2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumWhy did Clinton Need A Private Server? (Why can't we just ignore this until the general election?)
Last edited Mon Mar 7, 2016, 05:23 PM - Edit history (1)
Hillary Clinton is the only Secretary of State to delete 31,830 emails, from her own private server and without government oversight.
As the only Secretary of State never to use an @state.gov email address, Hillary Clinton is also the only Secretary of State to use a private server exclusively. As Yahoo states, "Clinton acknowledged in March that she exclusively used a private email account and private server from 2009 to 2013 while secretary of state, opting against a government account despite official recommendations."
MORE TO READ AT THE LINK.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-a-goodman/why-did-hillary-clinton-need-a-private-server-the-answer-makes-bernie-sanders-president_b_9397304.html
UPDATE: Here is the system Colin Powell used.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/423688/colin-powell-hillary-clinton-email
Wilms
(26,795 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Some have even recently referred to him as a journalist. lol.
Really bad that people spreading the email deception don't get how bad they are being ratfucked even when it is Goodman and blatantly obvious.
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)NCTraveler
(30,481 posts)Goodman was a Paul supporter until he saw dollar signs in another direction. Since that point he has obviously become ratfucker extraordinaire.
Second is that some have recently, and laughable, referred to this winger as a journalist.
His message is directed at LIV's and it works on a very small group. Goodman is pulling a Fox News on a small group on the left. Gotta make a living. Probably sits there in his office at night saying "I love the poorly educated."
Fuck this right wing ratfucker.
fredamae
(4,458 posts)is ..... "Well, a Lot of people do this...Gen Powell etc".
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)The State Dept searched and found some old Colin Powell emails and classified them, which Powell called ridiculous and the Clintonites argued - see, it is a matter of over-classification.
Hmm.... I think it is much more likely that it was the State Dept helping out Clinton.
fredamae
(4,458 posts)on Powells emails-Thank you!
However-that is what I am hearing from "pundits".
merrily
(45,251 posts)Powell has said that, when he took over State (from Albright, I guess), there was almost nothing in place. He had to create the system. He also said that he occasionally used his private email account--private accounts like most of us, have, not a private server, like most of us don't have--for some purely administrative matters.
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)earthside
(6,960 posts)Hillary wanted control.
A control, in my opinion that comes from a sense of paranoia or persecution.
I don't know if she did anything illegal with this whole email server thing ... I think more importantly it shows in her Nixon-like control behavior.
And that concerns me a whole lot more than if she did anything illegal.
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)Who was looped into this wall-off world that was her server?
I read that hardly anyone had her email address, not even John Kerry, and that they communicated to her through her assistants.
Did she conduct all official State business off of this server?
What about planning the overthrow of Libya? Robert Kagan, the founder of the neocon movement was one of her primary Middle East advisers. Any emails regarding Libya that demonstrate what she was doing? Obama has been quoted as distancing himself from what happened in Libya, calling it, "Hillary's project." Was she engaging in these high-level activities, while being advised by Kagan? What was Obama's role in all of this? How much was he 'in the loop'?
I'd like to know the logistics here, because it could give us some incredible insight into how she ran things.
yardwork
(61,690 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)yardwork
(61,690 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)Sounded like bs to me, so I asked a couple of obvious questions.
yardwork
(61,690 posts)Noted that it was common knowledge that the State Dept servers were unreliable. That's why Colin Powell used a private server when has Secretary of State.
Note that nobody ever investigated Powell for doing so.
merrily
(45,251 posts)I saw him interviewed about this on TV. See replies 7 and 13. Thanks.
yardwork
(61,690 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)BTW, Mother Jones does not know more about what Powell did than Powell himself knows.
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)If I had done a tenth of what these three posts alone say, I'd be in jail, just as Susan McDougal was.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=post&forum=1251&pid=1434455
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1435952
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=1436093
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)That doesn't excuse her for setting up a standalone system.
The fact is IT at the state department under Clinton massively degraded and weakened. The audits after her tenure were brutal. Google it for yourself if you don't believe me.
merrily
(45,251 posts)are understandably cautious and other rationalizations galore.
Fact: Our legal system depends a great deal on people telling the truth when under oath and producing everything they've been asked to produce and without getting rid of anything before they comply.
Fact: When Hillary was subpoenaed, she took two years to comply, claiming the papers that had been subpoenaed had just turned up in the family dining room of the White House. This strained credulity, to say the least.
Fact: Susan McDougal went to jail rather than answer three questions about Bill Clinton. Not about herself, not about her husband, but about Bill Clinton.
Fact: Bill Clinton indisputably lied under oath on national television, in addition to parsing what the definition of is, is.
Fact: Hillary has been caught in some whoppers, though not created while she was under oath.
Fact: Hillary took two years to comply with an FOIA request, wiping her server first.
Fact: the man who set up the server for her took the Fifth when questioned.
Fact: The FBI, in the Executive Branch of a Democratic President, thought there was enough there to investigate.
Fact: A major part of the job description of a US President is faithful execution of our laws.
Fact: I expect this post to be alerted on, even though it contains only facts. If I am correct, that in itself will speak volumes, no matter what a jury decides to do with the alert.
Make of those facts whatever you will.
elehhhhna
(32,076 posts)On Friday I think.
merrily
(45,251 posts)When she testified, her answers were as limited and guarded as if no deal had been made. And whoever in Congress was questioning her did lousy jobs of it. It was little more than a dog and pony show for the TV cameras on both sides.
Whether people don't want to look bad or don't want to give up people they worked with or for, or whatever, the immunity deal is not a guaranty that the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth will come out.
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)I honestly don't expect much to come from the guy who set up the server. I don't even really expect him to be questioned very skillfully. Goodling sure wasn't and that was televised.
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)randome
(34,845 posts)Most government regulations on this level contain similar loopholes. So she is perfectly within her rights to delete emails she deems personal. It's only if someone is caught attempting to delete official information that a problem arises.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]"There is a crack in everything. That's how the light gets in."
Leonard Cohen, Anthem (1992)[/center][/font][hr]
Skwmom
(12,685 posts)NWCorona
(8,541 posts)Vinca
(50,300 posts)They need to clear her or charge her ASAP. At the moment we have a second viable candidate in the race. In October we won't.
CoffeeCat
(24,411 posts)Maybe she engaged in criminal activity. Maybe she didn't. Maybe this IT dude who was granted immunity will reveal substantive information that will lead to an indictment. Maybe what little he will say will provide nothing.
Whatever is going on, needs to be wrapped up sooner, rather than later.
Clear her and let's move on--or convene a grand jury, indict her--whatever.
And Clinton needs to call off her dogs, when it comes to bullying Sanders out of this race. She has no business telling half of the party and a formidable opponent to exit a political race.
We're in it for the long haul, honey. Don't like it...tough!
yardwork
(61,690 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)yardwork
(61,690 posts)I don't know what game you're playing. Deal me out.
merrily
(45,251 posts)Not even close. And Reply 13 spells that out. You're claim that I am the only playing games appears to be projection, at best.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)I have a private Yahoo email account, but I don't own my own email server.
merrily
(45,251 posts)specifically and clearly state that a private email account, which most Americans have, is very different from a private server.
I am not the one playing games.
arcane1
(38,613 posts)This whole "But the Bushes did it too!" defense, even if it were accurate, is not really much of a defense.
If we let Bush's precedent determine what is right and wrong, we are truly doomed. It won't stop with email.
Arazi
(6,829 posts)In fact iirc, Clinton is the only Administration member to have ever had their own private server
mmonk
(52,589 posts)with a public server when looking to profit.
ladjf
(17,320 posts)they may have been too lazy to worry with security protocols. You idea is more likely the real truth.
mmonk
(52,589 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)before the server was even set up.
mmonk
(52,589 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)her records inside the white house for two years, until they mysteriously appeared in the dining room of the family quarters was not really plausible.
ebayfool
(3,411 posts)ladjf
(17,320 posts)merrily
(45,251 posts)ladjf
(17,320 posts)marlakay
(11,482 posts)Its that when they first asked for them she deleted a bunch saying they were personal, how does anyone know that?
Nitram
(22,845 posts)FlatBaroque
(3,160 posts)Why was there never a permanent Inspector General at State during her tenure?
mmonk
(52,589 posts)I've assumed so without asking.
FlatBaroque
(3,160 posts)yet for her entire tenure at State Hillary somehow managed to have a temporary person in there.
State Department Lacked Top Watchdog During Hillary Clinton Tenure
It is scandalous, really.
mmonk
(52,589 posts)FlatBaroque
(3,160 posts)mmonk
(52,589 posts)don't subscribe).
The vacancy in the top watchdog spot left the State Department with no confirmed inspector general for more than five years, the longest gap since the position was created in 1957, according to department records. While other agencies have had no permanent inspectors general at various points in recent years, some of those vacancies were due to a lack of confirmation by the Senate on nominees put forward by Mr. Obama.
...
The acting inspector general, Harold Geisel, had served in a variety of roles, including U.S. ambassador to Mauritius in Bill Clintons administration and in a State Department job under Richard Nixon. Because he was a longtime foreign-service officer, Mr. Geisel was banned by law from becoming permanent inspector general, a prohibition that Congress put in place to ensure that oversight is conducted by people who dont have ties to the departments they investigate.
Its a convenient way to prevent oversight, said Matthew Harris, a University of Maryland University College professor who has worked in law enforcement and researches inspectors general. Acting inspectors general dont feel empowered; they dont have the backing of their people. Theyre in a position where they could be removed at any moment, Mr. Harris said.