I don't think she'll start WWIII either and she wasn't the only one scolded in that State Dept. report. She's already said she wished she hadn't done it that way.
This.
Also, the uranium thing isn't such a big deal, Russia is already a nuclear superpower, in case you didn't know.
I don't think she'll start WWIII either and she wasn't the only one scolded in that State Dept. report. She's already said she wished she hadn't done it that way.
Pobody's nerfect I guess. It is too bad that Hillary seems to have done a few things that gave her opponents so much fuel for the fire. I personally don't think that any of those things are completely egregious, and 100% believe that her opposition is blowing it all so far out of proportion that they are basically lying through their teeth. And Republicans are eating it up like crazy, to the point where they think Trump would be a better option. It's nuts.
mud slinging is huge ! epically this close to election and honestly I don't know how much of it is true or not but in the end it's all designed to sway your vote, all of it, and sad thing about it is we are the one's eating that shit up, I see comments about all the candidates that are "as seen on T.V" or the trusty interweb and we really have no idea other than what the media wants us to know or hear, we are all guilty of it and we all get mad at that damn candidate when the T.V tells us to.......we are all prisoners to the media in that since, I say we should vote with our heat and gut, what's the difference if it's our choice or the media's ? answer: it's our good decision or mistake to make, it get's so out of hand that we attack each other over the views and opinions told to us by the media, how smart are we ??? does anybody else see this ??
Let's just keep making excuses for Clinton and keep ignoring everything that's going on...
It doesn't look good that she's refusing another agreed to debate w/ Sanders in CA, and that Sanders and Trump will debate. What is she afraid of? Hmmm
I don't think she'll start WWIII either and she wasn't the only one scolded in that State Dept. report. She's already said she wished she hadn't done it that way.
She broke the law.
The IG report doesn't say she broke the law. It said she didn't follow policy . . . Huge difference.
I don't think she'll start WWIII either and she wasn't the only one scolded in that State Dept. report. She's already said she wished she hadn't done it that way.
She broke the law.
Here in the States, we have a police force that investigates, a DA that chooses to prosecute, a trial by your peers, and then a decision. Although we fail at it sometimes, we all know that trial in media isn't the way to go. But thanks for your decision.
The Inspector General stated that she broke the Federal Records Act. The FBI will continue to investigate and decide whether to prosecute. I understand that you're all in for Hillary but am still slightly surprised how willing you are to sweep this transgression under the rug.
I don't think that's what he said. He said the she did not follow departmental processes that were designed to be in accordance with Federal Records Act. There's a big difference and if you work or have ever worked in a regulated environment, then you understand what I'm saying.
For example, say I designed a process at work that is implemented to ensure I never violate the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). However, one month the process failed to run properly. The good news is, that I didn't report inaccurate information on anyone's credit report. My failure to execute violated the protocol designed to protect, but since there was no inaccurate information reported, I did not violate the act. That's how I interpret it. The IG is not saying that the any classified information was in open space or breached, only that internal protocol was violated. I don't know the records act, but I would guess there has to be damage as that's how all federal statutes are generally written.
I understand what you're saying. I work for a govt institutions with computer use policies. For example, I'm not supposed to do personal stuff on my school computer, and if I use my home computer for school business, I know it's subject to subpoena. Yes, sometimes I violate the policy. I better not ever run for president . . .
As for Clinton's breaches of security . . . I can't imagine the Clintons hired some regular old Joe to install their server. I imagine they hired the best money could buy. Her server is probably more secure than say, the CIA who got hacked by the Chinese or any of the other govt institutions that have recently been compromised.
This latest news cycle is just another big yawn, in my view. I've read the posted articles here thinking I was going to learn something new, something to nail the coffin . . . but I didn't. Just another desperate attempt by the RNC Anti-Hillary Committee and the corporate media to keep a pretty boring story alive.
I don't like trump, I don't think he would make a great president. But I don't fear him being president as much as I fear Clinton and her decisions. I think donations they tried to hide with the Clinton Foundation are even worse and that include uranium ore deals with the Russians. She's willing to sell our national security for her own benefit.
You fear Clinton more than the guy threatening to use nukes during his campaign??? That seems irrational to me.
Yes, I fear the lady with zero regard to national security and selling uranium to Russians for personal gain and allowing the Russians to become the nuclear supergiant more than the guy who rambles off irrational stuff that he wont follow through with because he just likes to talk scary. Seems rational to me.
I'm sorry, where has she sold uranium for personal gain?
Even though she has promised full disclosure with the Clinton Foundation, there have been several cases where donors were not revealed. Donors that have links to foreign organizations, and organizations that needed her approval as SoS who made millions in donations that she tried to keep hidden, even though she had promised all donations would be revealed.
Donations were made to the foundation as well as ridiculous "speaking fees" by companies and individuals who were directly involved with business with Hilary as Secretary. These donations were not make public as required, but were funneled through other sources to try and keep it secret. Unfortunately as soon as they are reported, most of the media just sweeps it under the rug.
I don't think she'll start WWIII either and she wasn't the only one scolded in that State Dept. report. She's already said she wished she hadn't done it that way.
She broke the law.
The IG report doesn't say she broke the law. It said she didn't follow policy . . . Huge difference.
Executive Order 13526 and 18 U.S.C Sec. 793(f) of the federal code make it unlawful to send of store classified information on personal email.
96 Randall's Island II
98 CAA
00 Virginia Beach;Camden I; Jones Beach III
05 Borgata Night I; Wachovia Center
06 Letterman Show; Webcast (guy in blue shirt), Camden I; DC
08 Camden I; Camden II; DC
09 Phillie III
10 MSG II
13 Wrigley Field
16 Phillie II
I am just waiting for people to say well Colin Powell did it and the IG said that the rules were more fluid during Powells time. If everyone recalls email is still new in the grand scheme of things.
The rules were made clear by the time she became the nation’s top diplomat that using a private server for official business was neither allowed nor encouraged because of “significant security risks.”
96 Randall's Island II
98 CAA
00 Virginia Beach;Camden I; Jones Beach III
05 Borgata Night I; Wachovia Center
06 Letterman Show; Webcast (guy in blue shirt), Camden I; DC
08 Camden I; Camden II; DC
09 Phillie III
10 MSG II
13 Wrigley Field
16 Phillie II
A lot of New York Times links. NY times has been very bias in favor of a more left point of view. Almost as bad as Fox News is the other way around.
Maybe, but as far as I know she hasn't denied the contributions, even saying they were only hidden because of a filing error or something like that. Only denied that there was a connection. But come on, even if there wasn't a connection, that is just stupid to accept million dollar donations from foreign companies that need your approval as Secretary, and that level of stupidity is just as bad. Companies that are prohibited from donating to you or your campaign, so they donate to your foundation instead.
This pretty much puts the nail in the coffin. State Department Inspector General says Hillary didn't follow guidelines, didn't maintain records and didn't cooperate with investigators. Also evidence that she intentionally set up own server to bypass transparency laws and that her private server faced security attacks on multiple occasions. So in a nut shell she jeopardized national security so that she could avoid transparency.
I don't think she'll start WWIII either and she wasn't the only one scolded in that State Dept. report. She's already said she wished she hadn't done it that way.
She broke the law.
Here in the States, we have a police force that investigates, a DA that chooses to prosecute, a trial by your peers, and then a decision. Although we fail at it sometimes, we all know that trial in media isn't the way to go. But thanks for your decision.
The Inspector General stated that she broke the Federal Records Act. The FBI will continue to investigate and decide whether to prosecute. I understand that you're all in for Hillary but am still slightly surprised how willing you are to sweep this transgression under the rug.
I don't think that's what he said. He said the she did not follow departmental processes that were designed to be in accordance with Federal Records Act. There's a big difference and if you work or have ever worked in a regulated environment, then you understand what I'm saying.
For example, say I designed a process at work that is implemented to ensure I never violate the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). However, one month the process failed to run properly. The good news is, that I didn't report inaccurate information on anyone's credit report. My failure to execute violated the protocol designed to protect, but since there was no inaccurate information reported, I did not violate the act. That's how I interpret it. The IG is not saying that the any classified information was in open space or breached, only that internal protocol was violated. I don't know the records act, but I would guess there has to be damage as that's how all federal statutes are generally written.
There were attempted hacks on her system. She was obligated to report those hacks. She failed to report those hacks.
how's that? Nothing classified was sent/received. The only items that were considered classified were done so months or years after the fact. None of those items related to national security.
Turn off Faux News.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
I am just waiting for people to say well Colin Powell did it and the IG said that the rules were more fluid during Powells time. If everyone recalls email is still new in the grand scheme of things.
The rules were made clear by the time she became the nation’s top diplomat that using a private server for official business was neither allowed nor encouraged because of “significant security risks.”
Even if nothing top secret was sent, why are staffers refusing to cooperate? Why did she not hand over all her emails when asked? Why did she go through and delete tens of thousands, claiming they had nothing to do with her job? Why did she wipe the server? What kind of investigation would allow the person being investigated to gather and collect their own evidence against them as she did? If there was nothing to hide, why did she hide so much?
Even if nothing top secret was sent, why are staffers refusing to cooperate? Why did she not hand over all her emails when asked? Why did she go through and delete tens of thousands, claiming they had nothing to do with her job? Why did she wipe the server? What kind of investigation would allow the person being investigated to gather and collect their own evidence against them as she did? If there was nothing to hide, why did she hide so much?
It is all a charade . I mean the FBI investigation is a fraud too didn't you know.
96 Randall's Island II
98 CAA
00 Virginia Beach;Camden I; Jones Beach III
05 Borgata Night I; Wachovia Center
06 Letterman Show; Webcast (guy in blue shirt), Camden I; DC
08 Camden I; Camden II; DC
09 Phillie III
10 MSG II
13 Wrigley Field
16 Phillie II
Even if nothing top secret was sent, why are staffers refusing to cooperate? Why did she not hand over all her emails when asked? Why did she go through and delete tens of thousands, claiming they had nothing to do with her job? Why did she wipe the server? What kind of investigation would allow the person being investigated to gather and collect their own evidence against them as she did? If there was nothing to hide, why did she hide so much?
Let me tell you about staffers and why they would refuse to cooperate if not subpoenaed. A gentleman that works for me today was on Al Gore's military staff. Basically he carried the 'football' for Gore, if you know what I mean. Well this gentleman also worked two cubes over from Monica. He was privy to ALL of it. He was subpoenaed by Ken Starr and had to pay 50k+ of his own money for legal counsel during the multiple times he was deposed. There was no legal fund or anything to support him.
The point is, a staffer is not going to cooperate unless required to do so. You wouldn't either because everything you say could put you on the hook or in legal jeopardy. Therefore you need counsel. Counsel is expensive. Why would you voluntarily put yourself in that type of financial and legal risk?
Even if nothing top secret was sent, why are staffers refusing to cooperate? Why did she not hand over all her emails when asked? Why did she go through and delete tens of thousands, claiming they had nothing to do with her job? Why did she wipe the server? What kind of investigation would allow the person being investigated to gather and collect their own evidence against them as she did? If there was nothing to hide, why did she hide so much?
Let me tell you about staffers and why they would refuse to cooperate if not subpoenaed. A gentleman that works for me today was on Al Gore's military staff. Basically he carried the 'football' for Gore, if you know what I mean. Well this gentleman also worked two cubes over from Monica. He was privy to ALL of it. He was subpoenaed by Ken Starr and had to pay 50k+ of his own money for legal counsel during the multiple times he was deposed. There was no legal fund or anything to support him.
