Quote:See below.

Quote: 

<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="anonymous2112" data-cid="768658" data-time="1467738828">
<div>
Patraeus voluntarily GAVE troop movements and exceedingly sensitive information to his girlfriend. Troop movements are not deemed classified unless associated with additional information or OPCON. These were also shared after the fact. Doesn't necessarily excuse the sharing of information with his girlfriend. Oh, by the way, she had a clearance. In addition, the information he ADMITTED to was no higher than SECRET. Still wrong, but Clinton was well beyond this.


 

Snowden leaked classified information in attempt to sabotage the federal government. Not that I agree with what he did, but his action can in fact fall under the
Whistleblower
Protection Act of 1989 (governing disclosures of illegality, waste, fraud, abuse or public health or safety threats).


 

Clinton had a couple dozen emails about classified material on a non-approved server, and then deleted them at an appropriate time. This is just flat out wrong. They are numbered well above 1200 and included Top Secret and SAP information on targets and code names of operatives for upcoming missions. When is the appropriate time to delete emails on a non-approved server? She was attempting to bypass Federal Law.


 

 

It's OK to be upset, as thin skinned tweetmaniac Donald is, but there are no parallels with Clinton, Patraeus, and Snowden.  There are other ways to show displeasure over the ruling, and plenty on which to fault Clinton (you can call her careless or clueless, for example), but her conduct was not deemed to be criminal by the FBI, and I have no problem with the ruling.