Hillary Clinton also used iPad for e-mail

[morningfog]

Hillary Rodham Clinton e-mailed her staff on an iPad as well as a BlackBerry while secretary of state, despite her explanation she exclusively used a personal e-mail address on a homebrew server so that she could carry a single device, according to documents obtained by The Associated Press.

The dispute over her e-mails has cast a shadow over Clinton, the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination who is widely expected to announce her candidacy next month.

The State Department released a total of four e-mails between Clinton and her top advisers as part of a Freedom of Information Act request filed in 2013 by the AP, which sought Clinton's correspondence with senior advisers over a four-year period relating to drone strikes overseas and U.S. surveillance programs.

While limited, the e-mails offer one of the first looks into Clinton's correspondence while secretary of state. The messages came from and were sent to her private e-mail address, hosted on a server at her property in Chappaqua, N.Y., as opposed to a government-run e-mail account.

They show that Clinton, on at least one occasion, accidentally mingled personal and work matters. In reply to a message sent in September 2011 by adviser Huma Abedin to Clinton's personal e-mail account, which contained an AP story about a drone strike in Pakistan, Clinton mistakenly replied with questions that appear to be about decorations.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2015/03/31/hilary-clinton-email/70708314/

Another unforced error from Hillary. Why lie about the "convenience" of only one device as the reason for co-mingling? Ineptly or cocky, she thinks she can just say whatever she wants and won't get contradicted. Almost everything from her only press conference has been proven inaccurate or worse.

[boston bean]

1. oh ferchrissakes!

having a access to an account on an ipad or computer is not akin to carrying two phones around.

This shit is getting more ridiculous by the day.

[morningfog]

6. It's another hit to her credibility.

Why give an excuse that won't hold up? Why not, I don't know, tell the truth?

[boston bean]

10. Do you have a phone with your email on it?

Can you also access that email on another device like an ipad or computer, when you don't want to look at the small screen of your phone?

Most people do this, however, most don't carry two phones!

Hell, this shit doesn't pass the laugh test. someone's credibility is taking a beating that's for sure... the msm carrying right wing water.

People are going to point to this and say "So, what?"

[Historic NY]

21. I do it so often my bank won't allow me access unless I verify.

[JonLP24]

44. Even hotmail does that to me

I can't ever log on with a phone but when I go on the laptop - boom there it is, someone was trying to log in to your account or some verification.

[mylye2222]

82. She gives those excuses..

...because anyway she knows she will get a free pass . As she always had.

[tammywammy]

11. +1 n/t

[SidDithers]

27. The right hates Hillary. The fringe left hates Hillary...

And they use the same tactics to attack her.

Sid

[merrily]

79. You discuss Hillary with communists?

[karynnj]

75. Making the issue "Hillary had more than one device" actually helps Hillary

She easily wins that strawman issue. It boils down to what she said - she only wanted to carry ONE DEVICE. It is possible that she didn't even have the ipad when she decided on the system she chose - so even if the ipad has the ability to have multiple accounts, it doesn't matter.

The issue is more why did she commingle everything in one account. Once she decided to use her server, not the government account, she could have avoided this entire issue, IF:

1) She had separate accounts for government vs anything else. It was HER server, so she certainly had this ability. Any problems on the Blackberry seemed to be using Government Blackberries and adding a personal account. Given she went to the trouble of having her own server, the team that set that up could have set up a blackberry to get 2 or more email streams.

2) She immediately set up a procedure with the State Department for regular, scheduled transfer of copies of her government account's emails to the State Department. (Note - this would comply with regulations written for subordinates during her tenure.

It is almost certain that no laws were broken. However, this can be seen as being SECRETIVE (and NO, that is not a sexist word - even if Hillaryworld says it it). Where it edges into a grey area is that there is the potential that messages are missing that could have been subject to FOIA.

However, what has been revealed is that while there are likely long mandated processes for official letters, press releases, minute notes etc the State Department did not before or during the Clinton years develop clear policy on archiving emails. This is pretty startling as I can remember as a worker at a company regulated by the government, we regularly had to provide the government with all email relating to one project or another - and this was in the 1990s. I am glad that Kerry has the State Department Inspector General looking at this on a going forward basis - they need clear rules on this. Obviously, any rules developed for the future, don't apply to anyone who went before.

I don't think this issue will have any more impact than it already has. Note that the HRC vs various Republicans has not changed. There is only one poll I know of that shows it changed her favorability - the CBS one that asked specifically about the email problem as well as that question. I don't know the order in which those questions were asked, but I suspect the email question was asked first -- and that is why the results are so startling in their difference from all regular polls. If it was asked first, it was - in essence - a push poll. They provided negative information (in the form of the earlier question) and then asked the favorability question.

However, it is something that for many of us, flies in the face of what we consider good, open government.

[JaneyVee]

94. +1. Someone inform the OP about difference between...

Using one email account on multiple devices vs. using 2 email accounts on 2 different devices.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

114. +1. Ridiculous.

I mostly answer emails for my business on the phone because the phone organizes the files the way I like it.

But I will answer a quick email on the iPad when I'm home surfing the web.

[leftofcool]

2. Who gives a flyin' fuck?

[madamvlb]

4. I second that.

emailgate is over.

[pnwmom]

121. I third that. n/t

[Warren Stupidity]

3. oh that fucking does it. She's toast. Everyone knows Ipads are made in CHINA!!!@!@@!@!@!@111!

[hobbit709]

5. Her emails have nothing to do with why I don't want her as President.

I could give a flying fuck about the emails.

[deutsey]

12. Bingo

I haven't even been following this very closely because it seems like one, big nontroversy.

Aside from being used by her enemies to create the appearance that something fishy must be going on, if there's anything to this, what is the substance of it that we should be concerned about?

[morningfog]

17. The email debacle is why I don't want her as a CANDIDATE.

I don't want her as a president for policy reasons.

This is a preview of her candidacy. She can't shoot straight and is a poor messenger. The entire run will be about her and her issues rather than the issues that matter to people. It is a disservice and a liability to the Democratic Party to have her as a candidate.

[merrily]

80. Well, it's one of the reasons.

People claim she was thoroughly vetted while Bill Clinton was President, but it was Bill Clinton who was the target. Nonetheless, she carries all that baggage and it will get dredged up again. Count on it. That makes my stomach churn. I got sick enough of that through 2000.

We don't know yet what will get added to the old baggage and Benghazi and the emails when she is the direct target.

[RiverLover]

7. I guess she'll need another flimsy excuse for hiding her official correspondence on a private server

& then destroying the server.

The "convenience" rationale for having only one device just went out the window.

[demmiblue]

8. I think she fucked up regarding the whole private e-mail/server situation, but this is just stupid.

[OKNancy]

9. LOL - 4 emails on an ipad!! oh the outrage

JFC -

[morningfog]

18. Why give us a bullshit excuse?

Why not just say, I wanted to protect my privacy. Or I wanted the convenience of one email, but now realize that was a foolish decision.

Her presser was full of inaccuracies and misstatements. For that the story will go on. Problem of her own making.

[OKNancy]

22. and you are just tickled pink to keep it going.

It's silly. People forget things, even young people. I'm sure she forgot about the four-fucking emails on the ipad written 5 years ago.

[morningfog]

24. This is the first four emails released.

As in 4 of 4. There will be much more.

I am not, as you say, tickled pink. I am cognizant that she has been deemed our front runner and likely nominee. I see her as a liability and I don't think she can win the general because of this type of mismanagement and inability to be clear and honest.

[SidDithers]

28. FUD'ers gonna FUD...nt

Sid

[pnwmom]

123. Maybe she thought it would be more useful to carry around an iPad and a phone

than 2 phones. I read that she used the iPad to read newspapers, and that would be a lot harder to do on a second blackberry.

But where is your evidence that she carried the iPad around with her? My husband only uses his at home.

[SidDithers]

13. Benghazi!!....nt

Sid

[Kingofalldems]

14. Somebody call 911 !

[Vinca]

15. Well, let's burn her at the stake. She's evil, evil, evil.

Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi.

[RiverLover]

16. "Almost everything from her only press conference has been proven inaccurate or worse."

