Collarchat.com

Join Our Community
Collarchat.com

Home  Login  Search 

RE: Hillary's E-Mails


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Hillary's E-Mails Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Hillary's E-Mails - 3/4/2015 6:39:34 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
oh and this one about the home brew is even better.....
WASHINGTON (AP) — 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.

The highly unusual practice of a Cabinet-level official physically running her own email would have given Clinton, the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate, impressive control over limiting access to her message archives. It also would distinguish Clinton's secretive email practices as far more sophisticated than some politicians, including Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin, who were caught conducting official business using free email services operated by Microsoft Corp. and Yahoo Inc.

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: Hillary's E-Mails - 3/4/2015 6:51:59 AM   
tweakabelle


Posts: 7522
Joined: 10/16/2007
From: Sydney Australia
Status: offline
Sooooo .....
1. The rules that were alleged to have been broken were not operative until after Hilary left State; and
2. Leading GOP politicians were doing the exact same thing anyway.

It doesn't seem like there is anything interesting to see here. Will that shut the Right up on this issue? I doubt it but being naturally optimistic, I'm crossing my fingers in hope ....

_____________________________



(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: Hillary's E-Mails - 3/4/2015 6:59:17 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
the lil cleopatras will carry on without taking any notice of anything that doesnt agree with their sources.

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: Hillary's E-Mails - 3/4/2015 9:33:38 AM   
Aylee


Posts: 24103
Joined: 10/14/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Sooooo .....
1. The rules that were alleged to have been broken were not operative until after Hilary left State; and
2. Leading GOP politicians were doing the exact same thing anyway.

It doesn't seem like there is anything interesting to see here. Will that shut the Right up on this issue? I doubt it but being naturally optimistic, I'm crossing my fingers in hope ....


No, the Federal Records Act was in place before Hillary was Sec of State.

_____________________________

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam

I don’t always wgah’nagl fhtagn. But when I do, I ph’nglui mglw’nafh R’lyeh.

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: Hillary's E-Mails - 3/4/2015 10:10:08 AM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
which other politicians, on either side of the aisle were doing the "exact same thing?" and if I missed something (and I certainly might have) did liberals criticize/attack those republicans at the time? and if they did, then how could they not be doing the same thing in regards to Hillary right now?

but that said, I think here are some differences: she exclusively used her private account and did not use her work one at all.

and if I was reading ken's earlier link correctly, its been subsequently shown that the server for those emails actually belongs to her.

she has no actual knowledge as to whether or not all of her work emails have been salvaged/saved according to the law.

and I think one reason why we, or at least why I hope we wont "shut up" is because no one knows what was turned over and what was not.

< Message edited by bounty44 -- 3/4/2015 10:19:04 AM >

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: Hillary's E-Mails - 3/4/2015 10:30:52 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
What exact statute and specification has she violated? Give me the USC and para.



< Message edited by mnottertail -- 3/4/2015 10:31:16 AM >


_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: Hillary's E-Mails - 3/4/2015 10:35:47 AM   
GoddessManko


Posts: 2257
Joined: 3/6/2013
From: Dante's Inferno
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

which other politicians, on either side of the aisle were doing the "exact same thing?"


Jeb Bush.

_____________________________

Happy consent is the name of the game. You are my perfect Mistress. - my collared.

http://submissivemale.blogspot.com/

The Bird of Hermes is my name, eating my wings to make me tame.

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: Hillary's E-Mails - 3/4/2015 10:45:12 AM   
joether


Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Gee you guys sound like a lot of sore sorry losers. The impression I gained from most of the above posts is the Hilary is guilty of .... er ... um ... something but it's not going to make any difference because she's a Clinton and therefore above the law. As if .....

I seem to remember the Right spending an awful lot of time and money chasing the Clintons while BIll was President and failing to find anything improper. I see the Right currently trying to do the same to Obama- birth certs, law degrees Benghazi etc etc and still failing to find anything substantial.

I see the GOP in Congress shutting the government down and losing face and voters. I see them trying the same failing tactics with DHS funding.

The obsessions are pursued while the real business of running the country is ignored. The voters are uninterested and alienated while the GOP chases pink elephants. Does anyone think the electorate (outside of a narrow dwindling GOP base) is impressed? Do you think any one else cares?

When are you guys ever going to learn? The same failures being repeated will result in the same outcomes - kiss the White House good bye in 2016. Better still if you are unprepared to change kiss it good bye now and save everyone the time, bother and expense.


Conservatives 'vote' (i.e. hire) bad people to 'represent them' before the name. These people then go around fucking shit up, so it helps during the election that they guys need to be re-elected to fight 'bad government' (the stuff they created in the first place). Unfortunately, conservatives dont hold the people they support and vote into elected office to the same level as they blame Democrats. For if they were to do such a thing, we'd have better government over night.

Last year, the Republican Party partially shut the government down, and wanted a full shut down. Now imagine if Democrats had done such a thing? Every single blogger and media engine in the conservative ideology would be railing them as total traitors and anti-Americans. Since it was Republicans and more importantly, Tea Partiers, the conservative media was absolutely silent on the issue.

When the event known as Benghazi came up, the Republican/Tea Party was all over it. Demanding inquire and congressional discussions as often as possible. Trying to pin the administration on some 'wrong' in any way they could. An the conservative media egged on the ignorant conservatives to push this. After all the evidence was sorted, examined, and looked at objectively, the issue was something different, and the Administration was not even a 1/10th as responsible for events as the conservative media pushed. Yet, during the previous Republican administraiton, there was quite a number of such attacks, and this conservative media, the elected officials in Congress, nor conservatives, help that administration to even a billionth of the accountability and responsibility.

What was Clinton impeached for (but a Republican controlled Congress)? Oh yeah, 'getting it on with a jewish intern behind closed doors'. How many politicians on either side of the isle have done that? Newt Gingrinch comes to mind. And what is he significant? He was doing the same FUCKING THING as Speak of the House while prosecuting Clinton on the impeachment hearings. Yeah, Bill lied about it to protect his family. The lie had....NOTHING....to do with the nation.

Lets compare that to George W. Bush. He and his administration told Congress and the nation that Iraq and Al Qaeda were working together (they werent), that Osama bin Laden was working was Saddam Hussein directly (they werent). That Iraq had weapons of mass destruction in massive stockpiles (they really didnt have that). So we invade on two fronts, and what did we find with the truth and fact? 3,200+ dead US Soldiers, 32,500+ wounded US Soldiers, 100,000-600,000 civilians dead, and spent $4 trillion of borrowed money on on the whole thing. And where were all the investigations, cries from conservatives to keep the people they support to the same level of accountability and responsibility as they lash at President Obama on a daily basis?

You could drop a pin into that room and be blown over by the shockwave of force from 100 miles away!

Conservatives lost both elections fair and square. There was no 'massive' voter ID fraud going on. Nor were voters lied to by the administration. They are just sore, immature losers. An now with this issue of the Dept. of Homeland Security and funding issue shows the level of bullshit on display to everyone....BUT....conservatives/libertarians in this nation.

I'm 'OK" if you conservatives want to hold some Democrat to a high standard of performance. Just as long as you hold the people you support and elect to office to that same level, if not higher. The amount of threads so far, show that you guys have been dropping the ball every time one of these conservative and libertarian assholes fucks up. In those threads, we see you trying to defend their silly and inexcusable positions time and again. Why should we hold Democrats accountable and responsible with power, when you cant with those you support and elect?

We are told that Republicans can govern better than Democrats. So far, I'm not really impressed given the Department of Homeland Security issue....

You might want to contact them, conservatives & libertarians. Tell those people to get their shit in gear. Because 2016 is approaching each day. And Americans are not happy with how Congress is behaving right now! Maybe we just need to flush all the Republican/Tea Partiers down the toilet. Seems when ever we have Democrats in office, we have good economic times, free of wars, and make actual progress on many areas.

(in reply to tweakabelle)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: Hillary's E-Mails - 3/4/2015 10:48:36 AM   
joether


Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee


quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Sooooo .....
1. The rules that were alleged to have been broken were not operative until after Hilary left State; and
2. Leading GOP politicians were doing the exact same thing anyway.

It doesn't seem like there is anything interesting to see here. Will that shut the Right up on this issue? I doubt it but being naturally optimistic, I'm crossing my fingers in hope ....


No, the Federal Records Act was in place before Hillary was Sec of State.


This would be the Federal Records Accountability Act of 2014 (H.R. 5170) your referring to?


