HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » HRC's email problems just...

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:28 PM

HRC's email problems just got worse

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by mcar (a host of the General Discussion forum).

Here is the article:https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/the-fix/wp/2016/05/25/hillary-clintons-email-problems-just-got-much-worse/

Letting her go to the presidency is political suicide! She broke the law!

63 replies, 6960 views

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 63 replies Author Time Post
Reply HRC's email problems just got worse (Original post)
jpmonk91 May 2016 OP
snooper2 May 2016 #1
grasswire May 2016 #6
snappyturtle May 2016 #13
Egnever May 2016 #47
gwheezie May 2016 #2
leveymg May 2016 #25
gwheezie May 2016 #30
leveymg May 2016 #48
Egnever May 2016 #38
liberal N proud May 2016 #31
Hoyt May 2016 #3
jwirr May 2016 #4
moonbabygo May 2016 #8
Trust Buster May 2016 #5
Post removed May 2016 #7
jpmonk91 May 2016 #12
leftynyc May 2016 #20
joeybee12 May 2016 #27
Egnever May 2016 #39
leftynyc May 2016 #41
The Polack MSgt May 2016 #32
jpmonk91 May 2016 #9
mercuryblues May 2016 #34
Egnever May 2016 #40
Bucky May 2016 #43
leveymg May 2016 #50
Egnever May 2016 #54
leveymg May 2016 #60
leftofcool May 2016 #10
jpmonk91 May 2016 #11
LanternWaste May 2016 #19
dawg May 2016 #14
jpmonk91 May 2016 #15
Paladin May 2016 #26
Maedhros May 2016 #16
dawg May 2016 #18
Maedhros May 2016 #21
dawg May 2016 #22
Maedhros May 2016 #23
dawg May 2016 #29
TeddyR May 2016 #51
Egnever May 2016 #52
TeddyR May 2016 #53
Egnever May 2016 #55
TeddyR May 2016 #57
Egnever May 2016 #59
LanternWaste May 2016 #17
Kingofalldems May 2016 #24
notadmblnd May 2016 #28
pa28 May 2016 #33
Egnever May 2016 #35
ismnotwasm May 2016 #36
Egnever May 2016 #42
pnwmom May 2016 #37
Andy823 May 2016 #45
TeddyR May 2016 #56
pnwmom May 2016 #62
TeddyR May 2016 #63
leveymg May 2016 #58
spanone May 2016 #44
Egnever May 2016 #46
Glassunion May 2016 #49
leveymg May 2016 #61

Response to jpmonk91 (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:31 PM

1. Always check out the author before reading a piece if I have never heard of them

 

This guy sounds swell LOL


" Cillizza and Dana Milbank appeared in a series of humor videos called Mouthpiece Theater, which appeared on the website of The Washington Post. An outcry followed a video in which, during a discussion of the White House "Beer Summit", they chose new brands for a number of people, including "Mad Bitch Beer" for Hillary Rodham Clinton. Both men apologized for the video and the series was canceled.[4]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Cillizza

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snooper2 (Reply #1)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:39 PM

6. Czilla has been beating up Bernie.

You might want to get informed. It's pretty weird that you have never heard of him.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snooper2 (Reply #1)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:51 PM

13. I'm a bit surprised you haven't heard of Cillizza...he's on teevee and been around for some time.

It's not like he's some random blogger trying to make a name for himself.
Cillizza works for MSNBC and the Post.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to snooper2 (Reply #1)

Wed May 25, 2016, 04:55 PM

47. Oh hes swell alright

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpmonk91 (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:32 PM

2. She broke the rules

Not the law. Just to be clear.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gwheezie (Reply #2)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:35 PM

25. Just to be clear, wait for the Intel Community and FBI report

Last edited Wed May 25, 2016, 04:59 PM - Edit history (1)

for the criminal acts. The DOS did find she violated the Federal Records Act, however, that had no criminal penalties attached.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #25)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:50 PM

30. I'll wait for that but the op

Said she broke the law. I'm just clarifying there's been no formal result of a criminal investigation.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gwheezie (Reply #30)

