Disgusting Hypocrisy of Clinton

[Ethereal]

Hillary Clinton on the Sanctity of Protecting Classified Information (https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/08/12/hillary-clinton-sanctity-protecting-classified-information/)

Glenn Greenwald
Aug. 12 2015, 11:47 a.m.

(THE // INTERCEPT) - It turns out that at least two of the emails which traversed Hillary Clinton’s personal email account and server were “top secret,” according to the inspector general for the Intelligence Community as reported by McClatchy. To describe that as reckless is an understatement given that, as AP notes, “There is no evidence she used encryption to shield the emails or her personal server from foreign intelligence services or other potentially prying eyes.” The FBI has now taken possession of that server.

When it comes to low-level government employees with no power, the Obama administration has purposely prosecuted them as harshly as possible to the point of vindictiveness: It has notoriously prosecuted more individuals under the Espionage Act of 1917 for improperly handling classified information than all previous administrations combined.

NSA whistleblower Tom Drake, for instance, faced years in prison, and ultimately had his career destroyed, based on the Obama DOJ’s claims that he “mishandled” classified information (it included information that was not formally classified at the time but was retroactively decreed to be such). Less than two weeks ago, “a Naval reservist was convicted and sentenced for mishandling classified military materials” despite no “evidence he intended to distribute them.” Last year, a Naval officer was convicted of mishandling classified information also in the absence of any intent to distribute it.

In the light of these new Clinton revelations, the very same people who spent years justifying this obsessive assault are now scampering for reasons why a huge exception should be made for the Democratic Party front-runner. Fascinatingly, one of the most vocal defenders of this Obama DOJ record of persecution has been Hillary Clinton herself.

In December 2011, Chelsea Manning’s court-martial was set to begin. None of the documents at issue in that prosecution was “top secret,” unlike the documents found on Hillary Clinton’s server. Nonetheless, the then-secretary of state convened a press conference to denounce Manning and defend the prosecution. This is what she said:

If his case goes to trial and he is convicted, Manning could face life in prison. The government has said it would not seek the death penalty.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton called Manning’s alleged actions damaging and unfortunate in remarks to reporters at the State Department on Thursday.

“I think that in an age where so much information is flying through cyberspace, we all have to be aware of the fact that some information which is sensitive, which does affect the security of individuals and relationships, deserves to be protected and we will continue to take necessary steps to do so,” Clinton said.

Manning was convicted and sentenced to 35 years in prison. At the time, the only thing Hillary Clinton had to say about that was to issue a sermon about how classified information “deserves to be protected and we will continue to take necessary steps to do so” because it “affect[s] the security of individuals and relationships.”

Just another example of how the political class is held to different standards than the rest of America.

When they mishandle classified information, it's no big deal, or some such nonsense, but when a low-level functionary like Manning does something similar, he is punished severely and disproportionately to the so-called crime.

You know you live in a phony democratic-republic when the citizenry is held to higher standards than the politicians who presume to rule over them.

"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others".

[Chris]

The first principle of rule of law is the kings and queens are subject to the same laws as the peasants. We have rule of man.

[Ethereal]

The first principle of rule of law is the kings and queens are subject to the same laws as the peasants. We have rule of man.

The hallmark of an oligarchy is legal double-standards.

[TrueBlue]

The difference lies in those who intentionally release classified information and those who do not like Hillary Clinton.

[Hal Jordan]

The difference lies in those who intentionally release classified information and those who do not like Hillary Clinton.

RFelease of classified information is release of classified information, according to the law. Intent does not enter into legal rulings.

[Peter1469]

RFelease of classified information is release of classified information, according to the law. Intent does not enter into legal rulings.


Correct. And for stuff that is top secret, it is doubtful that a person in Hillary's position didn't know it was protected.

[Cigar]

Coulter Repeats What is Becoming Obvious to the GOP: They Don’t Want to Run Against Bernie
Coulter: I wish Fox News would go a little easier on Hillary Clinton. She’s the one we want to run against. Could you guys just back off? Because I feel like I’m living through this, I feel like this is déjà vu again. We used to say, ‘Oh, the next president isn’t going to be a guy named Barack Hussein Obama.’ Our next president could be Sen. Bernie Sanders, if you people keep this up.

http://ringoffireradio.com/2015/08/coulter-repeats-what-is-becoming-obvious-to-the-gop-they-dont-want-to-run-against-bernie/



:grin:

[Safety]

RFelease of classified information is release of classified information, according to the law. Intent does not enter into legal rulings.

I have to disagree, while I have no vested interest in seeing Clinton slide into the POTUS position, intent plays a big factor in assigning punishment. That's why we have capital punishment for murder, but not for manslaughter, just like we also have a difference between vehicular manslaughter and having an accident.

[Chris]

Coulter Repeats What is Becoming Obvious to the GOP: They Don’t Want to Run Against Bernie
Coulter: I wish Fox News would go a little easier on Hillary Clinton. She’s the one we want to run against. Could you guys just back off? Because I feel like I’m living through this, I feel like this is déjà vu again. We used to say, ‘Oh, the next president isn’t going to be a guy named Barack Hussein Obama.’ Our next president could be Sen. Bernie Sanders, if you people keep this up.

http://ringoffireradio.com/2015/08/coulter-repeats-what-is-becoming-obvious-to-the-gop-they-dont-want-to-run-against-bernie/



:grin:



And the topic is what? Reminder...

http://i.snag.gy/MYaCl.jpg

[Cigar]

I have to disagree, while I have no vested interest in seeing Clinton slide into the POTUS position, intent plays a big factor in assigning punishment. That's why we have capital punishment for murder, but not for manslaughter, just like we also have a difference between vehicular manslaughter and having an accident.

I'd bet we'd all be surprised if we could actually read those emails ... somewhere between Launch Codes (Rep) and Passwords to the Ladies Restroom (Dems) :laugh:

Personally, I think the last thing The GOP wants to talk about is specific solutions to real problems.

[Cigar]

And the topic is what? Reminder...

http://i.snag.gy/MYaCl.jpg

What's wrong, you felling the need to enforce Rules today? :laugh:

[Chris]

What's wrong, you felling the need to enforce Rules today? :laugh:

They were enforced for Nixon, weren't they?

Is Hillary special? Is she royalty?

[Cigar]

I'd bet we'd all be surprised if we could actually read those emails ... somewhere between Launch Codes (Rep) and Passwords to the Ladies Restroom (Dems) :laugh:

Personally, I think the last thing The GOP wants to talk about is specific solutions to real problems.

I'd ignore this Post if I were you ... :wink:

[Cigar]

They were enforced for Nixon, weren't they?

Is Hillary special? Is she royalty?

Nope Royalty is when the THIRD Family Member runs for President, not the Second :laugh:

Now look who's derailing ... :laugh:

[Chris]

I'd bet we'd all be surprised if we could actually read those emails ... somewhere between Launch Codes (Rep) and Passwords to the Ladies Restroom (Dems) :laugh:

Personally, I think the last thing The GOP wants to talk about is specific solutions to real problems.

Reads like you want to give her majesty a free pass from following the law. I think you miss the point. It really doesn't matter what the emails contain, she violated law putting them on her own server.

[Cigar]

Reads like you want to give her majesty a free pass from following the law. I think you miss the point. It really doesn't matter what the emails contain, she violated law putting them on her own server.

Now you're confusing Laws with Office Rules :laugh:

[hanger4]

Now you're confusing Laws with Office Rules :laugh:

Aaaaaah bad news Cigar, mishandling classified matierals IS against the law.

[Cigar]

Aaaaaah bad news Cigar, mishandling classified matierals IS against the law.



:laugh: Your Words, mishandling classified materials :grin:

A) I'm not a Hillary Supporter
B) I personally couldn't care less about any of the GOP x-Gate scandals

[Chris]

Nope Royalty is when the THIRD Family Member runs for President, not the Second :laugh:

Now look who's derailing ... :laugh:

Fact Check: Hillary Clinton, Those Emails And The Law (http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/04/02/396823014/fact-check-hillary-clinton-those-emails-and-the-law)


The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee — not just a rank-and-file House member — alleged Tuesday that Hillary Clinton likely broke the law with her use of private emails as secretary of state....

The Laws

At issue are four sections of the law: the Federal Records Act, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), the National Archives and Records Administration's (NARA) regulations and Section 1924 of Title 18 of the U.S. Crimes and Criminal Procedure Code.

In short:



The Federal Records Act requires agencies hold onto official communications, including all work-related emails, and government employees cannot destroy or remove relevant records.
FOIA is designed to "improve public access to agency records and information."
The NARA regulations dictate how records should be created and maintained. They stress that materials must be maintained "by the agency," that they should be "readily found" and that the records must "make possible a proper scrutiny by the Congress."
Section 1924 of Title 18 has to do with deletion and retention of classified documents. "Knowingly" removing or housing classified information at an "unauthorized location" is subject to a fine or a year in prison.



...

[hanger4]

Fact Check: Hillary Clinton, Those Emails And The Law (http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/04/02/396823014/fact-check-hillary-clinton-those-emails-and-the-law)Cigar I'd ignore this Post if I were you ... :wink:

[Chris]

http://i.snag.gy/24CO8.jpg

[Cigar]

Cigar I'd ignore this Post if I were you ... :wink:

:studying: Dude, The GOP Top Presidential Candidate to Hillary Clinton is Donald Trump, and your best hand is Email-Gate?

Have you checked Bernie Sanders numbers against Trump yet?

I'll tell you what, I'll let you guys stick with Email-Gate :laugh:

[Safety]

Cigar I'd ignore this Post if I were you ... :wink:


Fact Check: Hillary Clinton, Those Emails And The Law (http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/04/02/396823014/fact-check-hillary-clinton-those-emails-and-the-law)


Watchdog groups conceded that she may not have violated the text of the law, but they argue she violated the spirit of it.


The Justice Department weighed in, calling it "sheer speculation" that "Clinton withheld any work-related emails from those provided to the Department of State." What's more, Justice wrote, "FOIA creates no obligation for an agency to search for and produce records that it does not possess and control."


"For some historical context, Secretary Kerry is the first secretary of state to rely primarily on a state.gov email account."


it's also unlikely she will ever be found to have violated the letter of the law.

Just some points highlighting the need to wait for the investigation to conclude before burning her at the stake....

It would probably help to think if this was a GOP official how "non-partisan" your responses would seem.....

[Cigar]

If Hillary Clinton inappropriately received or sent classified emails, then I say fine her or prosecute her for the offense and get back to talking about policies the American People give a shit about.

But just don't whine about it like Whitewater for the next 30 years.

:rollseyes: Benghazi

[Chris]

Just some points highlighting the need to wait for the investigation to conclude before burning her at the stake....

It would probably help to think if this was a GOP official how "non-partisan" your responses would seem.....



I would agree with that. She shouldn't be burned at the stake, nor should the case be summarily dismissed.

I've been comparing her case to that of Republican Nixon's. I think the entire government belongs behind bars. I'm non-partisan.

[Howey]

Just another example of how the political class is held to different standards than the rest of America.

When they mishandle classified information, it's no big deal, or some such nonsense, but when a low-level functionary like Manning does something similar, he is punished severely and disproportionately to the so-called crime.

You know you live in a phony democratic-republic when the citizenry is held to higher standards than the politicians who presume to rule over them.

"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others".

THE problem is, of course, none of the emails were classified. I'd like to point out that tthey didn't reveal Stevens location (specifically - and the fact he was going to Benghazi had already been revealed in a news conference), and that Clinton was not a direct recepient.

[Chris]

THE problem is, of course, none of the emails were classified. I'd like to point out that tthey didn't reveal Stevens location (specifically - and the fact he was going to Benghazi had already been revealed in a news conference), and that Clinton was not a direct recepient.

THe laws she may have violated were posted here: http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/49201-Disgusting-Hypocrisy-of-Clinton?p=1219581&viewfull=1#post1219581

[Cigar]

I would agree with that. She shouldn't be burned at the stake, nor should the case be summarily dismissed.

I've been comparing her case to that of Republican Nixon's. I think the entire government belongs behind bars. I'm non-partisan.

You do know that talking about the of value gifts in emails from other countries is classified ... like paintings and silverware.

Can't we just wait for the face and then put into context?

IF they are Launch Codes given to Saudis then that's bad ... if it's discussing Bo the President Dog shitting on the Oval Office Carpet ... No-Bad.

[Chris]

You do know that talking about the of value gifts in emails from other countries is classified ... like paintings and silverware.

Can't we just wait for the face and then put into context?

IF they are Launch Codes given to Saudis then that's bad ... if it's discussing Bo the President Dog shitting on the Oval Office Carpet ... No-Bad.


^^Denial, dismissive.

[birddog]

Even if Hillary broke no laws, although any sane person should believe she did, I would still see no reason to vote for her. Again I ask, what has she accomplished in office that is positive and important for our country? Can you name one or more? Her resume sucks!

She lied as a lawyer at Watergate, Rose Law Firm, Vince Foster, Benghazi, emails, etc etc!

[Howey]

THe laws she may have violated were posted here: http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/49201-Disgusting-Hypocrisy-of-Clinton?p=1219581&viewfull=1#post1219581

Yet as pointed out in your very link, there's no proof any of those laws were broken.


Just some points highlighting the need to wait for the investigation to conclude before burning her at the stake....

It would probably help to think if this was a GOP official how "non-partisan" your responses would seem.....

[silvereyes]

Even if Hillary broke no laws, although any sane person should believe she did, I would still see no reason to vote for her. Again I ask, what has she accomplished in office that is positive and important for our country? Can you name one or more? Her resume sucks!

She lied as a lawyer at Watergate, Rose Law Firm, Vince Foster, Benghazi, emails, etc etc!
Again: but you'd vote for dumbass Palin. Scary.

[Common]

Hillary Clinton is no more a phony or a hypocrit than any of the 17 republicans running for the nomination.

[birddog]

Hillary Clinton is no more a phony or a hypocrit than any of the 17 republicans running for the nomination.

:biglaugh::biglaugh:

[exotix]

We should release the classified information for all the world to see ... just to get Hilary ... and abolish the Secretary of State until we elect neocons and teawads.

[Peter1469]

We should release the classified information for all the world to see ... just to get Hilary ... and abolish the Secretary of State until we elect neocons and teawads.

Gibberish translator!

[Green Arrow]

I'll wait for the investigation to conclude before I pass judgement. I'm certainly suspicious and alarmed, but I believe in innocent until proven guilty. Until guilt can be proven in a court of law, I will consider her innocent of all charges.

If she can be proven guilty in a court of law, however, throw the book at her with all the force of the people's justice.

[Peter1469]

I'll wait for the investigation to conclude before I pass judgement. I'm certainly suspicious and alarmed, but I believe in innocent until proven guilty. Until guilt can be proven in a court of law, I will consider her innocent of all charges.

If she can be proven guilty in a court of law, however, throw the book at her with all the force of the people's justice.

The legal criminal issues are just one facet to consider. Trust is another. If she did everything reported, yet managed to not technically violate a law, has she shown the sense and judgement for elected office?

In a recent poll on trustworthiness - she got 2%, yes. :shocked:

[donttread]

Just another example of how the political class is held to different standards than the rest of America.

When they mishandle classified information, it's no big deal, or some such nonsense, but when a low-level functionary like Manning does something similar, he is punished severely and disproportionately to the so-called crime.

You know you live in a phony democratic-republic when the citizenry is held to higher standards than the politicians who presume to rule over them.

"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others".

And don't forget American hero Ed Snowden who let the enemy know the government was spying on them! Oh wait, that makes us the enemy doesn't it

[donttread]

Hillary Clinton is no more a phony or a hypocrit than any of the 17 republicans running for the nomination.


Sad that the American voter uses lines like this to defend their candidates instead of using lines like this to condemn them

[Common]

I'll wait for the investigation to conclude before I pass judgement. I'm certainly suspicious and alarmed, but I believe in innocent until proven guilty. Until guilt can be proven in a court of law, I will consider her innocent of all charges.

If she can be proven guilty in a court of law, however, throw the book at her with all the force of the people's justice.

Im with you if it turns out this is truth then shes in a jam, because she knows better. We will see

[Ethereal]

The difference lies in those who intentionally release classified information and those who do not like Hillary Clinton.

Depends on what you mean by "release". I'm sure there are some lawyers and judges who could argue that processing classified information in any unauthorized manner, such as using a non-government server to send and receive classified materials, is "releasing" it, and I doubt anyone would argue that Hillary Clinton didn't intentionally use a private server to process classified government information. And because she performed some kind of specialized wipe (possible evidence tampering) on her server, there might be no way to know if her server was hacked by a foreign government or non-state actor who might use that information to blackmail her somehow. It would be one thing if she was retiring or even taking a slight punishment like Patraeus did when he mishandled highly classified information, but she is insisting on being the President of the United States, so her being possibly blackmailed by a US adversary is a serious issue and a legitimate question to bring up.

[Ethereal]

Coulter Repeats What is Becoming Obvious to the GOP: They Don’t Want to Run Against Bernie


Coulter: I wish Fox News would go a little easier on Hillary Clinton. She’s the one we want to run against. Could you guys just back off? Because I feel like I’m living through this, I feel like this is déjà vu again. We used to say, ‘Oh, the next president isn’t going to be a guy named Barack Hussein Obama.’ Our next president could be Sen. Bernie Sanders, if you people keep this up.

http://ringoffireradio.com/2015/08/coulter-repeats-what-is-becoming-obvious-to-the-gop-they-dont-want-to-run-against-bernie/



:grin:

If this helps Bernie Sanders become the President instead of Hillary Clinton, then I'm doing important work and you should probably thank me.

:grin:

[Ethereal]

Nope Royalty is when the THIRD Family Member runs for President, not the Second :laugh:

Now look who's derailing ... :laugh:

There can't be a third Royal family member without a second, and the second is often the most disastrous of the group ... :laugh:

[Peter1469]

Depends on what you mean by "release". I'm sure there are some lawyers and judges who could argue that processing classified information in any unauthorized manner, such as using a non-government server to send and receive classified materials, is "releasing" it, and I doubt anyone would argue that Hillary Clinton didn't intentionally use a private server to process classified government information. And because she performed some kind of specialized wipe (possible evidence tampering) on her server, there might be no way to know if her server was hacked by a foreign government or non-state actor who might use that information to blackmail her somehow. It would be one thing if she was retiring or even taking a slight punishment like Patraeus did when he mishandled highly classified information, but she is insisting on being the President of the United States, so her being possibly blackmailed by a US adversary is a serious issue and a legitimate question to bring up.

That server is and has been under litigation holds in over 10 federal district court cases. If it was tampered with in any way the people who did it, ordered it, and knew about it are subject to criminal and civil sanctions.

[Ethereal]

:studying: Dude, The GOP Top Presidential Candidate to Hillary Clinton is Donald Trump, and your best hand is Email-Gate?

Have you checked Bernie Sanders numbers against Trump yet?

All the more reason to get Hillary out of Bernie's way as quickly as possible.


I'll tell you what, I'll let you guys stick with Email-Gate :laugh:

It's a serious issue, that is , if you believe the same Washington DC establishment who harshly punishes legitimate whistelblowers who reveal government criminality and/or incompetence. They only seem to have a problem with these laws when they are guilty of violating them... :laugh:

[Ethereal]

Part of the benefit of reading about the prosecution of government whistle-blowers like Ellsberg, Manning, and Snowden is that you learn a lot about how the federal government prosecutes people for releasing and/or mishandling classified information. Generally speaking, they are ruthless and will effectively seek to terrorize and imprison the offender. Manning is basically being subjected to a process of emotional and psychology torture that shows no signs of ending soon, and Snowden, apart from being charged under the onerous Espionage Act from the early 1900's, has been threatened with assassination by government officials, even though Snowden was the one upholding the law (several provisions in the Bill of Rights).

Of course, there are differing intents and consequences between what Manning and Snowden did and what Hillary Clinton and Patraeus did, but Patraeus, while receiving an effective slap on the wrist, was still charged and convicted of an offense. So I'm not even saying we need to treat Clinton the same as Manning by throwing her in a military prison for life (it would be nice, but I'm trying to be realistic), I'm saying she should be treated like General Patraeus and receive a legal sanction for what was obviously a mishandling (according to the US government's own repeated standards) of highly classified information and systems. She should also be made to answer seriously to the American public how she can prove that her servers were not compromised by US adversaries. Normally, government forensics and lawyers could examine the server's memory and cross-reference it with the memory of their security systems, but because Clinton kept the server private and then destroyed the data, there is no way to rule it out. Hillary Clinton was not some regular Joe, either. She is a high level target for all types of sophisticated state and non-state hackers. How do we know someone out there - North Korea, AQ, organized crime, etc. - didn't successfully hack Clinton's servers and use the information to blackmail her? Can we trust that person as the President of the US?

[Ethereal]

I am not sure, but strongly suspect that the US government, as a matter of routine, will classify even ostensibly mundane emails that pass through certain systems. In other words, the systems themselves are classified, and whatever passes through them, even if you personally think it's not important, receives a classification based on the level of classification of the server processing the data. I would assume the Secretary of State's Email server is one of the most highly classified systems in the US government, so even her Emails about equestrian parties and grand-kids could conceivably be classified.

[Ethereal]

And I think I've also read that even if a system is not specifically classified, it can become classified by virtue of having classified data stored and/or processed in it.

Bottom line: The US government has been classifying monumental hordes of systems and data, and aggressively prosecuting anyone who uses those systems to undermine the US government's criminality and incompetence. But in doing so, they have searched for a million legal excuses to prosecute them, creating a massive legal framework with which to potentially prosecute Clinton. If she is not charged, it won't be because she's not guilty of massively illegal acts, it will be because the political class exempts itself from its own onerous rules.

[donttread]

Depends on what you mean by "release". I'm sure there are some lawyers and judges who could argue that processing classified information in any unauthorized manner, such as using a non-government server to send and receive classified materials, is "releasing" it, and I doubt anyone would argue that Hillary Clinton didn't intentionally use a private server to process classified government information. And because she performed some kind of specialized wipe (possible evidence tampering) on her server, there might be no way to know if her server was hacked by a foreign government or non-state actor who might use that information to blackmail her somehow. It would be one thing if she was retiring or even taking a slight punishment like Patraeus did when he mishandled highly classified information, but she is insisting on being the President of the United States, so her being possibly blackmailed by a US adversary is a serious issue and a legitimate question to bring up.


I fully believe that the lion's share lion's share of classified documents are simply to hide what we don't know , rather than to hide what we do know

[Darmosiel]

Just another example of how the political class is held to different standards than the rest of America.

When they mishandle classified information, it's no big deal, or some such nonsense, but when a low-level functionary like Manning does something similar, he is punished severely and disproportionately to the so-called crime.

You know you live in a phony democratic-republic when the citizenry is held to higher standards than the politicians who presume to rule over them.

"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others".

It's a shame the GOP wasn't as concerned with Colin Powell's emails.
I would love to see what he and Cheney discussed on the missing WMDs.

[Peter1469]

It's a shame the GOP wasn't as concerned with Colin Powell's emails.
I would love to see what he and Cheney discussed on the missing WMDs.

Deflecting to Powell? He likely feels like White men have used him enough for one life time. Leave the man alone. :wink:

[TrueBlue]

THE problem is, of course, none of the emails were classified. I'd like to point out that tthey didn't reveal Stevens location (specifically - and the fact he was going to Benghazi had already been revealed in a news conference), and that Clinton was not a direct recepient.
That's correct, Howey The emails were not classified. And it's not like she started welcoming everyone to read what those emails contained. It is now actually the government agencies looking that are exposing what the emails said. Isn't that something!

Here's the very latest about the matter for everyone's information. Thanks to ABC News for this report.

Hillary Clinton Jokes About Wiping Email Server 'With A Cloth Or Something'
By RYAN STRUYK and LIZ KREUTZ

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/hillary-clinton-jokes-wiping-email-server-cloth/story?id=33165517

"Clinton has maintained that she never used her private email to handle classified information. Her spokesman, Nick Merrill, said it was “not surprising” that several hundred messages were flagged for further inspection “given the sheer volume of intelligence community lawyers now involved in the review of these emails.”

[exotix]

Deflecting to Powell? He likely feels like White men have used him enough for one life time. Leave the man alone. :wink:It's not like he changed his mind which socks to wear ... no he changed his mind to wage a war of attrition and genocide.

[TrueBlue]

It's a shame the GOP wasn't as concerned with Colin Powell's emails.
I would love to see what he and Cheney discussed on the missing WMDs.
Exactly! Can we say HYPOCRISY on the part of the Republicans in handling the Hillary case! Of course!! That's all it is plus an orchestrated WITCH HUNT designed to derail Hillary's campaign. That's all in the world that it is. They need to start an immediate review of Powell's emails too, @Darmosiel (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=209) for parity.

[exotix]

http://i.snag.gy/24CO8.jpgI'm reminded of a death row inmate who found God while on death row .... comparing his mass-murders to stealing a cracker ... because all sin is equal in the eyes of God

[TrueBlue]

Depends on what you mean by "release". I'm sure there are some lawyers and judges who could argue that processing classified information in any unauthorized manner, such as using a non-government server to send and receive classified materials, is "releasing" it, and I doubt anyone would argue that Hillary Clinton didn't intentionally use a private server to process classified government information. And because she performed some kind of specialized wipe (possible evidence tampering) on her server, there might be no way to know if her server was hacked by a foreign government or non-state actor who might use that information to blackmail her somehow. It would be one thing if she was retiring or even taking a slight punishment like Patraeus did when he mishandled highly classified information, but she is insisting on being the President of the United States, so her being possibly blackmailed by a US adversary is a serious issue and a legitimate question to bring up.
Another Conspiracy Theorist, I see!

The whole crux of this matter is that if the government agency(ies) overseeing the State Dept. security did not catch that she was using a private email server during her tenure then they shouldn't be crying over spilled milk afterward. They should have been On The Ball and caught that and brought it to her immediate attention to cease and desist if indeed it was the problem they are now blowing it up to be. But they didn't. Not a word! Therefore, this is simply a hypocritical move on the part of Republicans to try to derail Hillary's campaign. That's all it is and in the end after the Seventeenth Thousand investigation into her e-mails they will find that she did nothing wrong. They, themselves are even saying this is not a criminal investigation, so go figure! And of course the top secret investigative people knew all the time that it was a private server but kept quiet about it. Why, we just have to ask? If they didn't, then that would be very telling and would speak volumes about top security in this country wouldn't you say!

[Darmosiel]

THE problem is, of course, none of the emails were classified. I'd like to point out that tthey didn't reveal Stevens location (specifically - and the fact he was going to Benghazi had already been revealed in a news conference), and that Clinton was not a direct recepient.

Don't confuse them with the facts.

[Bob]

The difference lies in those who intentionally release classified information and those who do not like Hillary Clinton.


Sounds as if the rule is, so long as you like Hillary Clinton, you get to break the law.

[TrueBlue]

Sounds as if the rule is, so long as you like Hillary Clinton, you get to break the law.
You have to remember that she has not been accused of any impropriety or malfeasance.

[Bob]

Another Conspiracy Theorist, I see!

The whole crux of this matter is that if the government agency(ies) overseeing the State Dept. security did not catch that she was using a private email server during her tenure then they shouldn't be crying over spilled milk afterward. They should have been On The Ball and caught that and brought it to her immediate attention to cease and desist if indeed it was the problem they are now blowing it up to be. But they didn't. Not a word! Therefore, this is simply a hypocritical move on the part of Republicans to try to derail Hillary's campaign. That's all it is and in the end after the Seventeenth Thousand investigation into her e-mails they will find that she did nothing wrong. They, themselves are even saying this is not a criminal investigation, so go figure! And of course the top secret investigative people knew all the time that it was a private server but kept quiet about it. Why, we just have to ask? If they didn't, then that would be very telling and would speak volumes about top security in this country wouldn't you say!

You would learn a lot about Hillary by reading the awesome book ... Unlimited access by Gary Aldrich. He details how both Clintons don't give a care about national security and indeed flaunt it.

[Bob]

You have to remember that she has not been accused of any impropriety or malfeasance.

It will happen and that is why you are so afraid. by the way, the so called Colin Powell story has been debunked already.

[Safety]

Part of the benefit of reading about the prosecution of government whistle-blowers like Ellsberg, Manning, and Snowden is that you learn a lot about how the federal government prosecutes people for releasing and/or mishandling classified information. Generally speaking, they are ruthless and will effectively seek to terrorize and imprison the offender. Manning is basically being subjected to a process of emotional and psychology torture that shows no signs of ending soon, and Snowden, apart from being charged under the onerous Espionage Act from the early 1900's, has been threatened with assassination by government officials, even though Snowden was the one upholding the law (several provisions in the Bill of Rights).

Of course, there are differing intents and consequences between what Manning and Snowden did and what Hillary Clinton and Patraeus did, but Patraeus, while receiving an effective slap on the wrist, was still charged and convicted of an offense. So I'm not even saying we need to treat Clinton the same as Manning by throwing her in a military prison for life (it would be nice, but I'm trying to be realistic), I'm saying she should be treated like General Patraeus and receive a legal sanction for what was obviously a mishandling (according to the US government's own repeated standards) of highly classified information and systems. She should also be made to answer seriously to the American public how she can prove that her servers were not compromised by US adversaries. Normally, government forensics and lawyers could examine the server's memory and cross-reference it with the memory of their security systems, but because Clinton kept the server private and then destroyed the data, there is no way to rule it out. Hillary Clinton was not some regular Joe, either. She is a high level target for all types of sophisticated state and non-state hackers. How do we know someone out there - North Korea, AQ, organized crime, etc. - didn't successfully hack Clinton's servers and use the information to blackmail her? Can we trust that person as the President of the US?


