patrick.net

turtledove says

in fact, criminal

It's clear that both Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice handled their email similarly while serving as Secretary of State, and that the Bush Administration frequently did government business on RNC or other private accounts, and also deleted between 5 million and 35+ million emails, possibly after a subpoena had been served.

With the exception of the latter above, little of this has been investigated to any level anywhere near Hillary's email server; in the case of Powell and Rice, not at all.

Should justice only apply when the suspect is a democrat running for office? That does not resemble anything I have ever read or heard about our legal system.

You clearly have exacting standards as to the handling of email by public officials. It is fair to say that you believe no one should be above the law. Whatever Powell and Rice did may have been legal at the time, or not. We should have an investigation to determine this, yes? Particularly because, at whatever time, sloppy handling of classified material is never legal.

Yet you only apply your energy to the details of Hillary's case, and take an attitude of "no grey areas; no exceptions - this is about national security, character, and public trust." Yet wouldn't those considerations apply regardless of party? Shouldn't criminal behavior be punished regardless of affiliation? But I have seen little or no analysis of Powell, Rice, or Bush's practices from you? Why is this?

YesYNot says

One for official stuff, and another for any messages she wanted to send huma of the record.

Shit! That's exactly what I've been saying. Had she just maintained a separation between personal and State email accounts/servers then she either wouldn't have had to delete personal emails.... OR, alternatively, the intention to unlawfully delete State property would be clear. Which makes me think that's exactly why she may have muddied the two. Obviously, that's just speculation. But I give her enough credit to know how to blur lines... And by mixing the accounts/servers, you have to admit, it gave her an out. "Oopsie Poopsie! I inadvertently bleached State email when all I meant to do was bleach the yoga ones."

Being lazy about stuff like that myself, I actually can understand the urge to simplify everything... I sometimes send personal email from my work account because that's the account I happen to be in and it's just easier than opening up a new browser, logging into another email account, and sending it from there. I will even admit that I've been caught unawares with a personal expense and only had the business checkbook on me, so I paid a personal expense or two out of my business account. I get that. But if I were being sued or audited by the IRS, I would just simply hand it over and admit I screwed up or deal with the embarrassment that the opposing counsel will read an email of me gossiping with my mother over work email. What's the big deal? I wouldn't go get myself some BleachBit.... Skirt a subpoena.... and risk portraying myself as having something sinister to hide. That is WORSE.

You have to ask, why a smart person like her would choose the path that LOOKS worse. She's a lawyer. She knows all about the significance of a subpoena. I just find it hard to believe that she couldn't anticipate that this could LOOK really bad. Which begs the question, why did she choose that particular path?

I cannot hop into her brain and know for sure, but I know if I were scrambling to destroy all traces of something, it would only be because I have something worth hiding. I wouldn't waste the appearance of deception (especially when running for President) unless what I was trying to hide was worth it. What doesn't fit is that she says she risked all this over supposed yoga and wedding emails. It doesn't make sense. Who obstructs justice over yoga and wedding emails? Who destroys State property over yoga and wedding emails? It's too ridiculous to contemplate.

Ironman says

Wow, I didn't know Rice and Powell were Nominees for President. I must have missed that part.

Hurr, durr: Then you should read it again.

The point is that potential criminal activity should be investigated, with no consideration as to whether the party is a nominee for president.

Ironman says

How many times did Rice and Powell LIE about their email setups??

They haven't been investigated yet.

Let's investigate them each several times, and see whether or not they lie or misremember, or claim to have forgotten details. Condi said the pre-9/11 briefing titled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike in US" was "historical in nature," so she should be fun to watch on the subject of her own off-the-books email practices.

You clearly believe this to be among the highest of crimes a government official can commit. Why aren't you calling for a multiple investigations of all who have maintained private accounts and servers for government activity? Isn't sunshine the best disinfectant?

turtledove says

She's a lawyer. She knows all about the significance of a subpoena.

