Once a countries laws become negligible, the country ceases to exist.

At what point does an investigation become a witch hunt? At what point does an investigation become waste? I think were at that point (or just slightly past) it.

The investigation has revealed some rather alarming things about our government:

1. The government doesn't have it's shit together when it comes to archiving email. Go figure, we all knew there was waste there but this is worse than any decent nerd ever expected.

2. Our classification system is a mess. The fact that we can retroactively classify something is INSANE. Documents got out that you don't like, classify them, then prosecute any journalist who writes about them.

3. The number of people recently (not just in clintons case) who have immunity for testimony is amazing. In the case of clinton it looks like there was/is some wrongdoing on the part of the staffer who RECEIVED immunity. We all understand this is a prisoners dilemma problem, but there are external ethics that we don't often think about: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2378070 -- and this doesn't even factor in outside actors (us) who are harmed by the crime.

4. After Chelsea/Bradley Manning(see note) released all the cables, it apparently had ZERO impact on the IT culture at the state department. You would think that after an issue like that, things would have been on lockdown, but apparently government doesn't learn from its mistakes.

Why isn't any one screaming on high about these things?

NOTE: The whole gender and name change thing is confusing when referring to something done under/by the old name/gender so I put both down.

http://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2016/03/nsa-re...

“Each time we asked the question 'What was the solution for POTUS,' we were politely asked to shut up and color,” Donald Reid, State Department coordinator for security infrastructure, said in a 2009 email first obtained as part of a Freedom of Information Act request by the political action group Judicial Watch.

The woman asked for a workable solution, one that former SofS had access to and was told no. She asked what POTOUS had and was told NO, and instead offered something 1/2 assed at best.

There is also the question of a foundation staffer having highly compartmentalized data from the NSA... that is, to say the least, interesting as it apparently came from an "outside source". The story as it is being presented is NSA->leak-> Blumenthal -> clinton. One would think that this would have lead to a swift inditement of him (Blumenthal), yet nothing.

I suspect that there is a LOT more to this portion of the story that has NOTHING to do with Clinton, and it might make one want a tinfoil hat.

It is almost like she doesn't give a damn what you think. I'm beginning to not give a damn about her.

She remembered how the Republicans witch-hunted her before, and wanted to keep all her stuff under her control so they couldn't FOIA all her stuff.

I empathize with that. I really do. But there's no exception to FOIA for "the people who want the information are meanie heads."

Evidence of corruption.

Irrespective of your political leanings, what is the magic behind making emails disappear? Is it incompetence, gross-negligence. I think, its another standard DC "plausible deniability".

"In addition to the emails, the State Department also does not have any text messages or BlackBerry Messenger messages sent to or from Clinton during her time in office, the RNC claimed. The State Department declined to discuss that declaration."

I'm hardly a Clinton apologist, but I'd like to make sure, before I criticize her of something, that there is actually evidence.