I am not sure, but strongly suspect that the US government, as a matter of routine, will classify even ostensibly mundane emails that pass through certain systems. In other words, the systems themselves are classified, and whatever passes through them, even if you personally think it's not important, receives a classification based on the level of classification of the server processing the data. I would assume the Secretary of State's Email server is one of the most highly classified systems in the US government, so even her Emails about equestrian parties and grand-kids could conceivably be classified.


And I think I've also read that even if a system is not specifically classified, it can become classified by virtue of having classified data stored and/or processed in it.

Bottom line: The US government has been classifying monumental hordes of systems and data, and aggressively prosecuting anyone who uses those systems to undermine the US government's criminality and incompetence. But in doing so, they have searched for a million legal excuses to prosecute them, creating a massive legal framework with which to potentially prosecute Clinton. If she is not charged, it won't be because she's not guilty of massively illegal acts, it will be because the political class exempts itself from its own onerous rules.


Soo....
The State Department reached out to four former secretaries asking about personal email accounts. Two have said they rarely used email, the third used personal email but had no records to turn over and the fourth was Clinton..........That statement is much more grandiose than the reality of the situation. The State Department asked four former secretaries of state for any official business conducted on personal emails. Two of those individuals, Albright and Rice, rarely used email at all while in office, let alone on a personal account. The other, Powell, has said his personal emails no longer exist, but said he is working with the State Department to recover them, if possible.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/mar/08/charles-schumer/fact-checking-chuck-schumers-defense-hillary-clint/


Colin Powell, George W. Bush’s first secretary of state, wrote in his memoir about how outdated technology infrastructure at the State Department led him to install a personal laptop in his office to use a personal email account to “shoo[t] emails to my principal assistants, to individual ambassadors, and increasingly to my foreign-minister colleagues.”

Powell, who served from 2001-2005, apparently did not keep a record of personal emails, unlike Clinton.

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/when-the-shoe-was-the-other-foot

I see we have partisan politics in full safety blitz mode, pretty surprised at the libertarians here joining the fray.....

[texan]

Then arrest them all Safety...........................HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT..........Democrats synonymous with no responsibility? Sure looks like it here.

Democrats point at bad behavior to justify bad behavior.......

So lets move on:
-She said she turned them all over to the state dept.
-She said no classified info was on the server.
-Then came back and said well there was none marked classified when it was on the server.
-Then Sidney Blumenthal testifies and turns over emails from the server not turned over. (Oops let the lying become more rampant).
-2 different non partial inspector generals said huh wait there is classified info here we need to see that server she said they would NEVER get.
- They go to a Bill Clinton appointed Judge who can't even explain the facts away and orders a warrant to seize the server
-They find 300 more questionable emails
-They find that someone that has tampered with the headers of obvious classified info. emails.

EVEN YOU can see their is a problem and it isn't exactly right wing.

Hey safety show a little dignity here and stop spinning with left wing talking points.

[texan]

In addition, these are the facts and they are indisputable..............this was discovered by complete accident by Gowdy's committee trying to wrap up Bengahzi.

Now scurry off to the Kos and get some more BullShit to throw around.

BTW we will know soon as it appears they are going to recover most of not all emails. Ooops.

Now back to the liar liar pants on fire defense.

[Safety]

Then arrest them all Safety...........................HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT..........Democrats synonymous with no responsibility.

Democrats point at bad behavior to justify bad behavior.......

So lets move on:
-She said she turned them all over to the state dept.
-She said no classified info was on the server.
-Then came back and said well there was none marked classified when it was on the server.
-Then Sidney Blumenthal testifies and turns over emails from the server not turned over. oops let the lying become in the open.
-2 different non partial inspector generals said huh wait there is classified info here we need to see that server she said they would NEVER get.
- They go to a Clinton appointee who can't even explain the facts away and orders a warrant to seize the server
-They find 300 more questionable emails
-They find that someone that has tampered with the headers of obvious classified info.

EVEN YOU can see their is a problem and it isn't exactly right wing.

Hey safety show a little dignity here and stop spinning with left wing talking points.

Then show a little back bone and stop jumping on the bandwagon to find any nugget you can to try and see what sticks to the wall and what doesn't. I have seen this type of shit since '09...people don't give a shit what previous office holders have done, but as soon as someone gets in that ya'll don't like, all of a sudden you become expert stewards of the taxpayers monies, or clairvoyant sages that can predict when attacks happen.

Every. Single. Time. you guys think you have found the next new "Nixon" scandal, it fizzles away because you are grasping at straws. But obviously you will try to blame it on the "leftist" media for not running it, but fail to realize how many "right wing" news sites or blogs in existence speak on it daily.

Now, tell me how you were just as outspoken and rambunctious when a republican sat in office.....

[Safety]

In addition, these are the facts and they are indisputable..............this was discovered by complete accident by Gowdy's committee trying to wrap up Bengahzi.

Now scurry off to the Kos and get some more BullShit to throw around.

BTW we will know soon as it appears they are going to recover most of not all emails. Ooops.

Now back to the liar liar pants on fire defense.

Bengahzi....

:rofl:

[TrueBlue]

It will happen and that is why you are so afraid. by the way, the so called Colin Powell story has been debunked already. Nope Bob, don't think that will happen. Where was the agency that oversees security for the State Department? They should have been On Top of this but weren't, obviously because there were no laws being broken when Hillary was Secretary of State as has been brought out.

As for Colin Powell, you need to read what he has said about this matter. In fact, all bloodthirsty, witch hunting Republicans need to read this! Thanks to Addicting Info for this report.

Calm Down Hillary Haters, Colin Powell Used His Personal Email Too, So Your ‘Emailgate’ Is Just A Sham Author: Ryan Denson

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/03/04/hillary-email-issue-a-non-issue/

"Powell, who is the only honorable person to have ever served in the Bush Administration (except maybe Robert Gates), jumped to the aid of Hillary Clinton and admitted that he too had used his personal email, and that there was nothing wrong in doing so. In a statement released by the Powell camp (http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/03/04/hillary-email-issue-a-non-issue/secretary-of-state-colin-powell-also-used-personal-email-account), the former Secretary that he was not aware of any such breach of protocol:"

[Ethereal]

It's a shame the GOP wasn't as concerned with Colin Powell's emails.
I would love to see what he and Cheney discussed on the missing WMDs.

