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 All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
Well, she didn't do it to compromise our security. That's what matters. Hoyt Mar 2016 #1
I know a guy who didn't drive drunk to hurt someone tk2kewl Mar 2016 #12
Except Clinton didn't hurt anyone. I get the email deal is your last desperate hope Hoyt Mar 2016 #21
So by your logic drunk driving is ok as long as no one gets hurt tk2kewl Mar 2016 #26
Look man, I'm tired of this junk with you guys. I'm not talking about friggin drunk drivers, Hoyt Mar 2016 #54
Just sad. libtodeath Mar 2016 #67
the laws are for little people, I guess tk2kewl Mar 2016 #71
To those of us who work in cyber security, this is NOT "trumped up crud." Fawke Em Mar 2016 #77
The biggest problem facing the country today is more people believe it's nothing cherokeeprogressive Mar 2016 #83
Maybe you are a bit biased because of the source of your income. If classified Hoyt Mar 2016 #100
you are sadly using old talking points and not up to speed. grasswire Mar 2016 #104
Like you aren't using "talking points." Even your candidate says the email deal is BS. Hoyt Mar 2016 #117
Here is a news flash fer ya nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #119
Nadin, it's only serious in Sanders' and Trumps' supporters minds. Glad to know you are more astute Hoyt Mar 2016 #122
You ignore the FBI and the IGs... at your peril nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #124
Sounds like you have been reading too much Judge Napolitano. Hoyt Mar 2016 #132
Nope sounds like I have been reading nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #137
no, he didn't grasswire Mar 2016 #127
Anything to terminate Hillary's campaign Dem2 Mar 2016 #99
Some of us are talking of nothing serious nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #110
Thanks nadin. 840high Mar 2016 #113
"Suspicions" -- LMAO, from whom? Even Sanders said the email issue is BS. Saw him right there on TV Hoyt Mar 2016 #120
the idiots at NSA, and at least a couple of the the Inspector Generals nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #121
We'll know soon enough. Of course, when she is not indicted or anything else, you will rack it up Hoyt Mar 2016 #123
Given they extended this from December, when it was supposed to be done nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #126
LOL :) insta8er Mar 2016 #125
Sanders will continue to chip away at Hillary's shaky support, regardless of the damned e-mails. reformist2 Mar 2016 #49
That was the first thing that came to my mind as well... cherokeeprogressive Mar 2016 #23
You know this how? libtodeath Mar 2016 #66
You think she's a spy for Russia, ISIS or something? You guys crack me up. Hoyt Mar 2016 #118
Like buying a golden bathtub. To flaunt her power and wealth. Tierra_y_Libertad Mar 2016 #2
^THIS^ is the truth, right here. cherokeeprogressive Mar 2016 #24
Maybe she's a Russian spy. JoePhilly Mar 2016 #3
I know you are kidding nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #111
To keep the All-Powerful DU too busy arguing among ourselves to avoid the oncoming Fascist takeover. randome Mar 2016 #4
She learned sneaky cleverness treestar Mar 2016 #116
Didin't want anyone watching the deals she was Ferd Berfel Mar 2016 #5
Good question. mmonk Mar 2016 #7
I vote for this Hydra Mar 2016 #11
If so, it backfired spectacularly becoming a story on its own karynnj Mar 2016 #19
The Clintons practically live the mantra of "It seemed like a good idea at the time..." Hydra Mar 2016 #33
That sounds plausible. Gregorian Mar 2016 #17
plus communicating with blumenthal noiretextatique Mar 2016 #18
+10 million! So obvious along with her pay to play going on with the Foundation nt riderinthestorm Mar 2016 #43
.+1 840high Mar 2016 #114
+1 nt snappyturtle Mar 2016 #30
This seems the most likely to me, based on what we've seen so far. nt vintx Mar 2016 #41
There it is, right there! HassleCat Mar 2016 #61
That doesn't make sense gwheezie Mar 2016 #82
ay.. yup!! n/t dana_b Mar 2016 #88
Probably a lot bigger than that. JackRiddler Mar 2016 #109
Excellent answer. 840high Mar 2016 #115
^^^This^^^ eom farleftlib Mar 2016 #140
To avoid FOIL requests UglyGreed Mar 2016 #6
It is good for that. mmonk Mar 2016 #8
Probably on the advice of Kissenger tk2kewl Mar 2016 #13
FOIA Requests, and yes, I agree that this was the main reason. Dustlawyer Mar 2016 #51
I'm sorry in NYS UglyGreed Mar 2016 #68
This message was self-deleted by its author PonyUp Mar 2016 #9
This is becoming more and more obvious NWCorona Mar 2016 #34
Seems to me that replies 5, 6 and 9 aren't mutually exclusive HereSince1628 Mar 2016 #37
+1,000,000 eom dragonfly301 Mar 2016 #53
Maybe speaktruthtopower Mar 2016 #10
Just as Bill answered in 2004 about Lewinsky when he did book tours, "because she could" karynnj Mar 2016 #14
A tough situation. mmonk Mar 2016 #28
Why are Democrats propagating a Republican invented scandal against a Democrat? GreydeeThos Mar 2016 #15
is the FBI a republican group? noiretextatique Mar 2016 #20
The origin of the email controversy is the Republicans in the House of Representatives GreydeeThos Mar 2016 #29
No, the origin of the controversy is HIllary Clinton... Human101948 Mar 2016 #36
And the origin of discovering the stained blue dress was Hillary's desire to withhold information. frylock Mar 2016 #63
Look! Over there - Its a red herring. GreydeeThos Mar 2016 #73
If Hillary had just compliied with the request for those law firm papers.. frylock Mar 2016 #74
Yea, the dress was a hit job on Bill Clinton GreydeeThos Mar 2016 #76
So did the VRWC use mind control to get Bill to not have sexual relations with that woman? frylock Mar 2016 #78
Let's see GreydeeThos Mar 2016 #79
The common denominator is Hillary and her inability to comply with simple requests. frylock Mar 2016 #87
The FBI isn't investigating Clinton they're investigating the SoS serverS, this is so beneeth folk uponit7771 Mar 2016 #138
I asked a question based on the fact of the system created. mmonk Mar 2016 #31
And yet you still fall for it. baldguy Mar 2016 #42
Fall for reality? It does exist. Are you saying it doesn't? mmonk Mar 2016 #50
RW propaganda is not reality. baldguy Mar 2016 #60
They did not create another server system. mmonk Mar 2016 #62
Yes, they did use private emails. baldguy Mar 2016 #65
Whooossshhh.. Fawke Em Mar 2016 #80
"Whooossshhh" indeed. baldguy Mar 2016 #134
I didn't ask about emails. mmonk Mar 2016 #135
You're promoting a RW agenda insisting that Clinton conform to a standard of conduct baldguy Mar 2016 #139
Serious? They've applied to everyone involved. mmonk Mar 2016 #141
Where are the transcripts of Powell being grilled by a Congressional committee for 11 hours? baldguy Mar 2016 #143
I have to agree. One of the 99 Mar 2016 #45
Nope. Republican witch hunts may have poisoned the well... RufusTFirefly Mar 2016 #84
So Sad that you're believing GOP propaganda. One of the 99 Mar 2016 #142
One can only wonder why so many DUers uncritically support corporatist Broward Mar 2016 #58
So Bill could look over her shoulder? Gregorian Mar 2016 #16
So no incriminating public records are left. Fuddnik Mar 2016 #22
the nightmare scenario AgerolanAmerican Mar 2016 #103
Initially, because the NSA said she could not have a secure Blackberry like POTUS KeepItReal Mar 2016 #25
Convenience and control. DCBob Mar 2016 #27
You would allow hackers to get into your private server and view national secrets? Fawke Em Mar 2016 #81
In case you were not aware, there are ways to block hackers. DCBob Mar 2016 #96
We don't know that for sure. 840high Mar 2016 #128
Well then, that settles it. LOL libdem4life Mar 2016 #86
Actually, the FBI report will settle it. DCBob Mar 2016 #94
Thanks for that bit of info...we agree...the FBI will settle it. libdem4life Mar 2016 #98
Any IT professional knows that a system can be hacked and log entries wouldn't show it. nt DemocracyDirect Mar 2016 #131
She could always have a Blackberry. Rice had a blackberry. She was always allowed Recursion Mar 2016 #32
Did you ever move from one job to another that meant you needed to change your technology? karynnj Mar 2016 #44
Because our government was/is unprepared for the digital revolution. Trust Buster Mar 2016 #35
However, shouldn't her response have been to demand more changes in the SD system? karynnj Mar 2016 #46
The email bullshit is nothing but political. It's RW propaganda designed solely to attack a Democrat baldguy Mar 2016 #47
There is saying that includes a sex act and a chicken... DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2016 #59
You really think 2 judges, FBI are rw? 840high Mar 2016 #129
"Our government servers get hacked on a regular basis." Fawke Em Mar 2016 #85
Hillary was the most traveled Secretary of State in U.S. history. Trust Buster Mar 2016 #91
Because when you are preparing for a global crime spree FlatBaroque Mar 2016 #38
^^^ LOL! True. RiverLover Mar 2016 #108
Apparently, the road to the Presidency is paved with "He/She did it first!" cherokeeprogressive Mar 2016 #39
This message was self-deleted by its author PonyUp Mar 2016 #52
Death throes of a dying campaign. nt LexVegas Mar 2016 #40
Libya. nt. polly7 Mar 2016 #48
Possibly.... peace13 Mar 2016 #55
They are light. mmonk Mar 2016 #101
The server was set up so that FoIA requests would return the answer, 'We have no records'. w4rma Mar 2016 #56
FOIA requests is why I believe she set up an outside system. Autumn Mar 2016 #57
Yes, I believe that to be a reason. mmonk Mar 2016 #64
Because she and people like her, thin they are above the rules that apply to everyone else. pdsimdars Mar 2016 #69
It was a deliberate effort to frustrate the Freedom of Information Act. Attorney in Texas Mar 2016 #70
I can answer this. It was to be able to make business deals with and for wealthy private interests Zorra Mar 2016 #72
concise and pertinent. grasswire Mar 2016 #105
Because 9/11 FlatBaroque Mar 2016 #75
Paganini was not offered immunity for a day in the park. He was her IT guy. libdem4life Mar 2016 #89
yep nt grasswire Mar 2016 #106
because govt procurement is BACKWARD. slow, low power. pansypoo53219 Mar 2016 #90
Message auto-removed Name removed Mar 2016 #92
CONTROL. jalan48 Mar 2016 #93
Not quite unplaced paranoia with the RW nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #95
Yep. mmonk Mar 2016 #102
hey, the wealth of the world is at stake here grasswire Mar 2016 #107
I am not willing to go down that road nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #112
History will not be kind to the Clintons tough. DemocracyDirect Mar 2016 #133
History will not be kind nadinbrzezinski Mar 2016 #136
Yes. 840high Mar 2016 #130
Delete, deflect, plausible deniability. OZi Mar 2016 #97
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»So why did SoS Clinton ha...»Reply #94