(in reply to Aylee)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: Hillary's E-Mails - 3/4/2015 11:15:56 AM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: GoddessManko


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

which other politicians, on either side of the aisle were doing the "exact same thing?"


Jeb Bush.


that really doesn't answer the question fully. what did jeb bush do such that its the exact same thing? plus the post said politicians, plural, not just one.

and whatever it was that he did do, was he soundly/roundly criticized for it by liberals? and if so, then shouldn't Hillary be also?

< Message edited by bounty44 -- 3/4/2015 11:22:47 AM >

(in reply to GoddessManko)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: Hillary's E-Mails - 3/4/2015 11:33:14 AM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: joether


quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee


quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

Sooooo .....
1. The rules that were alleged to have been broken were not operative until after Hilary left State; and
2. Leading GOP politicians were doing the exact same thing anyway.

It doesn't seem like there is anything interesting to see here. Will that shut the Right up on this issue? I doubt it but being naturally optimistic, I'm crossing my fingers in hope ....


No, the Federal Records Act was in place before Hillary was Sec of State.


This would be the Federal Records Accountability Act of 2014 (H.R. 5170) your referring to?




I trust since federal records acts have been around since not too long after federal records first existed, and I trust aylee knows Hillary was secretary of state prior to 2014, so she is not referring to the particular one you've mentioned, but rather, to an earlier iteration of it....

if you were looking for some sort of "gotcha" moment, you don't have it.

if I have misread your post, then I apologize and I will look forward to reading why you are wondering about 2014.




< Message edited by bounty44 -- 3/4/2015 11:34:59 AM >

(in reply to joether)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: Hillary's E-Mails - 3/4/2015 11:40:18 AM   
mnottertail


Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline
And I still wait on the USC and para that has been violated from some previous iteration.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30


(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: Hillary's E-Mails - 3/4/2015 1:53:07 PM   
Aylee


Posts: 24103
Joined: 10/14/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

And I still wait on the USC and para that has been violated from some previous iteration.


quote:

44 U.S. Code Chapter 31 § 3101

The head of each Federal agency shall make and preserve records containing adequate and proper documentation of the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, and essential transactions of the agency and designed to furnish the information necessary to protect the legal and financial rights of the Government and of persons directly affected by the agency’s activities.

§ 3102

The head of each Federal agency shall establish and maintain an active, continuing program for the economical and efficient management of the records of the agency. The program, among other things, shall provide for
(1) effective controls over the creation and over the maintenance and use of records in the conduct of current business;
(2) cooperation with the Administrator of General Services and the Archivist in applying standards, procedures, and techniques designed to improve the management of records, promote the maintenance and security of records deemed appropriate for preservation, and facilitate the segregation and disposal of records of temporary value; and
(3) compliance with sections 2101–2117, 2501–2507, 2901–2909, and 3101–3107, of this title and the regulations issued under them.

§ 3103

When the head of a Federal agency determines that such action may affect substantial economies or increased operating efficiency, he shall provide for the transfer of records to a records center maintained and operated by the Archivist, or, when approved by the Archivist, to a center maintained and operated by the head of the Federal agency.

§ 3105


The head of each Federal agency shall establish safeguards against the removal or loss of records he determines to be necessary and required by regulations of the Archivist. Safeguards shall include making it known to officials and employees of the agency—
(1) that records in the custody of the agency are not to be alienated or destroyed except in accordance with sections 3301–3314 of this title, and
(2) the penalties provided by law for the unlawful removal or destruction of records.


§ 3106

The head of each Federal agency shall notify the Archivist of any actual, impending, or threatened unlawful removal, defacing, alteration, or destruction of records in the custody of the agency of which he is the head that shall come to his attention, and with the assistance of the Archivist shall initiate action through the Attorney General for the recovery of records he knows or has reason to believe have been unlawfully removed from his agency, or from another Federal agency whose records have been transferred to his legal custody. In any case in which the head of the agency does not initiate an action for such recovery or other redress within a reasonable period of time after being notified of any such unlawful action, the Archivist shall request the Attorney General to initiate such an action, and shall notify the Congress when such a request has been made.



As I understand it, archival is the issue here. Her Sec of State emails were not all archived government storage. And neither were a couple of her aides, Huma, being one of them.

Although I have seen things alluding to classified documents going through personal email which is not allowed because classified information is owned by the government and should never be on anything personal.

I really do not want to get into conspiracy theories about "foreign governments paying for her server."


