Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

karynnj

(60,984 posts)
50. Not necessarily - we don't know how his email worked
Mon Feb 1, 2016, 12:47 PM
Feb 2016

Most email packages create address books. I would not be surprised if the President's blackberry's address book was maintained by his staff. In that case - if he personally typed the email .. and it is not clear that someone on his staff didn't do that with him dictating .. he likely just had to type "Hillary Clinton" and the To line would be filled.

In addition, even if he noticed, it is not clear that he would know that she had ALL her email there and that she was not, in real time, archiving it. He did after all have more to thing of than that. As to the various people who worked in the State Department consider that they likely worked for at least one political person reporting to Clinton. Even if they understood completely what was happening - who could they go to? No one higher in the State Department - she controlled the top of that pyramid. The position of State Department IG was unfilled for 5 1/2 years starting in 2008 - so that path was not as effective as possible. Could someone troubled enough have contacted someone in the White House?

We know that John Kerry got a state.gov account day one. That suggests that someone on that transition either asked it be set up (maybe Kerry's chief of staff) or the career SD people created it and gave it to him. That's how things normally work so it is totally unremarkable that he did this. Just as every Senator has a .gov address, you would expect anyone working at the SD .. all the way up to the Secretary.. would routinely be given an email.

The bigger question is why this utterly normal process not happen with HRC. There is a big question as to why she was never given a SD account -- even if she never then used it.

At some point the Obama administration had to learn that HRC did this. There is a story here we don't know. I doubt they were happy, but knew politically they could not force her to change. Politically, Obama could not demand HRC resign. There is a good question to be asked of when Obama was told of the extraordinary decision of Clinton running the SD on her own server. Another question is whether - as she told the public - Clinton assured high level Obama people that the email was captured by the SD system. It does seem that it took almost a year before the fact that stuff was missing went to a high enough level that they could "negotiate" with HRC to get them back. (Note the word "negotiate" suggests again that she had unusual power.)

This has been why I have been intensely angry at Clinton on this issue, that her supporters want to make go away by putting their fingers in their ears - calling everyone concerned as pushing RW talking points. The fact is that this is a mess created out of Clinton's paranoia that has the potential of raising questions about the State Department and the WH - all the way up to the top.

Recommendations

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

Another Clinton, another monumental lapse in judgement. I just want them to go away! onecaliberal Feb 2016 #1
Have you been awaiting HRC indictments for 20 years Hortensis Feb 2016 #27
No, and you're support of her proves you are the right leaning one. onecaliberal Feb 2016 #39
Even without an indictment or a recommendation of an indictment, this has been a blemish on Obama's karynnj Feb 2016 #48
Bypassing the State Department to rely on Blumenthal may have hedgehog Feb 2016 #53
I agree that it was not illegal karynnj Feb 2016 #56
Don't deflect to Obama. This is about the blemish Hortensis Feb 2016 #57
What person are you speaking of who wants HRC in prison? It's not me and not the op, that I have karynnj Feb 2016 #65
The people I'm talking want indictments, Hortensis Feb 2016 #70
oh, and another risk factor for Obama grasswire Feb 2016 #2
Not necessarily - we don't know how his email worked karynnj Feb 2016 #50
Not necessarily... Merryland Feb 2016 #54
This message was self-deleted by its author 840high Feb 2016 #60
If they're gonna indict her, do it soon tularetom Feb 2016 #3
Conservative Venus Fly Trap method. glinda Feb 2016 #6
Shouildn't this post be on the Primaries page? CajunBlazer Feb 2016 #4
Blatant Repugnant dishonesty, repeated......... Darb Feb 2016 #5
Hillary is the MOST ADMIRED WOMAN ON THE PLANET. Hortensis Feb 2016 #38
I'd be willing to bet she's also the most disliked woman in the U.S. cali Feb 2016 #41
Maybe this will help you with your thesis, Darb Feb 2016 #42
The "most admired" and "most disliked" are often one and the same. razorman Feb 2016 #67
The president doesn't control the Attorney General. Renew Deal Feb 2016 #7
At least the president is not supposed to control the AG. razorman Feb 2016 #66
You're being duped by the Rethugs. The only issue, as stated by Obama's spokesman, pnwmom Feb 2016 #8
you are operating on old information... grasswire Feb 2016 #9
Then link to the new information. Has the state department taken back pnwmom Feb 2016 #10
The only new information murielm99 Feb 2016 #11
I get most of my information from car thieves. Agschmid Feb 2016 #26
Drudge has it first. Hortensis Feb 2016 #34
Some Sanders Supporters, apparently. vorgan24 Feb 2016 #37
+1,000. Thank you for facts, pnwmom. Hekate Feb 2016 #15
And you're wrong again. jeff47 Feb 2016 #40
Won't happen, but the beneficiary will certainly be Martin O'Malley, not BS. Tarheel_Dem Feb 2016 #12
sincerely, how is that? hopemountain Feb 2016 #21
O'Malley is the only other Democrat in the race. Tarheel_Dem Feb 2016 #71
Watergate involved, among other things, illegal breaking and entering lovemydog Feb 2016 #13
+1,000. Thank you for facts, and I love your dog, too. Hekate Feb 2016 #16
Thanks Hekate. lovemydog Feb 2016 #18
And that's why even her accusers say that they're certain she'll never be pnwmom Feb 2016 #19
So it's just smears and innuendo, without any charges. lovemydog Feb 2016 #20
I agree that this is not Watergate and closer to the impeachment, but I differ on how to describe it karynnj Feb 2016 #64
Does the term "ex post facto" mean anything to Bernie Bros? Sheesh! jmowreader Feb 2016 #14
+1,000. Thank you for facts, jmowreader. LOVE your second point. Hekate Feb 2016 #17
who are berniebros? what do they have hopemountain Feb 2016 #22
Manning and Snowden? Really? thesquanderer Feb 2016 #28
And you'll want to claim that Clinton's 'mishandling' was to subvert our way of life or something? randome Feb 2016 #43
*If* she mishandled data, it would have been for her own benefit. (n/t) thesquanderer Feb 2016 #47
+1 to your last paragraph treestar Feb 2016 #35
Not actually "ex post facto" backtomn Feb 2016 #73
Wrong forum, but you knew that before posting didn't you. B Calm Feb 2016 #23
oh my god, it's all bullshit. it's another Benghazi ginned up by Republicans Lil Missy Feb 2016 #24
The facts still remain the same, none of the emails were classified top secret when she received B Calm Feb 2016 #25
What if she sent top secret info to Huma? Yupster Feb 2016 #44
and she might have called the Benghazi terrorists and said attack now. Blah, Blah, Blah B Calm Feb 2016 #45
What kind of a response is that? Yupster Feb 2016 #49
if she's to be indicted, I sure as hell hope it comes soon , preferably KingCharlemagne Feb 2016 #29
This is the anti-Hillary campaign if she is the nominee. Vinca Feb 2016 #30
But she raises a lot of money for the party! All those moneyed interests buying US off. RiverLover Feb 2016 #31
If it wasn't the emails, the cons would have fabricated some other type of BS. B Calm Feb 2016 #32
Unfortunately Hillary's home server was real & not fabricated awake Feb 2016 #59
You seem to have forgotten that the majority of Americans justiceischeap Feb 2016 #36
There is nothing "hanging over her head", Darb Feb 2016 #46
Of course I'm not on his side. Don't be silly. Vinca Feb 2016 #52
Is there any of her "baggage" that is ACTUALLY REAL? Darb Feb 2016 #62
some say she's campaigning precisely to shield herself from prosecution grasswire Feb 2016 #55
Okay Trey mythology Feb 2016 #33
If a criminal referral comes down from the FBI... hoosierlib Feb 2016 #51
I used to have to go to free republic or Fox Noise for such right-wing smears joeybee12 Feb 2016 #58
You can thank Hillary for all this. 840high Feb 2016 #61
Nope joeybee12 Feb 2016 #63
I don't think Hillary should be indicted, but it's a real possibility DemocraticWing Feb 2016 #68
This is just another smear that she will rise above mwrguy Feb 2016 #69
Locking In_The_Wind Feb 2016 #72
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Obama may have a very dif...»Reply #50