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

This is all much easier if you start with "Hillary is a liar" and then adapt all the rest of your facts and assumptions to fit that. Then you can easily come to the conclusion that Hillary is, in fact, a liar here.

 

You just posed rumors.

In the business world (of course it's different from the government more secure world), iOS and Android devices are now pretty standard because... employee just use them and so they find way to secure them. It got so bad there is a term for it -- BYOD (Bring Your Own Device).

Plus, Blackberry is dying a slow death. The government, if it hasn't already by now, will also approve selected iOS and Android device.

 

And yet it violates security protocol (aka the law)

from today alone

Lie #2 from today

Btw she spoke for like 5 minutes today and managed these lies. Her whole marriage is a lie.

Can you explain why it took her over a week to explain her private server? If the answer was so simple as 'convenience' then what took so long?

 

Zero classified materials may be sent or discussed via personal email. None. You would have to be brain dead to believe that she went four years without discussing and/or sending any classified materials. In her position nearly everything is classified at one level or another.

 

Rumors? Lol, do you know who Judicial Watch is? And much of the federal government does still use Blackberries. Her department did not approve iOS devices, yet she repeatedly sought a waiver, which was never granted.

Do you think it unlikely that, using her own personal email that she would not use her preferred devices as well? Really?

There is no way to spin this. She screwed herself with her blatant lies today. Her "I don;t want to use multiple devices" was disproven by her own comments caught on video two weeks ago.

 

You didn't answer the question. I think you don't know, just like me.

 

I don't know. I can guess. And yea, it's rumors. You are saying this is fact?

 

What law did she break? I thought it was the case that no law was broken.

 

Vince Foster.

Don't screw with the Clintons, they are House of Cards personified. Besides, we don't need that. She admitted two weeks ago on camera to using multiple devices - she caught herself in the lie. The fact that you choose not to believe it just tells me that you prefer willful ignorance over truth.

News flash: Just because you don't want to hear it won't make it go away.

 

I have multiple devices and I use multiple devices. I have multiple phones as well. But I only use one as primary devices. The other are all secondary.

Today, it's rare that anybody just have ONE electronic consuming device, especially folks with money.

 

The Federal Records Act. She broke the **** out of that law. It also violates the Freedom of Information Act.

What is your point?

 

Well, yes, actually, I did answer the question. Government employees are NOT allowed to send or discuss ANY classified material over non-government email. That is the answer to the question. ZERO classified material. And you have to be brain dead to believe that the Secretary of State never, over the course of four years and tens of thousands of emails, sent or discussed any sensitive material.

How does this not answer your question? It precisely answers it.

 

that didn't said she broke that law

 

Have you lied about using multiple devices on national TV during a press conference? If not then you and Hillary don't have as much in common as you think.

 

Yes it does. Quite clearly too.

SO does the NYT

 

My question was related to what confidential info can be electronically sent (very different from email or personal email.)

Your answer is about non-government email, which is I think also wrong.

 

Willful ignorance. It's amazing. You really have to try, put effort into it, to be in denial about this one, I think. Amazing. But not surprising, and why I tend to avoid trying to have civil discussions with the libtards here. It's not possible to have an intellectually hon est discussion with them.

 

Ok, we have different interpretation of the posted words.

 

how are you interpreting this?

 

Come on treeman, not the libtards again. You might think it's willful ignorance, but what I see is you and some other only seeing what you want to see.

I leave the possibility that Clinton did break law, did intentionally hide things, all that bad stuffs. But I see none of it yet. I won't jump to that conclusion without more concrete info.