Originally posted by sh76 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.
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.
Originally posted by Kunsoo 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.
That there may be a parallel doesn't make the situations equivalent.
Originally posted by sh76 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.
The 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.