Why did no Republican member of Congress -- or anyone, anywhere -- object to Hillary's private email

[pnwmom]

while she was still using it? Because there was nothing to object to.

She wasn’t being sneaky. It wasn’t a secret. Anyone who corresponded with her could see she wasn’t using a government account.

And The Gawker reported that she had been using a private email account two years ago, in March 2013.

So this has been public knowledge since March 2013.

Here is the timeline:

2011: Obama signs a memorandum directing the update of federal records management.

Feb. 2013: Hillary leaves state department

August 2013: National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) declares that email records of senior government officials are permanent federal records

September 2013: (NARA) issues guideline on personal email use

October 2014: Department-wide notice is sent out explaining each employee’s responsibilities for records management.

So, like the Republican Secretary of State before her, she freely used her private email account for four years, corresponding with Congressional and Administration officials all that time, and no one objected till two years after she left the office. The NARA didn’t declare emails to be permanent public records till six months after she left.

Nonetheless, Hillary preserved her email records and turned them over upon request. And now Darrell Issa and other Republicans are raking her over the coals for not following regulations that weren’t in existence when she was Secretary.

And some of us are helping them.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/03/03/hillary-email-scandal-not-so-fast.html

[TwilightGardener]

1. The Obama administration needs to explain why they allowed her

to run her own email server out of her house for all of her official SOS communications, with who-knows-who maintaining it and accessing it. It's insane.

[pnwmom]

2. That would be good. But they clearly allowed her to, and NO ONE objected. n/t

[Agschmid]

9. I doubt they even realized it...

[TwilightGardener]

16. The WH was control-freaky with every other cabinet post. Hillary Clinton

was the exception--she brought a very large entourage with her to State, chose her own staff and deputies despite some having little to no foreign policy experience. John Kerry was not allowed to do so, not at that extent.

[NaturalHigh]

3. Did she pass on classified information through a non-secure server?

If not, all this "private e-mail" crap is not relevant to anything. It's just a (poor) excuse to attack Secretary Clinton.

[pnwmom]

4. No one has provided any evidence that she did. n/t

[NaturalHigh]

5. As I suspected.

If she had, her political enemies would have already her burning at the stake.

[former9thward]

8. Anyone can hack a non-secure server.

An no one would have known it had been done.

[NaturalHigh]

12. Yes, I understand that.

Hence my question: did she pass classified information through such a server?

[former9thward]

17. Well it would take someone far higher on the food chain

than us to determine that answer.

[DanTex]

22. And the other question is, was the home server insecure.

If it was set up right, it would have been more secure than the State Department's email system.

[mylye2222]

6. Because GOp Congress members and HRC share the very same

agenda when it coles to cover law violation acts.

[NoJusticeNoPeace]

7. If the reason she didnt use the official email system was it was or is clunky

I would think that should be the focus of this, why is it clunky, has it been updated and made easier to use for future staff?

This brief MSM "gotcha" of Hillary will die out eventually when they find the next outrage to boost ratings with, in the meantime are we fixing the problem?

There will be an endless display of reasons found why we shouldn't have our first female president in 2016, but how about addressing the problem?

[Fumesucker]

10. It doesn't strike you as odd that Republicans aren't going after Hillary for this?

They haven't had a lot to say about her Iraq War vote or support of the TPP either.

Actual substantive issues get too much into the weeds of policy, Republicans aren't nearly as interested in them as they are stuff they can yell and strut about.

I'm thinking this is accepted practice to get around transparency laws, it's obvious Republicans want it to drop off the radar as quickly as possible.

The good part is the NSA has the dirt on everyone but would never ever use it to influence policy makers. Pinky swear.

[Xyzse]

11. That's because they do the same thing.

I still remember Palin getting flack for using her Yahoo email which has very little protections for business.

Thus far, from all the reading I have done, my take-aways are as follows:

- Rules on Emails were updated AFTER Clinton left her post
- Government emails were notoriously bad in regards to their service and reliability
- There has been no leaks coming from Clinton
- This could have been used to hide certain emails from scrutiny

Thing is, I can completely understand the concern about hiding emails from scrutiny, but at the moment, that to me is "Situation Normal".

The others can be explained due to the first 3 take-aways and that was the current culture at the time, and I am sure it is more than just her doing such a thing.

Sooooo, I can see the concerns out there, but I feel that it is overblown and just another way to make Clinton look bad.

She is still my last choice for running in the primaries, but I will vote for her in the general elections if she manages to win the primaries since I just can't see voting for the Republican.

[mylye2222]

13. "Hide certain mails from scrutiny" You Perfectly Nailed it!

Bravo.

[Fumesucker]

15. An entire culture of unlogged "official" messages in government

What could possibly go wrong?

[Xyzse]

20. A heck of a lot.

I just have an ill view on politicians in general, which is probably why I am not outraged, because I expect these things from them.

I mean, sure, the first three reasons I gave could be used as valid reasons for why she did what she did. The last point though, I can not prove, so I would at the moment consider it as "Situation Normal".

I can wait for further developments.

[pnwmom]

19. Darrell Issa is a Republican and he's already written an Op-Ed about this.

But you're right -- they're being relatively quiet.

[randome]

21. He's an Idiot first and a Republican second, but your point is taken.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[kcr]

24. Republicans are hypocrites

If they could nail her for emailgate, they would in a heartbeat and the fact they do it themselves wouldn't give them the slightest pause. If they aren't there's a good reason for it.

[global1]

14. Seems To Me There Should Be An Official Governmental IT Office Set Up.....

Their first task is to make sure that every government official is sat down and schooled about e-mail security, the potential for hacking and the use of the governments e-mail system.

In this day and age of hacking into systems, stealing identities and out and out spying - this should be required for every elected and appointed official.

[Historic NY]

18. Well if Anonymous didn't know its okay...

the non scandal scandal. You can bet she didn't have some cheap ass, Best Buy computer or server. Its the government computers they hack.

[Dawgs]

23. Agree. She's got much bigger problems than this. n/t