2015, 07:08 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote:(09-14-2015, 05:37 PM)pyropappy Wrote:(09-13-2015, 12:56 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: You can imply that us not being convinced by what you've put forth equates to stubbornness, but that's no more true than suspicion and lack of evidence equating to fact and evidence of guilt.So, you believe there was no classified material on her server?
I really don't know why you're so interested in what I believe, pappy.
There's no reason I need to compare, contrast, and commit to any of the many conflicting opinions/interpretations regarding Hillary Clinton's email, server, and content classification/handling practices.
I can choose to wait for the experts who are actually investigating first-hand to finish their review and release their conclusions. That's what I'm going to do in this case, as I've said repeatedly.
I understand that you and some like-minded members here are convinced that she's guilty of a lot of things. Others believe that this is nothing but a bullshit manufactured scandal and that Clinton did nothing wrong. Others don't care much about this scandal one way or the other.
I'm not arguing or agreeing with any of those convictions/positions because I'm neutral, by choice, for now. If she's guilty of more than poor choices (like intentional or negligent security breach, policy/law violations...), she's screwed. If not, she'll probably just carry on. I can live with either outcome.
You are incapable of offering an opinion?