Hillary's Emailgate - The scandal that keeps on giving!

[Loren Pechtel]

What is the essence of what is being charged here? Is she being called a Benedict Arnold and a Snowden?

Generally she is being criticized (by some) for skirting government standards for transparency and openness, and -- because of the way she did it, by creating her own system outside of government control -- not being sufficiently careful in her handling of confidential information. Also engaging in Clintonian truth parsing and dissembling about it.

Many powerful people created their own e-mail servers at the time. The government servers were crap.

The only issue is the handling of classified information.

 

[maxparrish]

The discussion issue is the ethics and legal troubles of the here-to-fore "inevitable" ascendancy of Hillary Clinton. As the incriminating evidence mounts, along with the recent appearance of smoking guns, it is clear that there is more than enough evidence for the charging of Ms. Clinton with one or more crimes. Whether or not the Obama DOJ will have the moral worth to do so remains unknown.

https://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/clinton-spokesman-i-dont-know-what-wiped-means_1024643.html

And this:

Brian Fallon, Clinton's press secretary, spoke with CNN's Brianna Keilar about the news that a former IT staffer who worked on Clinton's private email server is pleading the Fifth Amendment in front of a congressional committee investigating the Benghazi terrorist attack.

Keilar pressed Fallon about why the former secretary of state deleted personal emails from her server, and the two had an exchange about the propriety of deleting those emails.

"Why didn't she keep them on the server?" Keilar asked....

..."Just to be clear, Brian, this is an electronic copy that I imagine is a PDF form that David Kendall retained or is this the actual e-mail with the metadata on it?" Keilar pressed. Fallon said the Justice Department also has possession of the Clinton server.

...What Keilar was pushing for was an answer to the question of whether or not the authorities had possession of the actual digital email files with attached metadata—the kind of data that might be able to determine when, how, and who might have deleted any emails. Finally, Fallon admitted the emails held by the Justice Department did not have the metadata.

The FBI thumb drive emails stored PDF, cleaned of their metadata? Gee who is trying to cover up an audit trail?

 

[dismal]

Is there anyone outside of the right wing noise machine that thinks this is a thing? CNN seems to view it as more of a "meh" than anything else from the one article I could find about it and I haven't heard anything else on the topic other than the Benghazi folks shrieking.

Does anyone else think this is a thing or am I correct to be shrugging it off as a nothing?

Hillary herself can end this whole thing (which may or may not be a thing) today. Right now. She has the power to end calls for further investigations, to end the Congressional inquiry into the larger issue (Benghazi!) and to actually end any and all investigations into her affairs.

How?

Simple. She can utter the words "I've decided to not run for President." She'd probably have to add "ever" as a further qualifier. The investigation will be dropped faster than a live grenade.

This whole thing is pure partisan politics, and has been since day one - the day after the Benghazi attack. In fact I'm so certain that it is nothing more than an effort to undermine her Presidential ambitions that I'm willing to make a seemingly bold but really not all that bold statement:


If - for whatever reason - Hillary Rodham Hussein Clinton either does not secure the Democratic nomination for President OR does so but loses the general election, the investigation into her email, Benghazi, and anything else that springs up in the next 14 months will vanish by the end of 2016 if not earlier. Bank on it.


If, however, the former First Lady becomes the wife of the first First Man, the investigations into her doings will continue unabated until at least January 21, 2021. I guarantee it.

You really have to admire the foresight and ingeniousness of the partisans to plant people in the FBI and inspector general offices to keep issuing these reports about highly confidential information (which they probably sent her) on her server (which they probably also tricked her into setting up...) to keep this going.

- - - Updated - - -

Generally she is being criticized (by some) for skirting government standards for transparency and openness, and -- because of the way she did it, by creating her own system outside of government control -- not being sufficiently careful in her handling of confidential information. Also engaging in Clintonian truth parsing and dissembling about it.

Many powerful people created their own e-mail servers at the time.

Cite?

 

[prideandfall]

i continually find the vast gulf between the right-wing reaction to this 'email scandal' and their reaction to the nearly identical bush 'email scandal' 10 years ago to be utterly hilarious, especially considering that many of the same posters now trying to dry-hump this story into submission were fervently defending bush and decrying anyone else who brought it up at the time.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

i continually find the vast gulf between the right-wing reaction to this 'email scandal' and their reaction to the nearly identical bush 'email scandal' 10 years ago to be utterly hilarious, especially considering that many of the same posters now trying to dry-hump this story into submission were fervently defending bush and decrying anyone else who brought it up at the time.

Well, to be fair to them, that's only because Bush's "scandal" was really nothing more than a clerical error, while Clinton's SCANDAL!!!!!!!!!!! is proof that she's evil.

You really can't just compare the two based on arbitrary criteria such as "factual similarities" or whatever other bullshit you want to come up with.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

So, if this is the scandal that keeps on giving, where are the arrests and stuff?

What I find odd is that it may have been illegal or against regulations to handle her email as such, but completely legal for the same branch of Government to divulge the identity of a secret agent. Or to publicly divulge secret military capabilities. Because this shit has all been about top secret stuff being put at risk. Yet, the right-wing didn't seem to have much trouble when the W Admin outed a secret agent and told the world we could arm our drones.

 

[maxparrish]

So, if this is the scandal that keeps on giving, where are the arrests and stuff?

What I find odd is that it may have been illegal or against regulations to handle her email as such, but completely legal for the same branch of Government to divulge the identity of a secret agent. Or to publicly divulge secret military capabilities. Because this shit has all been about top secret stuff being put at risk. Yet, the right-wing didn't seem to have much trouble when the W Admin outed a secret agent and told the world we could arm our drones.

For those paying attention to the obvious correlation between the email scandal and her collapsing polls, their is plenty of ongoing amusement. Naturally the "what about Bush" don't find it nearly as amusing as those who care little for Ms. Clinton.

And like any mini-series, one must be patient for the series finale that delivers the 'death blow of mercy' to Ms. Clinton. In the meantime, more news from the NY Times:

Second Review Says Classified Information Was in Hillary Clinton’s Email

WASHINGTON — A special intelligence review of two emails that Hillary Rodham Clinton received as secretary of state on her personal account — including one about North Korea’s nuclear weapons program — has endorsed a finding by the inspector general for the intelligence agencies that the emails contained highly classified information when Mrs. Clinton received them, senior intelligence officials said.

Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign and the State Department disputed the inspector general’s finding last month and questioned whether the emails had been overclassified by an arbitrary process. But the special review — by the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency — concluded that the emails were “Top Secret,” the highest classification of government intelligence, when they were sent to Mrs. Clinton in 2009 and 2011.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/08/u...s-in-hillary-clintons-email.html?src=twr&_r=0


Drip...drip...drip...

 

[Nice Squirrel]

I haven't been following this.

So what exactly did they find that is damaging?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

For those paying attention to the obvious correlation between the email scandal and her collapsing polls, their is plenty of ongoing amusement. Naturally the "what about Bush" don't find it nearly as amusing as those who care little for Ms. Clinton.

Clinton has decided to make moves into securing the South for the primaries. A wise decision seeing she has much stronger minority support than the much lesser known Bernie Sanders. Sanders is rising in the polls not because of emails but because he is getting his message out in Iowa and he represents the state next to New Hampshire.

Also, you didn't answer the question. Where is the scandal? I'm waiting for arrests.

The W remarks are just a continued reminder that people like you don't actually give a fuck about government secrets.

And like any mini-series, one must be patient for the series finale that delivers the 'death blow of mercy' to Ms. Clinton.

That right-wing mantra has been going on since 1993.

In the meantime, more news from the NY Times:

WASHINGTON — A special intelligence review of two emails that Hillary Rodham Clinton received as secretary of state on her personal account — including one about North Korea’s nuclear weapons program — has endorsed a finding by the inspector general for the intelligence agencies that the emails contained highly classified information when Mrs. Clinton received them, senior intelligence officials said.

Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign and the State Department disputed the inspector general’s finding last month and questioned whether the emails had been overclassified by an arbitrary process. But the special review — by the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency — concluded that the emails were “Top Secret,” the highest classification of government intelligence, when they were sent to Mrs. Clinton in 2009 and 2011.

Drip...drip...drip...

Let me know when the prosecutor gets XYZ to plead in support of testimony against Clinton.

 

[maxparrish]

You're kidding? The legal and political issue has been her retention of classified (and now Top Secret) information on her server, which is illegal and which she has denied (lied) about.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

You're kidding? The legal and political issue has been her retention of classified (and now Top Secret) information on her server, which is illegal and which she has denied (lied) about.

What information? Or is it so top secret only the shadow government knows?

 

[Ford]

For those paying attention to the obvious correlation between the email scandal and her collapsing polls, their is plenty of ongoing amusement. Naturally the "what about Bush" don't find it nearly as amusing as those who care little for Ms. Clinton.

And like any mini-series, one must be patient for the series finale that delivers the 'death blow of mercy' to Ms. Clinton. In the meantime, more news from the NY Times:

Second Review Says Classified Information Was in Hillary Clinton’s Email

WASHINGTON — A special intelligence review of two emails that Hillary Rodham Clinton received as secretary of state on her personal account — including one about North Korea’s nuclear weapons program — has endorsed a finding by the inspector general for the intelligence agencies that the emails contained highly classified information when Mrs. Clinton received them, senior intelligence officials said.

Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign and the State Department disputed the inspector general’s finding last month and questioned whether the emails had been overclassified by an arbitrary process. But the special review — by the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency — concluded that the emails were “Top Secret,” the highest classification of government intelligence, when they were sent to Mrs. Clinton in 2009 and 2011.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/08/u...s-in-hillary-clintons-email.html?src=twr&_r=0


Drip...drip...drip...

Further on down in the article (emphasis added):

Mrs. Clinton has said that her emails contained no information that was marked classified — having classified information outside a secure government account is illegal — and that she is fully cooperating with an F.B.I. investigation to determine who at the State Department may have passed highly classified information from secure networks to her personal account. She herself is not a target of the investigation.

 

[dismal]

Mrs. Clinton has said that her emails contained no information that was marked classified — having classified information outside a secure government account is illegal — and that she is fully cooperating with an F.B.I. investigation to determine who at the State Department may have passed highly classified information from secure networks to her personal account. She herself is not a target of the investigation.

This is what is generally what is referred to as "Clintonian parsing".

It matters not a whit whether the material is marked classified. It matters whether it is classified. Ad it was.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

This is what is generally what is referred to as "Clintonian parsing".

It matters not a whit whether the material is marked classified. It matters whether it is classified. Ad it was.

But if she received it and not sent it. Kind of like the Unibomber, we charge the guy who mails the bomb, not the receiver of the bomb.

 

[Ford]

This is what is generally what is referred to as "Clintonian parsing".

So the FBI is engaging in Clintonian parsing?

 

[TacticalLoco]

dismal parsing.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

You're kidding? The legal and political issue has been her retention of classified (and now Top Secret) information on her server, which is illegal and which she has denied (lied) about.

Yeah, the W Admin was blurting this shit in press conferences and leaking it to the public. But Clinton had it on a Server!!! Burn Her!!!

You are full of it.

If she is guilty, she deserves whatever the punishment is. But puhlease, stop it with pretending that you actually care about whether secret documents were on a server or not. You just want her in jail.

 

[Ford]

If she is guilty, she deserves whatever the punishment is. But puhlease, stop it with pretending that you actually care about whether secret documents were on a server or not. You just want her in jail to stop running for President.

Fixed it for you.

 

[bilby]

This is what is generally what is referred to as "Clintonian parsing".

It matters not a whit whether the material is marked classified. It matters whether it is classified. Ad it was.

Actually, neither the status of the material, nor how it was marked, need matter one whit to someone who is "not a target of the investigation".

But perhaps you missed that part of the post, with it being hidden in bold text.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

Did a bit of digging and it didn't take too long to see that Max's claim that Hillary's polls were "collapsing" is hyperbole. Especially when we look at this:

Show

-10 points does not constitute a "collapse". It's significant, but not a collapse. Moreover:

That's reinforced in a look at their favorability ratings, too. While Clinton's favorability rating with Democrats has slipped, it's mostly her favorability rating with all voters that's really taken a beating. She is still viewed favorably by 71 percent of Democrats -- exactly the same percentage who view Biden favorably. The percentage viewing her unfavorably is higher, yes, but only by five points.