Wed May 25, 2016, 05:04 PM

48. Technically, as head of agency, she did violate the Federal Records Act. That's in the report.

Last edited Wed May 25, 2016, 06:25 PM - Edit history (1)

That finding from the State Dept. came about as the result of multiple civil cases pending and an active federal criminal investigation. She can't be charged under the Federal Records Act because she's not presently in gov't and there are no criminal penalties in that statute. However, there are other federal laws referenced in State Department regulations that criminalize the destruction of federal records that she could be charged with, as was former National Security Sandy Berger.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #25)

Wed May 25, 2016, 04:38 PM

38. Along with 80% of governments agencies

 

Hardly breath taking.

Another Gem from the report. Nara the agency responsible for conducting inspections and surveys to asses compliance last reviews the SOS office in 1991. Most people didn't even know what email was then.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gwheezie (Reply #2)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:53 PM

31. But it sounds so much better to bash her by being loose with terms



Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpmonk91 (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:33 PM

3. She "jaywalked," like several administrations and agency heads before her.

Do you go through life adhering to, and worrying about, every little policy that some fool dreamed up to preserve their job?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpmonk91 (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:34 PM

4. Hillary does a lot of things out of paranoia and it is not good

to have that as we saw with Nixon.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jwirr (Reply #4)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:40 PM

8. as they say

 

it's never the crime it's the cover up. I suspect nothing is going to come out of this or she wouldn't be running for president.

The thing that bothers me the most is she knew she was going to run for president so why did you use her own server? She is too smart have thought this was ok.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpmonk91 (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:37 PM

5. Just got worse ? Did we learn anything today that we didn't already know ? No, we did not.

 

Please proceed.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpmonk91 (Original post)


Response to Post removed (Reply #7)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:50 PM

12. Do not accuse me of

Supporting that fascist fuck Trump! Just because I don't support your queen!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpmonk91 (Reply #12)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:02 PM

20. Why is it only

 

Bernie supporters that call Hillary "our queen" - why pretend anyone else considers her royalty? Your hysteria over the emails tells everyone they need to know about you.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftynyc (Reply #20)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:41 PM

27. Apparently that's today's Revolution Messaging talking point...nt

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftynyc (Reply #20)

Wed May 25, 2016, 04:42 PM

39. Same poster yesterday was running around excusing all of Cornel's questionable remarks

 

Saying it was just Hillary worship that makes people uncomfortable with him. Seems to be a constant theme with this poster and honestly with the low post count and trending theme I think this one is a plant.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Egnever (Reply #39)

Wed May 25, 2016, 04:43 PM

41. June 7th can't come soon enough

 

Time for the sewer to get emptied.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpmonk91 (Reply #12)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:55 PM

32. Evidently, repeating right wing talking points are ok in the service of Sanders

Accusing someone of being a right winger is allowed if it's a Sanders fan accusing a Clinton fan.

Accuse a Sanders fan with the same language and that's worth a hide...


On Wed May 25, 2016, 11:42 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Take your pro-Trump trolling to the Primaries forum
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7855903

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Accusing posters of RW proclivities is highly uncivil.

JURY RESULTS

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Wed May 25, 2016, 11:46 AM, and the Jury voted 5-2 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Can't directly accuse DUer of being right wing troll without more evidence than just a distorted, inflammatory OP, which is common among supporters of both candidates.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Sauce for the goose sauce for the gander.
Sanders supporters cannot possibly believe that calling some one a right winger is an alertable statement. That has been their favorite thing for 6 months now
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I can't hide a post that is obviously correct. There is no reason for the OP, that should be hidden.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpmonk91 (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:43 PM

9. If you don't think she broke the law

Than you live in a fantasy world just like the trump supporters

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpmonk91 (Reply #9)

Wed May 25, 2016, 03:46 PM

34. What law did she break?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mercuryblues (Reply #34)

Wed May 25, 2016, 04:43 PM

40. crickets..

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mercuryblues (Reply #34)

Wed May 25, 2016, 04:48 PM

43. She crossed the border to take a job away from a hardworkin' American

Ooops, sorry, got my hates switched up.

Go about your business, folks

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mercuryblues (Reply #34)

Wed May 25, 2016, 05:11 PM

50. As of today, the State Dept has found she violated the Federal Records Act, the Intel Commun IG has

referred her for classified information violations which, according to her signed security agreement, which may be prosecuted under several federal felony statutes, including several parts of the Espionage Act, Section 793. These are 10 year felonies for each act. Shall I go on?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #50)

Wed May 25, 2016, 05:32 PM

54. Please do

 

IC IG made a referral detailing the potential compromise of classified information to security officials within the Executive Branch. The main purpose of the referral was to notify security officials that classified information may exist on at least one private server and thumb drive that are not in the government's possession. An important distinction is that the IC IG did not make a criminal referral- it was a security referral made for counterintelligence purposes. The IC IG is statutorily required to refer potential compromises of national security information to the appropriate IC security officials. [Statement from the Inspectors General of the Intelligence Community and the Department of State Regarding the Review of Former Secretary Clinton's Emails, 7/24/15]


https://oig.state.gov/system/files/statement_of_the_icig_and_oig_regarding_review_of_clintons_emails_july_24_2015.pdf

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Egnever (Reply #54)

Wed May 25, 2016, 05:54 PM

60. There appears to have been some cherry-picking in your selection. Here's the previous paragraph:

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

I would also like to remind you that the excerpt of the joint statement dates to July, 2015, and the focus of the investigation has changed and intensified over time, with Mrs. Clinton's operation of the unauthorized email server becoming the focus. As FBI Director Comey recently commented:

Clinton and her team have made a point of not describing the FBI's work as an "investigation," but alternately as a "security review" or "security inquiry." They've also noted that the issue was referred to the FBI not as a criminal matter but as an intelligence breach.

However, in response to a question Wednesday, Comey said he wasn't familiar with the term "security inquiry" that Clinton and her aides have used. The FBI chief said he considers the work agents are doing to be an "investigation."

"It's in our name. I'm not familiar with the term 'security inquiry','" the director said.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/hillary-clinton-email-investigation-fbi-james-comey-223071#ixzz49htXyo8m


The FBI report and IC AG report will confirm the official statement made last July, that has not changed, and will detail the allegations. It will be clear she violated her security clearance, and in so doing violated several federal felony statutes.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpmonk91 (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:46 PM

10. No she didn't.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftofcool (Reply #10)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:47 PM

11. Have fun in your info free bubble

The republicans like theirs too

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpmonk91 (Reply #11)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:01 PM

19. I too pretend that people who disagree with me do so due to living in a bubble

I too pretend that people who disagree with me do so due to living in a bubble. It's both self-validating and minimizes other opinions, so it's an ethically convenient win-win!

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpmonk91 (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:52 PM

14. I'm sick of hearing about her damned emails.

I don't care what server she used. The official government servers were breached. Who knows, maybe Hillary's bathroom was more secure.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Reply #14)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:56 PM

15. OMG

the HRC dems are becoming just as fanatic as the conservatives

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpmonk91 (Reply #15)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:38 PM

26. Look who's talking. (nt)

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Reply #14)

Wed May 25, 2016, 01:59 PM

16. What official government servers were breached? [n/t]

 

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maedhros (Reply #16)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:00 PM

18. Just google it. Here's one article.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Reply #18)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:13 PM

21. Ok - thank you.

 

Now, how does this hack absolve Clinton from FOIA violations regarding the sequestering of email communications and deletion of same?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maedhros (Reply #21)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:23 PM

22. It just isn't that big of a deal to me. She was damned if she did, damned if she didn't.

The partisan witch hunt against her is a real thing. If she immediately gives over to every request, they'll just pore through everything, take a few words out of context, and create a dozen *new* controversies.

Democrats and other left-leaning individuals need to be fighting with Hillary Clinton over issues of policy. Not over manufactured bullshit like this. (Or Benghazi, or Whitewater, or Vince Foster, etc., etc., etc.)

FWIW, I didn't vote for the woman. But it looks an awful lot like she's going to be my candidate this fall.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Reply #22)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:32 PM

23. Pardon me if I don't really care how you feel about it.

 

She's a Democrat, so she gets a pass from you. Just like she gets a pass for the Honduran coup, or bombing Libya based on lies about genocide.

There is no integrity in such a stance.

/ignore list.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Maedhros (Reply #23)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:44 PM

29. There's no integrity in helping Trump win the Presidency, either.

If you really put me on your ignore list, well ... that's a shame. The more we surround ourselves within ideologically pure bubbles that agree with us 100% of the time, the more ineffectual we become.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dawg (Reply #29)

Wed May 25, 2016, 05:19 PM

51. I agree about your ignore list point

 

And one reason I like this website is I can debate these issues with others who are generally pretty informed individuals. But with respect to the email issue Hillary violated the rules, was told she was violating the rules, and continued to violate the rules. The folks here on DU would skewer someone like Paul Ryan or Marco Rubio if it turned out they committed similar violations, and we shouldn't excuse Hillary when she does it. For me it at the very least reflects poorly on her decision-making.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TeddyR (Reply #51)

Wed May 25, 2016, 05:23 PM

52. Hillary and a large portion of the government.

 

According to the document over 80% of the government is at risk of non compliance.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Egnever (Reply #52)

Wed May 25, 2016, 05:28 PM

53. But isn't the real point here

 

That Hillary was told she was in violation and didn't really care? If I'm going 75 in a 55 and everyone around is also going 75 but I get pulled over for speeding the judge isn't going to let me off because everyone else was going 75. I was breaking the rules and shouldn't have been. And to clarify, a "large portion of the government" wasn't using a private server as the exclusive means of conducting official business. Only Hillary did that.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TeddyR (Reply #53)

Wed May 25, 2016, 05:33 PM

55. The point is 80% of the government was told the same thing and didn't care

 

Why is Hillary special?

in Fact if you actually read the report it is pretty damning when it comes to the governments record keeping in general.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Egnever (Reply #55)

Wed May 25, 2016, 05:38 PM

57. Hillary is "special"

 

Because she's the front-runner to be the Dem nominee for president of the United States. And she already has issues with being viewed as untrustworthy. So yeah, whether the entire fucking government violated security rules is irrelevant - the question is did Hillary comply with State Department rules regarding information that is both subject to FOIA and might contain sensitive, indeed top secret, information. The answer appears to be that she did not, and that she knowingly did not.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TeddyR (Reply #57)

Wed May 25, 2016, 05:53 PM

59. Not seeing that as the answer at all

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/apps/g/page/politics/state-department-report-on-clintons-email-practices/2039/?tid=a_inl-amp

The actual report is there in all it's glory and if anything the entire theme of it seems to be Clinton did nothing out of the ordinary or different from her predecessor or the vast majority of the federal government.

In fact it specifically states that because of horrible records management by the government they cant verify any of the SOS going all the way back to Albright were ever in compliance. Hillary claims compliance and because of shit record keeping they can't verify weather she did or did not comply.

Really wish I could cut and paste from the report as it paints a picture so ridiculous of government handling of emails it is a wonder the Government doesn't indict itself. Going to need to find a pdf of it because this spin from Cizzila is so off the mark one wonders if he even read it.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpmonk91 (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:00 PM

17. Every day, someone alleges "this will be the factor that brings her down!"

Every day, someone alleges either directly, or simply by cowering behind implication that "this will be the factor that brings her down!" Every day, those allegations are as quickly forgotten as they do not come to pass. But fear not, oh those of righteousness and purity... tomorrow another poster will allege "this will be the factor that brings her down!" regardless of its inaccuracy.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpmonk91 (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:35 PM

24. This is GDP material.

Clever that you used initials instead of her full name.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpmonk91 (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:41 PM

28. Love this part

This is a bad day for Clinton's presidential campaign. Period. For a candidate already struggling to overcome a perception that she is neither honest nor trustworthy, the IG report makes that task significantly harder. No one will come out of this news cycle with the exception of the hardest of the hard-core Clinton people believing she is a better bet for the presidency on May 25 than she was on May 23.

