2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumJust a reminder. Hillary was not investigated by the ...
... State Department. The OIG investigated the department's e-mail/security practices. As I've said elsewhere (thanks again to BeachBumBob), the e-mail flap is like the Whitewater flap is like the Benghazi flap is like the Vince Foster flap is like....
Unfortunately those of you who think these were more than flaps require lots of time and effort to remind you of the complex truth. And you're not interested, as far as I can see.
Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)about how she complied with the rules and what she did was allowed by the SD?
LAS14
(13,749 posts)... for you Hillary haters.
Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)Previously it was allowed by the SD and all above board....as of yesterday she only THOUGHT it was allowed.
"What I did was allowed. It was allowed by the State Department. The State Department has confirmed that." - AP interview, September.
Live and Learn
(12,769 posts)Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)CanadaexPat
(496 posts)Maybe she shouldn't lead it.
Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)leading anything more complex than Windows Outlook is
Response to Press Virginia (Reply #11)
silvershadow This message was self-deleted by its author.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)... for you Hillary idolizers and apologists.
.
rock
(13,218 posts)Facts and truths don't mean anything to the BSers that are loud-mouthed, obnoxious, immature, and cannot accept reality. and are undoubtedly the ones that will respond to you (the rest of the supporters are adults but they're quiet and not very talkative). My point is every question you answer, they just make up more crap to ask you.
Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)Her story changed after the report was released. The truth doesn't change. Lies change.
Almost two-thirds of US citizens associate the word "liar" with Hi11ary Clinton. It's disingenuous to assert "life's too complex" in an effort to deny that she lies.
BTW, you are now on my IL, so please don't bother to post any more of your condescending drivel.
Response to chervilant (Reply #82)
silvershadow This message was self-deleted by its author.
chervilant
(8,267 posts)and too many Hi11ary supporters aver that this FBI investigation is a "right-wing attack," as though it is not a measure of her unsuitable battle to "win" this race, like it's a big game.
I am disgusted by this.
Exilednight
(9,359 posts)To invent scenarios and create lies and then keep up with those lies.
Autumn
(44,765 posts)pnwmom
(108,925 posts)Because everyone knew that no Secretary before her had ever used a .gov account, and that Powell had exclusively used a private account and there was nothing in the 1950 public records act, the applicable Federal Records Act, that prevented them from doing so. It was only in 2014 that the law was changed -- after she left office.
They "allowed" her in that they made no attempt to hinder her.
They knew and let her continue.
Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)scscholar
(2,902 posts)They're going back after the fact and are now mad at themselves about allowing her to continue.
Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)I can read
Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)IG said it would not have been allowed had she requested authorization to do what she did?
She went from "it was allowed" to "I thought it was allowed".
It can't be both
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)it was allowed -- because that's how it had been done in earlier administrations under the same 1950 public records law that applied to her. And then others showed her that it hadn't been officially permitted, and so she said she had "thought it was allowed." Mistakenly.
Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)"What I did was allowed. It was allowed by the State Department. The State Department has confirmed that." - AP interview, September.
Bob41213
(491 posts)to nothing was marked classified....
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)Bob41213
(491 posts)Good to know. Might want to tell the State Dept that because they're under the impression Hillary had classified info at the time it was sent.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)However, within her own Department, Hillary had full authority to declassify any document at any time.
And, except for retroactively classified emails, the State department has NEVER said that Hillary sent classified info except on her SCIF secure classified system.
Bob41213
(491 posts)This says there are emails that were classified and NOT retroactively classified.
The IC IG found four emails containing classified IC-derived information in a limited sample of
40 emails of the 30,000 emails provided by former Secretary Clinton. The four emails, which
have not been released through the State FOIA process, did not contain classification markings
and/or dissemination controls. These emails were not retroactively classified by the State
Department; rather these emails contained classified information when they were generated
and, according to IC classification officials, that information remains classified today. This
classified information should never have been transmitted via an unclassified personal system.
https://oig.state.gov/system/files/statement_of_the_icig_and_oig_regarding_review_of_clintons_emails_july_24_2015.pdf
Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)we got from HRC
Bob41213
(491 posts)A complete pile of crap, but technically true... Well except for the ones that Sid sent her that were marked classified.
Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)that's why her NDA specifically says classified information may be marked or unmarked
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)There is no reason to trust anything he says on the subject.
Bob41213
(491 posts)Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)these jobs for some reason
Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)Why would the president put a RW partisan in as IC IG?
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)He acknowledges that none of the emails were marked classified, but it is only his OPINION that those four should have been classified. Different agencies had different standards for what should be classified -- and Intelligence used different standards than State. Overall, the head of the national Archives has said the problem in government is OVER-classification, with the large of majority of classified materials not deserving that classification.
Just because someone in one agency disagrees with Hillary's assessment doesn't mean he was correct. It just means he would have done it differently in his agency.
Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)they would be the authority on whether it was classified or not. And, according to his report to congress, the information was classified at the time.
Media Matters has neither seen the information nor the affidavits. And what is "fair" supposed to mean? Either he is competently performing his job or he isn't.
Either he lied to congress and submitted perjured affidavits from IC reviewers or he didn't.
Your opinion of him has no relevance.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)looked at it and decided it should be classified.
Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)she had no access to the SD email system. She had no computer to access secure e-mails.
Bob41213
(491 posts)Oops, that wasn't allowed?
Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)as quickly as information to contradict the last "truth" comes to light.
Only liars change their stories
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)Irrational people cling to their original views no matter what new information they are given.
Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)unless the story was contradicted by facts.
The TRUTH doesn't change.
She said her set up was allowed and the SD had confirmed it. That was either the truth or it was not the truth.
Based on the fact she's now changed her story, I'd say her previous story wasn't the truth.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)Later, she acknowledged that she'd subsequently learned that officially it was against the rules, although those rules weren't being enforced. And had never been.
Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)Confirmation isn't a passive action
jonmac511
(46 posts)Finding out that it has been discovered one lied isn't considered new information. She broke rules that were already in place when she began lying. The only thing that has changed is her version of the story. She can't say she thought it was OK after saying that the SD had already approved it. By saying it was approved, she nullifies the ignorance option.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)a non .gov account. And that neither the President nor anyone else voiced an objection to her while she was SoS -- even though ANYONE could see that she wasn't emailing from a .gov account.
Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)says it was not have been allowed.
HRC changed her story since the release of the IG report.
People who tell the truth don't need to change their story
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)"Allowed" doesn't have to mean directly permitted -- it can mean "not hindered." Or "not objected to."
They confirmed that they were aware that she was using it and they didn't try to stop her. That means they allowed her to do it.
Bob41213
(491 posts)Good to know what "allowed" means.
Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)She said the SD confirmed this. The IG says it was not within the rules.
Now Hillary changes her story to "I thought it allowed"
Either the SD confirmed it or they didnt
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)slipslidingaway
(21,210 posts)extreme!
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)of course hadn't envisioned it, so the law was finally modified in 2014 to specifically include it.
karynnj
(59,475 posts)Obviously, as it it became used more, someone should have have asked for a definitive ruling. There actually WERE guidelines that emails should be retained and archived.
HRC is obviously sensitive to whether she should have considered this or she would not have lied to say that Kerry did the same thing when he became SoS. He didn't - he did the opposite in fact - taking a government account and insuring that any emails that he got on other accounts were sent to the SD and archived.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)Colin Powell deleted his work related emails when he left office and was able to produce nothing when the State Department requested.
And she didn't lie about Senator Kerry. She said he was the first SoS to use the .gov accounts, and he was.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/oct/23/hillary-clinton/clinton-says-john-kerry-was-first-secretary-state-/
Westmoreland: If they were gathering emails, you had to tell them that you had a private server when you were there.
Clinton: Well, the -- the server is not the point, it's the account. And I made it a practice to send emails that were work-related to people on their government accounts. In fact, you know, Secretary Kerry is the first secretary of state to rely primarily on a government account.
karynnj
(59,475 posts)In fact, he immediately got a .gov account.
She RETAINED the information, but did not archive it in a timely manner. NONE of it went to the State Department until late 2014 -- when it was 2 to 6 years old ... and then only after the SD demanded she do so. Not to mention, she sorted out what she termed private.
As to sending everything to the public email accounts, the report says this is not an appropriate way to do it. Not to mention, note that ALL of the Powell emails sent on private email were because the then SD system could ONLY be used for internal emails -- for which he used the internal system.
karynnj
(59,475 posts)are questioning HRC's comments -- not the report.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)karynnj
(59,475 posts)The report details what happened under every Secretary of State. It is not true that all of them did just what HRC did. She and Colin Powell alone can be said to have been criticized in the report. Albright, Rice and Kerry weren't.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)comparison is Colin Powell, who exclusively used his personal email account for work-related emails, and deleted them all when he left office.
karynnj
(59,475 posts)for emails to people outside the SD. The line and the computer were both from the State Department's IT organization and it was Very public that he was using email. He wanted it public to set an example. Where he was faulted was that his team did not retain the emails sent this way. A Powell aide said that she was advised - by a person who she does not remember the name of - that there was no need to.
Not to mention she used the PLURAL when speaking of predecessors - when just one was even close to relevant.
I KNOW Kerry followed her and I suspect the reason HRC tried to give the impression in the interview with Blitzer herself and the claims of her surrogates on other shows that he initially did the same thing was to make her own practice seem less an outlier. However, the practice changed when the Secretary changed. There is no gap where Kerry exclusively used either private email much less a private server.
She needs to stop making excuses and take responsibility and to commit to following the type of practices the IG has recommended and which Kerry implemented at the SD and elsewhere in her administration.
Claiming that Powell did it too will not get her past this politically. All I can hope is that enough people thing Trump is so beyond awful that she wins -- in spite of her self inflicted problems.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)private emails for non-classified emails.
And Hillary, unlike Powell, was able to turn her emails over to the State Department when they asked for them. Powell just deleted his.
karynnj
(59,475 posts)My point was he did use the INTERNAL ONLY unclassified system. When Powell was Secretary, the internal system could not access the outside world.
Not to mention, the report did fault Powell as well as Clinton.
bobbobbins01
(1,681 posts)So that makes it more than a flap.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)bobbobbins01
(1,681 posts)Where does the Illuminati fit in this?
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)Seeinghope
(786 posts)I am so sick of hearing this from people who just want to point fingers at the Republicans for every thing that Hillary Clinton does. Even Obama has a right leaning IG now? The SD is at fault.
.the Republicans investigate every Republican President. Hillary Clinton didn't have a computer to work on......on and on and on it goes. The video of her lies for 13 minutes was spliced together to make it look like she lied.
There comes a time when you just have to admit that you support a candidate that is untruthful, that doesn't play by the rules, will say what she needs to say to get elected, has several different sides to her personality and is somewhat paranoid.
All of this explaining away of what happened with the e-mail situation is pathetic and is just desperation at this point. Hillary Clinton bypassed the server in the SD and used her unsecured server in her private residence and deleted 30,000 pages of e-mails. She has dodged questions and changed answers. She continued to use Sid as an advisor even though the Obama WH told her not to use him as her advisor. Sid was being paid six figures by The Clinton Foundation. Of course Hillary Clinton supporters don't mind if Hillary Clinton snuck behind President Obama's back and disobeyed the White House decision about Sid. National Security or not Hillary Clinton was going to do what she was going to do......
Her privacy trumped the security of our country's privacy.
If she had this server installed in her home, why not use it exclusively for her personal emails? It is all so bogus.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)When they were both asked to supply emails to State, Powell said he deleted them all when he left office. Hillary turned over 55,000 pages on paper -- just as the 1950's law required.
And Hillary had every right to use her judgment deciding which emails were work related and which were personal. People with 2 accounts (one .gov and one personal) make that judgment BEFORE they send any email. She made hers AFTER. In both cases, the staffers are trusted to make the judgment themselves, either before or after they produce an email.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Or is this just another case of Clinton supporters declaring everything and anything that doesn't go her way to be "right wing conspiracy"?
Arkansas Granny
(31,484 posts)there was any wrongdoing. Maybe you remember Whitewater, Benghazi, Travelgate, etc.
bobbobbins01
(1,681 posts)Eventually one is going to stick, and it looks like this is it.
Meteor Man
(385 posts)Her political career is over.
Zambero
(8,954 posts)A spirited campaign, but being a few million votes short, not a prayer.
Sancho
(9,065 posts)They are too focused on following the CT as they go over the cliff and drown!
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)know how stupid it makes them look to use the analogy.
Fucking stupid indeed.
Sancho
(9,065 posts)look it up and don't be so stupid....https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemming
Because of their association with this odd behavior, lemming "suicide" is a frequently used metaphor in reference to people who go along unquestioningly with popular opinion, with potentially dangerous or fatal consequences.
Meanwhile, Blemmings continue to go unquestioningly with popular opinion....as obvious in this case of Hillary hate. BTW, the analog also holds because lemmings are ill-tempered and aggressive...just like Blemmings.
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)Sancho
(9,065 posts)Blemmings are attacking and acting stupid to think that years after leaving office a Sec. of State will be prosecuted because she used a Blackberry...that really is as crazy as Obama's birth certificate!
cherokeeprogressive
(24,853 posts)Sancho
(9,065 posts)This entire email thing is created by the RW, and promoted on DU by Hillary Haters. Chances are that a bunch of the instigators are paid operatives/trolls.
I'm amazed that so many go crazy about "breaking the law" - just like "Obama was born in Africa". It seems obvious that any Secretary of State will use email, phones, and likely a few paper documents too!!
They all had to do that a part of the job. It really doesn't matter how secure all that pile of work is when it's subject to FOIA and routine!! Hillary could have sent smoke signals from a tower or talked on a radio show if she wanted - as long as she achieved her work. She was the only one who seemed to actually do that as far back as the last 3-4 SoSs.
The rush to condemn and claim there was a hugh crime is nuts. Has any SoS in the last couple decades been prosecuted? After Colin Powell and Condi Rice and their screw ups, it's had to imagine Hillary's 55,000 emails as a crime!
tonedevil
(3,022 posts)that all BlackBerry traffic goes through their servers in Canada? If you think hard you might be able to come up with an idea why that is a problem.
Sancho
(9,065 posts)The phone could always be hacked! So Hillary never put stuff marked secret on email or the BB!
All that secret stuff was on a closed system. Even then the server was all backed up by Google and McAfee.
BTW, she also had encryption available, but won't discuss it in public...her IT guy worked for a leading encryption company. It's quite likely she could encrypt a Personal message and make it hard or impossible for even some governments to see it! That's probably why the FBI wanted to talk to her IT guy! They could read the server but it was gibberish without the software and keys.
They aren't going to tell you and me....which is why even a hacked message could be unreadable without the key...and passwords didn't matter. Get it now?
tonedevil
(3,022 posts)I have no idea how these things work. I've only installed, configured, and maintained half a dozen BlackBerry servers. I've only done the same for well over 100 Exchange servers. I don't know own anything about email thank you so much for explaining it for me. Can you give me your take on SMTP servers and their relation to the A and the MX records? An expert like you has no doubt looked into who owned those records for clintonmail.com. Please help me get why US Secretary of State email going though servers in a foreign country isn't a problem.
Sancho
(9,065 posts)Just like the 55,000 published emails! It's all public - subject to FOIA - and ASSUMED that it's being read by others.
Like talking in a room full of people!! Don't you get it??
There was no intention of anything going through that email being classified. If it was classified, then it was put on an entirely different, closed system. Everyone knows that a handful of the 55,000 were reclassified emails (after the fact) were not distributed under FOIA, mostly because of things that occurred between the original email and today's time.
It doesn't matter what technology you use or what phone you used - it's assumed that it's PUBLIC! If it's classified (and the government usually over-classifies), then it didn't go on email or the phone!!
So all your "expert experience" misses the point.
This week's Newsweek: http://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-email-scandal-not-scandal-464414
As for the departments unclassified system, the inspector general's report demonstrates that it was horribly insecure, and that hackers obtained terabytes worth of documents out of it; on the other hand, Clintons email system was quite secure and, when evidence emerged that someone was trying to hack in, the security officer overseeing the server immediately shut it down, then notified the relevant officials at State. In other words, while boxcars of documents were digitally pulled out of the agency, there is no evidence a single email was snagged out of Clintons server. So it could be the Clinton arrangement didnt follow the security procedures laid out in the federal regulationsthe inspector general did not reach a conclusion as to whether it did or notbut, as often happens, private security contractors did a better job than the government.
Matt_in_STL
(1,446 posts)COLGATE4
(14,732 posts)hopemountain
(3,919 posts)Skink
(10,122 posts)Powell and company got away with it. Since that time it was made clear what not to do.
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)compared to Hillary's full-bore conscious rule breakage.
LAS14
(13,749 posts)99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)When State officials called Hillary on the email thing, her reply was ...
"I don't want to hear about this ever again" (paraphrase)
Now that's some hubris.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)when left office. When the State Department asked for them, he said he couldn't comply -- even though the law required that he do so.
Hillary did. She produced the 55,000 paper copies of documents that the law required.
Response to pnwmom (Reply #23)
Post removed
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)wasn't factual.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)pnwmom
(108,925 posts)server that the 2014 amendment to the law requires.
But he was allowed to do that, just as Hillary was allowed, under the 1950 law they were working under.
The important difference between them is that he destroyed all his work related emails when he left office. She preserved hers and, upon request, produced the 55,000 paper copies that the law requires.
Seeinghope
(786 posts)pnwmom
(108,925 posts)When he was asked to produce them -- at the same time she was -- he said he didn't have ANY because he had deleted them ALL when he left State.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)That's a schoolchildren's excuse of pointing at someone else and saying "but they did it too".
.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)and that no one told her not to.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Gotcha.
.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)You aren't helping her any with your flawed arguments.
.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)employee using a private personal server vs. a private AOL or other commercial server (as opposed to the .gov server.)
Any law or regulation past or present.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)Deal with it.
p.s. Did you notice how I didn't ask you why you were bringing a BLACK man into this? Saying a BLACK man had done something wrong? That you were defending a WHITE woman but incriminating a BLACK man? See how race doesn't always matter?
I guess I forgot I didn't want to engage with anyone who tried to paint me as a racist like you have in the past. Maybe I'll stop now. So don't be surprised if I don't respond again since I don't recall getting an apology.
.
pnwmom
(108,925 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)You know I can see the time stamp of your reply, right?
So, no, you don't care that you exploited racism and tried to paint me and others as a racist the other day. You stand by that shameful and disgusting behavior.
Got it.
.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)I know you've been replying to people, you replied to another of my posts. So do you not think you owe me and others an apology for trying to paint us as racist the other day? I know you got 2 hides for it and couldn't respond in that thread, but I never got a pm nor a reply to the above post of mine that replied to this post of yours.
Oversight? Or do you think it's okay to run around race baiting in an attempt to try to paint someone as a racist? In my book that's an extremely dishonorable way to behave. And as I pointed out in my other reply, we are discussing a black man and a white woman in this thread and you brought up a black man without mentioning his race. Why is that? Could it be that race needn't have been mentioned in that other OP? Could it be that the ONLY reason it was brought up, by YOU, is that you were exploiting racism and trying to use it to paint me and others as racist? It certainly is a pattern with Hillary supporters.
You always try to sound so reasonable, even when you are arguing a losing battle, but that was way over the top and you really should apologize. That behavior was despicable. Maybe you have some excuse for it, well not an excuse, but maybe something was going on that made you become irrational, I don't know. But the fact that you haven't apologized shows what kind of character you actally have, and it's not pretty. Sadly, if you did apologize now it would ring hollow. Especially because you kept going on and on about it that day after people called you on it.
.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)And the OIG found her to have committed some very serious infractions as well as proving that she has been lying about this for a long time now.
So no, this is not Benghazi or any other made up shit. This is real. Take the blinders off.
.
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)Fawke Em
(11,366 posts)basselope
(2,565 posts)She just got torn to shreds in the latest report.
madville
(7,397 posts)They don't think Hillary is a liar. I think it's pathological with her, she may actually believe her own lies like they are the truth.
It's obvious that she's dishonest, her surrogates that push her lies have to know that when they give interviews and hit the talk shows. They're all liars, or at least extremely gullible and dumb (which I doubt).
LAS14
(13,749 posts)cui bono
(19,926 posts)The fact that she is a liar has been documented several times.
.
LAS14
(13,749 posts)tymorial
(3,433 posts)All of these posts have one single purpose: to reduce cognitive dissonance. eom.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)Bread and Circus
(9,454 posts)Avalux
(35,015 posts)What exactly IS complex truth anyway? I believe you've coined an oxymoron. Fitting, considering who you're defending.
LAS14
(13,749 posts)hopemountain
(3,919 posts)it is used to obfuscate the truth.
HassleCat
(6,409 posts)Democrats are balking at voting for Clinton because of the email flap. Some of them think it indicates incompetence. Others think it points to dishonesty. The Vince Foster thing was obviously ludicrous, and very few people ever thought it amounted to anything. The Benghazi flap was revealed as a fraud when people realized Issa was dripping the information out a little at a time, selectively revealing culling facts. At this stage, the email flap looks different because there is an FBI inquiry, not a tabloid style "inquiry" by the National Enquirer. If the FBI concludes there is no cause for serious concern, it's over, and no amount of Republican squawking and howling will keep it alive. If the FBI recommends something else, it may have a second life.
anotherproletariat
(1,446 posts)investigating Hillary.
bvf
(6,604 posts)Emphasis mine.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/state-department-lacked-top-watchdog-during-hillary-clinton-tenure-1427239813
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)ate because she answered all the questions they could possibly need answered in her testimony in front of the Benghazi committee.
Because, you know, the Benghazi committee was all about records keeping, FOIA and email practices at State, as opposed to events surrounding Benghazi.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Thanks for the post. You're not alone!
Scuba
(53,475 posts)Apparently, it's not a lie if Hillary says it, even if it's a lie. It's just too complex for us simpletons.
smiley
(1,432 posts)Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)seabeyond
(110,159 posts)any other way.
Vinca
(50,172 posts)You better hope the 4th of July news drop isn't as damaging as the OIG's.