Who is Yuri? Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 As I understand it, it's supposed to be illegal to use a personal server for State Department emails, so just having and using a separate server, home computer, etc is a violation of the law. All official correspondence is supposed to be handled strictly through official means, and to do otherwise is a criminal act. She shouldn't have anything to turn over - it should all have been left behind at her office. There shouldn't be anything at her home for her to turn over. And, even though it was her own phone, I thought that, because it was the gov't server mail, all that was copied to the gov't server. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 Justice dept under Obama is not going to prosecute her so a strict legal sense it's not an issue. It will be deemed a technicality at most. The real issue rests with voters and "court" of public opinion I'm not so naive as to think she'll actually be prosecuted, and even if she was, it would just be a slap on the wrist. The principle of it galls me to no end, but there it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gumby Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 (edited) If she was Thanks. I still can't really pass judgement yet. Maybe it took her a while to turn things over? Maybe she didn't take it seriously enough? I'm still not sure what the specific accusations are. And, even though it was her own phone, I thought that, because it was the gov't server mail, all that was copied to the gov't server. Once she uses that phone or the server to conduct government business the phone and server and all records on it, both official and personal, belong to the US Government. It no longer belongs to her it belongs to us. It seems you are having a hard time understanding what the accusations are. There are many but I leave you with one to contemplate. 18 U.S. Code § 1519 - Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in Federal investigations and bankruptcy Destruction of any record in contemplation of an investigation is obstruction of justice. (Interesting side note, Hillary voted for the change in this statute that says in contemplation to any investigation.) Now when these records were destroyed in wasn't even in contemplation as there were 8 house investigations going on. She announced a few months back she destroyed records claiming there was personal content within. The minute she did that all her records should of been subpoenaed. She was given a political pass on that. I don't think the FBI will be so lenient going forward. For violation of this statute alone she could be looking at up to 20 years behind bars. Whether it actually gets to that remains to be seen but she is in need of a criminal defense lawyer much more than a campaign manager. Edited August 19, 2015 by gumby Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 I'm not a big Hillary fan, but in her position, I wouldn't know what was meant by "wiping the server," either. Doesn't that mean deleting everything? Or in this instance, does it mean, cleaning up the mess? Is this an argument about the e-mails being vulnerable to cyberhackers? I thought that the government had been hacked, but I've heard nothing about Gmail. I'd like it if the problem could be identified first. I can't really analyse this information. First off, if she doesn't know the term "wiping the server" actually means, then implies two things. A, that she is so out of out of touch with technical terms that it's worthy of laugh lines throughout the country and more importantly, B, that she is so insulated and out of touch with reality, the discussion of her server being wiped has been mentioned ad nauseum throughout the press over the past few days and the fact that no one would even mention to her of this just tells you how woefully inept her overall operation is functioning. More realistically, she knew what they were talking about and she was doing what the Clinton's do best, which is obfuscate, blame, deflect and deceive. And she tried throwing in another lame joke to escape it. In regards to the State Department governmental emails being hacked, yes but it's not her call to choose to have a private email server that isn't even authorized by the government as an approved server. If the government emails get hacked, that's not on her but on the government, so to say that since the government emails get hacked so it doesn't matter what server she uses doesn't absolve her for the responsibility to follow protocol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keukasmallies Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 Hill'ry is merely an old woman who can't control her temper when questioned. She is so used to privilege and a sense of her own worth and entitlement that the woman can't function w/o her minions spreading rose petals before her feet. Long before November, 2016, the lightbulb will go on for the majority of voters. Those who support her might take a moment to write down things that she has accomplished; not promised, not positions held, not ideas she has supported, but actual things she has accomplished. Please PM that list to me ASAP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 Justice dept under Obama is not going to prosecute her so a strict legal sense it's not an issue. It will be deemed a technicality at most. The real issue rests with voters and "court" of public opinion Maybe, maybe not. FBI is involved now, and Comey is a career government guy that has a reputation of not being partisan. If you were to tell me that it was only a matter for the Attorney General to review, I'd agree with you. But this matter has gone far beyond that, you have the AG, State Department, various courts, congressional investigations and the FBI investigating into this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 Hillary "only" leads 49-25? Ok http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_democratic_presidential_nomination-3824.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truth on hold Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 (edited) How cool would it be if Hill blew another lead ? In football terms it would be like giants super bowl sweep of pats in Super Bowl, including ruining their perfect season Edited August 19, 2015 by JTSP Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 How cool would it be if Hill blew another lead ? In football terms it would be like giants super bowl sweep of pats in Super Bowl, including ruining their perfect season Frankly I compare her to another football team that seems to often times have a good lead, only to squander it in the end...usually in prime time events. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 Federal Judge Moves Up Hearing for Hillary Email Case by Debra Heine A Washington, D.C., federal judge, perhaps tired of getting the runaround from the Obama State Department, has moved up a hearing with the State Department, originally scheduled for September, to this Thursday, August 20th. This is the latest development in a Judicial Watch Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit that seeks records about the controversial employment status of Huma Abedin, the former deputy chief of staff to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Last week, Washington, D.C., federal judge Emmet G. Sullivan ordered the State Department to explain in writing what it was doing to work with the FBI and the Department of Justice More at : Original Article Law firm representing Hillary has ties to State Dept. Washington Examiner, by Sarah Westwood Original Article Press Conference Disaster: Hillary Refuses To Say If She Knew Her Server Was Wiped (Video) by Debra Heine Following her town hall event in Las Vegas on Tuesday, Hillary Clinton was challenged by skeptical reporters to explain her email arrangement, and once again she insisted that everything she did while secretary of State was “legally permitted.” Clinton also refused to say if she knew that her email server, which was turned over to the FBI last week, had been wiped clean of data. Fox New’s Ed Henry asked Clinton if she plans on taking responsibility for her email scandal rather than making jokes about Snapchat and blaming Republicans. “Isn’t leadership about taking responsibility?” he asked. Clinton, sounding defensive, answered, “Look, I take responsibility. Look, I just told Jeff, in retrospect, this didn’t turn out to be convenient at all and I regret that this has become such a cause celebre. Original Article Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 So all this means she gave the stand down order to let our embassy staff get killed? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 So all this means she gave the stand down order to let our embassy staff get killed? No, what it means is that she is one shady chick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 Hillary "only" leads 49-25? Ok http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_democratic_presidential_nomination-3824.html Frankly I hope she gets the nomination. She'll be the easiest target for the GOP. Soooo much material to work with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 (edited) Why Democrats Can’t Confront What Hillary Has Done The Democratic Party is about to have a breakdown. For at least the past four years, if not longer, the average Democrat, when asked about the nominee-in-waiting, will respond, “Hillary Clinton is the kindest, bravest, warmest, most wonderful human being I’ve ever known in my life.” Oh, sure, they may not be able to think of any accomplishments, and they may gripe about her ties to Wall Street. They may openly acknowledge that she lied about her e-mail server. Her team may openly gloat that no one cares whether she followed the rules or the laws about government archiving. But most of that they hand-wave away. She’s just doing it because she has such ruthless enemies. Everybody does it, she’s judged by an unfair, harsher standard than everyone else. The problem is that there isn’t really a good reason to keep lots of classified information on a private server. We’re talking about information from the National Security Agency, Defense Intelligence Agency, National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (spy satellite images), the Office of the Director of National Intelligence and the Central Intelligence Agency. {snip} The problem for Democrats is that their worldview rests upon the belief that their leaders being the smart ones. They’re the ones who are wrapped up in “smart power.” They’re the ones sophisticated enough to “empathize with our enemies.” It’s those knuckle-dragging Republicans, those neocon warmongers, those paranoid xenophobes, those backwards hicks who just don’t understand how the world works. All it takes to get Russia to behave better is a reset button. The fall of Muammar Qaddafi in Libya deserves a “victory lap.” Syria’s Bashir Assad is a “reformer” and “the road to Damascus is the road to peace.” If Democrats acknowledge Hillary made a stupid and consequential decision, everything else built upon that perception of intellectual and judgmental superiority crumbles. Yes, it erodes the case for her to be commander-in-chief. But what’s more, it forces Democrats to look at what their foreign policy philosophy has really generated. Has the outstretched hand really thawed relations with hostile states? Has the concessions made to hostile states changed their behavior, rhetoric, or policies? Are international institutions really responsive to horrific mass violence? Is the world safer? Are human rights more respected? Are extremist groups waning or thriving and expanding? Coming to terms with all of that is just too hard. So many Democrats will choose to believe that the Federal Bureau of Investigation is involved in a partisan witch hunt. Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/corner Edited August 19, 2015 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 (edited) So many Democrats will choose to believe that the Federal Bureau of Investigation is involved in a partisan witch hunt. An FBI run by a Democratic appointee witch hunting a member of their own party? I doubt it. That would take intellectual dishonesty to a whole new level. Edited August 19, 2015 by joesixpack Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 An FBI run by a Democratic appointee witch hunting a member of their own party? I doubt it. That would take intellectual dishonesty to a whole new level. The alternative (as the article points out) is to admit that Hillary was not just dishonest (they can live with that) but stupid. That they cannot do. . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Who is Yuri? Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 The alternative (as the article points out) is to admit that Hillary was not just dishonest (they can live with that) but stupid. That they cannot do. . I think, in hindsight, she made a mistake. I don't have a problem with other's calling it "stupid." Unfortunately, for her, admitting to the mistake would bust her campaign faster than the drip, drip. I don't think she could recover by just admitting the mistake, using a personal server. This doesn't bode well for her at all. I'm not an entrenched Dem. I don't read HuffPost, but I think this benefits Bernie Sanders most of all. For every voter Hillary loses, Bernie gains a voter, so long as Joe Biden can stay out of the race. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted August 19, 2015 Author Share Posted August 19, 2015 Dem's very strong and deep back bench: Bernie Sanders socalist democrat Princess Phouxahontas disingenuous lying opportunist Martin O'Malley mayor of Baltimore and governor of Maryland that instituted the polices responsible for the police department abuses that caused rioting this year Andrew Cuomo head of HUD for Clinton and pushed the banks to make unsafe loans to unqualified individuals thus stoking the flames inflating the housing bubble Joe Biden a peach of a guy, he's a four letter word - mensch Chuck Schumer won his seat by getting down in the gutter with Al D'amato which is the exact same game plan that Donald Trump is currently using to bully his opposition Al Gore what can we say about our Alpha male that hasn't been said already about a billion times? I hope he's found his deep inner second chakra and let it loose into some Kleenex. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted August 19, 2015 Share Posted August 19, 2015 (edited) I'm not an entrenched Dem. I don't read HuffPost, but I think this benefits Bernie Sanders most of all. For every voter Hillary loses, Bernie gains a voter, so long as Joe Biden can stay out of the race. I'd say Bernie gets about .75 votes in the general for each that Hillary loses. Many women will vote for Hillary simply because she's a women. If they decide she's not honest enough, then some of them won't vote for the old fart Bernie. Many might vote for Trump now that he's known to be great in bed. Edited August 19, 2015 by keepthefaith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts