Originally posted by sh76I'm just saying, the Governor has no reasonable expectation of privacy. Neither did she. There may be stuff which is legitimately kept classified, at both the state and federal level. But right now, I think he's looking to suppress politically embarrassing stuff, which was probably also at least part of her motivation.
The governor of Indiana doesn't have access to the same kind of classified information as does the Secretary of State.
Surely we can agree that this salient different shows the lack of comparability of the situations.
17 Nov 16
Originally posted by KunsooThat there may be a parallel doesn't make the situations equivalent.
I'm just saying, the Governor has no reasonable expectation of privacy. Neither did she. There may be stuff which is legitimately kept classified, at both the state and federal level. But right now, I think he's looking to suppress politically embarrassing stuff, which was probably also at least part of her motivation.
17 Nov 16
Originally posted by sh76The intent is the same as well as the spirit of transparency. Clinton's error could have held bigger consequences. That's really the only major difference.
The governor of Indiana doesn't have access to the same kind of classified information as does the Secretary of State.
Surely we can agree that this salient different shows the lack of comparability of the situations.