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

teejster, is Michelle Obama's "whitey" tape going to be released soon?

 

I largely agree with this and why even as an admitted Clinton supporter I think the investigation (not security inquiry) is the right thing to do. We've seen several investigations and Comey himself has said we've seen no sign of wrongdoing.

I don't know though if we can determine if her private server was safer but I think we can say as far as safety it probably was more unsafe than the official servers.

I think this was poor judgement and should be weighed with everything else including who she is running against.

 

I've heard this a lot of but have yet to see any solid proof. Can you provide sources?

 

It doesn't matter if it was more unsafe than the classified servers or not, it's illegal for the classified materiel to be stored or transmitted through that or any private system.

Saying that there is no sign of wrongdoing is completely false. The one email where she instructed someone to remove classification markings from a document and send it via unclassified means is in itself illegal. Not against policy, not just poor judgement, it's outright illegal so if you could stop parroting that nonsense, it would be great.

There were over 600 requests for additional security that were ignored by the Secretary of State's office. Hillary testified that none of those ever reached her desk which is pretty clearly a CYA stance. It's fact that the requests were made, it's fact that she got numerous emails from a personal friend expressing concerns over lack of adequate security forces in Libya.

 

No offense I will take the opinion of experts in the field including those investigating than a self proclaimed "the great."

Can you provide some source material?

 

LOL, I'm fine with you being wrong. You don't have to take my word for it if you don't want to. Look it up if you want to, it's much better than burring your head in the sand or eating up any party line BS you are fed.

 

[Premium Post]
One can not dispute that Hillary's selfish use of her own private email server was done to evade Freedom of Information Act requests. She openly attempts to avoid transparency by doing this, trading off for personal gain. Selfish motivations outweigh the interests of our country in her mind and judging by her actions. It is a certainty that people have her emails right now. Guccifer, a lone wolf, low level hacker from Eastern Europe, was able to get them. What do you think the Russian and Chinese intelligence agencies have their hands on?

Think about the potential bombshell emails that could emerge in October. Emails degrading Obama. Emails disagreeing with existing policy. Emails contradicting her public positions on issues. Emails that reveal her very serious personal health problems. Emails that reveal that she last had sexual relations with her husband over 30 years ago. If I were a Democratic primary voter, the fear of the unknown with Hillary is quite large. We may know soon.


GOOD DAY

 

What does being "dealt with" look like? Here's the situation right now -- she's not charged with any crime (much less convicted) and she's the nominee of the Democratic Party to run for the Presidency. She's within her rights to run and people have been voting for her. How do you even give someone else a shot? Who can tell her she can't run? Not the FBI, they need a conviction (and she could still run and maybe even win anyway). Not the President, he has no power here. Not the Democratic Party, she won on their rules. Not the electorate, they've already spoken.

Just imagine what the Chinese premier could do with that information!

(You have to use your imagination, because the reality is that this would be a useless little factoid.)

 

She deserves to be indicted. Her peers in her party and Democratic voters should deliver a clear message that she's not worthy of their support come November. If she stepped down, thereby relieving delegates of their pledge to support her and rallied behind Biden, I'd vote for him over Trump.

Hillary is an untrustworthy candidate

 

It's being edited as an add-on feature for the "Obama Cocaine Limo Ride" blu-ray.

 

Obama put whistle blowers in prison for similar offenses wrt to classified info. I am not saying Hillary should be put in prison, or what if anything should be her penalty, but it is not a good example to let Petreus off easily compared to the whistle blowers and most likely let Hillary off even more easily than Petreus. We need to hold cabinet members to the appearance of impropriety standard and not just is it out right criminally indictable as many of her more ardent supporters seem to find sufficient. That being said, folks like Bush, Cheney, quite a few of the bankers did worse yet were never indicted.

I would think that this sadly gives some indication of Hillary's attitude toward selective prosecution and her feeling of entitlement to have special rules/ laws apply to herself which is troubling in a president. It just adds to all the stuff like as basically the frontrunner for the presidency being paid $265 k per speech at Goldman or having the Clinton Foundation receive large donations from various governments and corporations that had business whether strictly as vendors or political involving the State Department.

 

I don't take your word for it and I've looked at the issue. The problem with your argument is that it is counting on future perfect knowledge of what is going to be classified. That Clinton had stuff that was later classified doesn't indicate wrong doing and so far that is what is being reported.

Your are free to believe your opinion is right but that doesn't make it true. I've noticed this is a pattern with you but to be fair you're not alone in this.

Anyway I'm still curious to see your source material regarding the request for security.

 

Except to be indicted malfeasance has to be shown. No malfeasance has been shown yet regarding Clinton. You can't just indict someone because they have the appearance of impropriety.

This has been debated variously in other threads so not going to rehash here. That said even accepting your argument none of that directly applies to the issue of the email server.

 

Multiple reports say the opposite. They didn't even have threat detection for a while so they were probably garbage. I know many here like Major want to fantasize that her closet server was better than the secure servers at the freaking state department but it's a laughable position.

 

So many experts here at CF. It's a wonder we even need to fund an FBI at all.

We could just disband it and pass the tax savings on, since that always strengthens the economy anyway.

 

Please don't give the tea partiers & "libertarians" any new ideas.

 

Not but really, Buck Turgidson, the internet lets people with time on their hands become instant experts. Just look how confident some people are here about knowing exactly the legal precedent, the details, and the contents and status of 10's of thousands of emails.... all because internet.

There should be societal savings. We can shut down the FBI at the same time we shut down the EPA and the Dept. of Education, also b/c... internet. Just Kahn Academy FTW, and then... more money for "working families" who like to vote for proto-fascists.

 

You don't understand how things work, and that's fine. It doesn't count on "future knowledge" the information was taken from classified documents and put into an email that didn't go through classification.....it was classified before hand. The actual emails themselves became classified once her attempt to delete her server failed and those emails were recovered and it was revealed to have classified information on them. So what they are doing is taking the fact that the emails themselves weren't classified till later and repeating that line over and over again so foolish people will get confused and think that the information inside the emails wasn't considered classified information till after the fact. This simply isn't the case.

For example, the email where she illegally tells a staffer to remove classification headings from a document and send it via unclassified means. The fax that came out the other end wouldn't be marked classified so if it was discovered, they'd have to apply classification after the fact.....it wouldn't change the fact that the information inside the document was always classified, but you could go around telling people that the document wasn't classified till later.

I know it's a bit confusing, but I hope that helps you understand what is going on.

 

You can guess at whatever you'd like. What we know for sure is that the state department servers were hacked and classified information compromised. I haven't seen the multiple reports that her servers were hacked. Would you mind linking that evidence please?