-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Hillary Clinton's Use of Personal Email Account (only) for Secretary of State Business
- Thread starter 4consideration
- Start date
Do you see nothing questionable about her retaining sole control of those emails, all the way until the time she turned over whatever she turned over?
esmith
Veteran Member
Well look at it this way. If she used only her private email account to conduct correspondence as Secretary of State (which they admit she did) how can these correspondence met the Federal Record Keeping Requirements Now there are those that say her email sent to US government officials are archived when the recipient's records are archived. Now there is just one little problem with this. What about email sent to foreign sources including governments. As per tytlyf's comment
Oh, by the way tytlyf is your new avatar a selfie?
Were others running for the office of the President Of the United States. Does this not reflect on her character? Of course we all know that any possible misconduct of a Democrat will be seen as not a problem, as per tytlyf's comment. Just what facts do you need tytlyf? The facts are there....or is it you just can't handle the truth. (excuse me Col. Jessep)
Oh, by the way tytlyf is your new avatar a selfie?
Last edited:
On the other hand...
http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/03/03/the-new-york-times-deceptive-suggestion-that-hi/202726
I come pretty close to detesting the Clintons, but this story is still pretty much young and I think it will be quite interesting how no one's opinion changes about it as new information becomes available.
CMike
Well-Known Member
that's her group that she funded.On the other hand...
http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/03/03/the-new-york-times-deceptive-suggestion-that-hi/202726
I come pretty close to detesting the Clintons, but this story is still pretty much young and I think it will be quite interesting how no one's opinion changes about it as new information becomes available.
It took over four years for people to find out that Hillary Clinton wasn't using a .gov email address?
Of course she should not conduct government business with a personal email, but is it very strange to think no one noticed such a thing previously.
People would notice, word of mouth would spread. Wouldn't it?
Of course she should not conduct government business with a personal email, but is it very strange to think no one noticed such a thing previously.
People would notice, word of mouth would spread. Wouldn't it?
It's all over the news as a controversy, but it doesn't smell all that negative, & the campaign is not yet underway. Wait til the campaign begins....then you'll see most media will rally behind her.....
- It's a manufactured controversy.
- It's a vast right wing conspiracy.
- It was legal.
- They attack her out of fear of a powerful woman.
If I'm wrong, I'll write you a limerick.
If I'm right, you must post one of your baby pictures.
You're probably right. Opinions may not change.On the other hand...
http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/03/03/the-new-york-times-deceptive-suggestion-that-hi/202726
I come pretty close to detesting the Clintons, but this story is still pretty much young and I think it will be quite interesting how no one's opinion changes about it as new information becomes available.
So far I've not seen new information. I see that the law requiring the retention of Private emails was not in effect at the time she left office, and I haven't really been arguing that what she did was technically illegal, although I personally think it smells of evading the law. That her Private email address was the only one she used, when there was a requirement in place (as I understand it) for governmental (and even private business) email account records to be kept, but not Private/Personal ones, yet -- is something I find suspect.
I am making an assumption in what I'm about to say. I am assuming that for a position as busy and important as Secretary of State, there is some computer tech guy/gal, that as a matter of course -- establishes email addresses for incoming staff members, and would have seen to it that she had one -- automatically. For no email address to have been established for Hillary Clinton, I think she would have to have instructed that it not be done. I could be wrong.
But...if the State Department's communication setup is so inept that Ms. Clinton did not use a governmental email address because no one thought to give her one, I think we're in a lot of trouble as a country. If one was established and never used by her, IMO, that indicates she consciously chose to use her personal email address over the one established for governmental business, and subject to the laws regarding such communications.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
If Hillary would decide not to run, I think the Dems would be in a hurting position. It's too early for Warren to run, especially since it would take time to make the proper connections for funding. Biden is, well, Biden. Webb isn't much of an impressive figure. Sanders stands little of a chance, imo.
However, with that being said, the Pub clown-car is already up and running, so it's not at all hard to predict that they'll likely shoot themselves in the foot again and again, and...
Could be an interesting race, but remember the Confucian take on "interesting": "May you be cursed to live in interesting times".
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
If this issue of not using government e-mail were to remain an important issue in 2016, which I doubt even though the Pubs definitely would bring it up probably even more so that their favorite mantra, "Benghazi", and if Bush were to get the Pub nomination, then the debate becomes a matter of whom hid more e-mails from the public while in office? Bush refused to turn some over.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
Yes, and some Pubs had to be aware of this because not all State Department employees are Dems.
