Because it's a national security issue. (Secondarily bc of decades-old issues w/Hillary & record retention). And because it's the sort of thing that, for anybody below her level in the national security world, would at minimum get their clearance pulled. https://www.nytimes.com/1999/08/21/us/former-chief-of-cia-is-stripped-of-right-to-classified-information.html …https://twitter.com/samstein/status/1298626204413702144 …
-
-
It's still wild how many liberals & progressives simultaneously argue that the risk of Hillary's emails being hacked by Russia or China was a nonstory but also that the hacking of DNC emails by Russia is proof that our entire democratic election was illegitimate. Pick one.
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
- End of conversation
-
-
-
The hatch act as law is almost is flimsy as the Logan act bc it's so broadly definitional and it's intended to be enforceable in only the most exagerated cases. BO criminalized FP definitions & tried to convert the military & DOJ into enforcement wings of the Dem party. Hatch?
-
*Foreign policy differences
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.