2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumIf I was Hillary here's what I'd say:
GAWD I'm going to both laugh and cry at the "the system is rigged" bullshit and the "she's crooked" lies sliding over into "she's irresponsible" and "she's got bad judgment" shots-in-the-dark.
Here's my thought on what she should say:
"Out of 30,000 emails we made 150 mistakes (maybe in percentages, which are minuscule) during a time when use of personal devices was a far more new and untested manner of communication. The world has since learned and so have I. You can bet that this past issue has resulted in my security being among the most carefully maintained of anyone on the planet's and though I'm deeply sorry for having made those few mistakes I believe the outcome has made me even more aware of how important it is to have a team around me that is at the forefront of technology and security. Together we move forward."
Other ideas?
Hekate
(90,644 posts)Deep down inside she might be thinking: "....and you can also kiss my ass." But she would never say it.
nolabear
(41,959 posts)I have been saying for a while that I thought the historical part has been removed from the discussion.
What we did 8 years ago and what technology could do 8 years is totally different than what we do today in terms of devices, wireless access, encryption, remote working etc.
I know it is what I am thinking, lol~ and I would say it.
PearliePoo2
(7,768 posts)Then she can add at the end, " Oh and Donald, you're making an ass of yourself...delete your account. "
BlueMTexpat
(15,366 posts)But I am afraid that there is literally NOTHING that Hillary can do or say that will satisfy the haters. That is simply NOT possible. They are deranged. I've seen the same bunch since 1992 and, if anything, they've gotten worse. They're like the Hounds of Hell without a Master.
F***'em all is what I say.
nolabear
(41,959 posts)She's going to have to deal with this in debates and interviews for months. Might as well set a course now.
BlueMTexpat
(15,366 posts)than mine and I wouldn't be surprised if Hillary did something like it!
But that is one of a thousand - nay, a million - reasons why Hillary will be President in November while I would never have made it!
MariaThinks
(2,495 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Not with the FBI confirming actual marked classified material was discussed in that system.
No, I would just go with 'All our systems are now fully compliant with the Government in the Sunshine Act for records keeping and public disclosure, as well as State Department, DIA, FBI, etc, classified material handling rules.'.
The private sector equivalent would be HIPAA and or Sarbanes-Oxley compliance.
Because that's all that really went wrong here. Standards were not adhered to. Records were not kept. Classified material was handled in a location it should not have been. No criminal malfeasance, so it's just important to stress that lessons were learned. The 'only 150' angle is a bad idea.
nolabear
(41,959 posts)Yes, classified but were they marked that way? It might be a fine point but it's an important one. He said he wanted to see the transcript, which I expect will be fine-toothed in the coming days.
Your point is well taken though. The only argument I see is "Well how do we trust you now if we couldn't before?"
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)The sunshine act is new. I would stick to the 'we learned, we meet current standards', etc.
Granted, there isn't a current standard for her to comply with at the moment, not being in the S.D. anymore.
The statement said they were classified, which I don't think matters if they were 'marked' or not. Not for the purposes of the law. But intent does matter. No criminal intent, so done deal there. No charges.
joshcryer
(62,269 posts)CrowCityDem
(2,348 posts)SummerSnow
(12,608 posts)BobbyDrake
(2,542 posts)"To quote the modern poet T-Pain: 'All I do is win, win, win, no matter what!'"
eastwestdem
(1,220 posts)People totally seem to overlook this fact. Think back to what you were using in 2009. I remember that many of the groups I belong to still had printed out member lists with contact information back then, and only about half of the people had email addresses. I bet if a similar, thorough investigation of other government departments was done from that era, that similar problems would be discovered.