David Petraeus, Jim Jones, and Tom Donilon used. If they had their own private accounts that they used at least half the time for work matters, then you are home free.

It just says she won't go to jail. BTW, apparently there's couple new stories out about former ambassadors (Gration) being forced out for setting up private email in Kenya, and also a directive Clinton's office issued against use of private email for State Dept. employees, claiming it was not secure.

... and the nonbiased GOP members of Congress will reveal what it is. And you're pretty sure she should go to jail, even if she gets off on a technicality.

Have I got that right?

What do you think it was? The murder of Vince Foster?

for her. I don't know if she did anything wrong, but that's the issue--we don't know, because her communications all took place, and were held, somewhere that the American people had no access to via records or FOIA. That's the whole point of the laws and regulations concerning officials' use of properly secured, maintained and archived systems.

...to the revelations about Hillary's musings about her daughter's wedding dress, her then-future in-laws, and her daughter's sonogram. I'm sure it will be riveting.

especially in an age of hacking and spying--is a "witch hunt". Those rules and regulations are meant to protect the records and show us what our public officials are up to as they serve us--Hillary Clinton doesn't own her official communications, we the people do. The fact that she stowed them away for years, maintained and accessed by who-knows-who, and we only see them when she and her staff allow it--that should make you angry and suspicious. I trust no one.

...and that is what makes me angry. That is what should make any Democrat angry and suspicious.

Consider the source. Consider the purveyors. It is a witch hunt. Benghazi, Benghazi,Benghazi,Benghazi,Benghazi, and Benghazi some more.

the foot and then hand over the rest of the ammo to their enemies. This is a self-inflicted wound. She could have just used a State Dept. system for the bulk of her work and avoided this--after all, she apparently insisted upon it for her underlings as a matter of policy.

Good to know.

when they received years of official emails from hdr22@clintonemail.com instead of hdr22@state.gov is beyond me. To what system, and to what security, did they think they were emailing to?

spin it as innocuous.

that the republicans are taking political advantage of it doesn't mean it's not problematic.

The same "logic" we heard for Whitewater, Benghazi, snd dozens of other RW BS smear campaigns.

Having first lobbed a smoke bomb in the room, the practitioners of these Segretti-esque capers then insist we look for the fire.

But now, as so often, there was no fire. Just a con artist with a smoke bomb.

is a right wing tendency. But I don't care which public official from either party does it, I can see the impropriety. I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't. I don't see it as a smear campaign. I see it as: she let her bad tendencies and iffy management skills get the better of her once again, and it affected how she did her job. That's a signal to me that she doesn't deserve a promotion to higher office.

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/03/04/politics/hillary-clinton-emails/

Transparency. Right there.

Like the hacked Blumenthal/Clinton email exchanges that a guy from Gawker requested in a FOIA a couple years ago, but never received. It's that whole deal of her communications not being subject to immediate archiving and FOIA that is the heart of this issue. We will only see what she LETS us see. If you're into that with public officials, that's your business. I don't trust them.

No matter what refutations are provided, the True Believers will not be daunted. No, they'll just shift focus, move the goalposts or change the subject.

Anything BUT open their minds.

Enjoy.

The documents are the property of the Department of State.

The set of documents is necessarily full of highly classified information as a function of the office of Secretary of State.

The Department of State is not in possession of the documents.

Hillary Clinton is in possession of the documents.

In any other case, this is prima facie evidence of theft. The question that needs to be answered therefore, is why she gets to make her own rules on highly classified government property? People get long prison sentences for this kind of thing when they're not Hillary Clinton.

But you just go right on enabling the Benghazi! Benghazi! crew.

official email communications for almost six years, away from the government, away from searches, against State policy and against WH policy. We do not know what is or WAS on her server. We don't know if it ever crashed, or was hacked, or had things lost or removed, we don't know who accessed it or maintained it. Interestingly, the WH might have known because their IT guys may have had to make sure her messages with her private address weren't kicked out as spam. Same with the IT at State Dept. and any agency that successfully received email from her. So it seems everyone knew, despite the WH saying that they had no idea.

I'll manage to get over this non-scandal.

Regardless of the actual legalities of our Secretary of State having a private email account, it gives the perception of shadiness—and therefor makes her a candidate for the Dems that will be easier to demonize and not elect. It hurts the chances of a Democratic win in 2016, should she run.

Never underestimate the nuance-free mentality of huge sections of the American voter.

