New York Times: Hillary Clinton illegally used private email for all State Dept. business

Bush found the yellow cake and mushroom clouds in the kitchen.

 

if you can't a friend in Washington, i won't trust a shared mail server either.

 

Looks like the FBI is able to recover at least some of the "personal" email's Clinton had erased from her server.

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/a...-personal-e-mails-from-hillary-clinton-server

I bet they're all just personal though.

 

Does anyone really think Hillary wouldn't be willing to do something like this, regardless of whether she did it?

 

Don't know. We should ask Condi and Colin what they think.

 

As usual you are being disingenuous. The first sentence of the article:

"The FBI has recovered personal and work-related e-mails from the private computer server used by Hillary Clinton during her time as secretary of state, according to a person familiar with the investigation."

 

I'm curious: is there anything illegal about her use of a private email account?

 

About having? no. About storing top secret data? of course

 

She can have top secret data. She just can't knowingly share it.

Good luck proving she did.

 

If you wanted to prosecute her or something. But to decide to vote for someone else for President? Proof doesn't matter. Neither do niceties about intent or knowledge.

 

it is illegal to transfer classified information to an unsecured medium such as her private servers. Of course, if she was competent enough to hold high office such as Secretary of State, she'd already know that.

 

Obviously this is politically driven. You can make someone look bad in this situation and put them on the defensive even if they didn't break any law.

Clinton made a casual decision about her email for convenience but it was a poor one. She didn't understand privacy laws. Then when people started to use it to make her look like she was trying to hide something, she got on the defensive.

And of course once you turn over the emails you can always go through and dig up any kind of dirt to use politically.

I bet no wrong-doing is ever actually found but the damage may derail her campaign which was the intent.

 

Pointing out gross incompetence when it comes to national security and top secret intelligence can have the effect of "making someone look bad" especially when that person is vying to hold high office yet again.

I'm sure she'll be MUCH more competent this time around, right?

 

I don't measure the competency of an elected official based on their email set-up. Otherwise we should get a compliance officer to run for president.

I am more concerned about her lack of vision and direction than mistakes she made with her email. But I guess you are more interested in this sort of stuff.

 

In many ways this whole email thing seems to be a lot to do about nothing. I understand that it was unwise for her to have her own email server that may not have been as secure as it should have been. But it doesn't seem to be that big of a problem.

BUT THEN. The Gov't employee she says she hired to set set up the email server, said he will refuse to answer questions about his role in this controversy if called before congress. THIS BOTHERS ME. I know that Hillary has said she would like him to testify. But, I don't believe for one second he wouldn't testify if she wanted him to.

Any time someone chooses to invoke their fifth amendment right against self incrimination, I start wondering what the hell is going on here.

So now I'm wondering. What are they trying to hide?

 

Well, yeah, of course it's political. She wants to be president. It's our job to vet her as a candidate. If there are laws broken, that's not a job for me to do anything with -- some prosecutor needs to handle that.

I rather doubt it was a casual decision for her or whatever genius predecessor or hers started this stuff. I think the intent is undeniably to skirt processes we have in place for eventual government transparency. The effect of the work-around is too obvious to me for me to conclude that it wasn't obvious to them. I don't buy a convenience argument. They might recover everything and discover nothing at all crooked in any of her emails. It really still wouldn't matter to me. I'm already pissed she tried to hide things in the first place. Other voters can probably be placated (though it seems to me like she does a poor job of controlling the damage), but in what is important to me as a voter, she has already admitted to wrongdoing by acknowledging she had a private server.

 

Storing top secret information on a private server is a very big deal. This is why when anyone else does it they go to jail. It puts at risk our national security. We were also just the victims of the biggest hack in US government data in history

Hillary has also now committed perjury it looks like (just like Bill)

 

The whole "Anyone else does it and they got jail" argument seems silly in this case. There are very few anyone elses who would be getting top secret information.

I don't think we even know if she put classified information on that server.

 

It is a big deal, and it should be prompting a discussion of why people shouldn't ignore IT policies and best practices, especially when state secrets are involved. She also knows it's a big deal, and that old familiar weaselly maneuvering to be dismissive reminds me why I always hated the Clintons and still should.