Hillary Clinton voted for that war, and she is responsible for the added destruction of at least two more secular governments in the Middle East (Gaddafi and Assad) since then. How many more millions of lives must Hillary Clinton help to ruin before so-called "liberals" and "progressives" will stop supporting her and excusing her actions?

[exotix]

In addition, these are the facts and they are indisputable..............this was discovered by complete accident by Gowdy's committee trying to wrap up Bengahzi.

Now scurry off to the Kos and get some more Bull$#@! to throw around.

BTW we will know soon as it appears they are going to recover most of not all emails. Ooops.

Now back to the liar liar pants on fire defense.Proof ?

[Ethereal]

Exactly! Can we say HYPOCRISY on the part of the Republicans in handling the Hillary case! Of course!! That's all it is plus an orchestrated WITCH HUNT designed to derail Hillary's campaign. That's all in the world that it is. They need to start an immediate review of Powell's emails too, @Darmosiel (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=209) for parity.

Except the article was written by Glen Greenwald, who is not a Republican. There are actual liberals and progressives still out there, you know... :laugh:

[Ethereal]

Another Conspiracy Theorist, I see!

I think the "conspiracy theorists" are the people who give politicians the benefit of the doubt when it comes to their claims and motives. A common sense person just assumes that a powerful, rich stranger like Hillary Clinton has secrets and lies just like every other person, whereas a party loyalist will take her claims and motives at face value, even though they ascribe villainous qualities to their political opponents. For these partisan loyalists, the term "conspiracy theorist" has become nothing more than a mindless smear that is meant to demonize healthy skepticism of politicians and other powerful figures. I'm sorry if I don't love Hillary Clinton as much as some Democrats do. To me, she is just some remote stranger who wields lots of power over me even though I never consented to such an arrangement, so I am naturally skeptical of her claims and her motives. In a practical sense, it's best to assume she is lying until she shows overwhelming evidence to the contrary. For example, figures like Ron Paul and Ralph Nader (and Bernie Sanders, to some extent) established credibility by being consistent in their words and deeds over many years. They spoke and voted the same way for many years, even when their ideas were not popular. People like Hillary Clinton have not demonstrated this kind of consistency and principle. She is the ultimate establishment candidate who will just say (and sometimes do) whatever it takes to obtain more power.


The whole crux of this matter is that if the government agency(ies) overseeing the State Dept. security did not catch that she was using a private email server during her tenure then they shouldn't be crying over spilled milk afterward. They should have been On The Ball and caught that and brought it to her immediate attention to cease and desist if indeed it was the problem they are now blowing it up to be. But they didn't. Not a word! Therefore, this is simply a hypocritical move on the part of Republicans to try to derail Hillary's campaign. That's all it is and in the end after the Seventeenth Thousand investigation into her e-mails they will find that she did nothing wrong. They, themselves are even saying this is not a criminal investigation, so go figure! And of course the top secret investigative people knew all the time that it was a private server but kept quiet about it. Why, we just have to ask? If they didn't, then that would be very telling and would speak volumes about top security in this country wouldn't you say!

The government agency overseeing the State Department? In other words, the government agency that Hillary Clinton was managing at the time of the incident?

And I noticed that, although you made the accusation of "conspiracy theorist", you didn't actually provide anything aside from your opinion to back it up. On the other hand, Glen Greenwald, the author of the article in question, is a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist who always backs his claims up with facts, and links to them in his articles so that anyone can substantiate the claim for themselves. If you think he's making a claim that is not factual, you can inform him in the comments section, via email, or via Twitter. I would LOVE to see that exchange! I encourage you to seek it out... :laugh:

[Ethereal]

Don't confuse them with the facts.

It's a "fact" that none of her emails were classified? I guess you and Howey know something the Inspector General's (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CMKdqVGVEAA2xxi.jpg) office doesn't?

These news stories are being reported on by PBS, McClatchy, AP, and Glenn Greenwald. Not exactly "right-wing" extremists!

I noticed you are sporting a Guy Faux mask as your avatar. Given your reflexive defense of a dynastic establishment candidate like Hillary Clinton, am I to assume your avatar is some kind of ironic or satirical statement? Or maybe you just think it looks cool? Just curious... :laugh:

[Ethereal]

You have to remember that she has not been accused of any impropriety or malfeasance.

If she wasn't doing something wrong, then why did she have to hand over her email server to law enforcement officials?

[Ethereal]

Soo....

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2015/mar/08/charles-schumer/fact-checking-chuck-schumers-defense-hillary-clint/



http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/when-the-shoe-was-the-other-foot

I see we have partisan politics in full safety blitz mode, pretty surprised at the libertarians here joining the fray.....

This only proves the author's point about the double-standards that DC establishment types like Clinton and Powell help to perpetuate.

If classified information is really as sensitive and as important as people like Clinton and Powell both claim, then they need to be held accountable for mishandling that information. Otherwise, as they claim, American civilians and/or service-members could die!

Clinton need not be thrown into prison or threatened with assassination like Manning and Snowden, but she should at least face some kind of legal consequences for mishandling those systems and information, like Petraeus did when he exposed top secret systems and information to an unauthorized party. And I noticed your article said that Powell brought a personal laptop into his office at the State Department because State Department tech was substandard. Is that the case with Hillary Clinton? Did she feel the State Department's tech wasn't adequate in terms of its telecommunications and security? And did she rectify the situation by bringing her personal device into the State Department's offices so that it could be monitored and audited by the Department's security infrastructure? Or did she keep her official email server off-site in a private location without any transparency?

[Ethereal]

Bengahzi....

:rofl:

I am simply amazed that some people can pretend like Bengahzi is not a legitimate and serious issue that has been reported on by respected, mainstream journalists like Sharly Atkinson and Glen Greenwald.

Not only did Obama and Clinton effectively wage war in Libya without any Congressional authorization, they failed to secure the diplomatic, military and intelligence operatives they inserted into the country after it had been destabilized.

[Ethereal]

Nope Bob, don't think that will happen. Where was the agency that oversees security for the State Department? They should have been On Top of this but weren't, obviously because there were no laws being broken when Hillary was Secretary of State as has been brought out.

As for Colin Powell, you need to read what he has said about this matter. In fact, all bloodthirsty, witch hunting Republicans need to read this! Thanks to Addicting Info for this report.

Calm Down Hillary Haters, Colin Powell Used His Personal Email Too, So Your ‘Emailgate’ Is Just A Sham Author: Ryan Denson

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/03/04/hillary-email-issue-a-non-issue/

Is Powell claiming that he did the exact same thing as Hillary Clinton did? If so, then he should also be investigated and possibly charged for mishandling classified information.

[texan]

Then show a little back bone and stop jumping on the bandwagon to find any nugget you can to try and see what sticks to the wall and what doesn't. I have seen this type of $#@! since '09...people don't give a $#@! what previous office holders have done, but as soon as someone gets in that ya'll don't like, all of a sudden you become expert stewards of the taxpayers monies, or clairvoyant sages that can predict when attacks happen.

Every. Single. Time. you guys think you have found the next new "Nixon" scandal, it fizzles away because you are grasping at straws. But obviously you will try to blame it on the "leftist" media for not running it, but fail to realize how many "right wing" news sites or blogs in existence speak on it daily.

Now, tell me how you were just as outspoken and rambunctious when a republican sat in office.....

Dear Safety (and Greeny for a ridiculous like IMO)
Both of you should know I don't follow the company line in politics. UNLIKE safety who can't seem to think for himself.

Get this thru your thick skull, it is not partisan!

If you can read or pay attention the Inspector Generals, the FBI and the Clinton appointed JUDGE are not partisan. NOW you say don't jump to conclusions LOL..............I NEVER jump that is why I have been right on every racial BS thing you and your pals JUMPED to CONCLUSIONS ON!

When something like this comes along I always wait, keep my powder dry until I see enough info. IMO and any logical person can see a the problem on this one.

Your original post avoids the facts with the liar liar pants on fire defense.

Sorry the facts are the facts!

This BS everyone is did it isn't a defense genius! Hang them all I don't care. Guess the admin shouldn't have went after Petraeus huh, was that partisan? Precedence set.

Now about that dignity?

[Safety]

I am simply amazed that some people can pretend like Bengahzi is not a legitimate and serious issue that has been reported on by respected, mainstream journalists like Sharly Atkinson and Glen Greenwald.

Not only did Obama and Clinton effectively wage war in Libya without any Congressional authorization, they failed to secure the diplomatic, military and intelligence operatives they inserted into the country after it had been destabilized.

Please realize the difference in it being a legitimate issue, and people politicizing it.

[Safety]

Dear Safety (and Greeny for a ridiculous like IMO)
Both of you should know I don't follow the company line in politics. UNLIKE safety who can't seem to think for himself.

Get this thru your thick skull, it is not partisan!

If you can read or pay attention the Inspector Generals, the FBI and the Clinton appointed JUDGE are not partisan. NOW you say don't jump to conclusions LOL..............I NEVER jump that is why I have been right on every racial BS thing you and your pals JUMPED to CONCLUSIONS ON!

When something like this comes along I always wait, keep my powder dry until I see enough info. IMO and any logical person can see a the problem on this one.

Your original post avoids the facts with the liar liar pants on fire defense.

Sorry the facts are the facts!

This BS everyone is did it isn't a defense genius! Hang them all I don't care. Guess the admin shouldn't have went after Petraeus huh, was that partisan? Precedence set.

Now about that dignity?

You sound angry, maybe now isn't the time to tell you that you're full of shit?

[Bob]

Nope Bob, don't think that will happen. Where was the agency that oversees security for the State Department? They should have been On Top of this but weren't, obviously because there were no laws being broken when Hillary was Secretary of State as has been brought out.

As for Colin Powell, you need to read what he has said about this matter. In fact, all bloodthirsty, witch hunting Republicans need to read this! Thanks to Addicting Info for this report.

Calm Down Hillary Haters, Colin Powell Used His Personal Email Too, So Your ‘Emailgate’ Is Just A Sham Author: Ryan Denson

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2015/03/04/hillary-email-issue-a-non-issue/

Democrats claim she broke no laws then use as their excuse the bogus claims so did Colin Powell whom they insist broke the law.

Nope, this will end up in court as has a lot more things of this sort of problem.

[Bob]

Is Powell claiming that he did the exact same thing as Hillary Clinton did? If so, then he should also be investigated and possibly charged for mishandling classified information.

No ... Powell did not use a server at his home exclusively to handle official government communications. Hillary put top secret information in danger of being in the wrong hands. Powell never used his phone for official business. Powell used the government supplied phone / e mail for that.

[TrueBlue]

Democrats claim she broke no laws then use as their excuse the bogus claims so did Colin Powell whom they insist broke the law.

Nope, this will end up in court as has a lot more things of this sort of problem.
And if it does end up in court Hillary will be vindicated as she has done nothing wrong. End of story.

[Bob]

And if it does end up in court Hillary will be vindicated as she has done nothing wrong. End of story.

You should actually watch C-span for your information as opposed to the official shill for Hillary sites.

[TrueBlue]

You should actually watch C-span for your information as opposed to the official shill for Hillary sites.
Oh you mean the network that will not bring things out about Powell and Bush that need to be revealed? No thank you. I can do without the partisanship.

[Ransom]

Oh you mean the network that will not bring things out about Powell and Bush that need to be revealed? No thank you. I can do without the partisanship.

Oh look, a Bush deflection.

Means they're scared sh!tless.

[Ransom]

It's a shame the GOP wasn't as concerned with Colin Powell's emails.
I would love to see what he and Cheney discussed on the missing WMDs.

Another deflection. The cage is rattling, forum.........the stench of fear quite obvious, the Hillary supporters sphincters are tightening.

And shat all over these pages the results.

:poopfan:

[Peter1469]

The bucket carriers are building up some strong shoulder muscles. Silver lining, I guess. :smiley:

[Bob]

Oh you mean the network that will not bring things out about Powell and Bush that need to be revealed? No thank you. I can do without the partisanship.

CSPAN is paid for by cable program companies. They bring out a lot more than that you seek.