The point is, a staffer is not going to cooperate unless required to do so. You wouldn't either because everything you say could put you on the hook or in legal jeopardy. Therefore you need counsel. Counsel is expensive. Why would you voluntarily put yourself in that type of financial and legal risk?
I think I'd pay 50k just to not be privy to everything that happened with Monica 2 cubes over.
A lot of New York Times links. NY times has been very bias in favor of a more left point of view. Almost as bad as Fox News is the other way around.
Maybe, but as far as I know she hasn't denied the contributions, even saying they were only hidden because of a filing error or something like that. Only denied that there was a connection. But come on, even if there wasn't a connection, that is just stupid to accept million dollar donations from foreign companies that need your approval as Secretary, and that level of stupidity is just as bad. Companies that are prohibited from donating to you or your campaign, so they donate to your foundation instead.
Let me tell you about staffers and why they would refuse to cooperate if not subpoenaed. A gentleman that works for me today was on Al Gore's military staff. Basically he carried the 'football' for Gore, if you know what I mean. Well this gentleman also worked two cubes over from Monica. He was privy to ALL of it. He was subpoenaed by Ken Starr and had to pay 50k+ of his own money for legal counsel during the multiple times he was deposed. There was no legal fund or anything to support him.
The point is, a staffer is not going to cooperate unless required to do so. You wouldn't either because everything you say could put you on the hook or in legal jeopardy. Therefore you need counsel. Counsel is expensive. Why would you voluntarily put yourself in that type of financial and legal risk?
I think I'd pay 50k just to not be privy to everything that happened with Monica 2 cubes over.
He told me that Monica was very pretty when that all started. He said she a 'stress eater'.
Even if nothing top secret was sent, why are staffers refusing to cooperate? Why did she not hand over all her emails when asked? Why did she go through and delete tens of thousands, claiming they had nothing to do with her job? Why did she wipe the server? What kind of investigation would allow the person being investigated to gather and collect their own evidence against them as she did? If there was nothing to hide, why did she hide so much?
Probably half of what you are asking is Faux News smoke and mirrors.
It was a personal email so I'm guessing there were personal emails that she didn't want plastered all over the internet. How criminal.
Servers get wiped all the time. I have about 3 that are just sitting on a shelf because I'm not going to dispose of them with data on the hard drives.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
Maybe, but as far as I know she hasn't denied the contributions, even saying they were only hidden because of a filing error or something like that. Only denied that there was a connection. But come on, even if there wasn't a connection, that is just stupid to accept million dollar donations from foreign companies that need your approval as Secretary, and that level of stupidity is just as bad. Companies that are prohibited from donating to you or your campaign, so they donate to your foundation instead.
This was discussed at length much earlier in this thread. But I'll summarize in two points:
1. She had no connection to the Foundation during her time as Sec'y 2. Most important...Do you think for one second that the sale of Uranium is approved by one cabinet officer? This would go through the DHLS, State and the Joint Chiefs, at a very minimum. Which means Obama would be involved.
I find it interesting that people believe that she not only ran State without any checks and balances or bureaucratic oversight, but she somehow co-opted the other cabinet officers and the Potus.
A lot of New York Times links. NY times has been very bias in favor of a more left point of view. Almost as bad as Fox News is the other way around.
Maybe, but as far as I know she hasn't denied the contributions, even saying they were only hidden because of a filing error or something like that. Only denied that there was a connection. But come on, even if there wasn't a connection, that is just stupid to accept million dollar donations from foreign companies that need your approval as Secretary, and that level of stupidity is just as bad. Companies that are prohibited from donating to you or your campaign, so they donate to your foundation instead.
Let me tell you about staffers and why they would refuse to cooperate if not subpoenaed. A gentleman that works for me today was on Al Gore's military staff. Basically he carried the 'football' for Gore, if you know what I mean. Well this gentleman also worked two cubes over from Monica. He was privy to ALL of it. He was subpoenaed by Ken Starr and had to pay 50k+ of his own money for legal counsel during the multiple times he was deposed. There was no legal fund or anything to support him.
The point is, a staffer is not going to cooperate unless required to do so. You wouldn't either because everything you say could put you on the hook or in legal jeopardy. Therefore you need counsel. Counsel is expensive. Why would you voluntarily put yourself in that type of financial and legal risk?
I think I'd pay 50k just to not be privy to everything that happened with Monica 2 cubes over.
He told me that Monica was very pretty when that all started. He said she a 'stress eater'.
exactly....keeping your mouth shut always looks bad but it is the first thing an attorney will tell you
Post edited by Gern Blansten on
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
Even if nothing top secret was sent, why are staffers refusing to cooperate? Why did she not hand over all her emails when asked? Why did she go through and delete tens of thousands, claiming they had nothing to do with her job? Why did she wipe the server? What kind of investigation would allow the person being investigated to gather and collect their own evidence against them as she did? If there was nothing to hide, why did she hide so much?
Probably half of what you are asking is Faux News smoke and mirrors.
It was a personal email so I'm guessing there were personal emails that she didn't want plastered all over the internet. How criminal.
Servers get wiped all the time. I have about 3 that are just sitting on a shelf because I'm not going to dispose of them with data on the hard drives.
I do watch a little Fox News. But I also watch several other networks like NBC and CBS, almost anything but CNN because they annoy me, and I remember a lot of networks covering this when it was developing.
There was no need to plaster personal emails all over the internet. She could have easily signed an agreement to not to publicly disclose any unofficial communication and given access to her account to the officials doing the investigation. She should have. She was a government employee who chose not to use the government email servers and when asked, delayed in supplying the emails and deleted thousands more. If my employer asked for a record of my emails that was suppose to be on their server and I instead deleted them, I'd be fired today (actually on leave for about 2 weeks, then fired). She took months to comply, and chose which emails were relevant and which ones were not. It doesn't seem unreasonable to not allow the person being investigated to decide which evidence is relevant. That would be the worst system ever.
Even if nothing top secret was sent, why are staffers refusing to cooperate? Why did she not hand over all her emails when asked? Why did she go through and delete tens of thousands, claiming they had nothing to do with her job? Why did she wipe the server? What kind of investigation would allow the person being investigated to gather and collect their own evidence against them as she did? If there was nothing to hide, why did she hide so much?
Probably half of what you are asking is Faux News smoke and mirrors.
It was a personal email so I'm guessing there were personal emails that she didn't want plastered all over the internet. How criminal.
Servers get wiped all the time. I have about 3 that are just sitting on a shelf because I'm not going to dispose of them with data on the hard drives.
I do watch a little Fox News. But I also watch several other networks like NBC and CBS, almost anything but CNN because they annoy me, and I remember a lot of networks covering this when it was developing.
There was no need to plaster personal emails all over the internet. She could have easily signed an agreement to not to publicly disclose any unofficial communication and given access to her account to the officials doing the investigation. She should have. She was a government employee who chose not to use the government email servers and when asked, delayed in supplying the emails and deleted thousands more. If my employer asked for a record of my emails that was suppose to be on their server and I instead deleted them, I'd be fired today (actually on leave for about 2 weeks, then fired). She took months to comply, and chose which emails were relevant and which ones were not. It doesn't seem unreasonable to not allow the person being investigated to decide which evidence is relevant. That would be the worst system ever.
There is always another party to an email. I believe it has been mentioned that any email she received or sent that was required to be cataloged most likely got picked up on the other end.
Remember the Thomas Nine !! (10/02/2018)
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago 2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy 2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE) 2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston 2020: Oakland, Oakland:2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana 2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville 2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
they've stated that before as a defense, but still doesn't make much sense. If you want to investigate someone for their emails, you search their emails. You don't search accounts of every person she possibly could have sent an email to or received one from which would be thousands and thousands of accounts, each with thousands and thousands of emails looking for an email one person sent.
If you had a company credit card and your employer thought you were using it for personal gain they would not go to every possible website or retail store to see if their card had been used. They would search their credit card records for inappropriate use. It doesn't make sense to do it any other way.
To say "if everyone else kept their emails then why do I need to for my records" is illogical. With that logic you wouldn't need to use toilet seat covers in a public restroom either.
Let's just keep making excuses for Clinton and keep ignoring everything that's going on...
It doesn't look good that she's refusing another agreed to debate w/ Sanders in CA, and that Sanders and Trump will debate. What is she afraid of? Hmmm
She's playing to win, I don't like it much either, but that's how it goes.
The potential Bernie / Trump debate right before the convention has to be driving her crazy.
This is the person who was a shoe-in six months ago ...
So close she could taste it, how fleeting her dreams must be.
I don't see Trump doing it. The one advantage is to damage Hillary, but it would be risky for Trump too. I mean, what's his strategy? Does he eviscerate Bernie, thereby helping Hillary who is the presumptive nominee? Or does he go soft and risk the talking point that "he can't even beat Bernie in a debate". There's really no upside.
This could be a long term mistake for Bernie, or the chance to be. If he goes around the DNC and debates the GOP, that will be seen as subverting the party and more importantly the person who has the most pledged delegates and raw votes. Any hope of influence he would have in the Senate would be cooked. It's not going to sway the super delegates and if Hillary really has a DOJ issue, the SD's may vote for Biden. Why would they vote for Bernie over Biden?
Comments
Also, the uranium thing isn't such a big deal, Russia is already a nuclear superpower, in case you didn't know.
Godfather.
It doesn't look good that she's refusing another agreed to debate w/ Sanders in CA, and that Sanders and Trump will debate. What is she afraid of? Hmmm
As for Clinton's breaches of security . . . I can't imagine the Clintons hired some regular old Joe to install their server. I imagine they hired the best money could buy. Her server is probably more secure than say, the CIA who got hacked by the Chinese or any of the other govt institutions that have recently been compromised.
This latest news cycle is just another big yawn, in my view. I've read the posted articles here thinking I was going to learn something new, something to nail the coffin . . . but I didn't. Just another desperate attempt by the RNC Anti-Hillary Committee and the corporate media to keep a pretty boring story alive.
Donations were made to the foundation as well as ridiculous "speaking fees" by companies and individuals who were directly involved with business with Hilary as Secretary. These donations were not make public as required, but were funneled through other sources to try and keep it secret. Unfortunately as soon as they are reported, most of the media just sweeps it under the rug.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/23/us/politics/election-clinton-foundation.html?_r=0
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html?action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
98 CAA
00 Virginia Beach;Camden I; Jones Beach III
05 Borgata Night I; Wachovia Center
06 Letterman Show; Webcast (guy in blue shirt), Camden I; DC
08 Camden I; Camden II; DC
09 Phillie III
10 MSG II
13 Wrigley Field
16 Phillie II
The rules were made clear by the time she became the nation’s top diplomat that using a private server for official business was neither allowed nor encouraged because of “significant security risks.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/26/us/politics/state-department-hillary-clinton-emails.html?_r=0
98 CAA
00 Virginia Beach;Camden I; Jones Beach III
05 Borgata Night I; Wachovia Center
06 Letterman Show; Webcast (guy in blue shirt), Camden I; DC
08 Camden I; Camden II; DC
09 Phillie III
10 MSG II
13 Wrigley Field
16 Phillie II
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
Turn off Faux News.
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
Honestly...it's as simple as not allowing any unapproved email address to be allowed through any government system
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
98 CAA
00 Virginia Beach;Camden I; Jones Beach III
05 Borgata Night I; Wachovia Center
06 Letterman Show; Webcast (guy in blue shirt), Camden I; DC
08 Camden I; Camden II; DC
09 Phillie III
10 MSG II
13 Wrigley Field
16 Phillie II
The point is, a staffer is not going to cooperate unless required to do so. You wouldn't either because everything you say could put you on the hook or in legal jeopardy. Therefore you need counsel. Counsel is expensive. Why would you voluntarily put yourself in that type of financial and legal risk?
Let me tell you about staffers and why they would refuse to cooperate if not subpoenaed. A gentleman that works for me today was on Al Gore's military staff. Basically he carried the 'football' for Gore, if you know what I mean. Well this gentleman also worked two cubes over from Monica. He was privy to ALL of it. He was subpoenaed by Ken Starr and had to pay 50k+ of his own money for legal counsel during the multiple times he was deposed. There was no legal fund or anything to support him.
The point is, a staffer is not going to cooperate unless required to do so. You wouldn't either because everything you say could put you on the hook or in legal jeopardy. Therefore you need counsel. Counsel is expensive. Why would you voluntarily put yourself in that type of financial and legal risk?
I think I'd pay 50k just to not be privy to everything that happened with Monica 2 cubes over.
He told me that Monica was very pretty when that all started. He said she a 'stress eater'.
It was a personal email so I'm guessing there were personal emails that she didn't want plastered all over the internet. How criminal.
Servers get wiped all the time. I have about 3 that are just sitting on a shelf because I'm not going to dispose of them with data on the hard drives.
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
This was discussed at length much earlier in this thread. But I'll summarize in two points:
1. She had no connection to the Foundation during her time as Sec'y
2. Most important...Do you think for one second that the sale of Uranium is approved by one cabinet officer? This would go through the DHLS, State and the Joint Chiefs, at a very minimum. Which means Obama would be involved.
I find it interesting that people believe that she not only ran State without any checks and balances or bureaucratic oversight, but she somehow co-opted the other cabinet officers and the Potus.
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
There was no need to plaster personal emails all over the internet. She could have easily signed an agreement to not to publicly disclose any unofficial communication and given access to her account to the officials doing the investigation. She should have. She was a government employee who chose not to use the government email servers and when asked, delayed in supplying the emails and deleted thousands more. If my employer asked for a record of my emails that was suppose to be on their server and I instead deleted them, I'd be fired today (actually on leave for about 2 weeks, then fired). She took months to comply, and chose which emails were relevant and which ones were not. It doesn't seem unreasonable to not allow the person being investigated to decide which evidence is relevant. That would be the worst system ever.
1998: Noblesville; 2003: Noblesville; 2009: EV Nashville, Chicago, Chicago
2010: St Louis, Columbus, Noblesville; 2011: EV Chicago, East Troy, East Troy
2013: London ON, Wrigley; 2014: Cincy, St Louis, Moline (NO CODE)
2016: Lexington, Wrigley #1; 2018: Wrigley, Wrigley, Boston, Boston
2020: Oakland, Oakland: 2021: EV Ohana, Ohana, Ohana, Ohana
2022: Oakland, Oakland, Nashville, Louisville; 2023: Chicago, Chicago, Noblesville
2024: Noblesville, Wrigley, Wrigley, Ohana, Ohana
If you had a company credit card and your employer thought you were using it for personal gain they would not go to every possible website or retail store to see if their card had been used. They would search their credit card records for inappropriate use. It doesn't make sense to do it any other way.
To say "if everyone else kept their emails then why do I need to for my records" is illogical. With that logic you wouldn't need to use toilet seat covers in a public restroom either.
This is the person who was a shoe-in six months ago ...
This could be a long term mistake for Bernie, or the chance to be. If he goes around the DNC and debates the GOP, that will be seen as subverting the party and more importantly the person who has the most pledged delegates and raw votes. Any hope of influence he would have in the Senate would be cooked. It's not going to sway the super delegates and if Hillary really has a DOJ issue, the SD's may vote for Biden. Why would they vote for Bernie over Biden?
My gut: Not going to happen.