This message was self-deleted by its author

[morningfog]

This message was self-deleted by its author (morningfog) on Thu May 26, 2016, 10:10 AM. When the original post in a discussion thread is self-deleted, the entire discussion thread is automatically locked so new replies cannot be posted.

[Fred Sanders]

1. More RW opinion...fucking yawners!

[morningfog]

2. What do you make of moving classified info as described?

[Fred Sanders]

3. What do you think of right wing opinion, since I raised the question first?

[morningfog]

7. This part:

Because top secret information travels on entirely separate systems throughout the federal government, it is virtually impossible that a Clinton staffer blithely or unknowingly pasted a top secret paragraph into an unclassified email.

On the contrary, it seems increasingly likely that Clinton's staff was engaged in a systematic effort to take details off classified IT systems and strip them of proper classification markings (every paragraph in an intelligence report is classified separately) before sending them out electronically. This was not only a violation of numerous federal regulations, but also a crime — a felony when it involves top secret information.

Is that part fact or opinion?

[Fred Sanders]

10. Opinion. And lies.

[morningfog]

13. Are these lies?

"top secret information travels on entirely separate systems throughout the federal government"

"every paragraph in an intelligence report is classified separately"

[Fred Sanders]

15. Now reduced to tossing out clipped quotes you want ME to comment on....please.....

[morningfog]

16. Are those factual statements? I took out the opinion to be fair.

I am trying to determine whether these critical points are true or lies. If you don't know, just say so.

[awake]

12. The RW did not setup her Server in a bathroom closet in Denver

Hillary brought this on herself and blaming the Right Wing or making bad jokes about "snap-chat" and "Wiping the email server with a cloth" does not help. Hillary's problem is in how she is handling this issue, so far she has not handled it well.

[stevenleser]

4. It's going away. The State dept completed their review and said Clinton broke no laws or guidelines.

It's over for everyone except those who were still in for Benghazi after the fourth or fifth investigation showed no wrongdoing.

[morningfog]

5. Well, the FBI hasn't completed its review or released its findings.

They may agree with State, they may not.

[stevenleser]

6. It's over. nt

[morningfog]

8. We'll see, won't we?

[Fred Sanders]

9. hope of the downfall, real or imagined - I go with imagined - of the Democratic Party nomination leader reigns eternal at DU!

[morningfog]

11. Oh, I openly hope that the fall happens before the convention, because I don't believe that

Hillary can win the general. I will hold out hope until she is formally nominated.

[Fred Sanders]

14. No need to elaborate, we all get it.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

28. Which Republican *genius* is going to beat her in the General?

[morningfog]

31. The one left standing, sadly.

I just don't think that Clinton can last. She will bring herself down through her own misfires and/or non-stop defense.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

44. Any Democrat who makes it through the primary

stands a helluva lot better chance of winning against the current Republican field. In fact, I'm not even sure how we could lose with our 2012 Democratic "firewall" intact unless people just really feel like voting for a Republican next year- or somebody extremely charismatic (and moderate) pulls out of the GOP primary. It could happen, of course (so can a lot of other things), but isn't bloody likely IMHO.


As for Hillary specifically, once the media gets bored with this latest "chew toy", people will likely forget about it. It's probably a good thing that this is all being talked about now since most people have yet to really start paying attention to the primaries. Also, outside of most circles, an e-mail "scandal" just doesn't seem nearly as exciting as her and Obama issuing "stand down" orders and leaving Ambassadors to die in Benghazi (if you believe all of those zany conspiracy theories). I don't know what circles you run in but I just don't hear about it from anybody I know.

[cali]

33. I wish it were. It's not.

[cascadiance]

17. Whether or not she messed with security of email or hid them in my book is not the big issue...

It still is the POOR JUDGEMENT by someone who's trying to posit herself as the most qualified person to lead this country in:

Deciding to move her work email to a private server and not make that known to the public in my book is the big problem. WHY? Were there problems with security of our government email servers or with the way they functioned? If that was a problem that is crying for a LEADER to speak out on and perhaps publicly to get it fixed, especially a Democrat who should not be about privatizing government infrastructure, which is precisely what she did at a macro level, then she failed horribly the leadership test in not doing so at that point.

By her not trying to make issues that would be legitimate reasons for her to move to a private server visible to all of us or PTB capable of making changes to fix those problems before she moved her mail, she in effect opens herself up to what the right wing is doing in trying to potentially making more out of what really happened with what she's done with those private email servers, and if she doesn't explain why she made this judgement early on so we can understand it, it even has us distrusting her motivation too.

