General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsServer scrubbed clean
I don't know how or why it was done, but it was done. Foolish decision. There was probably nothing on them that could have hurt more than deleting them.
That couldn't be the end of the matter because whom those emails went to may have them on their computers or servers. "If" there is anything controversial on them, there may be problems ahead.
The folks who received them and still have them will have to be treated with kid gloves. They can either demand bribes to keep the emails confidential, which is extortion, or out of a purer motive, may decide to release their copies of emails knowing they have negative information that could blow up the campaign.
We ain't heard the end of it. Before you know it, Dowdy will be offering rewards for information leading to....you finish.
JHB
(37,122 posts)...and that's never had any substance.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)newspaper articles, etc.
The need to destroy the emails opens the door wide to suspician of far worse than actually probably existed. Dumb move, unless someone is somewhat self-destructive or conflicted over what they really want. Paranoia really will destroy ya.
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)that don't belong to the State Department? She shouldn't.
And they should trust her to make the distinction because they're trusting all government employees to do that every day -- each time they send an email and have to choose to send it either by .gov or through a personal account.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)pnwmom
(108,915 posts)Hekate
(89,977 posts)Hekate
(89,977 posts)What makes you think that ANY amount of proof from HRC will suffice?
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)It's about what Hillary was trying to hide. People now will wonder what it was she was trying to hide. And there is no way to prove she wasn't trying to hide something.
Hekate
(89,977 posts)....no amount of evidence will ever be enough to people who disliked and distrusted her from the time she was FLOTUS trying to carry Bill's health care act to the US Senate.
So the argument is pointless. Pick something real.
magical thyme
(14,881 posts)\
Hekate
(89,977 posts)Sunlei
(22,651 posts)fadedrose
(10,044 posts)you're paying attention
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)Fumesucker
(45,851 posts)We all knew there was nothing underhanded going on with Romney.
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)leveymg
(36,418 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,702 posts)It is Tuesday
(93 posts)and YOU know it... Anything to damage the Democratic nomination process.
HRC isn't the best person for the Democratic nomination (so far) - and currently no Democrat is announcing as of yet, so there's always going to be speculation.
Let the primaries begin! May the best of the Democratic people step up for the job.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,702 posts)and he left office with an approval ratings in the high 60s!!!:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/116584/presidential-approval-ratings-bill-clinton.aspx
and he remains America's most popular living president:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/171794/clinton-elder-bush-positively-rated-living-presidents.aspx
As for Secretary Clinton she has solid leads over all her Republican opponents:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_presidential_race.html
Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.
-John Adams
It is Tuesday
(93 posts)It's more rapid information out there to disseminate, though....
Now? Even more scrutiny than usual...
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,702 posts)If you show me one persuadable voter who won't vote for Hillary Clinton in November of 2016 because she used a personal e-mail address I will streak across Dodger Stadium during their biggest game of the year.
It is Tuesday
(93 posts)it's the people who don't give a rat's ass, but the M$M will be willing to blare that crap for the Republican Party all day long...
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,702 posts)And folks who don't have strong feelings either way will vote for that candidate they feel will do the most for him or her and comes closest to representing their values.
It is Tuesday
(93 posts)I think I'll wait for my choice as Ms. Clinton isn't exactly what represents me as a person.
Since Ms. Clinton isn't an declared candidate, I'd hold your enuthasim until she does officially declare, and you can try to persuade me why a moneyed Third Way member should hold my interest as a voter that is definitely in the 99%?
I'll listen to what she has to say, but I'm perceiving her as someone who's not really for the people.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,702 posts)I don't know what else I can say...
It is Tuesday
(93 posts)Just waiting for the Democratic primary season to begin....
Good luck to yours!
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,702 posts)It is Tuesday
(93 posts)Beautiful weather this weekend... nearly 80s in Denver,
And I have to head towards crappy weather for the next week (50s in Chicago) - and ironically enough, I'll be there for the runoff, but it's probably Rahm winning it as I am hearing that Chuy isn't putting much of a campaign steam...
Maybe I could be wrong too.
fadedrose
(10,044 posts)A big crowd cheered him as he went on his way.
When I analyze why I was happy for him, I know that it was because of the unfair treatment he and Monica received from Ken Starr and his hoods.
Maybe Clinton did wrong and the young woman was not coerced, that made it consensual among adults. The impeachment was ridiculous because Clinton lied, when he never should have had to answer the charges under oath. It was ridiculous.
That said, Clinton was a great communicator, but not a great man. NAFTA sucked then and still does. I used to go on Ebay to buy fabric and the women who lost their jobs working at fabric manufacturers in PA hated and despised him. The best cloth you could buy was sold for $1/yd on bids. The fabric was given them by the owners... He cut welfare and did not renew the Glass- Steagall Act that made the banks behave and is responsible for many of our current troubles and the wealth going to the 1% when they should have gone to jail.
But impeachment for lying about an consensual affair with a female, NO NO NO.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)Who?
Exactly.
fadedrose
(10,044 posts)And I didn't look it up.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)To conspiracy by members of Congress to continue to waste tax payer money on non scandals".
greytdemocrat
(3,299 posts)Answer isn't going to cut it this time. Very foolish.
Response to fadedrose (Original post)
Post removed
RiverLover
(7,830 posts)No biggie, she still just so darn admirable!!
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,702 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,702 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)anything? Explain it.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,702 posts)If you want to abet Mr. Gowdy in his fishing expedition there is nothing a random internet poster (me) can do to stop you.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)for support is meaningless? He claimed scrubbing the server proved something, but it clearly didn't.
Abet Gowdy? Weak sauce.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,702 posts)I stand with Mr. Cummings in his opposition to Mr. Gowdy's fishing expedition.
If you want to stand with his Republican opponent there is nothing I can do to prevent you...
What you really want to do is engage me in some pointless debate over e-mail protocol... I am content to let the voters sort it out.
If you think this is a matter for law enforcement you can petition the Attorney General to launch an investigation.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)used. How does scrubbing the servers prove anything?
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,702 posts)She satisfied the demands of the Ranking Member of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform and the Select Committee on Benghazi.
That's good enough for me...
If you believe that disqualifies her a a presidential candidate I suggest you find someone to support in the primaries and back him or her to the hilt.
If you feel that laws were broken you can contact:
The Honorable Eric Holder
U.S. Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW
Washington, DC 20530-0001
202-353-1555
morningfog
(18,115 posts)You shouldn't post quotes that are meaningless just because you like who said it. At least if you do, you should be prepared to explain why the quote isn't meaningless.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,702 posts)If you think she broke the law petition the Attorney General to launch an investigation.
If you think this incident while not unlawful disqualifies her as a candidate find a candidate you like and support him and her to the hilt...
If you think what she did is unlawful and/or disqualifies her as a candidate for the president there is nothing I can do to disabuse you of that notion...
Speaking colloquially I don't give a rat's ass about her e-mail protocol and am willing to wager that this brouhaha will not prevent her from being our forty fifth president...
morningfog
(18,115 posts)You keep talking about protocols ans laws ans some republicans and such. All I asked of you was to explain Rep. Cummings' quote, because it does not make sense. I don't get how her scrubbing the server proves anything.
That is it.
Have I ever said she broke the law? Have I said it disqualifies her? No.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,702 posts)"Have I ever said she broke the law? Have I said it disqualifies her? No."
-Morningfog
-morningfog
morningfog
(18,115 posts)So now you focus on me. Have at it.
It does smell. I was stupid. The story is not over. She is a liability. Nowhere did I say she broke the law or is disqualified. I better understand now your inability to answer simple questions or stay on point. I think I get it now. I won't wait for any further explanations from you, clearly you lack the ability.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,702 posts)Have a nice evening though.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)DemocratSinceBirth
(99,702 posts)#lol@me
stone space
(6,498 posts)On Sat Mar 28, 2015, 09:02 AM an alert was sent on the following post:
Says Draco Malfoy (R- Slytherin)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6427584
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
Though we decided that some words aren't used at DU whether they are used in a sexist way or not. There are plenty of other names to call people other than c***s.
JURY RESULTS
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Mar 28, 2015, 09:07 AM, and the Jury voted 6-1 to HIDE IT.
Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Agree with alerter, poor word choice obscures and otherwise correct sentiments.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Come on, Dar; grow up! You're an adult, not some middle school teeny-bopper. If you have to use foul and demeaning language, use it in front of the women in your life, not the the women of DU.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: They use that 'word' in England with impunity all the time. It's my least favorite next to the n-word. But I'm going with the sentiments of the sentence which are spot on not the icky word.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
DemocratSinceBirth
(99,702 posts)Scuba
(53,475 posts)... they are Republicans who weren't going to vote for Hillary anyway.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)Scuba
(53,475 posts)There are plenty of real problems with Hillary's candidacy; this isn't one of them.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)And, a real enough scandal is enough to swing the election. You want to bet the whole thing on guessing just what percentage that impacts? Not me. No how. Particularly since she has plenty of other liabilities and historically high negatives.
Scuba
(53,475 posts)leveymg
(36,418 posts)or remember what Presidents he served, much less his roles in the Chilean Coup and the Vietnam War. That he's a name partner and architect emeritus of the NWO, and that Hillary wants to inherit his seat on the Board, goes completely over their heads.