..was certain.
BAM..along comes an unknown from Hope, Arkansas and the people loved him.!!!
And Bill Clinton sent GHW BUSH packing his bags & exiting the White House.
And its been an unforgivable defeat that has carried through to the Obama's today.
And one that will not stand for Hillary to even speak 9f a presidential run before the Right Wing forces are plotting her demise.
Their hate boils over & foams at the mouth at the mention of her name.
They will not stop.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-04/clinton-s-e-mail-system-built-for-privacy-though-not-security

Article gets a bit hyperbolic about the "could hide stuff" angle. But provides a relatively accessible explanation of what they screwed up after one whole day of looking at their setup.

http://gizmodo.com/why-hillary-clintons-homebrew-email-is-a-security-night-1689470576

This article gets a little more technical. Also not terribly well-written, but brings up some other problems.

Long story short: They left the default encryption keys in place, so anyone could read her email. It took a whole day after the hit piece for someone to figure this out.

There's also a typosquatter at clintonmail.com (no 'e' before 'mail'). Domain was registered not long after the real domain was. You can't typosquat a .gov address, because only the US government hands them out.

..hang her on. Or at least keep her from the White House.
Endless sick stuff that keeps recycling in the Rovian play book.

and that there would be other countries trying to read her email.

Did the GOP push to cut the funding for the US gov tech upgrading? Or did they just effin overlook that part?

meaning they were widely-known, and thus easy to break.

Where's your link showing mail.state.gov uses factory default encryption keys?

How 'bout you link to the typosquatter who managed to get a .gov address?

Slow down..maybe you intended this for someone else.
?

Here, lemme remind you of your own post:

The stories I linked showed that her VPN was misconfigured. It did not use unique encryption keys. That is how someone else could read her email.

You are now claiming "a crappy US gov server" would have the same problem. Evidence?

Perhaps you could link to the Bloomberg article that doesn't know the government distributes it's own SSL certificates for its servers.

and their habit of defunding useful programs.

I seriously made NO MENTION of encryption anything.
That's your line tonight.
Relax this isn't a courtroom..Its a comment site.

Here perhaps adding the sarcasm thingy will help you out.
oh boy!

Ignore.
You missed my point. Never mind

If you did not write what you intended in your title, correct it.

If that is the best thing the HDS platoon can offer, it's not much of a muchness.

And why this http://clintonmail.com/ goes nowhere.

Never in history has the same First Couple sought to return to the White House 24 years after they first got there. It's not only unprecedented, it's kind of absurd.

I am a loyal Democrat who will not hesitate to vote for Hillary, but I have heard and seen enough of her and Bill to last a lifetime, and that's before the next pending mega-dose. Just the fact that we are talking about the Lewinsky era, even if it is in the context of journalistic malfeasance, makes me wonder how the fuck is this happening again? I am tired of it.

And I know I'm not alone.

It's among the reasons why I believe it's going to be a tough sell for Hillary to win, no matter what the polls might say today. So many people believe she is Democrats' best chance to win, but I feel the opposite, really.

My OP makes it pretty clear that I don't like either Clinton. So I think we should talk about dislike in this case, but not invent charges of "illegal" actions even after they have been debunked.

Let the Teabaggers do their own dirty work.

But my point is a quarter century of Clintonian drama is an even worse joke. Even though they bring some of it on themselves, the last eight years should tell everyone that the Republicans run on bullshit, and any Dem will eventually receive the same treatment.

There's a problem with putting the Clintons front-and-center again that should be apparent to even their biggest fans. They are old news, and they are wearing thin with many people. The best thing that could happen to them right now isn't happening, and that's a serious primary challenge. It would remind people why Hillary is the strongest choice, if it turned out that way. It would also push bullshit like email gate back by a year. There would still be faux scandals, but most people in our party at least would tune them out in favor of the contest. Absent a contest, this is what you'll get for another year. Not healthy.

To eliminate a candidate in advance because people will say nasty crap about them?

Any candidate we field will be thus treated. HRC is not unique in this aspect.

wait till she announces

Don Segretti 4.0, A Teabagger Nation

By Driftglass - **June 21, 2010**

'Ratfucking' is a method the GOP began during the Nixon era and consistently after that time. Since they have the money to fund pundits to do this for them, it will continue. Beware.

The practice has won the right many victories for them and very effective in causing Democrats to abandon their candidates and their party. The man who originated the term and method was:

Donald Henry Segretti (born September 17, 1941, in San Marino, California) is a former political operative for the Committee to Re-elect the President (Nixon) during the early 1970s. Segretti was hired by friend Dwight L. Chapin to run a campaign of dirty tricks (which he dubbed "ratfucking"[1]) against the Democrats, with his work being paid for by Herb Kalmbach, Nixon's lawyer, from presidential campaign re-election funds gathered before an April 7, 1972, law required that contributors be identified. His actions were part of the larger Watergate scandal, and were important indicators for the few members of the press actively investigating the Watergate break in in the earliest stages that what became known as the Watergate scandal involved far more than just a simple break in. Segretti's involvement in the "Canuck letter"[2] typifies the tactics Segretti and others working with him used, forging a letter ascribed to Senator Edmund Muskie which maligned the people, language and culture of French Canada and French Canadians, causing the soon to be Democratic presidential candidate Muskie considerable headaches in denying the letter and having to continue dealing with the issue. Many historians have indicated over the years that Muskie's withdrawal from the Presidential primaries, and the disastrous Iowa primary loss to George McGovern that precipitated it, were at least partly the result of Segretti and some of the other "Ratfuckers" creating so much confusion and false accusations that Muskie simply could not respond in any meaningful way.

In 1974, Segretti pleaded guilty to three misdemeanor counts of distributing illegal (in fact, forged) campaign literature and was sentenced to six months in prison, actually serving four months. One notable example of his wrongdoing was a faked letter on Democratic presidential candidate Edmund Muskie's letterhead falsely alleging that U.S. Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson, a fellow Democrat, had had an illegitimate child with a 17-year-old; the Muskie letters accused Senator Hubert H. Humphrey of sexual misconduct as well.[3] After testimony regarding the Muskie letters emerged, Democrats in Florida noted the similarity between these sabotage incidents and others that involved stationery stolen from Humphrey's offices after Muskie dropped out of the race. A false news release on Humphrey's letterhead "accused Rep. Shirley Chisholm (D-N.Y.) of being mentally unbalanced" and a mailing with an unidentified source mischaracterized Humphrey as supporting a controversial environmental measure that he actually opposed.[3]

In the 1976 film about Watergate, All the President's Men, Segretti was played by Robert Walden.

Segretti was a lawyer who served as a prosecutor for the military and later as a civilian. However, his license was suspended for two years following his conviction. In 1995, he ran for a local judgeship in Orange County, California. However, he quickly withdrew from the race when his campaign awakened lingering anger over his involvement in the Watergate scandal. In 2000, Segretti served as co-chair of John McCain's presidential campaign in Orange County.[4]

He holds a B.S. in Finance from the University of Southern California (1963) and a J.D. from UC Berkeley School of Law (1966). While at USC he became associated with Dwight L. Chapin, Tim Elbourne, Ron Ziegler, Herbert Porter and Gordon C. Strachan, they all joined the "Trojans for Representative Government" group.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Segretti



Back in the Nixon era

It would be tempting to label this "The Return of the Ratfuckers", but of course the GOP Ratfuck squad (from Corrente) --

Ratfucking is an American slang term for political sabotage or dirty tricks. It was first brought to public attention during the Watergate scandal investigation that during the 1972 presidential campaign the Nixon campaign committee maintained a "dirty tricks" unit focused on discrediting Nixon's strongest challengers.

According to Woodward and Bernstein, Nixon aide Dwight Chapin hired fellow USC alumnus Donald Segretti to run a campaign of dirty tricks (which Segretti dubbed "ratfucking&quot against the Democrats in 1972. The purpose of the operation was to create as much bitterness and disunity within the Democrat primary as possible. One notable example of Segretti's wrong-doing was a faked letter on Democratic presidential candidate Edmund Muskie's letterhead falsely alleging that U.S. Senator Henry "Scoop" Jackson, a fellow Democrat, had had an illegitimate child with a 17-year-old...

-- has never left us.

Much more worth reading at:

http://driftglass.blogspot.com/2010/06/don-segretti-40-teabagger-nation.html

This is why we see one thing after another against Obama, Kerry, Pelosi and other Democrats to gin up outrage. Now we can add the Clintons to the list again. The major cable news pundits made their careers on them.

While some things are based on difference of opinion, tearing up Democrats and our leaders is not productive. Many of the issues have been manufactured about the things guaranteed break the hearts of liberal, progressive Democrats, usually by Libertarians who do not want the same things as we do. But they want to destroy Democrats because they are the force that robs their corporatist masters.

