"Other Secretaries of State did it, so it was okay for Hillary to do it" Sure. My parents always accepted that excuse when I tried it as a child.

What do you think. I've been an internal auditor most of my career. I can tell you this is a combination of what was most important. To me it is a big deal. But Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

---

---

"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden

Look at the scoreboard behind Corrupt Hillary. The time is 20:16 and the score is even at 45 - 45.

Photoshopped?

We can hope she's indicted later today......Bernie vs. Trump for the fate of the free world!

---

"The great pleasure in life is doing what people say you cannot do."

It didn't say that. It says that document retention policy that loose under prior administration. Having a server offsite is unprecedented. They also suffered a scope limitations due to clinton and team failing to cooperate.

You have to view an if report like an internal audit report. Igs and internal auditors have he same training and follow very similar standard.

If you are an employee in a company or gov't agency causing a scope limitation, you can suffer major consequences of the scope of the audit is mundane. But if the scope is a fraud investigation or investigation into wrong doings, you can face jail time in certain circumstances.

The only exception to such would be invoking fifth amendment rights and that means you feel your statements would implicate you in a crime.

But these are appointees and political hacks placed into position. So I guess the normal rules don't apply.

Again, if these were any other people, they would be jailed. Somebody has to go down just so people keep some faith in the system.

---

---

"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden

Nobody went to jail for the largest perpetration of financial fraud in the history of the world. Who gives a f*ck about an email server?

Unfortunately you are right. But we're not just talking about jail.

If you ask any average joe or Jane if people should have gone to jail for the housing crisis, they would say yes.

So to say nobody gives a damn isn't so. Instead the correct term is cynical. That the system protects certain people and this is just another case. I do think people care when when people walk for things that average people would be jailed for. But I think society feels there is nothing they can do.

That is why Bernie and trump
Are popular. And that is why I think trump had a better chance than expected of pulling it off.

---

---

"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden

I agree with it being cynical. I just think for the average person, the email scandal rates somewhere below inflate-gate.

So since this has been done by other Secretaries of State are you for prosecuting them?

---

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.

How can you compare the two? Yes, prior DOS used extra-departmental email address like google. But she had hardware installed specifically to avoid being on the State Dept server. Also, policies were updated during her tenure to address this. It has already been debunked the comparison is valid.

She has also lied as highlighted in the report and compared in this article.

1. That she followed the rule - false, the report says she didn't.
2. She fully cooperated - false, the report has a scope limitation and states that here and her staff did not cooperate.
3. That it was for convenience - false, there is testimony it was designed to avoid FOIA, which was the first thing most people suspected.
4. Here website and her said it wasn't hacked - false, IT staff confirmed it was hacked.

So at best she is a fucking liar on matters that aren't trivial.

http://townhall.com/...-email-lies-n2168836

---

---

"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden

I don't think so. The caption under the photo says it was from yesterday and the name above the left score looks a lot like "Hillary."

---

-------------
"Life is fragile - we are all just a slip or a car crash away from being a very different person."

No, the report didn't say it but the Hillary camp did in their response, "Clinton spokesman says inspector general's report shown Clinton's email practices consistent with that of former Secretaries of State." For their sake they had better workshop this excuse a little more before trotting it out further.

I think Rick's point was that blaming others for one's behavior stopped working sometime around Kindergarten.

So others did it but not to the same extent she did. Where do you draw the line, when is it ok and when is it not?

---

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.

3. That it was for convenience - false, there is testimony it was designed to avoid FOIA, which was the first thing most people suspected.

This and the fact that it allowed her to blur the line between official correspondence and private correspondence are the real issues to me. I always thought the questions around classified information were a dead end and not where the meat of this is.

---

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.

The line is already drawn. There's really not any need for confusion on where the line is drawn. It's written down in black and white. The question is whether or not anyone will enforce the rules that exist.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

It's written down in black and white. The question is whether or not anyone will enforce the rules that exist.

Assuming the rules are enforced, what is the penalty?

Well played. The 'penalty' should be not be a promotion to POTUS.

That's my point. Just because she did it on a larger scale doesn't mean it should be treated differently. If it's wrong for one, it's wrong for all. Maybe the penalties should reflect scale as it does in other crimes but it should not be ignored.

---

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.

I'm not a lawyer, so this is just a guess, but I'd say she might have committed several violations. Potentially, she violated the law on Federal Records Keeping, the laws and/or Executive Order on handling of classified materials in e-mails, and the Freedom of Information Act.

Penalties for a violator could be fines and/or jail time, and potentially forfeiture of current office and prohibition against holding any other public office (Presidency not included). Specifics on fine amounts and years in jail,...a lawyer would have to figure out and it would potentially depend on the number of violations committed.

---

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)

Well played. The 'penalty' should be not be a promotion to POTUS.

If that is a defined penalty then it is appropriate but it likely isn't.

If there are rules there should be written consequences for breaking them and if she broke the rules, then apply those penalties. The same goes for the other Secretaries. Then, finally we can put this to bed.

I think they should all be trotted out. But if you can't see the difference between using a gmail account for convenience because the DOS IT infrastructure was not in line with current technological advances and setting up a server when these prior issues were mitigated, I cannot help you.

As I stated, the intent was to avoid FOIA. She was instructed on new policy that was put in place to address prior SOS from doing this yet did it anyways. That alone is a clear line.

Texting while driving was once accepted. Lets say it is still legal and I continue to do it and get in a accident. I cannot be found guilty of driving while texting. Sure, there are other violations you could find. But lets day the day after my accident, society deems it a danger and passes a law about texting and driving that goes in effect immediately. The law is broadcast and communicated adequately. My employer even instructs me on the law for cases where I use my vehicle or a company vehicle for company business. Yet a week later, there I am texting and driving. A coworker gets in an accident and evidence shows he was texting and driving. Well now he can be found guilty of it. Saying it wasn't enforced the prior is not a valid excuse.

Why you Hillary supporters can't see this I do not know. So maybe I comment from one of the foremost experts on Gov't Information and Disclosure policy will help you.

Dan Metcalf, spent more than a quarter-century as founding director of the Justice Department’s Office of Information and Privacy, effectively serving as the federal government’s chief information-disclosure “guru.”

To be sure, this cannot as a practical matter be absolute. When Obama administration officials came into office in 2009, the Federal Records Act certainly allowed room for the occasional use of a personal email account for official business where necessary—such as when a secretary of state understandably must deal with a crisis around the world in the middle of the night while an official email device might not be readily at hand. That just makes sense. But even then, in such an exceptional situation, the Federal Records Act’s documentation and preservation requirements still called upon that official (or a staff assistant) to forward any such email into the State Department’s official records system, where it would have been located otherwise.
This appears to be exactly what former Secretary of State Colin Powell did during his tenure, just as other high-level government officials may do (or are supposed to do) under such exceptional circumstances during their times in office. Notwithstanding Secretary Clinton’s sweeping claims to the contrary, there actually is no indication in any of the public discussions of this “scandal” that anyone other than she managed to do what she did (or didn’t) do as a federal official.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/...116116#ixzz49gxLZAyz
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook

---

---

"In the world I see you are stalking elk through the damp canyon forests around the ruins of Rockefeller Center. You'll wear leather clothes that will last you the rest of your life. You'll climb the wrist-thick kudzu vines that wrap the Sears Towers. And when you look down, you'll see tiny figures pounding corn, laying stripes of venison on the empty car pool lane of some abandoned superhighway." T Durden

So if all of this is new technology, how in the world did other SOS's engage in emergencies without e-mail. Please, I'm sure this has been going on with other methods of communication prior to this. The convenience argument is bullshit. If you think this is isolated to Clinton then I'm sorry, I can't help you.

What in my question indicate that I am a Hillary supporter? Did I say she should be excused from the rules? Did I say this was acceptable behavior? I would like to see equal vitriol. If it's wrong for one then it's wrong for all and they should be punished according to the rules and the severity of the crime.

---

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.

[/quote] Nobody went to jail for the largest perpetration of financial fraud in the history of the world. Who gives a f*ck about an email server?[/quote]
False dichotomy. Just because nobody was successfully prosecuted for any crimes that may have been committed during the 2008 financial crisis doesn't mean that we then stop prosecuting any crimes. I give a fuck about the email server because it is yet one more indication that Hillary and those like her don't think that that the rules apply to them.

Spot

---

___________________________________________________
Taco cat spelled backwards is....taco cat.

I give a fuck about the email server because it is yet one more indication that Hillary and those like her don't think that that the rules apply to them.

I don't think it's a matter of Hilary and those like her don't think the rules apply to her as much as the rules aren't being applied to them. Isn't that more the fault of the system that Hilary is taking advantage?