More classified emails on Clinton server

[Merc14]

Government watchdog Judicial Watch has just released a new batch of emails, more than 1600 pages worth, belonging to former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and longtime aide Huma Abedin. The emails, released by the State Department as part of a lawsuit, show further mishandling of classified information. 

The list of egregious incidents is long, including exposure of a classified conversation about U.S.-Israeli relations, the war against drug cartels in Mexico, details about Clinton's arrival in war torn Afghanistan, Afghanistan elections and much more. Here are a few.:

Article continues:  https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2017/09/14/new-emails-show-clinton-mishandled-even-more-classified-information-n2381433?utm_campaign=socialflow_townhall&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social

[+and-then]

This reprehensible person epitomizes the corruption in our government today.  Until she is tried and imprisoned, I will never trust this government again.

[skliss]

Unreal! Yet they are free to run around hitting the talk shows and book signings. 

[+DieChecker]

Perhaps if enough of a stink is made, a REAL investigation can be conducted. Rather then one that was predestined by Comey to be dismissed before he spoke to a single witness.

Edited September 15, 2017 by DieChecker

[C L Palmer]

So, we have zero tangible evidence (other than rumors and suspicions) that President Trump colluded with the Russian government, which itself isn't a crime anyway. (Find me a law that even uses the word colluding. Also, find me a definition of the word colluding that isn't so vague as to make it useless.) The election itself wasn't hacked (as in altering the votes once they were cast), but information regarding one of the candidates was divulged that she would rather the public had no access to, which may or may not have shaped people's voting decisions. Meanwhile, the same candidate whose party is seeking to impeach the current president, who hasn't even been accused of an actual crime, is manifestly guilty of myriad federal crimes that would have landed anyone else in prison. My head swims...

It's crap like this that got Trump elected, not the Russians.

The regulations regarding an independent counsel require that a specific crime that is known to have actually occurred be the focus of the investigation. In this case, there is no crime as the general charge of colluding isn't against the law, nor could it be since colluding is such a vague concept anyway and can involve something as innocuous as re-tweeting or some other form of hypothetical and harmless support. Mueller needs to be fired, as there is no legal basis for his entire investigation. All Trump needs to do is hold a press conference, read the regulation out loud, read a statement applying that regulation to the investigation, and leave without answering any press questions (which would have been answered by the reading anyway, at least the substantive ones). 

Now as for the rumors of Trump approving DACA, there I have a problem. 

[Lilly]

4 minutes ago, C L Palmer said:

 

It's crap like this that got Trump elected, not the Russians.

 

Pretty much.

As for the DACA issue, I think Trump going to use it as a bargaining chip to get stronger border security (and the wall). I do not think there will be amnesty. I suspect there will be a way of letting the so called 'dreamers' stay for a certain time period during which they must demonstrate certain criteria for citizenship (no criminal record, employment or being in school).  

[aztek]

Just now, and then said:

This reprehensible person epitomizes the corruption in our government today.  Until she is tried and imprisoned, I will never trust this government again.

will never happen, and it has little to do with her,  if that Pandora's box opens, every politician will be at risk of being arrested for misconduct, nether congers not house, state or federal will ever let it happen. i would not be surprised if there is a secret law that protects them from almost anything, and it is kept secret so we do not raise shtstorm over it. 

[+OverSword]

Quit picking on her!  It's not her fault!  You are all misogynists!

[+and-then]

Is misogyny the desire to create a third eye in a person's forehead?  If so, count me in - hypothetically speaking, of course  

[Gromdor]

She won't go to jail.  She has a family friend who believes that the rich and powerful should be allowed to twist laws for their benefit as president.

[Merc14]

If they can bring a solid case of public corruption to the courts then she may serve time.  I haven't heard where this case is, though, only that 5 FBI field offices were investigating it.  March 2017 article  http://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/clinton-foundation-scandal/

Edited September 15, 2017 by Merc14

[Dark_Grey]

1 hour ago, aztek said:

will never happen, and it has little to do with her,  if that Pandora's box opens, every politician will be at risk of being arrested for misconduct, nether congers not house, state or federal will ever let it happen. i would not be surprised if there is a secret law that protects them from almost anything, and it is kept secret so we do not raise shtstorm over it. 

So...Congress? Exemptions on top of exemptions for themselves and their children, as voted on by Congress.

[Gromdor]

2 hours ago, aztek said:

will never happen, and it has little to do with her,  if that Pandora's box opens, every politician will be at risk of being arrested for misconduct, nether congers not house, state or federal will ever let it happen. i would not be surprised if there is a secret law that protects them from almost anything, and it is kept secret so we do not raise shtstorm over it. 

Laws like that evidently  exist already.  We've had numerous claims that Trump did things that are illegal for the common man or regular government employees but his supporters were able to point out how the president was legally exempt.  Take into account that congress is legally allowed to do insider trading and the like.  Then throw the pardon power (get out of jail free card).

[ChrLzs]

And now, Jared Kushner's (and five? more Trump staff - let's not raise Ivanka..) use of private emails is OK, of course, because umm.. it was not as many, and apparently these trustworthy folks have assured everyone there was nuthin classified.. Yep, got it.

[DarkHunter]

1 hour ago, ChrLzs said:

And now, Jared Kushner's (and five? more Trump staff - let's not raise Ivanka..) use of private emails is OK, of course, because umm.. it was not as many, and apparently these trustworthy folks have assured everyone there was nuthin classified.. Yep, got it.

It's a bit more nuanced then what you are making this out to be with what I assume is trying to paint Trump and his administration as hypocrites.

First off there is the amount which does make a difference, Clinton had over 30,000 if I remember correctly while Kushner and the others are around 100.  The significance is that Clinton was using her private email server as her main work email while being secretary of state while they are using their private emails sporadically.  

Secondly it's not illegal to use a private email for government work as long as any work related emails get forwarded to the government email so they can be properly recorded and there seems to be no indication that the Trump administration isn't doing that, which is something Clinton clearly didn't do as those emails are/were missing and she went out of her way to make sure they wouldn't be found or recovered.

Lastly there is no evidence that any classified information was in these emails while Clinton was storing classified information on her nonsecured email server.

If you want to ignore the rather significant differences between the two cases to paint Trump and his administration as hypocrites you can.

[ChrLzs]

You mean it's not against Trump administration rules?  Gee, I thought all those angry tweets were all pretty clear on this - using a private email account is not allowed.  But, yes, it's only a few hundred emails, weve been assured they aren't important, and Trump now has his man in the FBI.  So let's face it, it's all fine, it's not about the principles involved.. (it's about putting people in jail!)

No hypocrisy here, nope, not at all. No sarcasm either.  Just more fake news I guess.

[GlitterRose]

1 hour ago, ChrLzs said:

You mean it's not against Trump administration rules?  Gee, I thought all those angry tweets were all pretty clear on this - using a private email account is not allowed.  But, yes, it's only a few hundred emails, weve been assured they aren't important, and Trump now has his man in the FBI.  So let's face it, it's all fine, it's not about the principles involved.. (it's about putting people in jail!)

No hypocrisy here, nope, not at all. No sarcasm either.  Just more fake news I guess.

I can't imagine anyone with half a brain actually bought that bs. I mean, if they were really concerned about our secret information, they wouldn't invite a hostile foreign power to the White House and then spill the beans...and have everyone look the other way on it. 

Nobody gives a crap about security. Nobody gives a crap about corruption. 

They just wanted to get their guy in so they could rape the middle class and the poor. But they're so dysfunctional, they can't even manage what they've been dreaming of for the last 8 years (even though the deck couldn't be more stacked in their favor). 

Edited September 27, 2017 by ChaosRose

[Merc14]

6 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

And now, Jared Kushner's (and five? more Trump staff - let's not raise Ivanka..) use of private emails is OK, of course, because umm.. it was not as many, and apparently these trustworthy folks have assured everyone there was nuthin classified.. Yep, got it.

I have no idea what you are whining about as it seems to be a nonstory here.  Are you defending Hillary Clinton?  3k+ emails on a private  SERVER that she had wiped after ordered to turn it over?  Top secret info wiped so no one has any idea what she was trafficinng?  Is that comparable to someone using a gmail account for private emails (I am guesssing that is what you are whining about)/  How come we never heard from you when her story was being told?  

[Merc14]

HS, I just read about this and am LMAO at ChrLzs and hysterical Rose over their over the top reaction.  Talk about ridiculous?   If there is a question investigate but there is nothing illegal about using private email as long as you copy it to your official account.   It is  IN NOW WAY COMPARABLE TO WHAT CLINTON DID!    If you two disagree then please explaining to me how a woman who had her own unsecured server  hidden away and copied NOTHING to her official account and then, subsequently, wiped said server when subpoenaed to turn over these emails is comparable to this situation?   I'll ask ChrLzs again why he was so quiet when Hillary was committing crimes and is in an uproar over this?

[ChrLzs]

I think you are misjudging people's state of mind here, Merc - and frankly, that's a tinfoil tactic.  Read the posts again, and stop adding your own mental tone-of-voice.    In fact I'm rather puzzled by the fact that as soon as it turns to politics, all the logic and methodology you (and a couple of notable others) normally apply in analysis is replaced by mind-reading, ad-hominem, and subjective opinion.

My 'mindset' regarding the USA is that while the country seems to be managing to hold most things together (apart from unprecedented levels of division and anger) the presidency is a trainwreck.  But it's an entertaining trainwreck and let's just say I've learnt much about your culture...

If you wish to deal with this logically, then please address the issues rather than attack perceived/invented states of mind and accuse others of being hysterical (may I observe we are not using CAPITALS and LMAO-type claims of emotion...  Tell us things like how these newly admitted private email abuses have been examined (by the FBI? - yes or no and why?), and how many in total..  No?  You can't?  Oh well, let's continue as a decent researcher would:

Is it not true that Trump's (and several successive administrations') rules are that private email services are not ever to be used for gubmint business?

Is it *also* not true that a mostly blind eye has been turned to that rule, as many people (including now several from Trump's top level admin team) have done and still do it, it is almost impossible to police, and generally pretty harmless?

Is there a notable exception to that blind eye treatment, and what was the result?

Is it OK that we have the numbers and nature of the emails for that notable exception, but not for Ivanka, Jared and the others?  Is this about numbers, or is it more about content?  Which *should* it be about?

 

Address those issues and be careful, as this is a topic I know pretty well...  I strongly suggest you do some homework, esp. about what happened during the Bush and Clinton administrations, and then you can show us how you get from that to what appears to be an accusation of me mindlessly supporting Hilary Clinton. Had you read my previous posts and taken any notice, you would realise that I think both candidates for your last election were unbelievably ill-suited to any sort of office, let alone presidency.

 

Anyway, I shall continue being ...  simply bemused.  No hysterics, no support of Clinton or Trump or any of the hypocrites and incompetents that seem to infest a large portion of US politics.  If you are happy with all of this stuff, or wish to claim 'Fake!', then good for you.

Edited September 27, 2017 by ChrLzs

[Agent0range]

Who's Hillary?  A nobody.  How many classified emails on Jared, Ivanka, Steve, Priebus, and other's in the PRESIDENTIAL ADMINISTRATIONS private emails.  You campaign on it, you better be extra careful.  Apparently they didn't get the memo. 

[Merc14]

4 hours ago, ChrLzs said:

I think you are misjudging people's state of mind here, Merc - and frankly, that's a tinfoil tactic.  Read the posts again, and stop adding your own mental tone-of-voice.    In fact I'm rather puzzled by the fact that as soon as it turns to politics, all the logic and methodology you (and a couple of notable others) normally apply in analysis is replaced by mind-reading, ad-hominem, and subjective opinion.

Your state of mind is fairly obvious, you have an intense and visceral hatred of Donald trump.  The only subjective opinion was yours when you insinuated that Trump had the FBI in his pocket, which is laugahble and especially telling when Comey and Lynch, the former director of the FBI and Attorney General, were obviously in the pocket of the DNC and you were silent.

Quote

My 'mindset' regarding the USA is that while the country seems to be managing to hold most things together (apart from unprecedented levels of division and anger) the presidency is a trainwreck.  But it's an entertaining trainwreck and let's just say I've learnt much about your culture...

You may think you have learned much about our culture but I am guessing 90% of that, if not 100% has been from very biased sources.  Once again you seem to be blaming Trump for something that bloomed and thrived under the most divisive president we have had in decades, Obama.   Black Lives Matter, Occupy Wall Street (now Antifa), race riots etc. had calmed down for many years only to blossom once again and in fact grow and thrive through Obama's destructive 8 years as president and I don't remember a single post of your's bemoaning the fact that the US was "unprecedented levels of division and anger". You were silent a sI am sure those same sources you depend on were also silent.  So much for fair and balanced sourcing of research material.  

Quote

If you wish to deal with this logically, then please address the issues rather than attack perceived/invented states of mind and accuse others of being hysterical (may I observe we are not using CAPITALS and LMAO-type claims of emotion...  Tell us things like how these newly admitted private email abuses have been examined (by the FBI? - yes or no and why?), and how many in total..  No?  You can't?  Oh well, let's continue as a decent researcher would:

Oh please!  I posted because of the angry and ill-informed post you placed here where you did everything but have Trump paying off the FBI.   Show yoru evideb=nce please.  My evidence of Obama corruptin the DoJ and FBI will be played out for you soon when all these crooks are marched before congress.

Quote

Is it not true that Trump's (and several successive administrations') rules are that private email services are not ever to be used for gubmint business?

Is it *also* not true that a mostly blind eye has been turned to that rule, as many people (including now several from Trump's top level admin team) have done and still do it, it is almost impossible to police, and generally pretty harmless?

Is there a notable exception to that blind eye treatment, and what was the result?

Is it OK that we have the numbers and nature of the emails for that notable exception, but not for Ivanka, Jared and the others?  Is this about numbers, or is it more about content?  Which *should* it be about?

Here ya go:

The Presidential and Federal Records Act Amendments of 2014 (H.R. 1233) is a United States federal statute which amended the Presidential Records Act and Federal Records Act. Introduced as H.R. 1233, it was signed into law by President Barack Obama on November 26, 2014.

The act amends federal law regarding the preservation, storage, and management of federal records, specifically towards ensuring, prior to the release of records, the Archivist of the United States gives appropriate notice to both the current President of the United States and the President who was in office at the time the documentation was made .^[1] The last provision forbids officers and employees of the executive branch from using personal email accounts for government business, unless the employee copies all emails to either the originating officer or employee's government email, or to an official government record system to be recorded and archived.^[2]

The bill was introduced into the United States House of Representatives during the 113th United States Congress by Representative Elijah Cummings.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presidential_and_Federal_Records_Act_Amendments_of_2014

Don't like wikipedia go look it up in the US federal record, I don't have time now I am cloning a hard drive.  If old Jarwed screwed up and didn't forward official coorespondence then F him.  

 

Quote

 

Address those issues and be careful, as this is a topic I know pretty well...  I strongly suggest you do some homework, esp. about what happened during the Bush and Clinton administrations, and then you can show us how you get from that to what appears to be an accusation of me mindlessly supporting Hilary Clinton. Had you read my previous posts and taken any notice, you would realise that I think both candidates for your last election were unbelievably ill-suited to any sort of office, let alone presidency.

Hey if he broke some law then let him pay for it, I really don't care.

Quote

Anyway, I shall continue being ...  simply bemused.  No hysterics, no support of Clinton or Trump or any of the hypocrites and incompetents that seem to infest a large portion of US politics.  If you are happy with all of this stuff, or wish to claim 'Fake!', then good for you.

Yo u go right ahead and kid your self but it is obvious to me that you despise Trump.  I am bemused by your sudden worries about America who hasn't had a GDP above 3% for the last 8 years (usually at 1%) and lost its AAA credit rating under Obama but had a GDP of 3% and rising under Trump his first year.  The most disfunctional part of the government is our do-nothing republican congress (both houses) who are worthless IMHO.

 

BTW, comparing what Kushner did to Hillary is laughable and ridiculous. Want to get into that?  Be careful as this is a topic I know pretty well.  BTW, Obama changed the rules so forget Bush and Clinton, that is history.

Edited September 28, 2017 by Merc14

[Will Due]

It will be something won't it? Jail time for the worst kind of person, a lyin' politician.

But what will we do with an even worse person, the lyin' journalist?

 

Lying, it's worse than murder.

 

 

[Tatetopa]

There seems to be  common sense propriety missing here.  Years ago, when I handled money for my church and the charity we were supporting, I did not put the funds in my own bank account, I used the church account.  That way the question of impropriety never arises. 

It would seem also to be common sense not to use private emails for government business.  That way the question of impropriety never arises.    Seems obvious to smart corporate business types.

I don't like the Clintons much, I am not accusing the Trumps of being  crooked, just somewhat clueless after using it as a campaign issue.

25 minutes ago, Will Due said:

Lying, it's worse than murder.

Will, I think not committing murder is #5 if I remember and bearing false witness is #8.  Next time you talk to God, you might tell him HE got the order mixed up.

[Merc14]

19 minutes ago, Will Due said:

It will be something won't it? Jail time for the worst kind of person, a lyin' politician.

But what will we do with an even worse person, the lyin' journalist?

 

Lying, it's worse than murder.

 

 

I honestly don't know anymore.  Hillary obviously committed a felony with her email server when she wiped the drive after it was subpoenaed.  Comey testified that she showed "no criminal intent" when she trafficed classified material through her unsecured, unapproved server and that was obviously a lie yet she w ill likely never pay for that crime while many have.  Intent is pointedly NOT required for violating that law, in fact it is emphasized in the training and there is no doubt that crook had intent when she ordered the drive wiped so Comey was, as ChrLzs lamented above about Trump with ZERO evidence, "in the hands of the DNC and Obama administration" when he rendered that judgment, something he should never have done as the head LEO of the USA.   That there are two sets of laws in America now is pretty obvious as I see no sign of her paying.  

A bigger crime, which was being investigated but I have no idea where it stands now, is the public corruption case and RICO violations that five FBI field offices were assiduously investigating against the Clintons, and their foundation.   Many have gone to jail for less but they seem to have skated.  I may be premature since those things are usually kept quiet but we shall see.