So what happens is Democrats feel betrayed and react accordingly, but are not given opposing information fast enough to debunk and restore them.

As soon as one issue has been debunked, they move immediately to another. It is exhausting to rebutt all of these, and after a while by repetition they are established as a truth by the inability to not rebutt them at the speed they are being sent out.

Ratfucking also relies upon the learned perception that the well of political discourse has been turned into a cesspool, and counts on the discouraged to lose the will to get into government to clean the mess up which fulfills its purpose.

Instead, in their place are the Tea Party grifters who become the voices of power, instead of the compassionate who stay out of political life. Thus the RW mission is accomplished.

Another major reason some smears are not rebutted is we don't have Koch billions to fund these smears, so they out vote us with their media dollars and paid pundits. We musr be smart and patient with our movement to not allow them to divide us.

Anyone who followed the political scene for many years would recognize the approach being used with or without using the word 'ratfucking.'

But the term is shorthand for a complicated process. Its purpose is to destroy the reputation or credibility of the Democratic Party and Obama (and now HRC) among those who should be rightly proud of our accomplishments and values. The media is owned by RW billionaires and they do not show our side in a credible fashion.

Make no mistake, it is not just the personality or the actions of our party or our president being attacked, it is the progressive ideas we represent. Those ideas are the enemy the RWers and Koch organizations are fighting by going after our leaders. They will use Citizens United and every other weapon in their hands to defeat us and our hopes for a better America and a better world.

Think of the method employed to ruin the Kennedys, ACORN and so many others. We must not be taken in.

**Yes, some of us realized what was happening as the media and pundits that were formerly trusted, did this in the summer of 2010, and it worked very well. We tried to warn others, but they stayed away from the polls and many states now live under the boot of the Tea Party. Now they live under the boot of Secessionists determined to impose a fascist theocracy on them.

Bitterly -- it is not.

We have been ratfucked.

Dirty tricks are unethical, duplicitous, slanderous or illegal tactics employed to destroy or diminish the effectiveness of political or business opponents. The term "dirty trick" can also be used to refer to an underhanded technique to get ahead of an opponent (such as sabotage or disregarding rules of engagement).

Leaking secret information, digging into a candidate's past (opposition research) or exposing real conflicts between the image presented and the person behind the image are always subject to argument as to whether they are dirty tricks or truth-telling. When a candidate runs into trouble or roadblocks in his or her campaign that are traceable to the other side, he/she can easily charge their opponent with dirty tricks. Often, the candidate is right in this accusation, but one candidate's "dirty trick" is another's "political strategy". The distinction changes with the times. Of course imputing the discovery of a past misdemeanor to the other side can be considered a "dirty trick" in its own right.

However, manufactured, irrelevant, cruel and incorrect rumors or outright lies or falsehoods designed to damage or destroy an opponent are easily described as dirty tricks. They serve to tie up the opponent into defending against and answering false charges rather than explaining their policies and platform.

Sometimes dirty tricks are not only aimed at slandering the opponent. Dishing the dirt against your candidate's opponent can be effective at alienating voters in order to turn them off from the entire project. These tactics may reduce turnout in order to assure your candidate gains by having his/her core voters show up at the polls; thus, an operative molds the outcome by angering everyone. The effort to lower an official's or a candidate's popularity in the polls is called "driving the negatives"[citation needed].

Political speech is protected by the Constitution in the United States and it is rare that a wronged candidate sues for slander after an election season is concluded. Laws were introduced in the UK to prevent untrue statements being made about candidates—see Miranda Grell for a 2007 case.

Political candidates have been accused by their opponents of virtually every sin and crime ever described, from graft and vice to bribery and communism, polygamy, drug use, spousal abuse, fascism, pedophilia, miscegenation, adultery, stupidity, demagoguery, and support for nudism.[citation needed]

The story of dirty tricks in American politics begins with the first campaign for President of the United States, in the 1790s. Thomas Jefferson hired journalist and pamphleteer James Thomas Callender to slander his opponent, Alexander Hamilton.[citation needed] After a falling out, Callender turned on Jefferson and published attacks on his previous employer.

