Page 35 of 42 FirstFirst ... 253334353637 ... LastLast
Results 341 to 350 of 418

Thread: Clinton had no official State Dept. email address

  1. #341
    Sage
    Fenton's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,320

    Re: Clinton had no official State Dept. email address

    Quote Originally Posted by DifferentDrummr View Post
    And of course, you have no proof. Thanks for supporting my claim.
    Lol !

    Proof that she DIDN'T set up her own personal Email server ?? Are you kidding ?

  2. #342
    Advisor Rearden's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Last Seen
    @
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    347

    Re: Clinton had no official State Dept. email address

    Quote Originally Posted by DifferentDrummr View Post
    And of course, you have no proof. Thanks for supporting my claim.
    Ms. Clinton's liability is premised on the report that she has not turned over, to the proper authorities, government records she sent while serving as the SOS. If she turned over every record already then there is no liability. However, right now, based on what I've read, it appears that Clinton aides themselves are saying that not every record has been turned over. Doubtlessly, this will be the debate in the coming days.

    44 USC Chapter 31, which is titled RECORDS MANAGEMENT BY FEDERAL AGENCIES.
    "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"
    "§ 1236.22 What are the additional requirements for managing electronic mail records?
    (a) Agencies must issue instructions to staff on the following retention and management requirements for electronic mail records:

    (1) The names of sender and all addressee(s) and date the message was sent must be preserved for each electronic mail record in order for the context of the message to be understood. The agency may determine that other metadata is needed to meet agency business needs, e.g., receipt information.

    (2) Attachments to electronic mail messages that are an integral part of the record must be preserved as part of the electronic mail record or linked to the electronic mail record with other related records.

    (3) If the electronic mail system identifies users by codes or nicknames or identifies addressees only by the name of a distribution list, retain the intelligent or full names on directories or distributions lists to ensure identification of the sender and addressee(s) of messages that are records.
    ...

    (b) Agencies that allow employees to send and receive official electronic mail messages using a system not operated by the agency must ensure that Federal records sent or received on such systems are preserved in the appropriate agency recordkeeping system."

    That is the law, she broke it.

  3. #343
    Sage
    Mycroft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    25,877

    Re: Clinton had no official State Dept. email address

    I find it an amusing, pathetic display of lefty hypocrisy, don't you?

    I mean, on the one hand, we have leftists explaining how Clinton complied with the law...as it is written...to excuse her actions. On the other hand, those same leftists argue that the current Obamacare case before the Supreme Court should be thrown out because the law...as it is written...shouldn't be followed.
    TANSTAAFL

    “An armed society is a polite society.”
    ― Robert A. Heinlein, Beyond This Horizon

  4. #344
    Student
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    98053
    Last Seen
    04-19-15 @ 03:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    264

    Re: Clinton had no official State Dept. email address

    Quote Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
    I find it an amusing, pathetic display of lefty hypocrisy, don't you?

    I mean, on the one hand, we have leftists explaining how Clinton complied with the law...as it is written...to excuse her actions. On the other hand, those same leftists argue that the current Obamacare case before the Supreme Court should be thrown out because the law...as it is written...shouldn't be followed.
    Au contraire. We want the law, as written, to be enforced. It seems that the intent of the words in the ACA is not clear, hence the court case. The interpretation of the people who voted for the law is fairly clear, that the US government could run the exchanges if a state decided not to. It is absurd to assume that the intent was to deny subsidies if a state decided to let the US government run the exchange. That, of course, might not keep the SCOTUS from saying that the law means something other than Congress and the President say that it means because the SCOTUS has ruled that corporations are people and that is about as stupid as you can get.

  5. #345
    Sage
    Mycroft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    25,877

    Re: Clinton had no official State Dept. email address

    Quote Originally Posted by zip98053 View Post
    Au contraire. We want the law, as written, to be enforced. It seems that the intent of the words in the ACA is not clear, hence the court case. The interpretation of the people who voted for the law is fairly clear, that the US government could run the exchanges if a state decided not to. It is absurd to assume that the intent was to deny subsidies if a state decided to let the US government run the exchange. That, of course, might not keep the SCOTUS from saying that the law means something other than Congress and the President say that it means because the SCOTUS has ruled that corporations are people and that is about as stupid as you can get.
    The words in Obamacare...as written...are quite clear. Yet leftists don't want the words...as written...enforced. They talk about "intent". Well, if they intended one thing...but wrote another...then they screwed up.

    But that's where the hypocrisy comes in. In the Clinton case, they aren't interested in "intent"...rather the words of the law...as written.
    TANSTAAFL

    “An armed society is a polite society.”
    ― Robert A. Heinlein, Beyond This Horizon

  6. #346
    Student
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    98053
    Last Seen
    04-19-15 @ 03:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    264

    Re: Clinton had no official State Dept. email address

    Quote Originally Posted by Mycroft View Post
    The words in Obamacare...as written...are quite clear. Yet leftists don't want the words...as written...enforced. They talk about "intent". Well, if they intended one thing...but wrote another...then they screwed up.
    If the meaning of the words was "quite clear" then I don't believe that there would be a case in front of the SCOTUS. All kinds of people who were responsible for writing and enforcing the law (including Republican Governors) have said that they assumed that the law allowed subsidies no matter the exchange (state or federal). What is actually screwed up is this continuous Republican attack the ACA.

    But that's where the hypocrisy comes in. In the Clinton case, they aren't interested in "intent"...rather the words of the law...as written.
    The intent matters. It was not common understanding that the Federal Records Act covered emails. That why Secretaries of State like Clinton and Powel maintained private email accounts and why the FRA had to be clarified to make it clear. Hillary has made her emails available. She has met the spirit of the old law. She can't go back in time and have not had a personal account but she has provided the emails which puts the record keeping at parity with the new law. Naturally, this will not keep the Republican conspiracy mill from cracking out all kinds of BS. This will juice up the base and bore the hell out of the rest of us.

  7. #347
    Traveler

    Jack Hays's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Williamsburg, Virginia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    54,917
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Clinton had no official State Dept. email address

    Quote Originally Posted by zip98053 View Post
    It was not common understanding that the Federal Records Act covered emails.
    "It's always reassuring to find you've made the right enemies." -- William J. Donovan

  8. #348
    Sage
    Mycroft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 09:28 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    25,877

    Re: Clinton had no official State Dept. email address

    Quote Originally Posted by zip98053 View Post
    If the meaning of the words was "quite clear" then I don't believe that there would be a case in front of the SCOTUS.
    The words ARE quite clear. You can't get much more clear than "established by the State". The only reason it's before the Supremes is because the IRS realized how clear the words were and subsequently "re-interpreted" the law to say something it doesn't.

    All kinds of people who were responsible for writing and enforcing the law (including Republican Governors) have said that they assumed that the law allowed subsidies no matter the exchange (state or federal). What is actually screwed up is this continuous Republican attack the ACA.
    No...what's screwed up is that the Democrats wrote the law with a certain intention (forcing the States to create their own exchanges) and when that intention blew up in their faces they found they had to go into spinning mode...hence these after-the-fact assumptions.

    The intent matters. It was not common understanding that the Federal Records Act covered emails. That why Secretaries of State like Clinton and Powel maintained private email accounts and why the FRA had to be clarified to make it clear. Hillary has made her emails available. She has met the spirit of the old law. She can't go back in time and have not had a personal account but she has provided the emails which puts the record keeping at parity with the new law. Naturally, this will not keep the Republican conspiracy mill from cracking out all kinds of BS. This will juice up the base and bore the hell out of the rest of us.
    The problem here is that everyone is stressing the letter of the law and minimizing Hillary's actual intentions. She never made her emails available...for years...until matters forced her to turn them over. And nobody is sure she has actually turned them ALL over.


    Face it...to liberals/progressives/socialists/Democrats, nothing matters...not even blatant hypocrisy...if the means bring about the ends.
    TANSTAAFL

    “An armed society is a polite society.”
    ― Robert A. Heinlein, Beyond This Horizon

  9. #349
    Sage

    Join Date
    May 2007
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:43 PM
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,940

    Re: Clinton had no official State Dept. email address

    She said she will give up 55,000 of her emails, divide 55,000 by four years in office and you have 13,750 emails per year, divide that number by 12 months and you get 1,146 per month. Take weekends off and you have 22 work days, so 1,146 emails divided by 22 gives you 52 emails per day. Anyone smell something here? Keep in mind the 55,000 does not include the emails she is hiding.

  10. #350
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Last Seen
    10-14-15 @ 09:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    56,981

    Re: Clinton had no official State Dept. email address

    Quote Originally Posted by rhinefire View Post
    She said she will give up 55,000 of her emails, divide 55,000 by four years in office and you have 13,750 emails per year, divide that number by 12 months and you get 1,146 per month. Take weekends off and you have 22 work days, so 1,146 emails divided by 22 gives you 52 emails per day. Anyone smell something here? Keep in mind the 55,000 does not include the emails she is hiding.
    Mornin RF. What you think is left on the burner? Even Lawrence O'Donnell from MSDNC says Hillary did this to Defy the Freedom of Info Act. That's to Defy the Law, he said.




    The Clinton email controversy isn’t going away, no matter how hard Media Matters’ David Brock–a die-hard Clintonite–tries to squash it. Clinton appears to have created multiple private email address, and a senior State Department official said that she was probably operating in direct violation of State Department policy regarding electronic communications for six years. Clinton’s way of executing official government business through a private server also exposed the United States to data breaches. Additionally, it appears that 90 percent of the emails Clinton turned over could have already been in State’s hands since it was intra-department communication with employees using the state.gov email address. This pretty much kills any “she’s being transparent … because emails” talking point that some of her defenders have been peddling (via WaPo)

    Of the e-mails that were turned over to State, the Clinton aide said, 90 percent were correspondence between Clinton and agency employees using their regular government e-mail accounts, which end in state.gov.

    The remaining 10 percent were communications between Clinton and other government officials, including some at the White House, along with an unknown number of people “not on a government server,” the aide said. The aide requested anonymity because the e-mails are not yet public.....snip~

    Wait, The State Department Already Had 90 Percent Of The Emails Clinton Turned Over? - Matt Vespa



Page 35 of 42 FirstFirst ... 253334353637 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •