General Discussion

Aerows

(39,961 posts)

76. That isn't "anecdote"

Reply to Name removed (Reply #52)

Tue Mar 3, 2015, 03:46 PM

Mar 2015

That the law. It's in place for very good reasons, too.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

127 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

So, how many people actually researched the Clinton email story? [View all] brooklynite Mar 2015 OP

Do YOU "actually" research every single news story you read???? closeupready Mar 2015 #1

Reading isn't the question-- commenting is. TreasonousBastard Mar 2015 #2

Nonresponsive. closeupready Mar 2015 #3

Is there a problem trying to be fully informed? still_one Mar 2015 #33

not if you are for the focal point of the controversy. it will be enough to throw shade roguevalley Mar 2015 #125

ME. And I gotta say, I found nothing HereSince1628 Mar 2015 #4

So Aerows Mar 2015 #11

You're assumption jumps WELL BEYOND what I said. Catapult as you like but HereSince1628 Mar 2015 #18

Lord have mercy. Aerows Mar 2015 #25

Did you actually research the Cheney story? Capt. Obvious Mar 2015 #19

No. I also didn't Aerows Mar 2015 #30

It's not the use of private email (but is a security risk) - failure to turn over email records leveymg Mar 2015 #12

Ok, if you have a link to an internet site that states that I'd much appreciate it HereSince1628 Mar 2015 #23

Cornell law library on-line, here: leveymg Mar 2015 #31

As I read that it DOES NOT ban the use of private email HereSince1628 Mar 2015 #36

You've never worked Aerows Mar 2015 #54

I have. Maybe not YOUR government. But, I have HereSince1628 Mar 2015 #59

So you Aerows Mar 2015 #67

you are off on a wild-goose chase my friend, HereSince1628 Mar 2015 #69

So you Aerows Mar 2015 #71

I haven't worked under updated regulations now in effect, no HereSince1628 Mar 2015 #82

So you Aerows Mar 2015 #83

But I CAN read!!! I read the relevant chapters of the law re Federal Records Act HereSince1628 Mar 2015 #88

Oh Lord Aerows Mar 2015 #94

Message auto-removed Name removed Mar 2015 #95

? Aerows Mar 2015 #101

I would agree if there were a turnover of all State Department emails karynnj Mar 2015 #98

You can keep posting it Aerows Mar 2015 #90

Add to that the odd HRC true believer with obnoxious "progressive poutrage" comments. leveymg Mar 2015 #110

Before HRC was SoS... remember the Sarah Palin Email Fiasco? TheBlackAdder Mar 2015 #127

Your research gets an F - '50 Act has included "machine readable" messages since the '70s leveymg Mar 2015 #5

No records were removed from the agency and there is no evidence that any were destroyed. pnwmom Mar 2015 #13

What is deleting an email? What is not turning in the record, as required? leveymg Mar 2015 #24

What evidence is there that she deleted any emails or failed to turn in any State Department emails? pnwmom Mar 2015 #27

As far as I can tell...300 emails were submitted to a Bengazi committe while 55k HereSince1628 Mar 2015 #32

She hasn't turned all the emails over. It's in today's NYT article: leveymg Mar 2015 #41

Why should she have turned over any PERSONAL emails? Read your quote again. pnwmom Mar 2015 #50

As far as I can tell from what -I- read...only documents meeting req as Fed. Records HereSince1628 Mar 2015 #63

Incorrect Aerows Mar 2015 #73

SHOW ME WHERE IT SAYS A PRIVATE EMAIL IS ILLEGAL. YES PRIVATE EMAIL CAN BE A FED. RECORD HereSince1628 Mar 2015 #78

Rant at me Aerows Mar 2015 #81

you keep claiming law. show me the text of the fucking law. HereSince1628 Mar 2015 #84

When did you work Aerows Mar 2015 #87

See #5 and #31, above. leveymg Mar 2015 #89

Private email becomes a public document when used for official purposes. leveymg Mar 2015 #86

Yes, I never said email couldn't be a federal record, note on toilet paper could be HereSince1628 Mar 2015 #91

HRC's use differs from other officials, including Powell, who used both - DOS email for official leveymg Mar 2015 #99

Nailed it. Aerows Mar 2015 #121

That says "in the custody of the agency" prayin4rain Mar 2015 #17

It was all official business, so it is in the custody of the Department when created. leveymg Mar 2015 #26

Where does it say that? prayin4rain Mar 2015 #29

If the Judge orders you to produce all work-related email, and you produce none because it was all leveymg Mar 2015 #48

That is clearly a COMPLETELY separate issue. prayin4rain Mar 2015 #53

The '50 Records Act requires machine readable docs be turned over. If they aren't, that violates the leveymg Mar 2015 #74

If a statue, order, or subpoena called for my work prayin4rain Mar 2015 #85

Colin Powell exclusively used private emails. The NYTimes never suggested that was illegal. pnwmom Mar 2015 #35

LOL snooper2 Mar 2015 #42

What I read suggest policies and procedures must be in place in the agency HereSince1628 Mar 2015 #51

Agreed. And it could have been handled better, but prayin4rain Mar 2015 #68

At this point, neither do I. I am open to be shown that, but no one -has- shown me that. HereSince1628 Mar 2015 #75

The use of private email isn't illegal, its use for official purposes without retaining a record and leveymg Mar 2015 #104

The right hates Hillary. The fringe left hates Hillary SidDithers Mar 2015 #6

+1 trumad Mar 2015 #9

The least interested of all are in the dull middle. See above, Sid. leveymg Mar 2015 #15

True. n/t FSogol Mar 2015 #22

I would be amzed of all the presumabled Democrats on DU ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #40

Amen!! uponit7771 Mar 2015 #108

And neither, thankfully, are in the majority. NYC Liberal Mar 2015 #119

These stories are a dream come true for some folks BainsBane Mar 2015 #7

+1 JustAnotherGen Mar 2015 #37

Next? ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #44

Keep in mind JustAnotherGen Mar 2015 #61

But face it ... 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #64

But - you - you said JustAnotherGen Mar 2015 #72

+1 uponit7771 Mar 2015 #109

Most people don't seem to have read past the headline. DanTex Mar 2015 #8

Or, the 1st paragraph of the blog of their preference 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #47

I, personally find the email 'scandal' boring. bravenak Mar 2015 #10

It is easy to find it boring Aerows Mar 2015 #21

I archive my emails, and i am a nobody. bravenak Mar 2015 #28

As Secretary of State Aerows Mar 2015 #39

I understand completely. bravenak Mar 2015 #56

Did she not archive her emails? DanTex Mar 2015 #60

Are Aerows Mar 2015 #65

What does that mean? DanTex Mar 2015 #80

As much as I don't want to see her as the nominee, it's a nonstory. ScreamingMeemie Mar 2015 #14

We are still in the stage where people throw shit at the wall to see what sticks. Agnosticsherbet Mar 2015 #16

Easier just to quote Breitbart (nt) Nye Bevan Mar 2015 #19

+1. n/t 1StrongBlackMan Mar 2015 #55

+1 uponit7771 Mar 2015 #111

There's no law nichomachus Mar 2015 #34

I'm sure if Hillary left her files on the counter at Denny's Capt. Obvious Mar 2015 #38

Except she isn't some Aerows Mar 2015 #46

Show me the law that says she can't eat at Denny's Capt. Obvious Mar 2015 #57

Bingo! Aerows Mar 2015 #43

I've held several government jobs where use of private email was Lee-Lee Mar 2015 #45

If anything Aerows Mar 2015 #49

Message auto-removed Name removed Mar 2015 #52

That isn't "anecdote" Aerows Mar 2015 #76

Message auto-removed Name removed Mar 2015 #100

Oh Lord. Aerows Mar 2015 #102

She may not have violated the law- that doesn't mean Lee-Lee Mar 2015 #93

Then you might be interested in reading this. Pacifist Patriot Mar 2015 #58

Not understanding the law Aerows Mar 2015 #77

Did you intend to reply to someone else? Pacifist Patriot Mar 2015 #96

I replied in the context Aerows Mar 2015 #97

have some source data Man from Pickens Mar 2015 #62

DU is my research, quite frequently. Orsino Mar 2015 #66

What you're noticing is factually-challenged 'progressive' poutrage. wyldwolf Mar 2015 #70

Right wingers aren't into facts. Just not their thing. nt. NCTraveler Mar 2015 #79

I can't comment on it yet since I haven't heard enough. Xyzse Mar 2015 #92

I did-- it was a big meh ismnotwasm Mar 2015 #103

Daily Beast proves story is not true and Clinton was 100% legal. Agnosticsherbet Mar 2015 #105

The law's been around since 1950. Daily Beast can't change that. See posts #5 and #31. leveymg Mar 2015 #113

Looks like Dailybeast did, at least. elleng Mar 2015 #106

My issue is the lack of security for those emails. KeepItReal Mar 2015 #107

Me! Me! And so did Media Matters McCamy Taylor Mar 2015 #112

The House Oversight Committee is on it. Autumn Mar 2015 #114

Message auto-removed Name removed Mar 2015 #115

The sad thing is that they are on it. They don't have to find wrong doing. Autumn Mar 2015 #117

"we would be talking about us out-dumbing them" wyldwolf Mar 2015 #122

Of course they didn't! They thought they had Clinton and it all fell apart. hrmjustin Mar 2015 #116

It fell apart pretty fast, too. wyldwolf Mar 2015 #123

Last night I was dejected but glad that there wax push back today on it. hrmjustin Mar 2015 #124

I did. riqster Mar 2015 #118

Kick & recommended. William769 Mar 2015 #120

Reflexive criticism is just as easy as reflexive defense. nt Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #126