She really thinks people are stupid and the CBS Radio blurb didn't bother to make the distinction between using Gmail or Yahoo mail and Clinton having her own ineptly-built, insecure, Windows Exchange email server set up in her house, connected to her ISP, pointing to her own dot com address.

They've been attacking Hillary constantly since this campaign started. They decided about a year ago they didn't want her to be the nominee. I guess someone competent and boring doesn't sell nearly as well as having a blowhard like Lyin' Ted or Trump in the White House.

... Bernie Sanders, whom they black-holed with no coverage at all for the first six months of his campaign, whose amazing wins, including several blowout wins, against incredible odds, they virtually ignored, and whom they now declare 'has lost" and treat as a footnote though he keeps winning primaries and though the biggest state in the country hasn't voted yet; meanwhile--meanwhile!--they create Trump out of nothing, with 24/7 coverage of his every sneeze, from the day he announced!

They'll take Clinton and her scandals, or Trump and his mouth, any day over an honest president in the White House, a New Deal president in the White House, a jail-the-criminal-banksters president in the White House, an anti-"free trade for the rich" president in the White House, an advocate of the people in the White House, a REAL president in the White House.

Their fear of the uncorrupt is palpable. And their dismay at not being able to bury Sanders, no matter how hard they try, is quite visible these days and verges on hysteria.

Not so sure about competence. Ability to memorize + bad judgment does not = competence.

server in her bathroom and even if they did they are so inept that they would have never been able to hack into it.

Yeah, right.

There are rumors that the Russians have at least 20,000 of Hillary's emails and are debating releasing them. If that is true and it happens it will most likely occur after the FBI totally clears Hillary of any wrong doing. How embarrassing would that be?

I think Putin would rather see Trump as President than Hillary.

as in Secretary Clinton is the only SoS in herstory to use a private email account exclusively for State Department business. So, no. Not the same as Powell or Rice.

government or private - in her SD job. This meant they looked, but didn't find any email from her sent to others for whom email was saved. Note all it would have taken to dispute it was ONE.

This basically reduces it to Colin Powell and HRC. We do know that he used his .gov email in most cases, but he too failed to archive the ones on private email. ( I guess HRC can claim credit for returning hers under demand from the SD -- in his case, he was already out of office for almost a decade when asked for them in October 2014. I really am not surprised that he does not still have them.)

Of note, is that Kerry used a .gov account primarily from day one and worked t set up a timely archiving of the few emails that came in to his private account. This suggests one of three things - 1) He did it because he saw it as the right thing to do. or 2) Obama's team actually saw the Clinton mess and ensured that he stayed completely on the government account or 3) He actually asked the SD ID what should be done and followed their advice - just as most people starting a new job would do. Note that the difference between Kerry and Clinton comes down to their values if you assume either 1 or 3. (2 is problematic as it says that Obama's team knew before she left and did not demand that she leave the email - so I think 1 or 3 most likely.)

"private email" or "private email account" are not the same as "private server." I also think that people who persist in using the wrong term or using the terms interchangeably are being intentionally dishonest.

The vast majority of HRC supporters are being intentionally misleading and attempting to spin or flip the conversation.

I have my own personal domain I use for my personal email -- it is stored on the godaddy servers. If I deleted the email, I am sure that go daddy has some copy of the email somewhere should discovery be requested from them if I am involved in a civil/criminal case. This also goes for Gmail, Hotmail, yahoo and AOL.

If I controlled the server personally and in my own home, I am certain I could wipe it clean should my email be requested or if I suspected my emails would be requested in an investigation.

...muddying the waters is a tried-and-true, if underhanded, political tactic.

next tier down use the "other people did it, so why can't we get away with it too" excuse. I think it is way too often used in Florida, where our education rates are lower than most.

our six year olds.

When leaders do it, it's just plain corrupt cronyism.

And they rarely get called out on it so when they do, they act all offended and as if it's some political move to destroy them. This isn't. But her camp will claim that it is (or that it's sexist or some other absurd thing).

Either Bush is corrupt or incompetent and neither are acceptable. The same can be said about Hillary.

All people who use a (D) before their name are the pillar of virtue. Well except Sanders because he has only used the (D) for a few months.

kind of like an American playing pro basketball in Europe for 10 years, but playing on two USA Olympic teams during that period, and, upon coming to the NBA at age 27, is considered a 'rookie'...

No, they didn't have a link for that.

Bernie can't win with voters, so you try and win with a silly email non-scandal.

Not gonna work either, sorry.

YMMV of course.

And it's not going to get Bernie the nomination, it's just going to make his supporters look desperate.

The denials are just shameful.

Hey, but she will be the nominee - so all is cool!

Yes, she will be the nominee, and yes, that is cool. The only reason Berners care about this is because they hope it will stop her from being the nominee.

Hillary has lied about this since the day the story broke. The IG report proves what she did wasn't "within the rules and totally above board".

Of course the people on FOX will think it's an outrage, that's what they do.

using a private server and contradicts her claims that it was within the rules and policies.

And the FBI doesn't spend a year investigating a non issue

But they got all the emails anyway for the records. Scandal!

when the issue was brought up about getting her e-mail in the state system to capture them she decided her privacy was more important than complying with policie based on federal law

And in the end all the records were kept and the emails released. There's nothing.

Additionally the IG said she shouldn't have deleted the 33k without SD review.

Nobody would possibly care about any of this if they weren't trying to use it to score political points.

nobody would care that a presidential candidate willfully sought to evade the federal records act, lied about following the rules put in place to comply with said act and retained classified data on a server in her basement 3 years after leaving office?

Oooookaaaaay

isn't going to get Bernie the nomination. It's a red tape thing, in the end all the records were preserved.

I know, the GOP is going to keep talking about it, that's what they do.

...once again trying to conflate "occasionally used their private email account for official business" with "set up her own private email server and used it exclusively for official business".

They are NOT NOT NOT the same thing.

But good try on muddying the waters.

It's the whole point to the FOIA lawsuits (she is being taken to court by several organizations and news services, not just Judicial Watch) for gross and willful failure to comply with public disclosure laws).

More importantly, your description of this issue shows either an ignorance of the specifics or you are intentionally attempting to spin and/or spread misinformation.

The IG report is not, specifically, about if laws were broken or not, they are not the FBI, they are an independent watchdog their to ensure the administrative policies and regulations regarding conduct are being followed. (FYI, HRC did not have an permanent IG for the majority of her term in office and left a staffer, loyal to her, in the interim role. This is in direct conflict with Department policy and regulations. Kerry's first act in office was to appoint an independent IG as is required, it was not the interim Clinton insider)
Neither Clinton nor her senior staff sat for interviews with the IG, the only people to refuse. That refusal may have been due to the ongoing FBI investigation.

The IG report did determine that Clinton and her staff did violate administrative policies and procedures regarding the use and handling of State Department emails as well as regulations regarding conduct in office. These violations were not the same as others and they were significant and persistent violations.

If someone else did or did not do something similar, with or without consequences, is completely irrelevant (see speeding ticket analogy).

I, as well as many others, are more than willing to have discussions on how big or little of a deal these issues are but to deny that there are issues is ridiculous and to make excuses for it is going down a very dangerous road that allows or gives tacit acceptance to corruption or graft.

Bernie supporters are hoping for a miracle from the FBI as a way to get the better candidate.


Hans Gruber: You asked for miracles, Theo, I give you the F.B.I.

Its her problem and she has to/should own it.

If it's no big deal, why then has the HRC team been dragging their feet, changing their story, and obfuscating at best or even lying about the nature and use of the server - from the get go?

a topic of discussion? Why have we just now received a state dept report, why has this just recently been a matter for the FBI to investigate?

Because - the GOP??! No, this whole mess is a problem of HRC's making. From the beginning they've been dragging their feet, insinuating one thing when another was really the truth, releasing information piecemeal, - over and over - x10...

she may escape indictment - like someone escaping a burning building; but the stench of the smoke will remain. And because of her shenanigans, she has provided even more ammunition to her opponents, perhaps giving them enough impetus to give us a Trump presidency.

Thanks a bunch...

is "stench" around Hillary. That's FOX.

they disagree with you as will many people.

.....cuz you really nailed that.

will be the nominee.

And she sure does have a bumper crop.

than the next. Berners see this as their great hope.

You've said from the beginning she will be the nominee. Yet, you've done NOTHING but tear her down.

I look forward to reading you new attitude once Skinner formally calls it.

I won't think Hillary is anything but what she's demonstrated herself to be. No matter what Skinner dictates. She's a dishonest neocon with poor judgment and multiple appearances of conflict. My attitude won't change. I'll simply be more discreet.

And if she loses to Trump, I'll have plenty to say.

n/t

AND admit she will be the nominee...

AND acknowledge she would be a better choice than Donald Trump....

Then the fact that you continue to drag her through the mud looks a bit odd. To what end? You realize of course it only helps Donald Trump. If only by a tiny tiny bit.

And no, I'm not significant enough that my comments hurt her.

Because they are the ones doing an investigation right now.

1. Was it appropriate for Hillary to disregard the policies and procedures of the State Department?

2. Was it appropriate for Hillary's private email server to house the ONLY copies of official State Department emails, leaving no audit trail? Those emails did not belong to her and there is no way of knowing what she deleted since she had sole control of them.

3. Was it appropriate for Hillary to disregard the advise of IT experts who told her the private server was not secure, and to never speak of it again?

4. Was it appropriate for Hillary to refuse to answer questions from the State Department IG?

If you think any of these actions were appropriate, please provide a reason why that is NOT partisan. Thanks.

The gist of it all is that Clinton did not follow all the rules and no SOS has ever followed all the rules.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

"At a March 10 press conference, Clinton said, "I fully complied with every rule I was governed by."

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/mar/12/hillary-clintons-email-did-she-follow-all-rules/


"Secretary Clinton: By Secretary Clinton’s tenure, the Department’s guidance was considerably
more detailed and more sophisticated. Beginning in late 2005 and continuing through 2011, the
Department revised the FAM and issued various memoranda specifically discussing the
obligation to use Department systems in most circumstances and identifying the risks of not
doing so. Secretary Clinton’s cybersecurity practices accordingly must be evaluated in light of
these more comprehensive directives."



The gist for me is her constant lying about it, and the various attempts to minimize her shady choices.

No one follows all the rules or all the laws. That applies in private life as well as public.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

...and I wonder if you even realize it.

Though she does always try to tell the truth...or something.

I wish she wasn't even running because after Obama, I thought we'd be done with the older generation of politicians. But the voters say otherwise so...
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

OH, you mean an outright LIE,
but one told by a 1% crony with "connections".
When the 1%er LIE, their acolytes say it is using "throw away phrase", even though they themselves would NEVER get away with a wild LIE like that.
When the lowly proles try to say that to a government investigator, we wind up in jail.

I don't understand WHY people who Work for a Living support this woman who works only to advance the agenda of the very RICH. Are you hoping to an invitation to the Pool Party? Don't hope too much. THAT will never happen.

like...i did hit the kid on the bike...but i wasn't speeding...and yes, i left the scene...but i wasn't drunk

So yeah, I think picking and choosing about something that the voters clearly don't care about is okay. Maybe not something to be admired or celebrated but okay.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

She did not " Have it set up."

must have been a lucrative selling point for the real estate agent...

where I saw that though.

It's like a certain subspecies of human has evolved astoundingly good luck.

It's not a problem to take them with you when you move. At least not the ones for personal use, anyway.

The obfuscation from the surrogates on TV is so similar that it suggests scripted talking points. Brock's not earning his pay this week.

1) they think she is either evil or VERY DANGEROUS

2) they would never vote for a Democrat.

Sorry adding a third

3) they are a hopeful Bernie Sanders supporter

But it appears to be growing legs. DU is not making that happen. Sanders supporters are not making that happen.

Did you mean that the IG and the FBI are the ones overblowing it?

on the OIG report and we are waiting on the FBI report. Early indications are that it will not result in an indictment.

Not growing legs? Its all over the news. Its all over this site. But whatever.

You said it was overblown. now you are saying it too early to tell if its becoming overblown.....?

About the three reasons someone would be "attacking" her on this.....are you apply that to the IG and to the FBI, who are the ones who originally found enough cause to investigate?

believe they are doing their jobs as they should.

The IG can propose in the report that Clinton knowingly and intentionally broke regulations despite being advised not to, that this is ok with you, but if i restate what this report says, I am a political attacker?

That seems silly, doesn't it?

Maybe I'm just a long time Democrat who is against corruption and secrecy in government....?

Maybe I'm an IT security professional who is concerned that Clinton, with zero IT knowledge, background, or experience, ignored and dismissed the advice and recommendations of qualified IT engineers regarding her email solution......?

Maybe I'm just someone who believes that the regulations that are in place at the state department should be followed by all state department personnel.....?

There are so many other possibilities that the three you have proposed. There is some obvious bitterness on your part in the three reasons you list.

Clinton supporters are getting frustrated and worried.....its all over this site.

about her (Hillary) being advised against the setup she employed.

You are free to look through her emails.

The Clinton campaign supports the IOG findings that the systemic issues identified should be addressed.

The email server was already there and running. I don't think it has been shown to my satisfaction (like in a formal report) exactly what its security weaknesses were. Nor do we know exactly what advise on it she received.

The IOG report addresses the fact the there are many issues both before and after in the SD policies and rules.

In short summary, you are basing your criticisms on a lot of stuff floating around or not actually in the report and ignoring stuff that IS in the report.

Being warned = being advised.

You clearly have not read the report.

I have yet to read or hear that she herself was warned.

My google has been hacked three times. But of course any email is better than states loser system.

an opened RDP port and an opened VPN port. ...That's honestly sad, cause these are the same people who told me I don't know what I'm talking about, when I worked civilian IT for 2 years, and then military communications/systems for 3.

not anymore, to the extent it ever was.

in all probability HRC is going to be the Democratic nominee. everyone knows it. the mass media sure as hell knows it. SBS and his campaign staff appear to know it. i'm pretty sure the people posting in this forum know it, whether they admit it or not. but there's this problem, see.

the problem many people are pointing out is that she's a weak GE candidate. that's not unusual in itself, the Republicans nominated a weak candidate in 2012 and likely 2016, and Democrats have nominated our share too (Dukakis, i'm looking at you), it happens, that's democracy in action. the problem with this particular weakness is it gives DJT, who against any strong D candidate would be a complete wipe-out for the GOP, a fighting chance at winning the presidency, a situation a broad cross-section of the world finds simultaneously hilarious and terrifying.

early in the primaries, SBS said straight up, "the American people are sick and tired of hearing about your damn emails." this was true enough at the time, but doesn't mean it won't come up anyway, especially in the GE race. in all likelihood, it's going to come up over and over and over again in attack ads from SuperPACs we haven't even heard of yet, but they'll have names like "Justice for America" and "Americans Against Corruption". i can predict with some confidence that any American who wasn't sick and tired of hearing about HRC's damn emails when SBS said it 7 months ago is indeed going to be sick and tired of the damn emails 5 months from now. in some ways SBS did us all a disservice by not directly attacking her on these grounds during the primary.

and every day this scandal continues (and it is a scandal, make no mistake) is another day when HRC is associated with duplicity in the mass media, which gives DJT ammunition for his lowest-common-denominator attacks and makes it harder for her to win in November. fuck having SBS drop out of the race, what HRC needs to get her GE candidacy underway for real is to lose some of this stupid baggage.

somehow, and maybe it's already gotten beyond this point or wasn't possible in the first place, HRC needs to clear this shit up before the convention, or it hurts us all badly in the fall. if we end up with president Orange Foolius, HRC's email server will be one of a few main reasons. ultimately the responsibility for strengthening her candidacy rests with HRC and no one else; right now it is weak like uncooked dough when we need it to be strong like tempered steel.