I don't think it would necessarily be a red flag to receive an email from someone's ( a governmental official's) personal account, since that is not illegal to do. I wouldn't argue that it's never appropriate for the sake of convenience for governmental employees to send a communication that's actually business related from a personal account. I think it's a practicality thing, and can see that it may be completely appropriate to do from time to time.
I don't think people outside the State Department, or people that were not in a supervisory position, would be expected to be aware of what she did all the time, though, since one would need some sort of access to Department records to determine if she did not ever use an official governmental email address.
I found another article, and according to it, it seems the committee investigating the Benghazi attacks found out a year ago about her using private emails, and more recently that personal email accounts were all she used. Clinton ran own computer system for her official emails - Yahoo News
"Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., chairman of the special House committee investigating the Benghazi attacks, said the committee learned last summer — when agency documents were turned over to the committee — that Clinton had used a private email account while secretary of state. More recently the committee learned that she used private email accounts exclusively and had more than one, Gowdy said."
From the same article, (but this paragraph coming before the one quoted above):
"The AP has waited more than a year under the open records law for the State Department to turn over some emails covering Clinton's tenure as the nation's top diplomat, although the agency has never suggested that it didn't possess all her emails."
It appears that her retaining sole possession of these emails may be the/a cause of the delay in news agencies getting information that is supposed to be available to the public. If it was two months ago (from the first, NYT, article) that Hillary Clinton turned over the emails, and the AP has requested information on her emails more than a year ago, it looks to me like that's a significant and related delay in public access to information.
tytlyf
Not Religious
A selfie? This is the NRA conservative patriot draft dodger #1 Teddy "Pant Load" Nugent.Oh, by the way tytlyf is your new avatar a selfie?
You should know that.
esmith
Veteran Member
Nope
esmith
Veteran Member
Seems like more information is coming to light. Hillary had her own server located in her home.
Now the below link is prejudicial but the facts are the facts
Hillary Clinton's Off-the-Books Mail Server Was in Her House, Registered to a Non-Existent Man - Breitbart
Now I know that by using Breibart as a source will negate all the facts for some of you so just for those of you that like the unbiased???? source
The Hillary Clinton e-mail story just keeps getting worse for her - The Washington Post
Now the below link is prejudicial but the facts are the facts
Hillary Clinton's Off-the-Books Mail Server Was in Her House, Registered to a Non-Existent Man - Breitbart
Now I know that by using Breibart as a source will negate all the facts for some of you
so just for those of you that like the unbiased???? sourceThe Hillary Clinton e-mail story just keeps getting worse for her - The Washington Post
Slide
The 1st Rule.
My personal opinions about Hillary aside, I find it very difficult to believe that someone didn't bring up the issue beforehand. She was Secretary of State from 2009 to 2013, and we're supposed to believe no one mentioned that she shouldn't be using her personal e-mail? She's saying she wants the public to see her e-mail, but what is that supposed to prove? Why should I care about what Hillary's been writing in her mail? What, I'm supposed to think she was aboveboard in her practices?
There are guidelines and rules. You didn't follow the guidelines and rules. There should be some kind of punishment for what I would think is a breach of security. This is just a guess, but her personal e-mail probably didn't have the kind of security her work e-mail had. I don't know anything about computer security, but I would assume e-mail software at her level of government would have some kind of encryption that you're not going to find at AOL or IE or whatever.
Of course, we're in political sniping season, where politicians are giving and receiving criticisms of all kinds. It's like Christmas, when kids are on their best behavior, but they're tattling on the neighbors. Just remember, Donkeys and Elephants:
tytlyf
Not Religious
The server wasn't "in her house." Breitbart is far right wing extremist. You should be careful about getting your information from the echo chamber.
Is this like the Breitbart lie that Clinton ordered documents to be shredded? Republicans are playing you people for fools.
The Yahoo article I posted in #33 indicates the AP is saying so. What would you call the location, if not "her house?" Or, do you have information regarding a different location for the server?
"The computer server that transmitted and received Hillary Rodham Clinton's emails — on a private account she used exclusively for official business when she was secretary of state — traced back to an Internet service registered to her family's home in Chappaqua, New York, according to Internet records reviewed by The Associated Press."
Surely everybody who ever emailed her knew that she wasn't using a .gov email address?
How many thousands would that be?
Speaking as an IT professional who over many years has had to deal with those who aren't, I'm entirely unsurprised that she didn't think about it; but very, very surprised that there isn't an appropriate policy in place & that nobody in the torrent of emails she has received in her time in government thought to suggest that an official email address might be considered sensible.