Clinton: "secret email accounts" are shredding the Constitution (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
June 02, 2024, 02:12:00 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2016 U.S. Presidential Election
  Clinton: "secret email accounts" are shredding the Constitution (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Clinton: "secret email accounts" are shredding the Constitution  (Read 2018 times)
Ebsy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,001
United States


« on: May 26, 2016, 11:06:17 PM »

Well I mean, you can't say she isn't experienced. As you can see, while most politicians just have one position on various issues, she has experience with multiple positions on various issues Tongue
I don't think anything about Clinton's email usage was actually that secret; it was just that nobody cared while she was Secretary of State. Anyone who corresponded with her by email knew she was not using a State Department email.
Logged
Ebsy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,001
United States


« Reply #1 on: May 27, 2016, 01:30:40 AM »

Well I mean, you can't say she isn't experienced. As you can see, while most politicians just have one position on various issues, she has experience with multiple positions on various issues Tongue

I don't think anything about Clinton's email usage was actually that secret; it was just that nobody cared while she was Secretary of State. Anyone who corresponded with her by email knew she was not using a State Department email.

Well, somebody cared enough about what all high government officials might do to have each one sign a two page document stating that they understand the proper way of handling government information. Are you saying the Secretary of State did not understand the requirements set forth by the FOIA? Or was it the case that she absolutely understood those requirements, which is why she decided that a private server was in order, to circumvent those requirements?

I've not seen any determination made that Clinton attempted to circumvent FOIA by using a private email.
Logged
Ebsy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,001
United States


« Reply #2 on: May 27, 2016, 01:09:58 PM »

Well I mean, you can't say she isn't experienced. As you can see, while most politicians just have one position on various issues, she has experience with multiple positions on various issues Tongue
I don't think anything about Clinton's email usage was actually that secret; it was just that nobody cared while she was Secretary of State. Anyone who corresponded with her by email knew she was not using a State Department email.
They did care. She was asked multiple times to either use State Dept. email systems or have her personal server approved by department officials and declined. She did not hand over her work-related emails (standard practice for all government officials) until they became an issue, and even then, she did not hand over all of them. For months, she's been emphatically saying that her email practices were permitted, but that has been rejected by the Inspector General's report. The report also clearly differentiates between what she did and what Rice and Powell did. There was not even an IG appointed during her entire tenure as Secretary (likely because of a deal with Obama) and the acting IG was someone who was not even eligible to be appointed IG.

I don't think there is enough evidence to indict, let alone convict her of a crime, but she was at least irresponsible and disrespectful to the American people both in her cavalier attitude towards departmental procedures in office and her deception of the public afterwards. This is not a right-wing conspiracy, this is stuff coming out of the State Dept. that she used to run and the liberal media. This is no Benghazi.
Well, you are right about what she did being different from Powell; he literally just used AOL.
Logged
Ebsy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,001
United States


« Reply #3 on: May 27, 2016, 03:14:04 PM »

It really sickens me that national security and transparency concerns have to be framed by whether you have a D or an R next to your name.

I'm sure you felt the same when Bush and Cheney deleted thousands of e-mails and nobody bothered. 

I don't remember Bush and Cheney setting up personal, private email servers and making themselves responsible for which messages they decided to share with the public. But yes, if Bush and/or Chaney did that, then they too should face legal consequences, as that's what we mean by "rule of law" (in case you were wondering).
Cheney deleted massive amounts of emails before he left office.
So did Colin Powell.
Logged
Ebsy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,001
United States


« Reply #4 on: May 27, 2016, 04:16:21 PM »

It really sickens me that national security and transparency concerns have to be framed by whether you have a D or an R next to your name.

I'm sure you felt the same when Bush and Cheney deleted thousands of e-mails and nobody bothered. 

I don't remember Bush and Cheney setting up personal, private email servers and making themselves responsible for which messages they decided to share with the public. But yes, if Bush and/or Chaney did that, then they too should face legal consequences, as that's what we mean by "rule of law" (in case you were wondering).
Cheney deleted massive amounts of emails before he left office.
So did Colin Powell.
If you are seriously comparing Colin Powell's use of personal email during a time when the State Dept. had no rules against it and was still stuck in the last century with the abuses of Clinton and Cheney, you are out of your mind.
Well considering that the IGO report deemed his actions as just as egregious as Clinton's, I'm not sure how it isn't relevant to the discussion at hand.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.026 seconds with 11 queries.