[stevenleser]

18. It's over. nt

[cascadiance]

21. Not the poor judgement. That happened and is STILL an issue for many voters!

[MaggieD]

25. The facts don't bear that out....

"Republicans have been successful in using the email scandal to lower Clinton’s approval ratings, but those lower approval ratings have not translated into Clinton trailing any of her potential Republican opponents in general election matchups.

The takeaway from this data is that even if voters believe that Hillary Clinton did something wrong with her emails, the majority of them are still going to vote for her in November 2016.

In other words, voters don’t care about Hillary Clinton’s emails."

http://www.politicususa.com/2015/08/19/republicans-reeling-poll-shows-voters-care-hillary-clinton-emails.html

[cascadiance]

59. What "facts"?....

Poll numbers are not "facts". And it depends on what questions are being asked. Do I and most Democratic Party voters care about the Benghazi allegations that Republicans make about her emails? NO! I already said so, and whether it is shown she hid something or not hidden, is a bit more immaterial to my concern that she exercised in judgement in privately using a REPUBLICAN strategy of using PRIVATIZED solutions instead of government-supplied email services WITHOUT ANY EXPLANATION in a timely fashion when she did so. That is already established as a FACT!

The Washington Post editorial staff reflected my concern as I'm sure many other people out there have similar feelings too.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/hillary-clintons-use-of-private-e-mail-reflects-poor-judgment/2015/03/04/85ff4428-c215-11e4-ad5c-3b8ce89f1b89_story.html

[MaggieD]

63. They are to most people

Including to Bernie supporters when he's doing better in a given state like NH.

[cascadiance]

66. The facts are that her judgement had her decide to privatize her email from the government!

Do you disagree that this is a fact or not? If you do, then you are having a problem with reality! That in many people's opinions, like mine is a problem for me.

Now, you can say that public opinion has been measured in a way to say that people don't care about it, but that is hard to delineate as a *fact* as that depends on a lot of variables, like who is sampled, what questions are asked, how they are informed on these and other facts, etc. We shall see later how it affects her in the public eye as primary season starts. Her unfavorability ratings are still having problems as well and don't seem to be getting better for her in polls, which is likely why Biden is entering the race for the credit card industry to start pushing instead if she doesn't measure up for them...

[MaggieD]

22. Ditto

And I will add, those that want more mileage from this fake scandal should receive nothing but derision from actual liberals. I can promise you I would never support a fake scandal against Bernie regardless of the fact that I do not like him, even a little bit. It is against my principles.

[morningfog]

29. When you meet an actual liberal, let me know.

And, bullshit, on your second claim.

[MaggieD]

35. Why do you feel the need to personally attack me....

Simply because I won't join in on the Hillary fake email meme?

[morningfog]

38. Where was the attack?

[frylock]

56. "I would never support a fake scandal against Bernie"

Comedy gold!

[MBS]

57. you've gotten to the core of what's wrong/stupid here

Benghazi is nothing.
The classified email issue is blown way out of proportion, at worst. (And certainly if they do find anything "wrong", it's small potatoes compared to what Petraeus did).
I really do not think that there will be legal consequences, especially not for Hillary.

But here's what the problem is. Against explicit directives of the Obama White House (which explicitly directed federal employees, at least all those in the executive branch, including all cabinet-level agencies as well as all other agencies associated with the executive branch, to use government email for all government business), and against all political common sense, Hillary chose to conduct all of her government email correspondence from a private email server. I should emphasize that (per Ruth Marcus' column, and I believe she's right about this), NONE of the other officers in the Obama cabinet have conducted their business this way. Only Hillary.

The rationale for the Obama email directive is both sound and clear:
1) to protect confidentiality and security of sensitive correspondence
2) to ensure archiving of government correspondence
3) to ensure separation of personal (including personal professional) and government business. This is in the interest of minimizing and, ideally, eliminating, both the appearance and the reality of conflict of interest . It is especially in Hillary's interest to do so, given the many ways in which the activities (yes, worthy activities) of the Clinton Foundation intersect with those of the State Department.

This rationale applies easily to anyone working in the executive branch. But it applies most of all to those in the most sensitive positions, such as the Sec. of State. There is no GOOD reason for Hillary to have declared herself an exception to this soundly reasoned rule, and also (to repeat myself) to conduct her business differently from every other cabinet member. If anything, the sensitivity of her position would dictate that she adhere to these principles more fervently than anyone else in the Cabinet.

#1 and #2 have been discussed here ad nauseum. Much of the "issues" raised by the Republicans related to #1 and #2 are bogus of overblown.
But for me, #3 is the real problem. By using a private email server for government business, Hillary effectively entangled her personal and government business, and this is both stupid and ethically squishy (though not illegal). But I'm happy to leave the ethics aside. Let's just consider the politics of this. Because most of all it's a phenomenally stupid maneuver, in terms of political strategy. It's also puzzling that someone of Hillary's high intelligence, long political experience (in both the legislative and executive branch), long experience with the Republican hate-and-lies-machine, and longstanding presidential ambitions, would make such an obvious strategic mistake. It's just plain poor judgment. Why oh why did she or any of her experienced, and presumable highly-paid, advisors not think of the obvious political consequences? As someone who fervently wants the Dems to keep the white house in 2016, and who at least formerly considered Hillary as our best chance to do so, I admit that I'm both shaken and angry that she's freely given the Republicans this extra weapon with which to attack her, and to distract voters from the urgent policy issues that should be the focus of the 2016 campaign.And also to remind voters of the less attractive Clinton-family propensities for secrecy, exceptionalism , blending of personal and professional interests, paranoia about enemies, memes (fair or not) about honesty and trustworthiness and more.

It's because of this one decision that she's now having to deal with this Stuff.

And, FYI, it's not just "right-winger propaganda". Democratic and liberal commentators are equally critical, especially of her decision to use the private email server.

Also FYI: I'm firmly committed to voting for the Democratic nominee, whomever it turns out to be.

[cascadiance]

58. Thanks for explaining my feelings on this topic as well which I share with you completely...

As Sabrina noted in another thread in her reasons not to vote for Hillary Clinton, her focus was on the issue of her judgement. This controversy is really about judgement more than anything else, and whether or not it can be shown later she hid anything or not, which is a separate issue and one that the Republicans want to go after most, this is the big issue for me as a Democrat and I think most progressives.

The reason why the Republicans don't want to attack Hillary's judgement in moving email to a private server, is because they would also like to afford their representatives to emulate and follow suit with what Hillary did in moving from government solutions for IT to a privatized solution, which is really more of a Republican strategy than a Democratic Party policy too.

They are happy that she opened herself up to their media and other investigative tools to build the Benghazi myth more with what she did, which most of us don't really swallow or care much about, as we know their pattern of making up a lot of crap that isn't really true for that part of the equation.

I still think there's a way for Hillary to get out of this, but she needs to really come clean with her reasons for moving to a private email solution, and why she did it without alerting the public to the problems and reasons why she did so (likely security, etc.), and perhaps if she did so how she might have moved behind the scenes to get whatever problems that lead her to doing this action fixed. It would have been better to have done it earlier when she moved the mail, but she still could make it right if she did something substantive now. If she's honest and provides us good reasons why she did so, she would put to bed most of the concerns that non-Republican voters would have.

[MBS]

60. YES to everything you said! n/t

[LannyDeVaney]

19. Benghazinistas aren't the only ones ...

plenty of folks on this site will never let this go.

[Metric System]

20. Was an Ann Coulter article not available? More conservative commentary posted by Sanders supporters.

[MaggieD]

23. Sad. Just Sad.

[morningfog]

27. This is that part that interested me:

"top secret information travels on entirely separate systems throughout the federal government"

"every paragraph in an intelligence report is classified separately"

Is that accurate?

[blm]

53. It's been going on for 2 decades. I suppose RW media and GOP are only

interested and concerned in the process now because they know they can rely on the full cooperation of the corporate media running with their narrative.

I support Sanders and agree with his approach to all of this. He won't carry water for RW propagandists and neither will I.

[Zorra]

24. What a mess. How can anyone trust her if she won't come clean on this? nt

[MaggieD]

26. What is there to "come clean" about?

[cascadiance]

61. WHY she chose to PRIVATIZE her email!

First of all privatizing government functions is a REPUBLICAN way of doing things! Not a Democratic Party way of doing things!

Second of all, WHY did she need to use this privatized solution instead of a government solution? How did making this STUPID move politically make any sense for her to do. We are owed an explanation, and like on so many other issues, perhaps she feels that polls tells her she doesn't need to be honest or straight with the American people about what she is gong to do as president or why she is doing certain things if polls tell her that she doesn't need to do so. Afraid to be honest about what her real agenda is it would appear!

[MaggieD]

62. She already addressed that - like MULTIPLE times

If it was such a terrible thing why was there no policy against it?

[cascadiance]

64. THEN TELL US WHAT SHE SAID!

GIVE US A LINK!!!

You are saying nothing here!

[MaggieD]

65. Google "hillary statement on email"

She has made the statements many times. Also, here is a good synopsis as well http://www.hillarymen.com/latest/simplest-explanation-of-hillary-emails

[cascadiance]

68. Sorry, but this link is NOT what I asked for!

It has NO explanations BY HILLARY CLINTON as to WHY she moved her email to private servers!

High School Debate Class 101 should tell you that if you want to win a debate, you need to back up statements with verifiable facts from references that back up your statements. YOU need to provide me with a document to back up your statement that Hillary Clinton has explained why she went to a private email solution, if I can interpret your response here properly. You don't say in a high school debate, "Google it to see what I'm saying is right." I've looked for her explanations and I find none, only articles like I quoted in one of my recent responses to you that reflect my concerns as well, which tells me that these explanations from Clinton really don't exist!

Saying she didn't do anything wrong is not an answer, which of course is her trying to answer the more publicized Republican Benghazi critiques which isn't the issue I'm concerned with. Explaining WHY she moved her mail to a private mail server is what I'm looking for. Until you provide a link showing us her explaining the answer to that question, I will continue to make the case that she's made poor judgement in taking this action and not providing us an adequate explanation why she did so.

[oasis]

46. The Anti-Hills left with egg on their faces. There's your "mess".

A bogus story which weeks ago was reported to be the next "watergate" is already beginning to lose steam.

[Zorra]

51. Yum. Tastes like Eggs Benedict, can I have seconds, please?

[oasis]

52. Your bogus e-mail "Easter Basket" is about to "eggs-it" stage left

and out of the minds of serious voters.

[Zorra]

54. I get equinox baskets. They're full of nutritous goodies.

[fadedrose]

30. Don't know if she's guilty of anything

except poor judgment.

Why did she think it was funny to talk about "Snap" or whatever it is because the remarks erase themselves, and ask, "Do you mean, wipe it with a cloth?", in regard to her private server.

As though her supporters are all in grade school and would appreciate the childish humor.

Where are her advisors? Time to get some new ones who will show some respect for supporters' intellects.

[seabeyond]

32. still asking for obama's birth certificate.

[morningfog]

34. Those issues are nothing alike, not even similar.

Did the FBI get involved with the birth certificate bullshit?

[seabeyond]

37. exactly alike. kerry shot self in foot. gore invented the nets and dean screamed.

[morningfog]

40. All distinguishable from HIllary's mess.

[seabeyond]

41. benghazi!!!!

[morningfog]

42. Benghazi was also utter nonsense and nothing like this.

[MaggieD]

43. Sure they are.....

And Benghazi and the IRS and Whitewater, and on and on. It's what the GOP does. Sad to see people who think of themselves as liberals throwing in with them on their fake scandals.

[morningfog]

45. This isn't a "fake scandal."

This is a problem for Hillary. The sooner you admit it, the sooner SHE realizes it, the better.

You want it to go away, but it is far from over. The entire set up was so fucking stupid. The private server, the mixing of the persona/business emails, the self-screening, the scrubbing, the claim that it had all been deleted while the thumb drive remained, the jokes about scrubbing, the denial of knowing whether it had been scrubbed, claiming no classified info was sent, and now we find classified info was sent.

It is all bad judgment and looks suspicious, AT BEST. This is going to be a millstone for the duration of her campaign. It will be a distraction, but could end up being far far worse.

[emulatorloo]

47. I have a feeling you are going to be disappointed with what the FBI says

once the investigation is over.

[morningfog]

48. I won't be diappointed either way.

If there was no violation of law, good. If there was, good to know now and not be stuck with a candidate even remotely connected with illegality while in previous office.

[MaggieD]

49. Of course it is a fake scandal

Every SoS previous to her that used email also used a private server. The only difference is they did not turn over their email when asked, and she did.

90 plus% of her emails went to .gov addresses so they already had them. This is about as fake as it gets.

[morningfog]

50. She scrubbed her server of self-screened emails, which we now kow included classified communications

I know that you so badly want it to be fake. But, the Clinton campaign's lengthy defense shows that this is real.

Whistle past the graveyard all you want, but this will still be a story we are discussing in three months. Bookmark it.

[cali]

36. not an apt comparison.

[seabeyond]

39. we disagree. nt

[eridani]

55. It's bullshit. If Sanders were the frontrunner, they'd be cooking up similar bullshit. n/t

[Warren DeMontague]

67. I think the wiping of the server has the potential to be a real problem for her campaign.

I'm sorry, I do. And I suspect other people- good and well-placed Democrats- have come to the same conclusion, which is why we are all of a sudden hearing serious noise about Biden getting in after months of nothing.

Now go ahead, tell me I'm pushing RW memes, Tell me I'm "out to get her", whatever. I hope I'm wrong.

But I suspect I'm not.

[morningfog]

69. You aren't wrong. Hillary alone has given this story life.

She's lied about what she and her staff did, minimized it and made stupid decisions. Through it all, she has dodged and hidden it looks bad and keeps the story going.

It's almost as if she wants the story to continue. Maybe she does.