And for joether, I think this code was established in the 50s but it has been updated quite often.

_____________________________

Ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam

I don’t always wgah’nagl fhtagn. But when I do, I ph’nglui mglw’nafh R’lyeh.

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: Hillary's E-Mails - 3/4/2015 4:51:16 PM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline
I think all official emails from any serving politician should be kept for the public record.

Officials should also stop using the often bogus claim of witheld/redacted "due to public interest" anything said to fall under this claim should be contestable before a Judge.

(in reply to Aylee)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: Hillary's E-Mails - 3/4/2015 5:47:44 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee
Federal Records Act.
The issue is making sure that all of her emails were preserved on department servers. It looks like this did not happen.


It's not strictly all her emails that have to be preserved on department servers. It's all the emails that were part of her job as Secretary of State. If she emailed someone about something not work-related, that doesn't have to be preserved. Any email she sent to her aides government email accounts would be on government servers.

The problem is that her aides (and I'm sure she and/or former President Bill) went through all those emails and selected "all" the ones that pertained to her job as SoS. If you trust her and her aides, then all is well. If not, then all is not well. The problem is going to be in proving that she didn't release all the emails she should have.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Aylee)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: Hillary's E-Mails - 3/4/2015 7:36:04 PM   
bounty44


Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline
"The problem is going to be in proving that she didn't release all the emails she should have."

I think desideri since the server's in her house, its likely to be well nigh impossible though I understand trey gowdy just had (or is about to have) a subpoena issued for something.

I watched megyn Kelly and judge Andrew Napolitano have a conversation about this tonight on the Kelly file, and they both were talking about misdemeanor and potential felony charges.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: Hillary's E-Mails - 3/4/2015 11:27:23 PM   
joether


Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44
quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee
quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
Sooooo .....
1. The rules that were alleged to have been broken were not operative until after Hilary left State; and
2. Leading GOP politicians were doing the exact same thing anyway.

It doesn't seem like there is anything interesting to see here. Will that shut the Right up on this issue? I doubt it but being naturally optimistic, I'm crossing my fingers in hope ....


No, the Federal Records Act was in place before Hillary was Sec of State.

This would be the Federal Records Accountability Act of 2014 (H.R. 5170) your referring to?

I trust since federal records acts have been around since not too long after federal records first existed, and I trust aylee knows Hillary was secretary of state prior to 2014, so she is not referring to the particular one you've mentioned, but rather, to an earlier iteration of it....

if you were looking for some sort of "gotcha" moment, you don't have it.

if I have misread your post, then I apologize and I will look forward to reading why you are wondering about 2014.


No actually, I was rather inquiring if that was the same act she was referring to or not. I was aware that President Obama signed that bit into law, but think, its an update more than a new law. So I am merely backtracking information, so I can read up on the law as it might pertain to this issue.

(in reply to bounty44)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: Hillary's E-Mails - 3/4/2015 11:34:44 PM   
joether


Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline
Wouldn't it be neat if we could check on all elected official's emails? I'm sure Ted Cruz and others have some juicy bits.

Because I keep feeling like this 'shake down' of Hillary Clinton has nothing to do with the emails or anything related to them. And has more to do with Republicans needing....something...to tag onto the lady for 2016. Maybe we should investigate all the possible 2016 Republican and Tea Party candidates emails. Making sure they dotted their 'i' and cross their 't' in a manner of speaking. And that we do this with the same intensity as with Clinton right now. That way we know, things are being fair.

This is like the issue of Benghazi. Republicans and Tea Party fishing for....something....anything.....

...Anyone like to give me a reasonable argument that this is all 'legit' and has....nothing....to do with the general election?

(in reply to joether)
Profile   Post #: 38
RE: Hillary's E-Mails - 3/4/2015 11:51:17 PM   
KenDckey


Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline
Joe Don't forget it was a hacker that found them and ultimately released them. Not that I am in favor of hacking but for once it did something good.

(in reply to joether)
Profile   Post #: 39
RE: Hillary's E-Mails - 3/5/2015 12:44:09 AM   
DaddySatyr


Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline

It comes down to the same thing that's been going on for at least 40 years: Hillary and her ilk don't want to play by the same rules by which they demand others play. Really simple.



Michael


_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to KenDckey)
Profile   Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Hillary's E-Mails Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2024
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.102