Yep.

You were brave to post this article morningfog. I saw it earlier & knew the reaction from Hillary apologists would be exactly what they are here. Vile & ridiculous.

Some people don't mind purposeful deceit & probable obstruction if it comes with a (D). They defend it. I don't get it. And I don't want this for our party.

[Sheldon Cooper]

19. Yes, a brave and mighty blow was struck against the forces of evil!

Hillary Clinton used an iPad!! Dear god, will the nightmare never stop???

[RiverLover]

20. Yes & it wouldn't matter if she hadn't said she only wanted to carry one device, her ONLY reason

given for the bizarre practice for using private email on a private server for all official state business, dealing with foreign govts while her foundation accepted money from same foreign countries...

No other cabinet member has ever used only private email for work & personal. There is a reason for the FOIA lawsuits & others. They have a case. Made stronger by the fact she then destroyed her personal server.

[leftofcool]

23. I'm sure Try Gowdy is on top of this.

[Sheldon Cooper]

26. Yes, our long national nightmare continues apace.

What else you got?

[hrmjustin]

45. .

[merrily]

81. Since you asked:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026441003#post3

[Hekate]

138. Dear gods, what the hell IS that thing? Reminds me of a DUer's mystery animal...so long ago...

[OKNancy]

31. giving ones opinion about something one deems ridiculous

is not being an apologist. This is a discussion site. You detract, others object.

[Agschmid]

42. Yup.

[hrmjustin]

49. Vile?

[Bobbie Jo]

62. Vile!

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[hrmjustin]

63. Damn us for responding!

[MosheFeingold]

77. +1

"Some people don't mind purposeful deceit & probable obstruction if it comes with a (D). They defend it. I don't get it. And I don't want this for our party."

Thanks for your post. I thought I was alone.

The Clintons are out for the Clintons. They are not Progressive. They are oligarchs out for the 1%, co-opting and distorting the Progressive movement.

[Buns_of_Fire]

25. Wait until it's discovered that she also occasionally played "Angry Birds" on it, too.

And worse, she once sent a screenshot of her high score to Kim Jong Un with the note, "Beat this, Chucklenuts!"

Oh, the horror.

[leftofcool]

30. DUZY!

[Renew Deal]

39. lol

[misterhighwasted]

53. BwaaaHaaaaa!! no shit!

Angry birds with chucklenuts..

[uponit7771]

113. +1

[Number23]

117. The fail was thick in this thread. Until this post

[FSogol]

29. Translation: Benghazi!

[Gman]

32. BFD

[hrmjustin]

33. And Jesus Wept!

[misterhighwasted]

55. yup, in Indiana.

[hrmjustin]

56. indeed!

[misterhighwasted]

57. Now that's a story to be raging about!

This is mere distraction.
Typical RW sleight of hand. Look over there while we try to legislate discrimination in quiet secret closed door invite only meeting.
Seen this one before.
ALEC? ROVE? Is that you I smell?

[hrmjustin]

59. oh come on she used an ipad. she can't be president now.

[misterhighwasted]

60. [phone]. ^THIS^

[hrmjustin]

61. The next thing we will find out she used texting and a laptop.

Has she no shame?

[misterhighwasted]

64. Yes and she used both at The Same Time no less..

Last edited Tue Mar 31, 2015, 10:53 AM - Edit history (1)

[hrmjustin]

66. Well at least we had a good laugh.

[misterhighwasted]

68. True. Big Thank You to this OP for starting my day with a hearty HA HAAA.

Am off to work. Check with you later hrmjustin.

[hrmjustin]

70. Have a great day.

[johnp3907]

34. Fascinating.

[sharp_stick]

35. OMG AN IPAD!!!

I'm starting to hope for Clinton to pull this off just so I can watch the carnage of all the enraged heads popping due to blood pressure spikes.

[HERVEPA]

36. 24 hour fog, it appears

[morningfog]

37. Still morning here. I do have to smile at

A person with a screen name that always first reads as herpes making a name yuck yuck.

[Agschmid]

48. Classy post...

To me the only here really losing credibility is you.

[morningfog]

52. Oh, I'm heartbroken. I won't sleep tonight.

[Agschmid]

58. Good.

[merrily]

83. morningfog has no duty to take unprovoked personal insults silently.

Posting an OP is not a crime

[Agschmid]

86. I'm not talking about the OP I'm taking about the post where he says...

HERPEVA sounds a lot like HERPES.

Real good point they made there...

[merrily]

88. I know. HERPEVA insulted morningfog personally for nothing more than posting an OP, which is

not a crime. Once a poster does that, he or she can't complain about retaliation. morningfog simply retaliated to an unprovoked personal insult.

Hence, my statement that morningfog has no duty to take unprovoked insults simply because he or she posted an OP.

The first poster to attack personally for no reason has the greater fault.

[Agschmid]

89. There is a big difference between the insults which were said.

Some people just need to learn to not take the bait.

[merrily]

90. Yes. The first was unprovoked and unwarranted. The second was justified.

Some people just need to learn to not take the bait.

Does that apply to your unprovoked insults to morningfog for something morningfog said to another poster who had attacked morninggfog first?

Seems to me you have a very high standards for critics of Hillary.

[Agschmid]

91. So when someone insults someone by comparing them to Herpes...

I should just sit there and watch?

We aren't going to agree here. I hurled no insult all I did was callout a post that was OTT IMO would you rather I alert and just hide behind the scenes?

In my opinion it's better to just tell people when their words are hurtful.

Again...

"24 hour fog" = An insult, with no basis in reality.
"Herpes" = A disease which effects millions and causes a social stigma for those affected.

[merrily]

95. no, morningfog said the screen name HERVEPA looks like the word "herpes"

This was morningfog's entire response to an unprovoked personal insult from HERVEPA in reponse to morningfog's daring to post an OP critical of Hillary:

Still morning here. I do have to smile at A person with a screen name that always first reads as "herpes" making a name yuck yuck.

HERPEVA insulted the intelligence (or whatever) of a human for no good reason and, in retaliation, morningfog insulted (gasp) the screen name of a poster who had just insulted morningfog for no good reason.

"24 hour fog" = An insult, with no basis in reality.

The clear implication was that morningfog always suffers from mental fog. I don't understand why you say that has no basis in reality.

Clouding of consciousness, also known as brain fog or mental fog,[1][2][3][4][5] is a term used in conventional medicine denoting an abnormality in the "regulation" of the "overall level"[6] of consciousness that is mild and less severe than a delirium. The sufferer experiences a subjective sensation of mental clouding described as feeling "foggy".[7]

"Herpes" = A disease which effects millions and causes a social stigma for those affected.

Again, morningfog did not give the poster herpes, or say the poster had herpes or was like herpes. morningfog said he or she had to smile at being insulted by a poster whose screen name resembles the word "herpes."

I should just sit there and watch? [/

blockquote]

Under the actual circumstances, that would not, by any means, have been the ridiculous option you seem to think it would have been. If you felt compelled to speak anyway, you could have chided them both or only HERPEVA, for firing the first shot without provocation.

I hurled no insult

Really? Implying morningfog is not classy is not insulting? Expressing joy that morningfog might have a sleepless night is not insulting?

would you rather I alert and just hide behind the scenes

I think we can agree on something after all: Alerting on morningfog for replying to an unprovoked personal insult by (gasp) mocking the insulter's screen name would never have resulted in a hide (but might have resulted in some insults and scoldings from the jurors to the alerter).

it's better to just tell people when their words are hurtful.

Glad you feel that way because that was the reason for my posts to you. Well, that and I am sick of unprovoked personal attacks.

However, I am sorry you cannot see the fault of anyone but morningfog in this, though. Most people blame the one who fires the first shot with no good reason, not the one who defends herself or himself with a mild response.

[Agschmid]

96. I guess I'm not most people.

[merrily]

97. In some ways, maybe.

[Cha]

108. Thank Goodness!

Agschmid

[merrily]

125. Ok. you commend Agschmid after two personal insults twice to the OP, for no good reason, but

chastise me for a joke about the emoticon and links of a poster who stopped posting here many months ago, saying that, even though my insult was not personal and the poster may never see it, we could all do better and DU is starting to suck.

No double standard there.

[KMOD]

131. You seem upset.

Sometimes you should just take a break. It's a healthy thing to do.

[merrily]

132. You misread me yet again. I'm not at all upset.

It doesn't take being upset to notice the behavior of other posters.

Speaking of which, you've made quite a few posts to me in the last few minutes and on more than one thread. Are stalking me?

[KMOD]

134. lol

No, I'm stalking you.

[Cha]

140. I know.. I say "Thank Goodness" to Agschimd for not being like other people and say Hi to him..

and I get scolded for something that is none of their damn business.

Not replying to that poster.. they can go fight with themselves.. and be sure and get the final damn word in... and then if you keep replying to them they accuse you of "stalking".

No thanks.

KMOD.. glad you're not like anyone else either.

[KMOD]

144. love ya, Cha.

[Cha]

145. Love you back, KMOD

[Agschmid]

146. Yup!

[Number23]

118. And it's HERV not HERP and there's no S in that person's user name

Which makes that herpes comment all the more

[merrily]

122. Ah, yes, the whole point is exactly how many letters "HERVEPA" shares with "herpes" and not

that people piled on to the OP for making a relatively mild response about a screen name to HERVEPA's unprovoked insult about morningfog's mental capacity.



Moreover, though it's not especially relevant to the actual point, I never thought the comment was wtf because, in skimming thread, I have on occasion had to glance back to make sure what HERVEPA's screen name actually was. morningfog said the name "evoked" and I agee that it does, but, again, that is not the point.

[KMOD]

124. The screen name is not very difficult.

Well, at least not for the majority of people.

[merrily]

126. No one said it was and, again, that was SO not the point.

[KMOD]

127. No, you said this

I have on occasion had to glance back to make sure what HERVEPA's screen name actually was

I'm not sure why you would have difficulty with this. It's pretty easy for most of us to read.

[merrily]

128. Not "No" at all. When I said that, I said it was not the point. Twice I said it in one post and a

third time when I posted to you.

There is a difference between glancing down a thread to skim and "to read" a single word or name on a thread and I used the word skim. No one said the name was hard to read, either. A word that is easy to read can still remind someone of another word. But, for the fourth time, that was not the point. You're grasping at straws to pick and not succeeding either.

[KMOD]

129. It might not be your point, (which was silly btw)

but you still said it.

[merrily]

130. No, I replied to someone else who said it and nothing is silly about my defending a poster who got

piled on on this thread for no good reason, which seems to be the perpetual drill from DU's loyalists. But thanks for your input.

Rest assured, I will give it all the weight it merits.

[KMOD]

133. morningfog, who I generally like, is taking this in stride.

you, on the other hand, are taking it upon yourself to defend morningfog's honor. I think morningfog can more than take care of himself/herself.

The pile on is because no one cares, no one, that HRC has an iPad.

[merrily]

136. Actually, morningfog has also replied to every insult. And, yes, I am taking it on myself to

address the piling on. I find that a good thing because I appreciate when I'm getting piled on by what some DUers refer to as "the swarm. It's not right, IMO.

You apparently think it's a bad thing that I am doing. Not sure why, but you are entitled to your opinion.

I think morningfog can more than take care o himself/herself.

No one said otherwise.

The pile on is because no one cares, no one, that HRC has an iPad.

No, it is not. You can not care about the content of the OP news item without flinging personal insults at the OP. The insults are being flung because the OP had the "gall" to post something about Hillary that was less than favorable to Hillary. It happens on this board all the time, no matter how important or unimportant the news item is. If you really don't care about an OP, you move on to another thread. Surely, you know that.

You've now tried to pick irrelevant nits with me for quite a posts and have yet to make a true or correct comment. Refuting that level of commentary gets boring fast. Think I'll move on to something else. Enjoy your quest.

[KMOD]

141. You are a riot. lol

I'm so glad you see yourself as a white knight.



Now what in the hell is the swarm. lol

For the record, I have not flung any insults at morningfog. None at all. Nor will I.

I don't care about the topic because it's embarrassingly stupid. I will not just move on to another thread, because it needs to be pointed out how ridiculous this is.

I could care less if you like Hillary Clinton, or not. She currently is not even running.

Go after her on the issues, if you choose, but this email nonsense is utterly silly.

[merrily]

143. Have pity on the poor straw men and let them rest.

[one_voice]

92. not nice.

[morningfog]

98. Boo hoo.

[merrily]

100. morningfog simply made a very mild reply to an unprovoked personal attack.

Please see Reply 90 and 95

I commend him or her for restraint.

[Renew Deal]

38. Bwahahahaha

[melm00se]

40. New Flash for everyone

Politicians have political opponents (regardless of ideology) who are waiting to pounce on any misstep, misstatement, change in policy or change in stance. Veteran politicians all know this and go to great lengths to minimize these opportunities.

[madokie]

43. Who gives a fuck

those who do ain't gonna vote for her anyway and those who might vote for her could care less what she used to convey messages to whoever.

Making mountains out of molehills, stirring up more shit when it smells bad around here lately anyway

Fuck a bunch of this noise

[madokie]

41. I know someone who doesn't like Hillary

and it shows, Really bad too

[NightWatcher]

46. OMG Hillary is an Apple Fanboy. Call Bernie Sanders right....

[Yavin4]

47. This is taking on elements of the Salem Witch Hunt

"She uses an iPad! She must be a witch!!! Burn her!!"

[Capt. Obvious]

69. It's exactly the same!

They're still feeding their dogs Hillary witch cake waiting for her to cry out.

[Capt. Obvious]

50. This "scandal" blew over weeks ago

The only people who care about it are the tea party and their left wing allies.

83% of voters don't care.

78% said they're more likely to vote for her because of this "scandal."

[SidDithers]

84. "the tea party and their left wing allies."...

Better believe it.

Sid

[JonLP24]

51. I could give a rats ass about e-mails

the meat is probably in those cables but what interests me is how they respond to whatever potential scandal--anything at all that could look like one is how they respond post-scandal. I lost count how many times already someone has been contradicted by something they said after the e-mails only for the contradiction to appear the next day. That part of it all tells me everything, if they say we missed up we won't do it again but they're conditioned to release statements that sound good but full of bullshit, even if it is bullshit that contradicts their earlier bullshit.

[Dr Hobbitstein]

54. morningfog

[MosheFeingold]

65. Not a big deal in the general, but should be in the primary

Look, everyone who is saying this "blew over" is correct. The media will barely cover this, excepting Faux news, and she will stonewall. So, yes, this will go no where.

This should be a big deal in the primary, however, in that we are better than the Clintons.

They are OUT FOR THE CLINTONS. They are NOT progressive. They are whatever gives them power and makes them rich.

The whole private-email thing (and missing form) is just a symptom of the bigger problem: they don't obey laws, and are insulted we think they should. Laws are for the non-oligarchs and little people like you and me. Clinton IS the 1% and out for her 1% buddies.

She had private emails so she could say shitty things about the base, make private deals, and have no accountability.

You know it, and I know it.

There are a lot of honest progressives out there. Be nice to have a choice other than "sucks" and "sucks less."

[hrmjustin]

67. Shitty things about the base?

Really?

[MosheFeingold]

72. Really.

If you are in DNC, you know exactly who I am. It's not like I changed my name.

You know what the ruling class says about the little people.

[hrmjustin]

73. I am not in the DNC so I have no idea who you are.

[Hekate]

142. I have not a clue what you are talking about or who you are. Are you, like, important or something?

[misterhighwasted]

71. You have ZERO proof of your accusation..in other wrods:

"She had private emails so she could say shitty things about the base, make private deals, and have no accountability."

Could???? Not did. "could".

Total b.s.

Truth is you don't even know WHAT she put in the emails, just that she "COULD"

Good Lord.
Time to Trash this Thread & IGNORE the useless "what if".

[MosheFeingold]

76. Sure

I could say I am a volcano and an expert on lava. Such is the internet.

But, in reality, I was a lawyer for decades. I know why government officials have private files and why they destroy them.

I mean, do you have any doubts what is on the 15 minutes Richard Nixon deleted from his taping system? I don't either.

The first thing I learned as a lawyer is to not be so in love with your case that you can't see the other side's arguments.

Similarly, one should never be so partisan one cannot see flaws in your own candidate.

I'll support Hillary in the general.

But if I can get rid of her in the primary, it's better for the party and the country.

[merrily]

85. IMO, promising to support her in the general makes getting "rid of her in the primary" less likely.

I have no clue why so many who don't want Hillary as nominee seem so eager to volunteer loyalty oaths before she even announces formally.

I very much doubt any nominee cares how tightly you have to hold your nose in the voting booth, as long as you vote for him or her.

There will be plenty of time for loyalty oaths when the primary ends.

Good comments about seeing both sides of all candidates, though. I think it's against "human nature," though. We tend to collect evidence for why we are right and ignore, dismiss or rationalize all else.

[AgingAmerican]

74. Stupid

The whole thing is stupid. Gasp! She used her iPad! Move over Vincent Foster suicide and the Clinton Xmas card list, you've got company.

[merrily]

78. Hillary wanted 100% control over even her official emails.

She had to have expected, at a minimum, Congressional hearings and FOIA requests at some point, if not a subpoena.

Whether you think she was correct or wrong, lawful or unlawful, obedient to Obama or defiant of Obama, you knew the minute you heard that her emails were on a private server that it was about control of her emails, right? So did media.


The two device bit, Chelsea's wedding and her mom's funeral, had nothing to do with it. No clue why that was her story.


http://www.nytimes.com/1996/01/06/us/elusive-papers-of-law-firm-are-found-at-white-house.html

[6000eliot]

87. Chilling!

[LuvLoogie]

93. She was probably talking about being able to set up an IMAP account

as opposed to the State Department's closed POP3 system (probably), which she would have to access via a VPN login or be on a domain member computer.

So did Hillary kill our ambassador in Libya or what? Was she sexting Assad? Inquiring minds want to know.

[merrily]

99. Assad? No, she only called him a "reformer," knowing he was killing his own citizens

and torturing for us via extraordinary rendition, including during her husband's administration. Probably not by email, though.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/syrian-president-assad-regarded-reformer-clinton-says

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/03/30/imprisoned-and-tortured-in-syria-and-then-rejec-ted-by-washington.html

http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2005/02/14/outsourcing-torture

[LuvLoogie]

115. From the first article...

--When Kerry was asked about Syria during a question-and-answer session afterwards, he voiced optimism about the direction relations were taking.

“I have been a believer for some period of time that we could make progress in that relationship,” he said. “And I’m going to continue to work for it and push it.”

“President Assad has been very generous with me in terms of the discussions we have had,” Kerry continued. “And when I last went to – the last several trips to Syria – I asked President Assad to do certain things to build the relationship with the United States and sort of show the good faith that would help us to move the process forward....” --

It continues with Kerry further speaking of optimism regarding Syria. Then, as Secretary of State, he was able to help negotiate a removal of chemical weapons from Syria. A real Kissinger that Kerry.

Should Hillary Clinton have advocated for the bombing of Syria or for putting troops on the ground?

[merrily]

116. Hoping for improvement is not the same as calling Assad a reformer/

Should Hillary Clinton have advocated for the bombing of Syria or for putting troops on the ground?

Why are you asking such a ludicrous question, as though there is no middle ground between calling him a reformer publicly and announcing publicly that the US should bomb him? No, and she probably should not have shot him point blank in front of witnesses, either.

Point was, she should not have called a man who tortures for hire and was slaughtering his own people mercilessly a reformer publicly. Don't even know how anyone can deny that.

[LuvLoogie]

119. But wasn't she speaking in comparative context

of Assad the Elder's regime? Are you suggesting that she supports torture for hire and the slaughtering of one's own citizens?

She made her statement openly.

So what was on the server? Anything more damaging to U.S. diplomacy than what Wikileaks produced? Anything that makes Hillary Clinton the most heinous Secretary of State ever? We have nearly the entire GOP leadership openly undermining U.S. diplomacy and people hand wring over Hillary's demeanor.

[merrily]

120. "She made her statement openly." Exactly the problem. Calling him a reformer publicly as he killed

his own people and tortured for us for money, and I'm guess for others.

How do you supposed Syrians and other Arabs reacted to that comment? Do you think that was a prudent and honest statement on her part?

BTW, I am not the one who brought up Assad.

[LuvLoogie]

135. Do you think that it is possible

that Clinton and Kerry made overtures to Assad to manipulate Putin? Given the NeoCons' designs in the Middle East, don't you suppose the Obama administration were playing both a public and covert hand?

Compared to Bush/Cheny/Powell/Rice, Obama/Clinton/Kerry is thwarting the Neocon dream. There may have been email on that server that spoke to the more covert machinations of the State Department under Hillary Clinton. But fuck the GOP if they think they're going to get their hands on Hillary's server. After that stunt they pulled with Netanyahu and the letter to Iran?!

I mentioned Assad in parody of the Machiavellian Hillary Ogre and you obliged.

[merrily]

137. Ah yes, my reply about Assad obliged you. Your earlier replies to me made that obvious.

I played right into your waiting hands. You're welcome.

[B Calm]

101. So you think she e.mailed the Benghazi Terrorists to attack the embassy? Seriously

[what side are you on, republicans?

[morningfog]

103. Of course not. That is an asinine suggestion.

I have no idea what she is hiding, or why she makes such foolish decisions, or why she gave such piss poor excuses.

If I had to, I would guess whatever she is trying to hide deals with money.

[B Calm]

104. Actually it's not asinine suggestion. What she did was not illegal and you

are pushing right-wing propaganda designed to bring down the popularity of the Democratic frontrunner!

[morningfog]

105. What she did was probably not illegal.

We have no way of knowing whether she retained all the records she was supposed to. But, all the Hillary supporters ignore my point. I don't care about the emails. Obviously it is a witch hunt, the entire Benghazi committee is a farce.

The issue from my perspective, as a Democratic voter and observer, is that she gave this issue to the republicans by her own decisions. It was her foolish choice to co-mingle her emails, to self-screen her production, to scrub her server and to give excuses that don't hold. All unforced errors that show she is poor candidate.

[B Calm]

106. and you continue pushing this right-wing propaganda.

[morningfog]

109. Posting and discussing on DU is not pushing anything.

And, again, if you read and understand my words, I am not supporting the right wing's propaganda. The point is Hillary is not a good campaigner. If she is the nominee, and throughout her impeding primary candidacy, it will be about her and her issues, which she creates through her poor decisions.

Any discussions of the issues that matter to voters will be secondary to Clinton personal dramas.

[Agschmid]

110. 18 million primary voters, and one entire state disagree with you.

She seems to campaign just fine when the left doesn't push right wing memes.

Here is what I hate about this place... I am not a Hillary supporter but I have to spend most of time on here defending her from Brietbart attacks posted by liberals.

Just another day... Trumad was right that's for sure.

[Man from Pickens]

112. Of course not. She used a text message

Seriously though, it is so predictable and sad that when HRC gets caught with her metaphorical hand in the cookie jar yet again, her defenders shout "Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi!" as if it's relevant.

So predictable, that I already parodied that very tactic http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6430336

I really couldn't stomach 20 more months of disingenuous distractions. She ought to spare us, and declare that she is not running now or at any future date, and go back to charging a quarter-million a pop in "speaking fees" at universities where the students are being crushed with tuition hikes.

[treestar]

102. What difference does it make what device was used?

I can get my email off my computer, my phone, anyone else's computer and an iPad if I had one.

[Man from Pickens]

111. Enough of a difference that she saw fit to lie about it

This is what you get with HRC - something other than the truth, no matter what the question is or how little difference the answer may make.

It begs the question, why lie? Why needlessly destroy credibility and sow mistrust?

The only answer to that I can give you is that's simply who she is, someone whose first reflex is to be dishonest - which is of course the last thing you want in someone who can take the country to war.

[steve2470]

107. bfd, yawn nt

[Hekate]

139. The horror! the horror!

[morningfog]

148. Welcome back to DU. This op is 7 months old.

Strange to reply to that. Hmmmm.....