Clinton remains blessed that Republicans are on the verge of nominating Donald Trump, a candidate whose numbers on honesty, trustworthiness and even readiness to lead are worse and in some cases, far worse than hers. But Trump's task of casting her as "Crooked Hillary" just got easier.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpmonk91 (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 02:59 PM

33. Seems to be withholding of information in an official investigation.

I guess it's up to FBI investigators now to determine if any laws were broken.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpmonk91 (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 04:19 PM

35. Silly

 

That is the republican spin of the report. The report actually shows what a clusterfuck records keeping is inside the government and says something on the order of 80% of all agencies are not in compliance with the laws.

Pretty hard to single out Clinton when 80% of the government is out of compliance. The republicans and likely many of the hard core Sanders supporters will certainly try to do so but the Idea Hillary broke the law when 80% of government is also out of compliance is going to be a hard sell to anyone not already inclined to buy it.

It may work but if it does it will not because it has any semblance of the reality of government record keeping.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpmonk91 (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 04:22 PM

36. No they didn't

The actual report is interesting reading.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ismnotwasm (Reply #36)

Wed May 25, 2016, 04:46 PM

42. Agreed

 

it is interesting and actually lays out a pretty bad record of record keeping government wide. Also shows off the snails pace at which government adapts to new technology.

If anything it points out Clinton is just one of many not keeping records correctly and actually lays bare the idea that there is any real control over it at all.

Best part is much of it is blamed on budget cuts..Wonder where those came from. Sometimes starving the government has unintended consequences.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpmonk91 (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 04:23 PM

37. The article doesn't say she broke law. She broke department policy, which is not a law. n/t

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #37)

Wed May 25, 2016, 04:52 PM

45. It's like someone else said

She broke the "rules", something that I see every single day here on DU, and the same ones that break the rules here are having a cow because she broke the rules. The crappy part is when they post this crap and say she broke the LAW yet they can't tell you what law it was they claim she broke.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Andy823 (Reply #45)

Wed May 25, 2016, 05:34 PM

56. She violated State Department policy

 

And did so knowingly. Do you think that is a good thing? And we don't yet know if she violated the law - the FBI is still looking into that. Is this a good thing for the presumptive Dem nominee?

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TeddyR (Reply #56)

Wed May 25, 2016, 06:37 PM

62. She followed the same procedures as her predecessors. John Kerry has made good changes,

but her practices were in line with others in the Department.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #62)

Wed May 25, 2016, 06:38 PM

63. They actually were not

 

Read Chris Cillizza's summit at the WaPo. Hillary was unique in her violations.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pnwmom (Reply #37)

Wed May 25, 2016, 05:40 PM

58. DOS report says HRC violated the Federal Records Act and cites criminal penaties against destruction

Last edited Wed May 25, 2016, 06:18 PM - Edit history (1)

of federal records. See page 10, footnotes 40, 41

https://www.washingtonpost.com/apps/g/page/politics/state-department-report-on-clintons-email-practices/2039/?tid=a_inl

References to federal laws:

* Additional duties imposed by law upon the head of agency not observed are also cited at p. 12, ft. 48.

* The Secretary failed to timely notify the National Archives of pending destruction of official records according to law. p. 17, ftn 73.

* See, also, the discussion of State Department discussions and efforts to recover emails dating back to 2011. pp. 17-19.

* In particular, Pages 26-27 discuss Clinton and staff's failures to fully comply with Departmental records requests after leaving office.



Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpmonk91 (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 04:50 PM

44. bullshit.

eom

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpmonk91 (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 04:54 PM

46. Hey look it is Chris Cilliza

 

Same clown who claimed 150 anonymous leakers a few weeks ago and had to walk it back.

https://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/03/29/washington-post-corrects-faulty-report-that-nea/209615

Color me less than surprised he wrote this BS piece that almost completely ignores what the report actually says.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jpmonk91 (Original post)

Wed May 25, 2016, 05:11 PM

49. She did'nt break the law. Improper practice, and poor policy is not

against the law.

It's not illegal to call a toddler an asshole, it's just frowned upon.

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Glassunion (Reply #49)

Wed May 25, 2016, 06:20 PM

61. Yes, she did. Please see, #50 and #60

Cannot reply in locked threads

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink