HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » So we've now gone from &q...

Sat May 28, 2016, 02:48 PM

 

So we've now gone from "it was allowed under the rules" to

"I thought it was allowed"?
Did it not occur to HRC to ask the question about her e-mail account and server before using it? Clearly she's now saying she either didn't know the rules or wasn't clear on them.

It's the same evolving explanation we got on the classified information on her server. First it was "there is no classified information", then we got "I never sent or received any classified information" to "I never received anything marked classified"

This is why people distrust her. The truth doesn't need revision. Lies need revision and usually the revision happens after the first lie is caught.

102 replies, 8971 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 102 replies Author Time Post
Reply So we've now gone from "it was allowed under the rules" to (Original post)
Press Virginia May 2016 OP
AtomicKitten May 2016 #1
MuseRider May 2016 #13
840high May 2016 #24
Fantastic Anarchist May 2016 #38
CorporatistNation May 2016 #73
leveymg May 2016 #79
Sparkly May 2016 #84
leveymg May 2016 #87
Sparkly May 2016 #88
leveymg May 2016 #90
Sparkly May 2016 #94
Press Virginia May 2016 #97
leveymg May 2016 #98
Press Virginia May 2016 #93
Sparkly May 2016 #95
Press Virginia May 2016 #96
leveymg May 2016 #99
HooptieWagon Jun 2016 #102
Yurovsky May 2016 #2
polly7 May 2016 #4
Yurovsky May 2016 #10
dchill May 2016 #78
findrskeep Jun 2016 #101
Octafish May 2016 #5
jwirr May 2016 #27
Yurovsky May 2016 #53
nolabels May 2016 #68
XemaSab May 2016 #3
Press Virginia May 2016 #6
Fantastic Anarchist May 2016 #39
davidlynch May 2016 #16
SusanCalvin May 2016 #48
trumad May 2016 #7
Press Virginia May 2016 #11
Hydra May 2016 #17
Press Virginia May 2016 #22
Fantastic Anarchist May 2016 #40
Hydra May 2016 #42
libdem4life May 2016 #50
Aerows May 2016 #70
Fantastic Anarchist Jun 2016 #100
rhett o rick May 2016 #31
trumad May 2016 #33
Press Virginia May 2016 #34
rhett o rick May 2016 #37
Fantastic Anarchist May 2016 #41
jonmac511 May 2016 #56
trumad May 2016 #69
dchill May 2016 #80
Herman4747 May 2016 #49
onecaliberal May 2016 #8
Fantastic Anarchist May 2016 #43
Blue Meany May 2016 #9
Lizzie Poppet May 2016 #12
Press Virginia May 2016 #14
Fantastic Anarchist May 2016 #44
DebDoo May 2016 #15
Press Virginia May 2016 #21
LAS14 May 2016 #61
grasswire May 2016 #28
Downwinder May 2016 #18
RobertEarl May 2016 #19
thesquanderer May 2016 #20
LAS14 May 2016 #62
pdsimdars May 2016 #23
Press Virginia May 2016 #26
Cheese Sandwich May 2016 #25
cui bono May 2016 #46
Dems to Win May 2016 #29
Press Virginia May 2016 #30
undergroundpanther May 2016 #32
winter is coming May 2016 #35
liberal_at_heart May 2016 #36
cui bono May 2016 #45
Press Virginia May 2016 #47
flor-de-jasmim May 2016 #51
SMC22307 May 2016 #71
Faux pas May 2016 #52
Waiting For Everyman May 2016 #54
Hiraeth May 2016 #57
Waiting For Everyman May 2016 #60
DookDook May 2016 #91
Agony May 2016 #55
basselope May 2016 #58
LAS14 May 2016 #59
Press Virginia May 2016 #64
LAS14 May 2016 #65
Press Virginia May 2016 #66
LAS14 May 2016 #67
Press Virginia May 2016 #74
LAS14 May 2016 #75
Press Virginia May 2016 #76
LAS14 May 2016 #82
Press Virginia May 2016 #85
LAS14 May 2016 #83
Press Virginia May 2016 #86
LAS14 May 2016 #89
pdsimdars May 2016 #63
AzDar May 2016 #72
HassleCat May 2016 #77
dchill May 2016 #81
NorthCarolina May 2016 #92

Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Sat May 28, 2016, 02:49 PM

1. Caught with her pants down, she still cannot tell the truth.

 

The general election is shaping up to be a battle between two pathological liars spewing bombastic bullshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtomicKitten (Reply #1)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:11 PM

13. Perfectly said Atomic Kitten.

Damn spellchecker.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtomicKitten (Reply #1)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:35 PM

24. ...!100++++

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtomicKitten (Reply #1)

Sat May 28, 2016, 09:26 PM

38. Such a great choice we have.

Ugh, we're doomed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtomicKitten (Reply #1)

Mon May 30, 2016, 12:30 AM

73. Look At These Solemn Faces On Morning Joe With Mika, Andrea Mitchell And Chuck Todd Among Others..

A Funeral.... They had been carrying Hillary's water throughout the campaign and now they all have to admit that they have been lied to... The mood is glum!


MSNBC To the deniers... Watch THIS Video... It is not comforting to think that she may well be the Democratic Nominee...

Hillary really betrayed Andrea Mitchell... The entire context of this report was of a solemn nature... A Funeral so to speak...

Andrea Mitchell "I do not see this report as ...ANYTHING BUT... DEVASTATING!"

Chuck Todd "After this I don't think that she could get confirmed for Attorney General!"

Lots of FIBBING by Hillary here.. for more than a year!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CorporatistNation (Reply #73)

Mon May 30, 2016, 10:27 AM

79. Some basic research (and journalistic integrity) by MSM should have long ago revealed HRCs lies.

Last edited Mon May 30, 2016, 10:58 AM - Edit history (2)

We did it here at DU for free, without a budget. The corporate media refused to do it in order to protect their jobs and salaries.

Along with the cheerleading for the Iraq War, this points out the utter corruption of both major parties and the stenographic press.

A good example of this is Dan Abrams, a high-profile legal analyst who has been on the ABC payroll and now edits LawNewz. Abrams has in recent days published a scathing critique of Hillary's account.
http://lawnewz.com/politics/hillary-clintons-emails-now-might-finally-take-her-down/

As recently as February, however, Abrams was still misrepresenting the law to protect HRC. What changed?

In February, Abrams was arguing that 18 USC Sec. 793 of the Espionage Act doesn't fit in a potential prosecution of Hillary because, he claimed, that statute wasn't intended to be applied to high officials. He omitted mention that other heads of agency who retained, removed or shared classified materials without authorization -- CIA Directors Petraeus (2012) and Deutch (1996) -- were found chargable under that same section of the Espionage Act, even if they pled down (Petraeus) or the AG allowed the case to expire with the result of a Presidential pardon (Deutch). See, http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/analysis-hillary-clinton-commit-crime-based-today/story?id=36626499

I don't think Abrams was being entirely honest, or was simply badly informed, and the Clintonites still seize on the argument he made. He's smart enough to read the statute and has a budget do some accurate historical research. Without an explanation from him, we must conclude Dan has realized the gig is up for Hillary and is now singing a different tune.

Maybe, it's simply that he's not working for ABC.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #79)

Mon May 30, 2016, 10:47 AM

84. Some basic research and the NY Times

"Members of President Obama's cabinet have a wide variety of strategies, shortcuts and tricks for handling their email, and until three months ago there was no law setting out precisely what they had to do with it, and when. And while the majority of Obama administration officials use government email to conduct their business, there has never been any legal prohibition against using a personal account." (The New York Times, 3/13/15)

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/14/us/politics/vague-email-rules-let-federal-agencies-decide-when-to-hit-save-or-delete.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sparkly (Reply #84)

Mon May 30, 2016, 11:02 AM

87. It's not the server that's illegal, it's the classified information placed on it. That's a felony.

You may be confusing the violations of Departmental regulations detailed in the DOS IG report with the felony violations the Intelligence Community IG report, which will likely be released later this week, and the FBI report that will follow that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #87)

Mon May 30, 2016, 11:10 AM

88. No classified information was "placed on it."

It was reclassified at a later date.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sparkly (Reply #88)

Mon May 30, 2016, 12:03 PM

90. Not according to the joint statement of the DOS and Intel Commun. IGs

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

July 24, 2015
Statement from the Inspectors General of the Intelligence Community and the
Department of State Regarding the Review of Former Secretary Clinton's Emails

Yesterday the Office ofthe Inspector General ofthe Intelligence Community (IC IG} sent a
congressional notification to intelligence oversight committees updating them of the IC IG
support to the State Department IG (attached).

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.



and

The Spy Satellite Secrets in Hillary’s Emails
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/08/12/the-spy-satellite-secrets-in-hillary-s-emails.html

These weren’t just ordinary secrets found in Clinton’s private server, but some of the most classified material the U.S. government has.

After months of denials and delaying actions, Hillary Clinton has decided to turn over her private email server to the Department of Justice. As this controversy has grown since the spring, Clinton and her campaign operatives have repeatedly denied that she had placed classified information in her personal email while serving as secretary of state during President Obama’s first term. (“I am confident that I never sent nor received any information that was classified at the time it was sent and received,” she said last month.) Her team also denied that she would ever hand over her server to investigators. Now both those assertions have been overturned.

Hillary Clinton has little choice but to hand over her server to authorities since it now appears increasingly likely that someone on her staff violated federal laws regarding the handling of classified materials. On August 11, after extensive investigation, the intelligence community’s inspector general reported to Congress that it had found several violations of security policy in Clinton’s personal emails.

Most seriously, the inspector general assessed that Clinton’s emails included information that was highly classified—yet mislabeled as unclassified. Worse, the information in question should have been classified up to the level of “TOP SECRET//SI//TK//NOFORN,” according to the inspector general’s report.

TOP SECRET, as the name implies, is the highest official classification level in the U.S. government, defined as information whose unauthorized release “could cause exceptionally grave damage to national security or foreign relations.”


and,

CNN and Reuters: Inspectors General concluded Clinton emails presumed classified

The origin of the "presumed classified" determination applied to many of Hillary Clinton's emails are the Inspectors General of the Intelligence Community and the State Department, as reported by CNN. That assessment is shared by the former Director of the Government's Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO), as reported by Reuters.

CNN: 7/24/2015

http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/24/politics/hillary-clinton-email-justice-department/
Official: Clinton emails included classified information

Washington (CNN)The inspector general for the intelligence community has informed members of Congress that some material Hillary Clinton emailed from her private server contained classified information, but it was not identified that way. Because it was not identified, it is unclear whether Clinton realized she was potentially compromising classified information.

The IG reviewed a "limited sampling" of her emails and among those 40 reviewed found that "four contained classified information," wrote the IG Charles McCullough in a letter to Congress. McCullough noted that "none of the emails we reviewed had classification or dissemination markings" but that some "should have been handled as classified, appropriately marked, and transmitted via a secure network."

The four emails in question "were classified when they were sent and are classified now," spokeswoman Andrea Williams told CNN.

McCullough said that State Department Freedom of Information Act officials told the intelligence community IG that "there are potentially hundreds of classified emails within the approximately 30,000 provided by former Secretary Clinton."


CNN 8/17/15

http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/17/politics/hillary-clinton-server-referred-for-further-review/
Washington (CNN)Intelligence officials assigned to review emails from Hillary Clinton's server for classified information have so far recommended that 305 documents be referred to agencies for further consultation, according to a report filed with a federal judge Monday.

In court papers filed with U.S. District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras, the State Department updated its progress. It said that as of last Friday, Intelligence Community reviewers had completed a preliminary screening and determined that "out of a sample of approximately 20% of the Clinton emails," the reviewers have "recommended 305 documents -- approximately 5.1% -- for referral to their agencies for consultation."
. . .

inspectors general for the State Department and for the Intelligence Community raised concerns about the content of the emails, the State Department added intelligence staff to assist in the process.


Reuters 8/24/15

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/21/us-usa-election-clinton-emails-idUSKCN0QQ0BW20150821
Exclusive: Dozens of Clinton emails were classified from the start, U.S. rules suggest


In the small fraction of emails made public so far, Reuters has found at least 30 email threads from 2009, representing scores of individual emails, that include what the State Department's own "Classified" stamps now identify as so-called 'foreign government information.' The U.S. government defines this as any information, written or spoken, provided in confidence to U.S. officials by their foreign counterparts.

This sort of information, which the department says Clinton both sent and received in her emails, is the only kind that must be "presumed" classified, in part to protect national security and the integrity of diplomatic interactions, according to U.S. regulations examined by Reuters.

"It's born classified," said J. William Leonard, a former director of the U.S. government's Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO). Leonard was director of ISOO, part of the White House's National Archives and Records Administration, from 2002 until 2008, and worked for both the Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations.

"If a foreign minister just told the secretary of state something in confidence, by U.S. rules that is classified at the moment it's in U.S. channels and U.S. possession," he said in a telephone interview, adding that for the State Department to say otherwise was "blowing smoke."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leveymg (Reply #90)

Tue May 31, 2016, 12:19 AM

94. Key Word: "Retroactively."

You also fail to distinguish between sender and recipient, and to recognize that dot-gov or dot-other makes NO difference -- NEITHER is considered secure for classified info.

(As for the "born classified" excuse for an attack, this has been debunked repeatedly.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sparkly (Reply #94)

Tue May 31, 2016, 01:03 AM

97. EO13526 sect 1.4

 

Those items are automatically classified if they meet the standards in sec 1.2.

They are classified upon creation

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sparkly (Reply #94)

Tue May 31, 2016, 03:43 AM

98. None of that is germaine.

If you're going to claim something was "debunked recently" you have to cite a credible source.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sparkly (Reply #88)

Mon May 30, 2016, 09:38 PM

93. Except for the 114 e-mails that HRC personally authored that were

 

confidential upon creation. The 7 e-mails from the POTUS, which are at least confidential in nature, the 4 e-mails the IC IG found in the original sample, which prompted his request to the FBI, that were from Secret to TS as the time of their creation.
And then there's the 22 emails that were so secret they were 100% redacted

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #93)

Tue May 31, 2016, 12:21 AM

95. "Classified upon creation"

That is baloney, as is your timeline. The RNC thanks you, but Trump is going to lose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sparkly (Reply #95)

Tue May 31, 2016, 01:01 AM

96. EO 13526 spells out what is classified upon creation

 

section 1.4 is the relevant portion

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sparkly (Reply #95)

Tue May 31, 2016, 03:46 AM

99. Your response is not on point and is insulting. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sparkly (Reply #95)

Thu Jun 2, 2016, 10:19 AM

102. Classified upon creation is not only covered in the law,...

 

...but the SoS is required to recieve training on handling such material, as it's assumed the SoS would generate a significant amount of classified at creation documents. Clinton even signed a required statement that she received such instruction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Sat May 28, 2016, 02:54 PM

2. Is it any surprise why she didn't want an IG at State?

She & Bill have always played fast and loose with the rules. Before the interwebs, they could get off with plausible denials and hiding/destroying incriminating evidence. This might finally be karma settling up with a lifetime of questionable behavior and financial shenanigans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yurovsky (Reply #2)

Sat May 28, 2016, 02:59 PM

4. I can't get over the arrogance and self-entitlement of all of this.

Such a tangled, ugly web involving so many human beings that didn't deserve to suffer for their hubris and greed. I had no idea how many people had been harmed since his presidency ... add in all those during her term as SoS and it's staggering.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to polly7 (Reply #4)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:10 PM

10. Yep, that's the thing that gets lost...

when someone gains financially due to illicit means, someone undeservedly suffers. When Hillary cashes in at colleges with ridiculous speaking fees, less money is available to help needy students. When Goldman Sachs believes they have White House protection, they continue to screw the "little people" with impunity. When Hillary rigs the Democratic primary system to favor the "inevitable" winner, we all face the possibility of suffering a President Trump or a Hillary impeachment.

Hillary's lies are costing all of us. It's high time they started costing her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yurovsky (Reply #10)

Mon May 30, 2016, 10:24 AM

78. Apparently, there is no price too high for us to pay...

for the Clintons' dreams.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yurovsky (Reply #10)

Thu Jun 2, 2016, 08:48 AM

101. Very well said...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yurovsky (Reply #2)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:02 PM

5. The Edge of Legality

Like a Twilight Zone where the legal and not legal are but mere shadows for those with means and and outstanding legal team of forensic economists.

"Shenanigans."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Octafish (Reply #5)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:36 PM

27. And THAT is a perfect description of where Bill and Hillary

have always been. The skate up to the edge of illegal with just their toe on the ice and then turn around and say "I did not do that."

It is the worst kind of use for a law degree.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jwirr (Reply #27)

Sun May 29, 2016, 01:01 PM

53. Agree 100% with your last sentence...

They have used their knowledge of the law and the legal system to skirt the law and enrich themselves. Hopefully Karma will reward them 10 fold for their abuses of the American legal and political system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yurovsky (Reply #53)

Sun May 29, 2016, 07:26 PM

68. Through the years that seems like the story with many

Eventually the slippery wears out and get caught in trying slither through that last crack

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Sat May 28, 2016, 02:58 PM

3. We turned over everything! Except the stuff that I decided not to turn over!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to XemaSab (Reply #3)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:02 PM

6. and she acts as though she did it and they were made public at her request

 

instead of a FOIA lawsuit.

I wonder if she even knows what the truth is

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #6)

Sat May 28, 2016, 09:31 PM

39. Hillary and truth = oil and water.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to XemaSab (Reply #3)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:26 PM

16. Translation: Yes, I wiped the server n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to XemaSab (Reply #3)

Sun May 29, 2016, 10:49 AM

48. That's about the size of it.

Why should I trust her as to what's relevant and what's not?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:06 PM

7. Tick Tock BSers

 

Tick tock

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #7)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:10 PM

11. her evolving explanations have nothing to do with anyone but her

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #7)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:27 PM

17. Yes, we see all of you watching the clock with various levels of apprehension

Will the bomb go off before convention? Bernie has not be successfully ejected yet.

Who is the backup plan if Clinton is disqualified before the GE? Biden? Will you guys smoothly pivot to support him if needed?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hydra (Reply #17)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:34 PM

22. They will blame Comey and spew the "innocent until proven guilty"

 

line while desperately clinging to the idea she was only targeted because she's a woman.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hydra (Reply #17)

Sat May 28, 2016, 09:33 PM

40. As far as I know, Biden is infinitely a better choice.

Especially, with a Trump presidency looming.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fantastic Anarchist (Reply #40)

Sat May 28, 2016, 09:35 PM

42. Ah, but the Brock team belongs to Hillary

I'm not sure if that loyalty is transferable without a new set of paychecks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fantastic Anarchist (Reply #40)

Sun May 29, 2016, 12:54 PM

50. Biden kind of half-heartedly already ran.

 

His dying son begged him Not to run for president.

So, like Warren, the establishment Dems aren't at all eager to attach themselves to a failed candidacy. There is only who could pull it off. But egos being what they are...well we all know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fantastic Anarchist (Reply #40)

Sun May 29, 2016, 11:43 PM

70. I'd sure as hell vote for Biden

 

over Trump or Clinton. Obviously I prefer Bernie, but I would be willing to work hard to get Biden elected if Bernie was not a choice vs. Trump.

Slowly dragging my ass to the polls to half-heartedly vote for Clinton is about the best I can do if it comes down to Hillary or Trump.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aerows (Reply #70)

Thu Jun 2, 2016, 08:30 AM

100. I think I'll be staying home. I just can't vote for Hillary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #7)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:49 PM

31. I am proud to be a BSer. Your attempts to ridicule are childish, but then that's your

 

side. Nothing of substance only mockery and ridicule. But I do think your "Tick Tock" is ironic under the circumstances.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #31)

Sat May 28, 2016, 04:20 PM

33. Tick tock

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #33)

Sat May 28, 2016, 04:29 PM

34. your hopes must be pinned to this story going away by June 7th

 

Or, at least, no more evidence coming out proving HRC lied about something else related to her server set up

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #33)

Sat May 28, 2016, 04:52 PM

37. Again, childish

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #33)

Sat May 28, 2016, 09:34 PM

41. Yes, time is running out on Your Highness.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #33)

Sun May 29, 2016, 01:15 PM

56. drip drip

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jonmac511 (Reply #56)

Sun May 29, 2016, 10:17 PM

69. Tick tock

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #31)

Mon May 30, 2016, 10:28 AM

80. +1,000,001

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to trumad (Reply #7)

Sun May 29, 2016, 12:35 PM

49. Being saved from having a HORRIBLE CANDIDATE represent us is possible:

 

If Indictment Fairy comes through for us OR if the horrible candidate finally realizes she is indeed horrible and withdraws from contention!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:07 PM

8. Part of the rules is if you don't know you need to ask and she

Didn't do that either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to onecaliberal (Reply #8)

Sat May 28, 2016, 09:36 PM

43. Yep. Ignorance of the law is not a defense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:10 PM

9. I remember when the criteria for Republican candidates almost reached "not yet indicted" back in the

 

1990s. Let's hope were not headed there.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:10 PM

12. "I did not have relations with that server!" - Hillary Rodham Pinnochio

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lizzie Poppet (Reply #12)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:15 PM

14. pretty much

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lizzie Poppet (Reply #12)

Sat May 28, 2016, 09:38 PM

44. "Sorry, officer. I didn't know that I couldn't do that."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:23 PM

15. Strategic ignorance aka If I don't ask, I don't know, therefore I'm not guilty

If I don't ask, I don't know, therefore I'm not guilty

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DebDoo (Reply #15)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:31 PM

21. she would have been better off saying she didn't know the rules

 

and just assumed her actions were compliant rather than claiming her set up was allowed under the rules.
She held herself out as an authority on the rules, from the start. Now she's trying to feign ignorance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #21)

Sun May 29, 2016, 01:31 PM

61. Given that there was no stated prohibition...

... it's reasonable to assume that it's allowed. The "prohibition" is an after the fact statement by State. Sort of if we had known we would have said "no." Well, what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DebDoo (Reply #15)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:41 PM

28. it's called "plausible deniability" nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:27 PM

18. What did you expect?

She supported "Don't ask, don't tell."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:29 PM

19. It was a gamble

 

They almost got away with it.

The use of the State Department to build personal power, enrich themselves and their friends, has met justice.

It was inevitable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:30 PM

20. As "TPP sets the gold standard" became " "I hoped it would be the gold standard." (n/t)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to thesquanderer (Reply #20)

Sun May 29, 2016, 01:33 PM

62. Perfectly reasonable. As circumstances change, one must change with them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:35 PM

23. I don't even see how she can say that. SHE sent out an email to all the employees

 

telling them NOT to do what she was doing. So how did she not know?
Also, she fired the Ambassador to Kenya for doing it. How did she not know?
Her use of her server for her email was questioned and the people asking the questions were told not to mention it again.
She was given a few warnings about it, and she ignored them.

I think there is a difference between not knowing and conscious ignoring of rules and regulations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to pdsimdars (Reply #23)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:36 PM

26. The truth is she didn't care about the rules but she's never going to

 

admit to that

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:35 PM

25. There may be more than one pathological liar running for president.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #25)

Sat May 28, 2016, 10:51 PM

46. psst...

there still is.

.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:45 PM

29. Pretty upsetting that she refused to be interviewed by the IG

 

She refused to be interviewed by the IG, appointed by Obama, of the Dept. she used to lead. It shows contempt for the government and its procedures and checks and balances.

And now she wants to be President of that government. As a proud 'good government' type, this is really hard for me to stomach.

California and New Jersey, Save Us!

#StillSanders

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dems to Win (Reply #29)

Sat May 28, 2016, 03:46 PM

30. I believe it was probably on advice from council

 

but it would never be admitted

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Sat May 28, 2016, 04:11 PM

32. first excuse of a caught sociopath

But but I didnt KNOW i was breaking the laww...
I..i..i didnt Know. ..it was....wrong..... Same old shit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Sat May 28, 2016, 04:35 PM

35. So she was too dumb to know it wouldn't be allowed and too lazy to check?

Wow, that makes it so much better.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Sat May 28, 2016, 04:37 PM

36. Either she is corrupt or incompetent. Neither is acceptable.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Sat May 28, 2016, 10:50 PM

45. Too bad she can't have one of her lackeys change the rules on a whim without a proper vote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cui bono (Reply #45)

Sat May 28, 2016, 10:53 PM

47. The fact that people are actually defending her still amazes me

 

she lied. The truth doesn't need multiple changes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #47)

Sun May 29, 2016, 12:57 PM

51. I'm with you on this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #47)

Sun May 29, 2016, 11:47 PM

71. Because... Snowden, or some such bullshit.

Camp Weathervane never fails to entertain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Sun May 29, 2016, 12:58 PM

52. Sneakiness

and dishonesty are NOT attractive qualities in a person, let alone in someone who wants to rule the world.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Sun May 29, 2016, 01:07 PM

54. Her motto for workers' training: "don't ask for permission,

ask for forgiveness". It's how she operates. It's intentional and consistent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Waiting For Everyman (Reply #54)

Sun May 29, 2016, 01:20 PM

57. when has she ever asked for forgiveness ... refresh my memory. serious here. thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hiraeth (Reply #57)

Sun May 29, 2016, 01:30 PM

60. What she means is,

be sorry after you're caught. As in "I made a mistake" or "If I had it to do over again, I'd do it differently".

I agree, at best it's implied.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Waiting For Everyman (Reply #54)

Mon May 30, 2016, 12:49 PM

91. Maybe that's why she doesn't want to release the speeches?

I'm sure the theme of the speeches very well could of been: "Don't ask for permission, ask for forgiveness....and a bailout"

Do I need a smile thing?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Sun May 29, 2016, 01:08 PM

55. It is really very, very simple… being Secretary of State of the United States of America

and deciding that it is a good idea… OK… to run your email communications on a private server in your home

is too fucking stupid for words.

Hillary does not have the ability to make appropriate, timely decisions to be POTUS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Sun May 29, 2016, 01:21 PM

58. As often as it is in the political world, it's not the scandal...

 

But, the lying, twisting and spinning that happens AFTER.

You have to wonder how other candidates would handle this?

Bernie wouldn't have gotten into this mess, b/c he would follow the rules.

Trump would likely do the same thing as Clinton, arrogantly choose to use his own private server; however, when confronted, he would just say, "yeah, I did it, I trusted my private server more than some government one" and his voters would cheer him on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Sun May 29, 2016, 01:27 PM

59. OK. So when what is being said changes, your response changes.

Isn't that what rational people do? Given her experience, she didn't know that the state department was going to say they wouldn't have allowed it. They said it, so she explained. Perfectly reasonable, I'd say.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LAS14 (Reply #59)

Sun May 29, 2016, 06:53 PM

64. only liars have to change their story. She claimed the SD confirmed her use

 

of the server was within the rules. Not she thought they confirmed it. Not she thought it was within the rules. It WAS confirmed to be within the rules.
The IG report refutes the claim that was made so she's changed her story to "I thought it was within the rules"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #64)

Sun May 29, 2016, 07:01 PM

65. Source?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LAS14 (Reply #65)

Sun May 29, 2016, 07:07 PM

66. For what? HRC's change of her story?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #66)

Sun May 29, 2016, 07:14 PM

67. For Hillary "claiming SD confirmed."

She never did, as far as I know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LAS14 (Reply #67)

Mon May 30, 2016, 10:00 AM

74. More than one time

 

CLINTON: "What I did was allowed. It was allowed by the State Department. The State Department has confirmed that." - AP interview, September 2015

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #74)

Mon May 30, 2016, 10:13 AM

75. Thanks for the citation.

I've been studying this whole thing for a couple of days now and one thing is clear. The State Department system was incredibly messed up. I don't think Hillary is a liar, for sure. But I do think she gets caught by having to explain changing circumstances in sound bytes. In this case I expect early on someone had, indeed, told her it was "OK," since personal e-mails were definitely OK and private servers hadn't been addressed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LAS14 (Reply #75)

Mon May 30, 2016, 10:19 AM

76. The state of the SD system is irrelevant

 

to what she did

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #76)

Mon May 30, 2016, 10:38 AM

82. It's very relevant to what she might...

... and might not have been told by individuals at the time she answered the question. Easy to understand for those of us who live in a real world rather than a bubble.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LAS14 (Reply #82)

Mon May 30, 2016, 10:58 AM

85. She never asked.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to LAS14 (Reply #83)

Mon May 30, 2016, 10:59 AM

86. Newsweek materially misstates much of the IG report

 

and ignores most of what it says

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Reply #86)

Mon May 30, 2016, 11:28 AM

89. Can you cite some mis-statements?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Sun May 29, 2016, 02:00 PM

63. And when a few people raised concern about her server they were told to never mention it again

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 12:17 AM

72. K & R

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 10:20 AM

77. Just slow walking.

 

It's a time honored tradition among politicians. We (the unwashed masses) can't handle the whole truth, all at once.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 10:38 AM

81. "It was allowed."

I took your wallet while you were sleeping. Nobody told me not to. It was allowed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Press Virginia (Original post)

Mon May 30, 2016, 12:52 PM

92. She also "thought" wiping her server would permanently erase the email trail.

 

We all know how that turned out.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread