Explain this to me like I'm a second-grader

I understand that in the multi-decade struggle to bring her down by any means necessary, being stick with the actual facts available has proven quite limiting.

 

Perhaps it would be more proper to say that we have only that information that she hasn't destroyed.

 

We only have the information she *hasn't* mixed with poison and fed to orphans.

 

Well, she's not mentioned doing that, so I'll reserve judgement. But she's been very clear that she and hers went to the trouble to streamline the information-gathering process by deleting a whole shitpile of emails.

 

The emails she did turn over included documents classified at the highest levels.

We also know from emails obtained from others that she did not turn over all relevant emails.

 

LOL

 

FBI issues scathing report on e-mail practices but no indictment. Exactly the outcome every sane person predicted.

 

It was pretty brutal. She certainly didn't come awat unscathed. Awaiting Trumps tweets!

 

So it's not what you know, it's what you can prove. I get that.
Still, let's not forget something important here. She was, at the very least, careless while holding one of the most important positions in our government and put government secrets at unnecessary risk. Any government employee who did what she did would be fired and stripped of their security clearances immediately.
She brushes this off as not a big deal.
And now she wants the American people to entrust her with the highest office in the land?

 

If you feel like IT skills are *very* important to you in a President, you may feel free to not vote for her because of it.

 

We're not going to charge her, but don't anyone else get the idea that you could get away with the same thing:

 

Pray for the people of DC today. They'll need it to stay safe in the FBI riots.