Guess you don't know who D'Souza was. After the film on Obama, he was convicted of a political donation of about 2000 as I recall that was twice the allowed amount. He did some prison and community service time. The film is a history of Hilary as she attempts to make the 100 year goals of the racist, authoritarian and violent Democratic Party happen.
In America, a D'Souza does some time over 1000. Hilary knowingly endangers thousands of soldiers and information, but didn't mean to, and nothing happens.
Pragerradio.com, see ad link
"Interplanner" and our conservative friends are selectively focusing only on that part of the problem that serves their political agenda.
Elected members of both the House and Senate that serve on committees deal with classified information on a regular basis that is every bit as sensitive as that dealt with by the Secretary of State.
If private servers, accounts and classified information are the real issues, why haven't the Republican majorities in both the House and Senate seen fit to pass accompanying legislation to the Information Act (1966) to extend its mandate beyond executive agencies to include all those conducting government business - including elected politicians?
Currently, those elected members of Congress who are so eager to criticize Clinton, are themselves allowed to conduct classified government business on their own private accounts.
Instead of shutting down Congress, why aren't Republican legislators leading by example and introducing legislation that would hold them to the same standard that they wish to impose on others?
