General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsNew York Times BUSTS Jeb Bush For VIOLATING Florida Email Law
The New York Times has just busted Jeb Bush for not turning over the emails from his private account immediately after leaving office... but instead waiting a very, very long time to do so.It was so long, in fact, that he was clearly in violation of Florida law!
But it took Mr. Bush seven years after leaving office to comply fully with a Florida public records statute requiring him to turn over emails he sent and received as governor, according to records released Friday.
Damn. And the media was just criticizing Hillary for taking four months to turn over all her emails after the State Department's request!
A Florida statute governing the preservation of public records requires elected officials, including the governor, to turn over records pertaining to official business at the expiration of his or her term of office.
If theyve been adding to it, its a technical violation of the law, said Barbara A. Petersen, president of the First Amendment Foundation, a nonprofit, nonpartisan group in Florida that advocates access to government information.
She added, The law clearly says youre supposed to turn everything over at the end of your term in office.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/14/us/jeb-bush-a-clinton-critic-took-time-releasing-his-own-emails.html?_r=0
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/03/14/1370825/-Hahaha-NYT-Busts-Jeb-Bush-For-Violating-Florida-Email-Law
*****************
U P D A T E S
AND, CHECK THIS OUT:
The New York Times Reverses Course On Clinton's Emails After Public Editor Admits Fault In Reporting
http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/03/13/the-new-york-times-reverses-course-on-clintons/202894
AND THIS:
As part of presidential hopeful Jeb Bush's quest to counteract his last name, he released a trove of purportedly personal emails in the name of "transparency."
That's nice, but utterly symbolic: The emails Bush released were from a public-facing account that he used to communicate with random constituents, not to actually govern. It's like he released his spam inbox and proclaimed it as a window into his soul. If Bush wants to make a statement, he'll give us the data that actually matters.
Jeb Bush's big noble email dump is completely misleading.
All Bush made available to the public is the contents of one email accountjeb@jeb.org. That domain was registered via GoDaddy in 1997 and is owned by his POLITICAL campaign operationit is unaffiliated with the state of Florida or the office of governor. The emails the public has been given by Bush are garbage that have nothing to do with the official business dealings he had as governor.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/14/us/jeb-bush-a-clinton-critic-took-time-releasing-his-own-emails.html?_r=0
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)LiberalLovinLug
(14,153 posts)at least from the MSM's point of view.....The STORY is about HILLARY and her utter incompetence and sneaky behaviour. You can't just change the villain out for some other actor, especially if its a white powerful right wing male. I mean they must have worked for days, maybe weeks, on stoking the smoke for a bit of spark, fomenting confusion, implying malfeasance on Hillary!....They have all the Clinton bashers,...er...guests already lined up!
Renew Deal
(81,801 posts)Because he knew republicans were going to attack Hillary on the same thing. There is no coincidence.
kpete
(71,900 posts)spanone
(135,633 posts)Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)Dustlawyer
(10,493 posts)six media oligopolies that control 95% of all U.S. Media! While we're at it, let's bust up the banking oligopolies too!
BlancheSplanchnik
(20,219 posts)Maybe NYT was trying to mitigate their pushing the lies about Hilary, by pushing some truth about the attackers.
It's a thought.
Duval
(4,280 posts)forthemiddle
(1,373 posts)I hope the Bush email scandal becomes as big as the Clinton email scandal has become, but in the end he DID release his emails even if it was 7 years too late.
My concern is that with the lawsuits over the FOIA now filed, including from the AP that this will drag out the scandal through the primaries (if there are any primaries) and into the general election.
The smartest thing Clinton could do, this weekend, is to turn over the server. Even if she doesn't legally have too, or even if it is an "invasion of privacy". She could end it here. Although it may not seem fair, or right, when someone decides to run for President I think they do lose some privacy, and what they aren't upfront about becomes fodder to their enemies.
Another suggestion NO MORE CLINTONS OR BUSHS!!!!!!!
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)And that's how she wins.
mountain grammy
(26,568 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,705 posts)mountain grammy
(26,568 posts)AND I AGREE WE CANNOT USE BUSH AS AN EXCUSE FOR HILLARY.
ENOUGH ALREADY, LET'S MOVE ON!
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,705 posts)WELL, IF A PERSON EXCUSES BUSH AND NOT CLINTON FOR THE SAME ALLEGED MALFEASANCE HE OR SHE IS STANDING WITH THE BUSHES.
mountain grammy
(26,568 posts)That's a bullshit thing to say. Nobody's excusing Bush for anything here. That is some fucking insult for not agreeing with you.
You sound like a Bush, "you're with us or against us."
I have no animosity towards the Clintons, but Hillary is not my choice. I'm afraid her candidacy will end in the disaster of a Republican victory.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,705 posts)If you read my post carefully I used the word "person" and not "you" as to avoid pointing an accusatory finger.
I can almost assure you that both major party candidates are going to have "baggage".
If you look for the worst in anybody it's almost impossible not to find it.
P.S. I did not mean to convey you are sympathetic to Bush and I apologize if that is how you took it but Post #6 is wrong, ergo:
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/03/05/new-york-times-digs-in-on-email-double-standard/202773
mountain grammy
(26,568 posts)If a Democrat commits some malfeasance, in most cases, the Dem is banished for life, not so much with Republicans. After the Nixon resignation, Republicans got serious about their agenda and the media exposing shit so they started buying it up (the media and the shit.) That's why the despicable Sen. Vitter is still a senator and Rep. Weiner is gone. That said, I think they should both be gone.
And that's my point about Bush being an excuse for Hillary. I would rather not be in the position of saying what we do isn't as bad as what they do. The media is always easier on Republicans and the general public no longer cares, because "they all do it, they're all corrupt. I'm not voting for anyone." See how that works?
People love to hate Bush, for good reason, but they also love to hate Clinton, for whatever reason, and the conservative media will be sure amass lots of campaign cash to whip up the hate.
Baggage? Yes, Clinton has too much, and although most if it is fiction, it's out there. I want the Democratic party to nominate a candidate with very little baggage. We did that with Obama and it worked. If we can do that again in 2016, America just might have a chance.
azureblue
(2,131 posts)the correct frame is :"Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones".
And, "one is not equal to the other".
Essentially your logic runs like this: Clinton has too much baggage so let's find this "less baggage" candidate to replace her, even though we do not know who that person is nor do we know if they are qualified or even have the drawing power to be elected. Also see, "a bird in the hand, etc..."
Like it or not Ms. Clinton is way ahead in the polls. She is the most electable candidate the Democrats have. As you say, most of her baggage is fictional, so you are also saying that because the GOP is making up shit to tear her down, we should simply drop her from the candidates list. Uh, the last thing we should do is let the GOP tell us who to run for office.
I say let the GOP fling mud. They are already on shaky ground as it is, and they are already making fools of themselves, so let them fling, and make even bigger fools of themselves. I can guarantee what will happen is they will fling the wrong piece of poo, and it will come back on them like an atom bomb, and lead to an expose that will drive the last nail in the GOP coffin. Clinton is no dummy. You say how she turned that email press conference right around and took control of the press corps. She has experience fighting the GOP smear machine and is ready for a bloody battle. Much has changed since Ken Starr, and the GOP does not see that, and this will cause the GOP to fail at their smears and innuendo.
Logical
(22,457 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,705 posts)Logical
(22,457 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,705 posts)I have 50,000 or so posts... I assure you that you can count my shouting posts on your hands.
The poster thought he or she could slip that little chestnut that Bush released all his e-mails when he didn't by me.
forthemiddle
(1,373 posts)that I hope the media goes after Bush as much as they have Clinton.
I also NEVER said that he released all his emails, but he did release a huge chunk of them. For Gods sake, is it against all rules to make a suggestion on how Clinton could put this to bed this weekend?????
If Clinton releases her server to an independent investigator, or even complies, to the letter with the FOIA that the AP is requesting this issue would go away. Bush is not the problem, the problem is saying that Bush did it too!
I also said "No More Clintons, or Bushs" and I will stand by that. If in the end it is them against each other I will vote with my partys choice, but as long as I have a voice I will continue to say I am sick of both families running our Country. I want new blood. Look at how enthusiastic the country was about Obama. I personally think that a huge amount of that, in the beginning, was that he wasn't a Clinton. He was his own man, and a new direction for this Country. Hell even his slogan included the change theme "Hope and Change", and that didn't mean Hope Arkansas.
valerief
(53,235 posts)Logical
(22,457 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,705 posts)The caps were intentional.
McCamy Taylor
(19,240 posts)if Jeb Bush put them up to their lie filled story about Clinton in order to excuse his own e-mail problem with "They all do it"
NBachers
(17,001 posts)WASHINGTON (AP) A member of the House committee investigating the deadly attacks against Americans in Benghazi, Libya, says Hillary Rodham Clintons email server could help lawmakers answer vital questions.
Among them: Why was security at the U.S. diplomatic compound inadequate?
Rep. Susan Brooks of Indiana said in the weekly Republican radio address Saturday that gaining access to Clintons server is the only way to truly know that investigators have obtained all the State Department communications that rightfully belong to the American people.
Looks like forthemiddle is in good company.
valerief
(53,235 posts)wasn't it enforced?
IOKIYAR must be the answer.
hughee99
(16,113 posts)IOKIYAD seems to work just fine here.
mountain grammy
(26,568 posts)but, that said, I wouldn't be too upset to see this end both their candidacies.
Let's remember that Jebson is a part of America's largest, most dangerous CRIME family...with close associations to murderous regimes around the world.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)The Clinton e-mail story was remarkably free of context, and the Times had to walk back significant portions of it, because as it turns out there were no regulations in place for Clinton to violate. In fact, she operated on very much the same basis as previous Secretaries of State had operated. But the furor? Oh my, the furor! It was the ruination of the Republic, and Trey Gowdy fired up his subpoena machine tout de suite to get to the bottom of this. Maybe Benghazi? Oddly enough, one of the most strident points about Clinton was her use of her own server; the outrage over that dissipated earlier this week when it was reported that the government's own "secure" server had been compromised.
But now comes Jeb's turn. In contrast to Clinton, there were actual regulations and laws in place governing his e-mail accounts. And what do you know? He broke those laws. Not a "technical" violation of the law (whatever in hell that's supposed to mean), but a real, live breaking of the law, which he tried to remedy by a too-late-by-far partial dump.
Let's see how the popular media treat the revelations about Gov. Bush. Will we see even a tenth of the wall-to-wall coverage, speculation and outrage we saw with Secretary Clinton? Don't make me laugh. Will anyone dare say that this is "typical" behavior of the infamously secretive Bush clan? You have to be kidding.
JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)due to his violation of the law about his e-mails.
That's the way Republicans campaign. Distract. Distract. Distract.
Blame the opponent for your own failures.
Duval
(4,280 posts)NBachers
(17,001 posts)dballance
(5,756 posts)Last edited Sat Mar 14, 2015, 02:28 PM - Edit history (1)
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)Almost every day, when I open the Yahoo/Ask page, there is a headline about Jeb Bush. Seems like Yahoo is really pushing this guy. Ugggggh!
DeSwiss
(27,137 posts)Let's exposed all of these LAW and REGULATION violating politicians!!!! They should never be allowed into political office again!
- YAY!!!
K&R
Spitfire of ATJ
(32,723 posts)It IS.
cui bono
(19,926 posts)there.
Jeb Bush email dump includes Social Security numbers
By Elise Viebeck - 02/10/15 02:44 PM EST
A trove of 250,000 emails released by prospective 2016 presidential candidate Jeb Bush includes the sensitive personal information of several Florida residents, leaving them vulnerable to identity thieves.
A scan of the email dump by technology blogs The Verge and Gizmodo revealed names, emails and in some cases, Social Security numbers of Bush's correspondents. Many appear to be normal Florida residents unaware their messages to the then-governor would eventually become public.
...
"Even if most of these emails are subject to Sunshine Law disclosure, a public request for specific information is not the same as a huge, indiscriminate data dump being made for political reasons," wrote T.C. Sottek with The Verge, which first reported the presence of Social Security numbers in the trove.
"At minimum, it shows a serious ignorance of the volume of sensitive information in the records and a carelessness about their disclosure not a good look for someone who may want to sit in the White House," Sottek wrote.
http://thehill.com/policy/cybersecurity/232324-jeb-bush-email-dump-includes-social-security-numbers
davidn3600
(6,342 posts)Some might consider that a win for America. No more dynasties.