The Nixon Committee for the Re-Election of the President (CRP), a private, non-governmental campaign entity, used funds from its coffers to pay for, and later cover up, dirty tricks performed against opponents by Richard Nixon's employee, Donald Segretti. Segretti famously coined the term 'ratfucking' for recruiting conservative members to infiltrate opposition groups (and/or misrepresent them through false flag activities) in order to undermine the effectiveness of such opposition.[1]

As a result of post-Watergate reform legislation, such activities are strictly regulated, though other private entities still may practice what has become commonly referred to as questionable or unethical dirty tricks.

Recent nomenclature equates a Dirty Tricks Squad to any organized, covert attempt to besmirch the credibility or reputation of an individual or organization so as to render them ineffective...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirty_tricks

Note the exception for private groups in regulations. That is why the media gets away with so much. And of course it's not just DU that has sensed a problem.

It's going on at other websites, and is the mainstay of talk radio and cable television 'news' shows. The emphasis in the Wikipedia article is mine and it fits the pattern. This should be known by everyone here.

The original DU was beseiged by trolls early on. MIRT keeps expelling them.
Some have come to believe the same things the trolls do, and don't fit all the traits defining trolling.

But the terms Ratfucking and Ratfuckers were employed by the GOP referring to what they were doing to Democrats, not each other. Democrats do not do it to the GOP because it goes against our values as we want all to be informed with facts and to encourage voting. When someone says or does otherwise it gives the appearance of Dirty Tricks.

.

Last edited Thu Mar 5, 2015, 11:57 PM - Edit history (1)

Edit: Thanks for heads-up about hidden post -- thought everybody knew this term.

hard, hard look by the admins.

Attention jurors--it's about POLITICAL DIRTY TRICKS ......

Quite recently, today, in fact, a post got hidden because someone reported a news story that had a naughty word in it. The poster didn't endorse the naughty word, or approve of it, or cheer about it, but it was central to the story. The jury voted to censor the thread.

I guess we're only allowed to read about "certain" happenings.

I don't understand this place sometimes. In any event, ya can't be too careful.

I've had a post hidden because a type of f-word was used in a quote. That surprised me. I wasn't sure if it was because some people don't seem to understand that quotes mean another person has said something, or the actual f-word, or the topic. I should know to be more careful.

and raise you PLUS A GAZILLION!!!

(Please post this as an OP!!!)

deal is a load of rubbish. There are plenty of things you can hang her on a hook for, this isn't one of them

Mmmmmm waffles!

Hope all is well with you and yours.

Suffering from the crud, haven't been able to make Kendo practice all week because of it. Very irritating

Hope all is well with you too!

The Waffle Party, The Tastier Alternative.

jumping on the band wagon who thinks he's beyond "John Doe" issues because GAWD anointed him to be the leader of the free (I use loosely) world.

there wasn't a word about THAT on NBC, yet Hillary's emails led off with the top story of the day.

I would have thought that half of our congress bringing in an uninvited leader of another country to bang the drums of war would have at least raised an eyebrow.

Shame on them!! But then again, but since I expected to see some coverage, shame on me.

The RW based loved bibi, missed the DHS thing, and now howls about Hillary deleting emails as if emails are a single person event.

and probably many more to come. He's backing Biden.

Top Biden backer: Hillary Clinton will 'die by 1000 cuts'
Washington Post (blog)-Mar 4, 2015
Dick Harpootlian, a former Democratic Party chairman in South Carolina, home to an early and important presidential primary, said recent ...
A Clinton candidacy is weakened by string of revelations.........................
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2015/03/04/top-biden-backer-hillary-clinton-will-die-by-1000-cuts-on-e-mail-story/

If Clinton is out, it will have to be Warren, O'Malley, Webb, or someone else.

like Warren, Biden etc. But he'll definitely support HC if she gets nominated.
He said this will be the GOP strategy. One cut after another. 1000 cuts.

i so agree. it's all so much bullshit.

A "radical centrist"? Sounds like a dangerous social disease to me and probably communicable among the dim.

I don't think public servants should act as their own gatekeeper and holder of their work and I don't give a damn who thinks it is stupid, seemingly a universe made of of shifty Republicans until this hit. I don't recall Democrats opposing measures to restrict such handling or mocking the concept as meaningless.

What kind of fool thinks this is less substantive than Vince Foster murder accusations and BENGAZI! (a "scandal" that no one could even remotely articulate meaning it is by default even more stupid than a fake murder)?

Nothing has to be illegal to be inappropriate, unwise, and shady looking and if it happened today it would be illegal so isn't exactly wonderful and isn't unreasonable to frown upon the situation even if it isn't about going to jail.

Good rant. No minds will be changed here at DU.

http://thedailybanter.com/2015/03/aps-bombshell-hillary-clinton-email-story-fails-prove-existence-homebrew-server/

So their big evidence is....common sense.

And that demonstrates the VPN was actually configured properly because.........?

I don't care if some staffer set up a a cheap server in their house, or a cheap VM in some hosting company's server rack.

I do care that they used the default, and widely available, encryption keys. And I do care that instead of creating clintonemail.state.gov, they created their own .com, and thus made it much more likely that a typo leaks email.

I have it on good authority that Hillary showers while completely naked!

Thanks for the laugh.

And she masticates at the dinner table.

Thank you.

In his day, Lincoln was slimed repeatedly because of his humble origins. And because of his looks. And…well…you name it.

Clinton was a savant yes, and a horndog, certainly, but not an idiot.

And as for Hilary being "overly forgiving," well, who knows? Are we talking private or public?

In his day, Lincoln was slimed repeatedly because of his humble origins. And because of his looks. And…well…you name it.

Clinton was a savant yes, and a horndog, certainly, but not an idiot.

And as for Hilary being "overly forgiving," well, who knows? Are we talking private or public?

Thanks.

- This post would seem to indicate the validity of that statement.

this is about relations with donors.

...and a few of 'em showed us their sorry old behinds, too....!!!

All TV media cares about is getting one more nielsen box tuned to their station



That is why FOX does not care that BillO lied his ass off, he got his best ratings of the year yesterday

The water carriers who don't make a dime off repeating lies, though, that's all about partisan dislike that borders on that famous derangement syndrome that is oft talked about. When people are so willing to ignore facts and double down on discredited "details" because they suit their desires, ya gotta laugh.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/state-department-email-rule-hillary-clinton-115804.html

The State Department has had a policy in place since 2005 to warn officials against routine use of personal email accounts for government work, a regulation in force during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state that appears to be at odds with her reliance on a private email for agency business, POLITICO has learned.

The policy, detailed in a manual for agency employees, adds clarity to an issue at the center of a growing controversy over Clinton’s reliance on a private email account. Aides to Clinton, as well as State Department officials, have suggested that she did nothing inappropriate because of fuzzy guidelines and lack of specific rules on when and how official documents had to be preserved during her years as secretary.

But the 2005 policy was described as one of several “clear cut” directives the agency’s own inspector general relied on to criticize the conduct of a U.S. ambassador who in 2012 was faulted for using email outside of the department’s official system.

“It is the Department’s general policy that normal day-to-day operations be conducted on an authorized [Automated Information System], which has the proper level of security control to provide nonrepudiation, authentication and encryption, to ensure confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the resident information,” the Department’s Foreign Affairs Manual states.

.....

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/state-department-email-rule-hillary-clinton-115804.html

This story has gone from:

She broke the LAW!!!!!!

to


She violated a REGULATION!!!!!


to

She broke a RULE!!!!!!!!!!

to

She ignored a WARNING!!!!!!!

to

She disregarded a POLICY that was written by a PREDECESSOR!!!!!

Here's what the archivist of the United States has to say about the CRIMES OF HILLARY CLINTON:

The horse is dead. Anyone who keeps beating it is really showing us their backside....

Further, POLITICO (established by Albritton Communications, the same cretins who boycotted Bill Maher for his Nahn - Wun - Wun comments) is hardly friendly to Democrats, ever. They're great fans of the worst case scenario, while faking a nonpartisan POV. Anyone looking can see their wingnut lean at fifty paces.

When I was a fed, we had a policy that only official cell phones should be used for official business. But since they were hard to get, we all used private cell phones anyway.

When asked directly, the IT bubbas reiterated it was a policy, but not a hard and fast rule. Policy sometimes butts head with reality.

But this is a complete non-issue.

If I ever have to decide whether or not to vote for HRC or another Dem, this might come up. Until then, fuck these Segretti-esque smear campaigns.

I look forward to seeing that on car bumpers across America.

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/03/04/politics/hillary-clinton-emails/

Don't carry Republican water...it's putrid.

I mean the law is different now but it is of no significance, right?

If so then why were the laws changed?

Romney might have concerns about Democratic moles ratfucking him by possibly taking communications out of context or something, Hillary Clinton and Colin Powell did similar, and the systems might be problematic, right?