The real scandals always go unpunished, if they are even at all noticed by the public.
morningfog
(18,115 posts)Is she hiding it from the Dems, the Repubs or both?
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Given how crazy the GOP has been about Benghazi, she may have wiped stuff just to keep them from inflating something innocent into another "scandal". We'll never know. Either way, poor judgement on her part.
leveymg
(36,418 posts)wyldwolf
(43,864 posts)Surely there are big examples to point to.
Cheese Sandwich
(9,086 posts)...I guess for people who vote in Democratic primaries... is this how we think government should be? Should cabinet officers keep their own private records of official business and then destroy them when leaving office?
To me that's a horrible way to run a government and it makes me think she was trying to cover her tracks. She had to know that whatever was in those emails was so bad that it would be worth the controversy to destroy all the emails.
Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #70)
Cheese Sandwich This message was self-deleted by its author.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)communications and protect her image.
HRC has been and will continue to be harassed by the right.
It is one undoubted certainty of an HRC presidential campaign.
Her staff's competency to handle the wet crap filled muck and turn it into moldered compost is essential if she's going to be kept effective.
Hell Hath No Fury
(16,327 posts)has been beyond stupid. Private server in her own home and now scrubbed. I am sick to death of this kind of bullshit from politicians, R or D. She deserves every bit of shit she is going to get over this.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)morningfog
(18,115 posts)before the convention. This will only get worse. One self-serving, self-protecting stupid decision after another.
pnwmom
(108,915 posts)Jeb Bush's was similarly cleaned, and so was Mitt Romney's.
She's already watched her husband targeted by an investigator on a fishing expedition. She's kept that from happening.
It's ridiculous to think she had any deep dark secrets on her State Department emails. But she shouldn't have to give free reign to her personal account to the nutcases in the House.
valerief
(53,235 posts)he used as governor. He released those emails either late last year or early this year.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/25/jeb-bush-email-account_n_6938828.html
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/jeb-bush-owns-his-own-email-server
http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/14/politics/jeb-bush-emails-2016-president/
Or maybe how he posted Floridian SSNs and names and other personal info online.
http://www.theverge.com/2015/2/10/8013531/jeb-bush-florida-email-dump-privacy
Matariki
(18,775 posts)I'm probably out of the loop news wise and all, but posts without reference are kinda annoying.
fadedrose
(10,044 posts)The reference is from what's gathered from HowdyGowdy and from the news.
The news is all we know about the server. I don't give a damn about what Republicans did with their servers and emails, I'm a Democrat and am concerned with keeping the White House.
Either the emails were useless to anyone except the caterers, or they had some embarrassing (not illegal) emails among them. The point is we'll never know nor will anyone else except the recipients, and they may be the reason she wanted to protect them because people write the darndest things...
It would be a long long story if we knew who they went to, and if they had gone to caterers, why delete them. It would have been wonderful to punish that committee with a server full of boring emails. Too bad.
No matter how you look at it, it was a mistake..
morningfog
(18,115 posts)come to light before the convention or never at all. She had out herself in very tight spot. She is a liability and risk in retaining the WH.
wundermaus
(1,673 posts)If the information was ever transported on the internet, the information is there. You can scrub a server until you are blue in the face... the data remains. Of that I know.
belcffub
(595 posts)I work in IT... when we decommission servers the get scrubbed (triple deleting the data with random garbage) then the hard drives get sent out to be shredded... just deleting the data does not scrub the drives... the data on them could be recovered...
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)HeiressofBickworth
(2,682 posts)manufactured "scandal" for what it's really worth. All polls show that if HRC was the candidate, she would win the presidency against ANY Republican candidate. So, the plan seems to be to keep her from being nominated as the candidate which would serve to increase the odds for a Republican president.
The bottom line, like it or not, is that she did nothing illegal or even immoral. This is all about campaigning AGAINST her before she even becomes the nominee.
B Calm
(28,762 posts)scandal, just like the Benghazi scandal. Now the shit throwers are trying to connect the two scandals. Do they really think Hillary using a private e-mail server fired off an e-mail to the Benghazr terrorists to attack the embassy? Hell no, but that don't stop republicans from doing what they do best.
Motown_Johnny
(22,308 posts)Her team does not seem able to deal with even the slightest issue in a reasonable manner, and the vast right wing conspericy has not even begun to sling shit yet. She will never be on message due to the endless distractions.
The real problem is that you should never wrestle a pig, but she will be forced to endlessly wrestle an endless stream of pigs for the entire campaign. Swing voters w be so sick of that shit that they will vote for it to end, and that means no Clinton 2.