COnsider Cheney's meetings, deleted emails, or Halliburton's role in Iraq ? Maybe you were deeply bothered by him back then ? Hillary's supposed corruption can't hold a candle to what at least seems to be serious conflicts of interest on Cheney's part. And there we are talking trillions of dollars spent on a questionable war and thousands of Americans killed, as well hundreds of thousands of Iraqis.

He had his own email scandal that never got off the ground.

http://harpers.org/blog/2008/01/the-emails-that-dick-cheney-deleted/

I'm not saying that two wrongs make a right. But Cheney's clear implied reasons for deleting his emails smells a lot worse than Hillary's. Hillary has an understood paranoia about people trying to find something they can nail her on.

I wonder why ?

marcus says

But Cheney's clear implied reasons for deleting his emails smells a lot worse than Hillary's

Yes, that wasn't good. Sigh.... Maybe you should just run... I could be your campaign manager. As long as you understand my aversion to un-audited spending, we're all good. I can be such a persnickety little bitch about those kinds of things. You should see the email I just sent our LabCorp representative. They made $2,600 in erroneous charges on our client billing (charges on patients outside of insurance) since April. This shit has to stop. We are a small boutique practice, if you will. If it's happening to us, God can only know how big it is happening in primary care where they probably order 100 tests to our 1.. How much are insurance companies spending reimbursing this crap? Do they have people looking through the thousands of lines of tests to find where LabCorp billed improperly? I doubt it. For example, we have an agreed to STAT fee of $15. I found 27 separate examples where they charged us $34. We do infectious disease panels. Then they charged us for individual tests that are already a part of those panels. I go apoplectic when I see this kind of crap. So we do an infectious disease panel for an agreed upon rate of $312. This covers all the FDA infectious disease concerns. Then they charge us an additional $200 for a Hep B test. That's already a part of the panel! Gee, I wonder why our premiums are so high? You know these insurance companies don't have the time or OCD that I have to go through it line by line. This is ONE example of many.

marcus says

Actually this might shock you, but editorials and articles that include opinions have a very very very long history.

She did say she studied journalism, so I doubt it would be much of a shock. I think she said that even regular articles nowadays are often little more than opinion pieces.

I would think you are old enough to remember when journalism was about reporting the news and not some form of entertainment.

I can't believe anyone would vote for soemone who claims she didn't know C is for classified. I mean, you wnat this nut for a president?? Sigh..

I can't believe anyone would vote for someone who claims he didn't know who David Duke is. I mean, you want this nut for president?? Sigh..

But there's more. He didn't know:

If Rubio was actually a citizen and could run for president.
Why he (Trump) supported the Iraq war.
Obama is an American
Samuel L. Jackson
Foreign policy
The appearance of the disabled reporter he mocked on national TV.
Christians ask for forgiveness.

lostand confused says

she didn't know C is for classified.

It's not: C stands for "confidential".

Trump claims not to know that the C on rental applications to Trump apartments stood for "colored."

Ironman says

Yep, please give us the list of all the government employees that set up private email servers in their basements

The basement location isn't the issue. It's the use of any server not behind a .gov firewall.

But how can we know that Powell, Rice didn't have a basement or other unapproved server if we don't investigate? And the deletion of north of 22
million emails by the Rove administration surely deserves 6-10 investigations by both congressional and criminal authorities, yes?

One would think that a staunch advocate of sound email practices as yourself would be eager to know what they knew, and when they knew it.

Ironman says

Is Rove the Presidential nominee right now

No one is above the law. Many wingnuts told me this during the Clinton years. Candidacy or lack thereof should have no bearing.

What was the nature of Powell's and Rice's email setups? All good Americans will demand broad and repeated investigation of these questions!

Ironman says

Is Rove the Presidential nominee right now and did he have a personal foundation he was soliciting donations for while under employment by the government?

Were HALF, HALF his meetings with non-government officials composed of his Foundation's donors when he held a major Cabinet Position?

Ironman says

All of the other names above maintained both a private and a government-issued email address. That alone doesn’t make her guilty. But it does make her unique

1 versus 2: a telling difference, highly significant.

We don't know enough about them without an investigation.

turtledove says

Shit! That's exactly what I've been saying. Had she just maintained a separation between personal and State email accounts/servers then she either wouldn't have had to delete personal emails.... OR, alternatively, the intention to unlawfully delete State property would be clear

I think it proves there was no mal-intent on the server. Deleting an email is of no real use, because the gov has the sender's copy at least. Plus, if there were two systems, then it would provide a clear of the record channel as long as both parties were on private emails. If i were working out a system to hide certain info, that is what I'd do. Plus, bleach bit is not some super secret tool of criminals. Using software like that on deleted drives is standard practice at universities. I'd imagine it is also standard practice at corporations and gov as well. It's funny how the Republicans mis-explain what bleach bit is to mislead a few voters.

Maybe Hillary thought that the C stood for Crooked, Corrupt, or Crippled?

thunderlips11 says

Ironman says

Is Rove the Presidential nominee right now and did he have a personal foundation he was soliciting donations for while under employment by the government?

Were HALF, HALF his meetings with non-government officials composed of his Foundation's donors when he held a major Cabinet Position?

Did he have cankles and wear pantsuits? Durr.....

thunderlips11 says

Were HALF, HALF his meetings with non-government officials composed of his Foundation's donors

If wager a bet that more than half were people who gave money to some campaign or superpac rove was associated with.

YesYNot says

Using software like that on deleted drives is standard practice at universities. I'd imagine it is also standard practice at corporations and gov as well.

I use similar software on any drive I'm selling or disposing of. The way OS's cache content, any document may well exist in 20 places on your drive, and "deleted" files often aren't. It's smart practice.

If you've ever seen an ASCII dump of hard-disk, it's sobering. I was looking for a deleted file: I found it, dozens of times.

turtledove says

I cannot hop into her brain and know for sure, but I know if I were scrambling to destroy all traces of something, it would only be because I have something worth hiding.

Could be.

It could also be that for the past 25 years, the GOP has gone through her garbage, scrutinized lists of who drank coffee or stayed in the Lincoln Bedroom at the White House, investigated a colleague's suicide 3 times over, examined billing records of a law firm she worked at BEFORE she became first lady, and held 140 hours of testimony on the White House Christmas Card list. (I am leaving out a number of other investigations of Hillary during that time.)

And when the records show no wrongdoing - Huma gets request for favor; favor not granted - the conclusion from the GOP and the press is "this raises troubling questions, casting a shadow over the Clinton campaign."

There is no incentive to keep records. Powell acknowledges as much, and he's a Republican.

Meanwhile, Bush used an Enron jet for campaign travel, and that was no problem.

It's strange: Bill Clinton "lacked the character to enter the White House" (an interesting contention, when you observe its other inhabitants); Gore was an incredible liar and shifty; Kerry faked his Vietnam war wounds; Obama wasn't even born here, and is too stupid, weak, authoritarian, communist and fascist (all at the same time!) to be President. Plus, although the entire GOP refused to work with him starting on inauguration day, he is "divisive."

Now Hillary is profoundly, unprecedentedly corrupt.

Quite a coincidence, how the Dems always pick the very worst members of society.

YesYNot says

If wager a bet that more than half were people who gave money to some campaign or superpac rove was associated with.

Rove wasn't Secretary of State.

HydroCabron says

Obama wasn't even born here, and is too stupid, weak, authoritarian, communist and fascist (all at the same time!) to be President. Plus, although the entire GOP refused to work with him starting on inauguration day, he is "divisive."

"YOU LIE"

thunderlips11 says

Rove wasn't Secretary of State.

"Says Who?"