Hillary's emails

Headlines about her e-mail problem should read: "Hillary finds rake and decides to step on it"

Or it can read "It's campaign season! Let's invent controversy!!"

I feel pretty certain Hillary will use a .gov email address if she's elected president.


I just am still finding it hard to care about this. Until/unless someone actually finds the desperately sought "smoking gun" to prove something BAD happened while she used her personal BlackBerry, then it just doesn't seem to be a big deal. Obviously it didn't raise too many eyebrows in the FOUR YEARS that she was doing this. If it had, I feel certain the GOP would have been thrilled to alert the media then.

And again, you can only hide an email permanently if the recipient has also somehow deleted it permanently.

Lindsay Graham says he has never sent an E-Mail.
Does his staff send them on his behalf?
Is it like saying that he has never mailed a letter because his secretary handles the mail?
Or does he live in the 20th Century?

TarheelsInNj said:

I just can't find it in me to get worked up about this.

That's sort of my immediate reaction which is why I did not understand:

ice said:

I haven't been that anti-Hillary in the past... but seriously, how messed up is this? Will it hurt her eventual candidacy, or will the layers of slime she and Bill have developed just allow it to slide right off her?

If one did not know enough about Hillary Clinton before this to either hate her or not hate her how does this change anything?

This right here is the problem:

"Clinton's remarks at a crowded news conference outside the U.N. Security Council chambers overshadowed her message earlier in the day about gender equality. A throng of cameras and reporters, many waiting for hours to get their credentials, were there only to hear her comments about the e-mail controversy."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2015/03/10/hillary-clinton-emails-state-department/24668715/

http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/10/politics/hillary-clinton-email-scandal-press-conference/

"I opted for convenience to use my personal email account, which was allowed by the State Department, because I thought it would be easier to carry just one device for my work and for my personal emails instead of two," she said. "Looking back, it would have been better if I'd simply used a second email account and carried a second phone, but at the time, this didn't seem like an issue."

But,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kXjB-HAhmUY

i'm confused.

yahooyahoo said:

I didn't say that either. You are making assumptions.

This is what you said:

'Colin Powell used a personal email account as well and did not save any emails.'

Are you saying he did the same thing as Clinton or aren't you?

definitely a stupid way to go for Hillary Clinton. But the emails have to go somewhere and if they are government emails they go to government officials inboxes.

TRAITORS - thats a bit different. Not even traitorgate, its not a conspiracy its a reality. So go ahead GOPers have your next Hillary scandal-gasm that wont amount to a hill of beans while ignoring your parties real and real serious problems.

They'll keep digging until they find Hillary's email that says, "Re: Benghazi - LOL!"

I don't have a work email account on my iPhone because it's not secure enough. So when I'm remote, I conduct work-related correspondence through my personal email and texts. Should I be fired or should I be made to carry around a work-related secure iPhone, and also my own iPhone?

I carry both. It's not hard.

noo2wood said:

I don't have a work email account on my iPhone because it's not secure enough. So when I'm remote, I conduct work-related correspondence through my personal email and texts. Should I be fired or should I be made to carry around a work-related secure iPhone, and also my own iPhone?

You should be nominated as our next Secretary of State.

nohero said:

They'll keep digging until they find Hillary's email that says, "Re: Benghazi - LOL!"

The general public won't be interested until they find e-mails to her lover.

LOST said:

Lindsay Graham says he has never sent an E-Mail.
That's sort of my immediate reaction which is why I did not understand:

ice said:

I haven't been that anti-Hillary in the past... but seriously, how messed up is this? Will it hurt her eventual candidacy, or will the layers of slime she and Bill have developed just allow it to slide right off her?

If one did not know enough about Hillary Clinton before this to either hate her or not hate her how does this change anything?

It's an accumulation. Eventually the odor just gets strong enough that you can't ignore it any more.

ctrzaska said:

I carry both. It's not hard.

Not hard, but it is expensive.

But ice, you said you might consider voting for her.
If the odor has been that bad up to now why did you say that?
And if it's been so bad isn't this e-mail stuff a very minor addition?

TarheelsInNj said:

Or it can read "It's campaign season! Let's invent controversy!!"

I feel pretty certain Hillary will use a .gov email address if she's elected president.


I just am still finding it hard to care about this. Until/unless someone actually finds the desperately sought "smoking gun" to prove something BAD happened while she used her personal BlackBerry, then it just doesn't seem to be a big deal. Obviously it didn't raise too many eyebrows in the FOUR YEARS that she was doing this. If it had, I feel certain the GOP would have been thrilled to alert the media then.

And again, you can only hide an email permanently if the recipient has also somehow deleted it permanently.

A few points:

If she's elected president my bet is that she will never send and email.

Regarding the emails being archived by the receiver with the .gov address, well that doesn't help you if you're doing a FOIA search of her emails.

Smoking gun? In today's presser she brushed off concerns about security of the system - something like it's on property and monitored by the Secret Service so we know it hasn't been breached. Well I don't think she knows that it hasn't been breached.

Finally, and this is the biggest point I believe, is that if it's legal for the Sec of State to do it, It also should be legal for a governor (say Chris Christie or Scott Walker), his staff ( say Bridget Kelly or David Wildstein), a congressperson (say Michael Grimm or Anthony Weiner), a Senator (Robert Menendez), or any future corrupt politician of any party to do the same.

two devices are for the little people.

LOST said:

You should be nominated as our next Secretary of State.

I'd never make it past confirmation because of iPhonegate.

ctrzaska said:

I carry both. It's not hard.

Me too. But also it seems to me that Hillary has plenty of people around her to carry whatever she might need.

Don't know if the gummint does this with their email archives, but there is no reason whatsoever that a foia request can't search for all emails where Hillary was the sender
It's technically trivial.

i don't think she should have used a personal email, but this 'scandal' has about as much meat as Benghazi.

drummerboy said:

Don't know if the gummint does this with their email archives, but there is no reason whatsoever that a foia request can't search for all emails where Hillary was the sender
It's technically trivial.

You're assuming the recipients were using government email. An assumption I wouldn't make. Also, foreign recipient emails wouldn't be accessible using FOIA.

Yeah. Not sure what the crime or the damage is here. If transparency is the issue, then her personal emails can be searched, just like her government emails. Or does she have some special power, either technical or governmental, that allows her to conceal emails from a search? And what are we looking for in these emails? Do we think she sent an email through her personal, non-secure account to tell someone to, say, ignore the Embassy in Benghazi's requests for extra protection or something?

A picture is worth a 1000 words

BG9 said:

drummerboy said:

Don't know if the gummint does this with their email archives, but there is no reason whatsoever that a foia request can't search for all emails where Hillary was the sender
It's technically trivial.

You're assuming the recipients were using government email. An assumption I wouldn't make. Also, foreign recipient emails wouldn't be accessible using FOIA.

If the vast,vast majority of her emails were not to .gov addresses, then you have a real scandal.

Drebin said:

A picture is worth a 1000 words

except when it's from drudge.

Drudge? seriously? It's like 2015 dude.

Red_Barchetta said:

TarheelsInNj said:

Or it can read "It's campaign season! Let's invent controversy!!"

I feel pretty certain Hillary will use a .gov email address if she's elected president.


I just am still finding it hard to care about this. Until/unless someone actually finds the desperately sought "smoking gun" to prove something BAD happened while she used her personal BlackBerry, then it just doesn't seem to be a big deal. Obviously it didn't raise too many eyebrows in the FOUR YEARS that she was doing this. If it had, I feel certain the GOP would have been thrilled to alert the media then.

And again, you can only hide an email permanently if the recipient has also somehow deleted it permanently.

Regarding the emails being archived by the receiver with the .gov address, well that doesn't help you if you're doing a FOIA search of her emails.

Smoking gun? In today's presser she brushed off concerns about security of the system - something like it's on property and monitored by the Secret Service so we know it hasn't been breached. Well I don't think she knows that it hasn't been breached.

To the first point, yes, that's true about FOIA. My point is simply it doesn't stop the recipient from revealing an email to the world, if there is something to reveal.

She hasn't been Secretary of State for a while...if she was breached, the hackers are waiting quite a while to act on it.

Red_Barchetta said:

Finally, and this is the biggest point I believe, is that if it's legal for the Sec of State to do it, It also should be legal for a governor (say Chris Christie or Scott Walker), his staff ( say Bridget Kelly or David Wildstein), a congressperson (say Michael Grimm or Anthony Weiner), a Senator (Robert Menendez), or any future corrupt politician of any party to do the same.

Well, no. It's now illegal for the Sec of State (or any federal office holder) to do it (per the 2014 Records Management Act - or whatever it's called). And state politicians are subject to state laws that federal officials are not.

BG9 said:

drummerboy said:

Don't know if the gummint does this with their email archives, but there is no reason whatsoever that a foia request can't search for all emails where Hillary was the sender
It's technically trivial.

You're assuming the recipients were using government email. An assumption I wouldn't make. Also, foreign recipient emails wouldn't be accessible using FOIA.

Plus it assumes there is a single ".gov" email server or cluster than can be searched. There is not. Are people supposed to submit FOIA requests to every government department, agency and bureau in the hopes that they can cover all the possible recipients? If you don't know about an email, it's impossible to request it. On the other hand, if you were to request all the emails from secretary@state.gov, you could have gotten them all.

Drebin said:

A picture is worth a 1000 words

Like the picture of McConnell in another thread, it's easy to find a less than flattering photo in days or weeks worth of footage of a politician.

drummerboy said:

BG9 said:

drummerboy said:

Don't know if the gummint does this with their email archives, but there is no reason whatsoever that a foia request can't search for all emails where Hillary was the sender
It's technically trivial.

You're assuming the recipients were using government email. An assumption I wouldn't make. Also, foreign recipient emails wouldn't be accessible using FOIA.

If the vast,vast majority of her emails were not to .gov addresses, then you have a real scandal.

It's not the "vast majority" that are of concern.