Albright, Rice, and Powell should get it too.

(05-25-2016 02:00 PM)fsquid Wrote:  Albright, Rice, and Powell should get it too.

Why should they?

This is a serious question. I keep reading that they did the same things as Hillary did, but when I see specifics discussed, not exactly. They did some of the same things, but not all, and I've seen no indication that they did the things that are problematic. They had private email accounts. That's no a problem. The problems are failing to turn over copies of all emails upon leaving (small problem) and storing or transmitting classified information using uncovered servers and circuits (big problem). I haven't seen any indications that Colin or Condi did either of those. Have you? Link?

Speaking of Hillary, this is from Veterans for Bernie Sanders page.
[/quote]
"Quite frankly, Democrats lose by acting like Republicans. By acting like hypocrites. By continuing to take millions of dollars from dangerous lobbies even though that fundraising strategy has proven itself fatally compromised. By allowing its candidates to benefit from voters suppression and gerrymandering. By succumbing to rationalizations and cognitive dissonance in the face of legitimate specific grievances. And most dangerously, they lose by refusing to admit our own shortcomings and legislative failures or costly capitulations.
And now we are at a crossroads; a defining moment in American politics, not just for Democrats, but for the entire country. Do we fall through the now-gaping cracks in our broken democracy which have gradually been exposed over the past 40 years – the corporatism, hawkishness, and greed that has coalesced into a shrunken middle class, monumentally disastrous foreign policy decisions in the name of the empire, and the least democratic election(s) of our lifetime? Or do we resolve to change? Do we resolve to stand united against the forces that are seeking to divide us into smaller and more easily-conquered factions? Do we, as citizens of a country and not members of any political party, finally put our collective footdown and say enough is enough?
If the the answer to these questions for voters is Hillary Clinton, then the answer to these questions is a resounding no."[quote]

(05-25-2016 02:59 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-25-2016 02:00 PM)fsquid Wrote:  Albright, Rice, and Powell should get it too.

Why should they?

This is a serious question. I keep reading that they did the same things as Hillary did, but when I see specifics discussed, not exactly. They did some of the same things, but not all, and I've seen no indication that they did the things that are problematic. They had private email accounts. That's no a problem. The problems are failing to turn over copies of all emails upon leaving (small problem) and storing or transmitting classified information using uncovered servers and circuits (big problem). I haven't seen any indications that Colin or Condi did either of those. Have you? Link?

I have an issue with the private email account simply for the sake of preserving the records of an unelected cabinet member. I agree that Hilary's use of a private server was more egregious, but think all of them should be held to using state run emails, servers and VPNs.

(05-25-2016 01:09 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  This is probably the smallest thing she has ever done.

Yep. But they got Capone on tax evasion.

(05-25-2016 03:51 PM)fsquid Wrote:  

(05-25-2016 02:59 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(05-25-2016 02:00 PM)fsquid Wrote:  Albright, Rice, and Powell should get it too.

Why should they?

This is a serious question. I keep reading that they did the same things as Hillary did, but when I see specifics discussed, not exactly. They did some of the same things, but not all, and I've seen no indication that they did the things that are problematic. They had private email accounts. That's no a problem. The problems are failing to turn over copies of all emails upon leaving (small problem) and storing or transmitting classified information using uncovered servers and circuits (big problem). I haven't seen any indications that Colin or Condi did either of those. Have you? Link?

I have an issue with the private email account simply for the sake of preserving the records of an unelected cabinet member. I agree that Hilary's use of a private server was more egregious, but think all of them should be held to using state run emails, servers and VPNs.

We'd probably (most) all agree they should be or should have been, but the rules then were more in flux, a bit more murky back then. E-mail, to some extent, was still relatively "new" to Governmental work. Most correspondence was still done the "old way", from my understanding.
Bubba's sent supposedly 2 emails. Ever. I think it was W who made the decision to never use email for official purposes (it may have been Cheney or someone else).

This person made a conscious, intentional decision to use emails, prolifically, and to purposefully use exclusively a private server, a rather more deceptive "handle" so as to avoid detection, and then to deliberately and sloppily try to delete tens of thousands of those emails that are/were not only Federal Governmental property, but were also then exposed to some low level political hack operative that had NO clearance and NO business being anywhere around classified/top secret materials. Then the server (safe cause it was guarded in the house by the Secret Service ) was hacked by some two-bit guy over in bumfukistan or wherever.

Those two have now both either taken the 5th or copped a plea deal.

This isn't apples and oranges, this is apples and a dumpster fire.

Hillary's a criminal. Bernie's a lowlife scum sucking commie whore.

Better the criminal gets the nomination.

So this means she flunked that security review she's been squawking about?

(05-25-2016 12:19 PM)Smaug Wrote:  Someone calling the IG a partisan hack in 3...2...

You asked for it, and you got it.

Quote:Just a few hours later, Brian Fallon appeared on CNN's "The Situation Room" and called into question the timing of the State Department investigation into Clinton's use of a private email server. Fallon referred to the "appropriateness" of the investigation, parallel to the Justice Department's investigation into the same issue, as "an open question" even if both Fallon and Hillary were aware of the two investigations for over a year.

In other words, another conspiracy theory... the same kind of conspiracy theory that CNN want postal on Donald Trump for just 24 hours earlier when he dared to hint that something was "fishy" about the Vince Foster death. Oddly, there were no comparable accusations this time.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-05-25...inton-bias

Can't wait for Tom to call her out for her conspiracy theories.

Yeah, where is Tom?

The most striking thing that has become obvious as a result of these events is that the general public has no concept of the rules and procedures in place to protect classified material. I suppose that should not come as a shock, there's no reason for untrained persons to understand, but I have to say that the arguments I've heard advanced in Hillary's behalf are quite frankly amazing in their lack of understanding of the process.

(05-26-2016 04:51 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The most striking thing that has become obvious as a result of these events is that the general public has no concept of the rules and procedures in place to protect classified material. I suppose that should not come as a shock, there's no reason for untrained persons to understand, but I have to say that the arguments I've heard advanced in Hillary's behalf are quite frankly amazing in their lack of understanding of the process.

for example?

(05-26-2016 08:12 AM)fsquid Wrote:  

(05-26-2016 04:51 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  The most striking thing that has become obvious as a result of these events is that the general public has no concept of the rules and procedures in place to protect classified material. I suppose that should not come as a shock, there's no reason for untrained persons to understand, but I have to say that the arguments I've heard advanced in Hillary's behalf are quite frankly amazing in their lack of understanding of the process.

for example?

Here are a few comments that show multiple failures to understand how the system works:

Colin Powell and Conde Rice used personal email accounts, so Hillary just did what they did.
She didn't intentionally mishandle any information.
She didn't intentionally give information to enemies or to anyone not entitled to receive it.
There is no evidence that any information was actually leaked to any enemy.
The information didn't have the security clearance markings on it.
The information did not become classified until some time after she handled it.

Even though intent isn't necessary to convict, they now have intent.

(05-25-2016 12:21 PM)Ole Blue Wrote:  

(05-25-2016 11:10 AM)usmbacker Wrote:  This is a BIG event. This disputes the heart of Pantsuits defense that she obeyed all State Department regulations. She said this was just a security review by the FBI. Well, the FBI director says they do investigations, not reviews. This was the review and she failed it miserably. Also damning is the fact that it sates that she failed to cooperate in this process. This woman wants to be President. Unreal.

Her lack of cooperation indicates to me (from a legal perspective) that she knows she broke federal law and is trying to minimize the damage. If you're sure you're innocent it is ALWAYS better to cooperate in these massively in depth investigations to maintain your innocence. The fact that she refused the State inquiries is very very damning.

Well, She Is A Lawyer. At Her age and with all of Her"So Called" Experience to be the most qualified to be POTUS, She should have known better. No Excuse can be used for Her knowingly breaking the Law.