2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumSanders Goes From 'Don't Give a Damn about Emails' to 'Take a Hard Look.' Pathetic.
CBS News Politics @CBSPolitics
Bernie Sanders on @FaceTheNation : Voters should take a "hard look" at Clinton emails report http://cbsn.ws/1qUvito via @emilyrs
josh ?@jahwix 2h2 hours ago
@CBSPolitics @FaceTheNation @emilyrs didn't he literally wave his hands and say 'we're tired of hearing about your emails' during debate??
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Metric System
(6,048 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Metric System
(6,048 posts)support from his Congressional colleagues.
Seeinghope
(786 posts)Wouldn't be proud of that. People tend to be put off when someone is direct, open, honest and a fighter. Exactly what we need in a leader. Too bad people don't value those characteristics anymore because if they did Hillary Clinton wouldn't be anywhere today.
There are so many videos of her backtracking on her words, positions, stories.....coming down to out and out lies, but hey dishonesty is a redeeming quality.
barrow-wight
(744 posts)workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)scscholar
(2,902 posts)Seeinghope
(786 posts)pmorlan1
(2,096 posts)and he told the truth. Yeah, really pathetic telling the truth. Why can't he just lie like Hillary.
Unlike Hillary - he does not lie.
apcalc
(4,463 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)a Hillary supporter.
Seeinghope
(786 posts)lies that there are videos of lies that she has tried to get away with.
Tortmaster
(382 posts)... "rigged," it's just dumb, he must have been lying when he said, before, that it was rigged? He's been a massive hypocrite about unpledged delegates as well.
Then, there's the whole not-going-to-run-a-negative campaign thing.
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)'...damn tired of hearing about her emails..."
New information = new thoughts & new positions. If you use your brain anyway.
deathrind
(1,786 posts)Reports have a way of recalibrating the cognitive process on ones view of an issue.
CentralMass
(15,265 posts)annavictorious
(934 posts)Remember when he tried to tell primary voters that he never has run and never would run a negative campaign?
People don't like being lied to.
People don't like being dictated to.
People don't like bitter entitlement.
No wonder Sanders lost.
pmorlan1
(2,096 posts)You've learned well from your candidate.
Seeinghope
(786 posts)lmbradford
(517 posts)INVESTIGATION!! You act as if he caused her to mishandle classified info.
Newssflash. She did this to herself.
I'm guessing the Never Hillary crowd is growing by the hour with such asinine comments. How can a Hillary supporter, presuming she has this locked up, be such a sore winner?
Metric System
(6,048 posts)Jack Bone
(2,023 posts)underway...one of those have concluded that what Hillary did was wrong.
absolutely nothing wrong with pointing that out.
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)apcalc
(4,463 posts)Screw him.
Seeinghope
(786 posts)sufrommich
(22,871 posts)lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)Bernie's strongest statement about it is to encourage voters to read the truth for themselves. That's it. I think that's pretty damned generous considering the magnitude of the report's findings.
sufrommich
(22,871 posts)fake scandal,the fact that it's embraced here is disgusting and pathetic.
lagomorph777
(30,613 posts)the OIG report demonstrates that the e-mail server itself is a REAL scandal, and not a GOP game.
Hillary, and her staff, have handed Trump the nuclear button. Both figuratively (GE campaign) and literally (holy shit).
Beginning to think he is Trump's ally.
CentralMass
(15,265 posts)On Bill Maher he avoided the question and today when asked he said that Americans should take a hard look at it. As they should
Desperation ? Bull. Bernie didn't create her troubles and he is not bringing them up in these interviews.
pipoman
(16,038 posts)It will be fully vetted now or later....
pinebox
(5,761 posts)He believed Hillary at first, the same way Andrea Mitchell and Chuck Todd did.
Hillary has been lying for over a year about it and we all just found out last week with the IG report.
Sorry but Bernie is correct. Hillary did this to herself and nobody else but.
dchill
(38,462 posts)In the framework of this thread.
Demsrule86
(68,539 posts)But people who lose and can't admit always are ...and Bernie has crossed that line...sad way for his campaign to end.
TheFarS1de
(1,017 posts)Pathetic and a world class winner , so there goes your theory Bernie is simply pointing out the emerging facts . No one wants Trump , this "non issue" Hillary is having could deliver the WH right to his clammy hands .
Seeinghope
(786 posts)nc4bo
(17,651 posts)With those emails.
Emails by themselves = weak tea.
hollysmom
(5,946 posts)the report was way more negative than anyone expected. it has to be dealt with,not ignored, it is important to deal with things, not hope they disappear.
bigtree
(85,984 posts)...in any significant way.
I'm even less impressed with this issue coming from Trump, but, for those who think this is a big deal, I'm sure hope will spring eternal.
hollysmom
(5,946 posts)I am not saying this in a partisan way, every time something it buried under the surface, it comes up again. Do you really want this to be a bigger story just before the GE? or if she gets elected in her first term, you just know how republicans are salivated to start up more invesitgations and get less done.
bigtree
(85,984 posts)...the piddling complaints about her practice, statements, and actions don't amount to a mole on a mountain hill.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Remember Watergate? Good
CorporatistNation
(2,546 posts)Hillary really betrayed Andrea Mitchell... The entire context of this report was of a solemn nature... A Funeral so to speak...
Andrea Mitchell "I do not see this report as ...ANYTHING BUT... DEVASTATING!"
Chuck Todd "After this I don't think that she could get confirmed for Attorney General!"
Lots of FIBBING by Hillary here.. for more than a year!
bigtree
(85,984 posts)...good luck with that.
lmbradford
(517 posts)Her own administration started noticing things missing. She mishandled classified information.
Nobody else.
No right wing anything
She did this to herself.
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)Demsrule86
(68,539 posts)I did and your characterization is silly and untrue.
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)Demsrule86
(68,539 posts)You want it to be truly devastating, but it is not. Nope Bernie has lost and you can cry email 1000 times a day , it won't help his cause...tell him to quit save his movement.
NWCorona
(8,541 posts)But it's looking like the emails will end up stopping Hillary's campaign
bobbobbins01
(1,681 posts)And you're dead wrong. Hillary fucked up big time. If you have any concern for national security in the slightest, she is unequivocally unfit to be President.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Demsrule86
(68,539 posts)State Department spokesman Mark Toner briefed reporters Wednesday: "While not necessarily encouraged, there was no prohibition on using personal email. The only requirement is that -- and the regulations do state this, that these records need to be preserved."
http://news.wgbh.org/2016/05/25/politics-government/read-state-dept-inspector-generals-report-hillary-clintons-emails
Nothing there and it is worth noting that Powell has given the IG exact 0 of his emails
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Why don't you watch the full video? State has it, so does CSPAN. And anyway. If a partisan says it anymore, regardless of party, I cannot take it seriously. So I am not going g to take you seriously, even if you tell me the sky is blue.
TimPlo
(443 posts)The emails where about Benghazi, now saying emails is a totally different thing. The FBI investigation has zero to do with Benghazi and really Benghazi was not even what started this. What prompted the investigation was the Romanian Hacker posting sensitive information online. This made White House go hmm we know Clinton had a server in her house and now we see email from her to Blumenthal that sparked the AG to ask for the security review. Which then from that review spawned the investigation. So over past 6 months this Email thing went from a bunch of loony GOP in congress trying to do dog and pony show to the investigation that could topple a Presidential Election.
bigtree
(85,984 posts)floppyboo
(2,461 posts)If I hear Benghazi again, I just might spit. How can you stand it? What news source has numbed your brain? This began last March. NOT the B word shite. Different. Now, deal with that.
TheSarcastinator
(854 posts)More hubris and cognitive dissonance from Team Hindenburg.
apcalc
(4,463 posts)Are right wing bullshit wet dreams. And you are citing them here on DU. I expect Republican trolls to do that.
Seeinghope
(786 posts)They are nothing alike. Most Democrats agreed that it was a typical right wing witch hunt. The e-mails, private server installed by a person not associated with the SD with the reason that it was for the privacy of her personal e-mails and to make it easier is such bullshit that she should be ashamed to have tried to use that lame of an excuse. She could have installed the server for her own private e-mails and had her blackberry working with that. She could have used the SD server and another blackberry for SD business. If it was a little confusing or difficult she had staff for God's sake. It was that easy. Anybody that works on a computer for work when there is any confidential information is NEVER allowed to commingle their personal and employment e-mail together. It is simply ludicrous. There are penalties of laws to deal with if you do. I worked with a credit card company and I better never mix up any personal and professional work together because of FEDERAL LAWS.
So Benghazi is one thing the e-mail is a whole other ballgame.
Trust Buster
(7,299 posts)CentralMass
(15,265 posts)Bernie is not bringing the issue up and what he is saying about it when asked is quite reasonable.
Shemp Howard
(889 posts)Two possibilities here.
One, Bernie is getting desperate, and is grasping at straws.
Two, the Inspector's General's report was not exactly pro-Hillary. Many respected media people are saying that the report showed that Hillary was not being truthful here. So perhaps Bernie is pivoting because he's starting to realize that the emails are evidence of Hillary's lack of character, and not just much ado about nothing.
Take your pick. Unfortunately, most people will pick an option based on who their candidate is, and not on logic. As for me, I'll trust in what the impartial Inspector General said.
jonmac511
(46 posts)I'm trying hard to find a source telling voters they shouldn't give a damn about the emails. He chooses to keep the issues as the focus of his message, you should appreciate that by the way, and relying on voters to make up their own mind about trust and judgement. Making the connection between the two statements deserves a medal for gymnastics both mentally and for use of the English language.
99th_Monkey
(19,326 posts)At this point, if Bernie continued to "not care about her damned emails", he would start
to look complicit. At that point in the campaign, the M$M ws obsessing about the
email thing to the exclusion of any other issues, and it was doing a disservice to the entire
Democratic side of the primaries; so Bernie was gracious enough to insist that it be off the
table, to give it a rest.
The IG report changes everything, as it exposes Hillary's lying in bold relief, making her
radioactive. I don't blame Bernie a bit for finally having to agree that it's a legit issue in
the campaign.
bigtree
(85,984 posts)...reeks of desperation.
apcalc
(4,463 posts)Apparrently "I'll cooperate fully, and answer anyone's questions" turned into not cooperating with the IG or doing any interview somewhere along the line.
leftinportland
(247 posts)I can't think of a more stupid thing for the Democratic powers that be or anyone else to do. How would you plan to deal with this issue during the general...think Trump and his supporters will ignore it?
bigtree
(85,984 posts)...for refusing to follow.
They'll care even less about it coming from a republican. ( Powell, Rice, Cheney *cough, cough*)
leftinportland
(247 posts)There is enough damning stuff in the OIG report and we still await the results of the FBI investigation.
Unless republicans fail to get their voters to the polls in November, no Dem candidate can win just with democratic voters, they need to also bring in independent voters...that is where we can loose.
lmbradford
(517 posts)This is not some right wing attack.
If you belive this is nothing, then please put your ss# and bank acct# on an unsecure server with no password and leave it in a building where numerous guards, servants, aids, and society who gather for parties are constantly around.
Now imagine that same server with secret agent names and top secret military ops on it.
This is huge and there is no way that this isnt going to blow up.
bigtree
(85,984 posts)...despite it's adoption by Sanders and his desperate campaign.
lmbradford
(517 posts)Her own dept, under Obama is right wing? Kerry couldnt find any of her info and started looking. Thats why this whole thing was discovered. Only Hillary is responsible for this mess. Blame everyone else if you must but this is all on her.
bigtree
(85,984 posts)...twaddle.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)And national security is hardly a partisan issue. Continue to think it is
lmbradford
(517 posts)Blame Bernie for her carelessness as SOS. That makes perfect sense. ( eye roll)
Denial
apcalc
(4,463 posts)lmbradford
(517 posts)Its Obamas own IG.
She did this to herself.
Autumn
(45,013 posts)for over a year now. Hell yes that report needs to be looked at, hard. Saying you did something when you didn't,and saying you didn't do something when you did is what my Mamma used to call lies.
Kall
(615 posts)Hillary has said she'll cooperate fully and answer anyone's questions then refused to cooperate with or interview with Obama's IG, Obama's IG since released a report that said her actions were *not* allowed contrary to her repeated public statements, and that Obama's IG reported that her response to hack attempts on her home server was to unplug it for a few minutes.
It's sad watching people try to defend this. It's not peoples' job to be loyal foot-soldiers and defend Hillary Clinton's actions when they're wrong.
TeacherB87
(249 posts)Pathetic.
CentralMass
(15,265 posts)He has made it a point to not talk about it
The multiple posts of this type today thst that make the claim that Bernie is attacking Hillary on this are bogus and disingenuous.
In light of the recent developments in that case that have been aired by every network and major newspaper he is being asked questions about it.
He is answering graciously. Do you expect him to be a blind pyscophant and defend her when he doesn't know the truth on the matter ?
lmbradford
(517 posts)He answered a question after being pushed. He isnt responsible for her mess. He did nothing.
bvf
(6,604 posts)Really, you're not even trying.
That was worth $0.50, tops.
BootinUp
(47,135 posts)here he provides cover to right wing lies against the likely nominee.
leftinportland
(247 posts)in order to trash a democrate?
BootinUp
(47,135 posts)Seeinghope
(786 posts)Republicans. Bernie Sanders wasn't involved when Obama was dogged by Republicans. Bernie Sanders wasn't around when Carter had problems with the Republicans.
Your apparently lost in your Hillary fantasy. Time to snap back to reality.
CentralMass
(15,265 posts)Bernie Sanders did not invent the issue and he has made it a non campaign issues in a demonstrable way.
He was just asked a question about the recent developments on Face The Nation and his answer on the matter was very mild and reasonable. He did not bring it up.
Name one standing Senator or member of Congress who would go on A Sunday Talk show and wade into this one ? Do you expect him to defend her ?
BootinUp
(47,135 posts)I expect him to do better than to try and persuade superdelegates that they better look at it, which insinuates ITS BAD. YES.
lmbradford
(517 posts)You cant hold him responsible for her screw ups. He didnt do anything wrong. She did. At least according to her own dept under Obamas IG.
AzDar
(14,023 posts)accordingly. Hillary has screwed herself royally, and unnecessarily with this...to deny that is absurd.
Triana
(22,666 posts)as a candidate and as President.
Sander is - as usual - right.
kstewart33
(6,551 posts)He's doing himself no good. He's looking like an intensely frustrated and angry old man.
The Senate Dems' refusal to endorse him is making sense now.
They've observed him and some worked with him, or attempted to, for many years.
I wish Bernie would focus now on building his movement into a force that gets results - progressive victories in races at all levels. That's his true potential legacy.
I support the movement and I'd wager that the large majority of other Hillary supporters do too.
But he is burning so many bridges that he's hurting the movement.
seekthetruth
(504 posts)We have millions of people who voted for someone who......
- broke the rules and lied about it
- sent classified information to a person WITHOUT a security clearance
- and supports policies that will continue to keep us at the mercy of neoliberalism (look the term up if you have to......)
.....and we're just concerned with who wins the contest vs. whose policies are what the country needs right now. I wonder how many of those people now would vote give the results of that report??
This email issue, I honestly agree, didn't matter at all to me, really, 8 or 9 months ago. But, having experience myself in handling top secret material in the military, it sickens me to think that Clinton is somehow above the rules. We're saying to every sailor, marine, airman, and soldier who has a clearance that the rules don't apply to the "higher ups".
It's just sad to see so many people on here not giving a damn about fairness when it comes to how serious everyone else who holds a clearance in government has to take their responsibilities.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Partisans don't care. And let's be fair, many Americans don't get it
Seeinghope
(786 posts)ethical violation that happened. The information that could have gotten into the wrong hands could have cost some their life. If Hillary Clinton didn't think that would happen then she isn't fit to hold the most important office....in the world. If she just didn't care about the repressions of her actions, then she is a danger to this country. Either way she is not fit to be in the White House.
Why people only want to win at all costs is beyond me. It is systemic in our society. We no longer see honesty, integrity, humanity and a sense of " for the good of everybody". It is like so many people that go to church and sing praises and read the Bible and then come out and gossip, condemn, say the word "socialism" like it is a dirty word and still say things like "why should I have to pay for them? Nobody gave me anything. People shouldn't be allowed in this country...kids and their parents should pay for their education. I had to work 2 jobs....it has turned into the "win at all costs" and the "me first" society.
I look back at Jimmy Carter and I look at Hillary Clinton and we have sunk so so low.
cigsandcoffee
(2,300 posts)nolabels
(13,133 posts)The Republicans have done us a disservice crying wolf so many times. With that in mind when something comes up and the real wolf shows up we a found flat footed.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)Henhouse
(646 posts)Hydra
(14,459 posts)This is a legal issue, and no amount of opinioning changes that. Either we are for rule of law, or we aren't. She was just as guilty or innocent back then as she is now, but now she also gets obstruction of justice and a scandal out of it.
I'm sure Bernie wanted to stick to the issues, but this is an issue too.
TheCowsCameHome
(40,168 posts)Hillary blew it.
CanadaexPat
(496 posts)have lied.
frylock
(34,825 posts)portlander23
(2,078 posts)The Hill
Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders is still not jumping on rival Hillary Clinton's controversial private email server scandal, but said a recent report condemning her actions is something voters and superdelegates will have to take into account.
"Now, you're right the inspector general just came out with a report; it was not a good report for Secretary Clinton. That is something that the American people, Democrats and delegates are going to have to take a hard look at," Sanders said in an interview on CBS News's "Face the Nation" Sunday. "But for me right now, I continue to focus on how we can rebuild a disappearing middle class, deal with poverty, guarantee healthcare to all of our people as a right."
Bernie, as always, is pretty consistent. He wants to talk about problems that working people face.
What's really pathetic is that some Democrats don't care that Mrs. Clinton thinks whistleblowers like Snowden and Manning are criminals, but she's entitled to protection for FOIA requests as a high ranking government official.
Privacy in the United States is not something the government is supposed to have from the people. Quite the opposite.
bigtree
(85,984 posts)...what's inconsistent is the number of folks willing to give Snowden an pass who claim to be so concerned about the mere potential for leaks and hacks from Hillary's actions.
portlander23
(2,078 posts)I think there's a very big difference between a whistleblower providing information that the government had attempted to keep secret, and that the public has a right to know, from a government official that ran all communications through an insecure system in an attempt to shield themselves from FOIA requests and government oversight.
In Mrs. Clinton's case, you have someone in the government attempting to keep information from the public that we have a right to see, and in the Snowden case you have someone acting as a whistleblower. That fact that Mrs. Clinton may have leaked classified information is not a case of whistleblowing, it's one of willful incompetence.
bigtree
(85,984 posts)...and that's all this report addressed.
portlander23
(2,078 posts)Mrs. Clinton going around normal process to set up and exclusively use a private server to shield herself from oversight and scrutiny is not an administrative failure. This is something she chose to do, and it may or may not be illegal. We'll see. It's definitely sketchy as hell.
bigtree
(85,984 posts)...it's a curious argument to criticize her for wanting to limit access and then criticizing her for supposed vulnerabilities; especially since the government server was the one actually compromised.
I don't see how that case can be made, given that most of those emails were eventually made available. How is that 'shielding herself from oversight?'
portlander23
(2,078 posts)The whole reason this is in court is because Vice News and Freedom Watch had to sue the State Department because they did not turn over Mrs. Clinton's emails in response to various FOIA requests. The reason they didn't turn them over is because they weren't in their possession.
I can't imagine you have a problem with Jason Leopold and Vice, but even if you have a problem with Judicial Watch, this is information that the public has a right to and was withheld for years because Mrs. Clinton violated federal procedures. Mrs. Clinton "called for" the release of her emails only after she was subpoenaed to appear and produce them.
So, yes. This was to protect her own secrecy, which is fine as a private citizen, but not as a government official. The through line here with Snowden, Manning, and the Apple encryption case is that clearly Mrs. Clinton believes that the government is entitled to privacy but citizens are not.
But let's get back to the substance of your take on this:
And again, here's Mr. Sander's quote in context:
Mr. Sanders' stance has not changed. This is in fact a serious issue to people who care about open government, and it is a legitimate concern that Mrs. Clinton used an insecure server. The point that Mr. Sanders is making is not that this isn't a real issue, but it's not the top of anyone's list to discuss in an election when working people are hurting. That is the opposite of pathetic.
I get it. You're supporting Mrs. Clinton. You don't care about this issue, and frankly I assume most voters won't either. It remains to be seen whether or not she will be indicted, but given that there's likely enough legal wiggle room here and that Mr. Obama controls the Department of Justice, I think it's fairly unlikely.
But let's not pretend what she did here was OK, nor let us pretend this is something that she didn't bring on herself.
bigtree
(85,984 posts)...because they were retrievable and have been turned over. All of the talk about secrecy is contradictory nonsense.
portlander23
(2,078 posts)Jason Leopold and Samuel Oakford
Vice News
March 10, 2015
During Clinton's time as Secretary of State, the State Department received at least a half-dozen FOIA requests for her emails covering various issues. But Clinton operated a private server out of her home, and her emails were not accessible to the FOIA analysts tasked with processing the requests. The State Department has failed to produce any records responsive to the requests, some of which date back five years. A spokesperson for State did not respond to repeated requests for comment from VICE News about whether any FOIA analyst asked Clinton's staffers to review and turn over emails for the purposes of responding to FOIA requests, or whether State issued any legal guidance indicating that her emails were exempt from FOIA.
Clinton's camp released a nine-page "statement" that attempts to answer all of the lingering questions associated with her use of the private email system. One question posed on the statement asks whether Clinton's use of private email still enabled the State Department to respond to FOIA requests. Clinton's office says yes but fails to provide any concrete examples. The examples her office did provide assert that turning over documents to the State Department last December demonstrates that she was able to respond to FOIA requests filed in 2010.
Dan Metcalfe, the founding director of the Justice Department's Office of Information Policy (OIP), which is supposed to ensure government agencies are complying with the FOIA, told VICE News it is clear to him that Clinton's exclusive use of private email was a "blatant circumvention of the FOIA [in addition to] the Federal Records Act by people on both sides of it who unquestionably knew better."
Jason Leopold
Vice News
May 19, 2015
The State Department said it doesn't intend to make public roughly 55,000 pages worth of emails that belong to Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton until January 15, 2016, two weeks before the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary.
Government lawyers disclosed the proposed date for the first time Monday night in court documents, in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed by VICE News last January, months before the controversy erupted over Clinton's use of private email to conduct official business during her tenure as Secretary of State. VICE News sought Clinton's emails and a wide range of other documents pertaining to her work as Secretary of State.
Clinton's use of personal email to conduct official business during her first four years as Secretary of State was first revealed by the New York Times last March, and has since snowballed into a potentially epic scandal. It has been widely reported that Clinton's decision to use private email was a means to thwart FOIA requests. Under federal law, Clinton's work-related emails would be considered government records and should be preserved on the State Department's servers in accordance with the Federal Records Act so that journalists, historians, and the public can access them.
During Clinton's time as Secretary of State from 2009 to 2013, the State Department received at least a half-dozen FOIA requests for her emails covering various issues. But Clinton operated a private server out of her home, and her emails were not accessible to the FOIA analysts tasked with processing the requests. The State Department has failed to produce any records responsive to the requests, some of which dated back five years.
Jason Leopold
Vice News
May 19, 2015
A federal court judge Tuesday morning ordered the State Department to devise a schedule for releasing Hillary Clinton's emails on a rolling basis, rejecting a proposal the department made hours earlier to release all 55,000 pages on January 15, 2016.
US District Court Judge Rudolph Contreras also ordered the State Department to set an exact date for releasing 296 emails about the 2012 attacks on the American diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya. Those records were turned over to Republican lawmakers late last year and are the subject of a congressional investigation into the incident. Government lawyers said in court Tuesday morning that they expected these emails to be released within days or weeks.
Contreras set a May 26 deadline for the State Department to propose a new schedule for completing its review of Clinton's emails. He issued his order in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed by VICE News last January, seeking Clinton's emails and a wide range of other documents related to her tenure as secretary of state.
Reuters and VICE News
September 13, 2015
Hillary Clinton tried to delete tens of thousands of emails from the personal account she used during her time as secretary of state, but now it seems the frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination is about to learn that the internet is forever.
Platte River, the Denver-based company that managed Clinton's server, told the Washington Post on Sunday that it has "no knowledge of the server being wiped," indicating that around 31,000 emails deleted by Clinton could be recovered and eventually made public as part of an ongoing FOIA lawsuit filed by VICE News senior investigative reporter Jason Leopold.
Under a federal judge's order, 15 percent of the 35,000 emails sent by Clinton on the private server are to be released every month. The process has been delayed by intelligence officials combing the messages for information that could be retroactively upgraded to classified status. About 150 of the 7,000 emails released on August 31 were censored because they contain information that the government says it now considers classified.
The Federal Bureau of Investigation is examining the server to see whether any information, including classified information, was mishandled.
Mrs. Clinton's emails were subject to several FOIA request that were not met because she kept her records from the government. A court order and a congressional subpoena compelled the State Department and Mrs. Clinton to hand over documents. Mrs. Clinton attempted to destroy emails.
If you replaced "Secretary of State Hillary Clinton" with "Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice" and left all the other facts the same, I have to think you'd come to a different conclusion.
You can feel however you want about this, but you don't get to have your own facts.
lmbradford
(517 posts)Btw, they didnt have security clearance to see that info either. This is a BIG PROBLEM.
lmbradford
(517 posts)She went through training and signed a doc saying she understood the importance of the security clearances and then she ignored them. Every instance that she allowed someone to see a cl doc without clearance is call for indictment. Hell she gave her lawyer 4 of those docs on a thumdrive to turn over to investigators. He didnt have clearance. See the problem here?
KingFlorez
(12,689 posts)DebDoo
(319 posts)underthematrix
(5,811 posts)everything he can to make something stick. He's getting his A handed to him on twitter.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)State department employees who knew about the email system were instructed "never to speak of it again."
0rganism
(23,933 posts)he made what i think is a correct observation at the time: yes, the people are sick and tired of hearing about HRC's emails
assuming she gets the nomination,anyone who isn't sick and tired of hearing about her emails yet will be sick and tired of hearing about them by November
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)Ash_F
(5,861 posts)I think the chance she might be charged during the GE is a bigger risk than how she is doing in the polls.
Vinca
(50,249 posts)The Midway Rebel
(2,191 posts)For the worse for H.
bigtree
(85,984 posts)...Bernie's about to lose.
Desperation calls for desperate measures.
The Midway Rebel
(2,191 posts)You would know.
lmbradford
(517 posts)She is the only one responsible for her actions.
barrow-wight
(744 posts)I for one an tired of hearing about Bernie Sanders, his bird, and his "movement."
MFM008
(19,803 posts)me to, its all about Sanders. Ask him.
CentralMass
(15,265 posts)Bernie Sanders did not create Hillary's email/personal server issue. She did.
He and his campaign have never made it an issue.
On Bill Maher the other night he refused to comment on it.
Today on Face The Nation when asked about it he gave very reasonable answer.
The issue is not with Bernie Sanders or his campaign. Take it up with the networks who are airing the developing story and asking the questions. Take it up with your own candidate.
barrow-wight
(744 posts)Clearly you don't know me very well.
I'm taking it up with your candidate, though thankfully I only have 9 more days during which it even matters.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)...about an opponent's scandal by saying Americans will look at it and then he moved on.
Not ugly at all.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)And take a hard look. This makes no sense to hyper partisans, I get it. Party...country...that may very well be your choice
jillan
(39,451 posts)All he said is we need to see what happens next and it's up to the voters to decide.
But whatever. Because if there is one thing Bernie supporters are upset with Bernie about is that he hasn't gone after those "damn emails".
apcalc
(4,463 posts)a total shit. He always was I bet.
bvf
(6,604 posts)and well over 99% of your posts within the last 90 days?
Excuse me:
No, wait:
Tarc
(10,476 posts)Suggesting it is something voters should think about is pretty mild, comparative to how he could have run wit this bogus issue. Imagine for a moment of Bernie Sanders acted like those Bernie supporters in the DU that push Emailgate daily?
I'm willing to give him a pass on this one.
libdem4life
(13,877 posts)There has been an offer of immunity, aides deposed, then Guccifer comes along. Reestablishing the formerly erased emails has taken time and one Canadian laundering scheme through the Foundation has been verified. That's what we know...likely the tip of the iceberg.
Time to re-evaluate.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Derp
7wo7rees
(5,128 posts)CentralMass
(15,265 posts)over backwards to not make the story an issue when it is your own candidates who is being investigated by several agencies on very serious n matters involving national security.
nolabels
(13,133 posts)geek tragedy
(68,868 posts)Teamster Jeff
(1,598 posts)Probably changed his mind when they went after his wife
waterwatcher123
(144 posts)MS NBC and CNN had clip after clip of Hillary saying what she did with her private email server was standard practice at the State Department. Unfortunately, the Inspector General's report contradicts that assertion completely. So, she either has such an entitled opinion of herself that she does not have to pay attention to government standards, or she lied repeatedly. Either way, Hillary has a serious problem with this situation that going to go away through wishful thinking.
bkkyosemite
(5,792 posts)thing. It's about the issues in this debate. The emails are being taken care of. He did not want them to get away from the issues in the debate period. It had nothing to do with him thinking that her emails were nothing. When are people going to understand that.
RichVRichV
(885 posts)play itself out." - Bernie Sanders in CNN interview after the debate.
Well the process is starting to play itself out. Investigations are finally providing substantial information on what happened. Hillary got a giant gift when Bernie defused the whole email issue for her early in the election process. Now you're whining because that gift has finally run it's natural course.
pansypoo53219
(20,966 posts)portlander23
(2,078 posts)Here's Bernie in January:
Elise Foley
Huffington Post
Jan 31, 2016
CNNs Jake Tapper asked Sanders, an independent senator from Vermont, about his memorable damn emails remark in an October debate and whether it meant he didnt think Clinton erred in her use of a private email account.
Nope, nope. That is not, I think, a fair assessment, Sanders replied on CNNs State of the Union. That is, I think, a very serious issue. There is a legal process taking place, I do not want to politicize that issue. It is not my style.
He called the controversy a serious issue on NBCs Meet the Press on Sunday as well, although again he said he wouldnt make personal attacks on Clinton.
I am not going to attack Hillary Clinton, Sanders told NBCs Chuck Todd. The American people will have to make that judgment.
Here's Bernie today:
The Hill
Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders is still not jumping on rival Hillary Clinton's controversial private email server scandal, but said a recent report condemning her actions is something voters and superdelegates will have to take into account.
"Now, you're right the inspector general just came out with a report; it was not a good report for Secretary Clinton. That is something that the American people, Democrats and delegates are going to have to take a hard look at," Sanders said in an interview on CBS News's "Face the Nation" Sunday. "But for me right now, I continue to focus on how we can rebuild a disappearing middle class, deal with poverty, guarantee healthcare to all of our people as a right."
Nothing has changed. The idea that Bernie is the party at fault or that he's done something untoward is ridiculous.
Seeinghope
(786 posts)He has tried to keep it to the issues and the Clinton camp saw different. After the report just came out the e-mails have become an issue....National Security.....he has every right to bring it up.
Try to come up with something that is actually a valid problem before you start calling Bernie Sanders names because Hillary Clinton didn't want to follow the guidelines that she was supposed to follow. Hillary Clinton also didn't listen to what her boss, President Obama told her not to do which was to "not" use Sid as an advisor while she was in the SD but she did anyway. Those are issues.
Lokijohn
(46 posts)The more we learn the worse she looks. I'm tired of all the lies.
cliffordu
(30,994 posts)Like she did on abortion and social security.
Eric J in MN
(35,619 posts)Sanders was asked by Chuck Todd about Clinton's email scandal.
He said Americans "will" take a look at it, not "should."
Reasonable way to answer the question and move on to public policy.
bvf
(6,604 posts)Desperate people, now worried they've fucked up by backing a lame horse, not so much.
bigtree
(85,984 posts)Los Angeles Times endorses Hillary Clinton in California Democratic primary http://upi.com/6316142t via @upi
bvf
(6,604 posts)Thanks for the confirmation.
B Calm
(28,762 posts)if the Justice Department goes after her.
He has a legacy to consider, mixed (but on the balance, positive, IMO) as it is. His appointment of her as SoS will be forever seen as a low point--a political favor and nothing more. No reason to compound the damage.