Official Hillary Clinton 2016 thread (6 Viewers)

[SaintsInDome2006]

A second federal court has granted civil discovery to proceed on Hillary's server. I take this means more depositions of Hillary and her aides are forthcoming.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-second-federal-court-grants-discovery-in-clinton-email-case/

 

[Guest]

A second federal court has granted civil discovery to proceed on Hillary's server. I take this means more depositions of Hillary and her aides are forthcoming.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-room/press-releases/judicial-watch-second-federal-court-grants-discovery-in-clinton-email-case/

Just saw that,. Assume you say Chicago Sun Times opinion piece: problem is on,y going to get worse -- and its her fault alone.

chicago.suntimes.com/opinion/opinion-hillary-clintons-email-problems-will-only-get-worse/

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Just saw that,. Assume you say Chicago Sun Times opinion piece: problem is on,y going to get worse -- and its her fault alone.

chicago.suntimes.com/opinion/opinion-hillary-clintons-email-problems-will-only-get-worse/

Nope haven't seen it I will take a look. Thanks.

 

[jon_mx]

Second Judge Says Hillary Clinton Email Setup May Have Been In 'Bad Faith'
​

World | Reuters | Updated: March 30, 2016 02:03 IST

 e described Hillary Clinton's email arrangement as "extraordinary" in his order.​

NEW YORK:  A second federal judge has taken the rare step of allowing a group suing for records from Hillary Clinton's time as U.S. secretary of state to seek sworn testimony from officials, saying there was "evidence of government wrong-doing and bad faith."

The language in Judge Royce Lamberth's order undercut the Democratic presidential contender's assertion she was allowed to set up a private email server in her home for her work as the country's top diplomat and that the arrangement was not particularly unusual.

He described Clinton's email arrangement as "extraordinary" in his order filed on Tuesday in federal district court in Washington.

Referring to the State Department, Clinton and Clinton's aides, he said there had been "constantly shifting admissions by the Government and the former government officials."
 

 
Spokesmen for Clinton did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The case is a civil matter, but the order adds to the legal uncertainty that has overshadowed Clinton's campaign to be the Democratic nominee in the Nov. 3 presidential election.

The FBI is also conducting a criminal inquiry into the arrangement after it emerged that classified government secrets ended up in Clinton's unsecured email account. Clinton has said she does not think she will be charged with a crime.

Lamberth's order granted the request by Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group suing the department under open records laws, to gather evidence, including sworn testimony. The group has filed several lawsuits, including one seeking records about the 2012 attack in Benghazi, Libya, that killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.

"Where there is evidence of government wrong-doing and bad faith, as here, limited discovery is appropriate, even though it is exceedingly rare in FOIA (freedom-of-information) cases,"

Lamberth noted in his order.

The government is normally given the benefit of the doubt that it properly searched and produced records.

Since the email arrangement came to public knowledge a year ago, the State Department has found itself defending Clinton in scores of lawsuits from groups, individuals and news outlets who say they were wrongly denied access to Clinton's federal records.

Clinton left the department in 2013, but did not return her email records to the government until nearly two years later.

Last month, Judge Emmet Sullivan, who is overseeing a separate Judicial Watch lawsuit over other Clinton-related records, allowed a similar motion for discovery.



 

 

[BassNBrew]

My 5-year old kid likes to run out ahead of me and hide in the third row of seats before I get to the car.  Same exact place every time.

Now when I go to the car and don't see him I just get behind the wheel without looking and tell him to get in his seat.  

He asks how I know where he is, and I try to explain to him that when you try the same trick over and over again it eventually stops working.  But he's five.  So he doesn't really understand yet.

No idea why that came to mind just now.

Because you would have to either have to the intelligence of a 5 year old or be as naive as one to vote for Hillary.

 

[lod01]

Because you would have to either have to the intelligence of a 5 year old or be as naive as one to vote for Hillary.

If the planet is lucky, she will be in handcuffs before the general election.

 

[MaxThreshold]

If the planet is lucky, she will be in handcuffs before the general election.

Although, at the very least I would settle for her just NOT being elected President.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Although, at the very least I would settle for her just NOT being elected President.

If Hillary is actually questioned by the FBI that for me alone is a gratifying moment.

 

[Gr00vus]

If Hillary is actually questioned by the FBI that for me alone is a gratifying moment.

What questions do you think would be pertinent? I'm not trying to be a wise guy, I haven't followed this whole thing, so I'm genuinely curious. I'm just wondering what the crux of the perceived transgression(s) is (are) here.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Don't be ridiculous.  She's not going to have a second device just for work.

:golfclap:

 

[Henry Ford]

:golfclap:

I'll be here all week.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

FOIA wrongdoing discovery moves forward

"Where there is evidence of government wrong-doing and bad faith, as here, limited discovery is appropriate, even though it is exceedingly rare in FOIA cases," Judge Lamberth wrote in his three-page order.

 

[The Commish]

What questions do you think would be pertinent? I'm not trying to be a wise guy, I haven't followed this whole thing, so I'm genuinely curious. I'm just wondering what the crux of the perceived transgression(s) is (are) here.

My first question would be "Secretary Clinton:  what does it say about your judgment that you found it satisfactory to put an email server in your home rather than have it on the State Department network with it's (the State Department network) existing security measures in place?"  Depending on how she dodged the question, I'd continue.

 

[Guest]

My first question would be "Secretary Clinton:  what does it say about your judgment that you found it satisfactory to put an email server in your home rather than have it on the State Department network with it's (the State Department network) existing security measures in place?"  Depending on how she dodged the question, I'd continue.

"Look, as I've said..." [Dodge left, dodge right, avoid answering, argue that this is a witch hunt, refuse to answer, claim 'that's my answer' and 'I did answer your question' and claim you're not taking the 5th because that was your answer.  Whisper in lawyer's ear.  'I smell toast!" Fake stroke.]  And that's the first three minutes.  

 

[jon_mx]

My first question would be "Secretary Clinton:  what does it say about your judgment that you found it satisfactory to put an email server in your home rather than have it on the State Department network with it's (the State Department network) existing security measures in place?"  Depending on how she dodged the question, I'd continue.

She would babble on about how everything she did was allowed by the state department and that is what others did   

Unlike the media shaking their heads in violent agreement, the FBI would qursyion her further   

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

My first question would be "Secretary Clinton:  what does it say about your judgment that you found it satisfactory to put an email server in your home rather than have it on the State Department network with it's (the State Department network) existing security measures in place?"  Depending on how she dodged the question, I'd continue.

"PRESIDENT OBAMA TRUSTED MY JUDGMENT ENOUGH TO MAKE ME SECRETARY OF STATE AND I THINK THAT SAYS PLENTY ABOUT MY JUDGMENT. ARF! ARF! ARF! Next question."

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

My first question would be "Secretary Clinton:  what does it say about your judgment that you found it satisfactory to put an email server in your home rather than have it on the State Department network with it's (the State Department network) existing security measures in place?"  Depending on how she dodged the question, I'd continue.

Her answer should be -

• It would be against policy for using my government account for personal emails and I was not making myself an exception 
  
• It would be too impractical to manage local .pst files with my travel schedule as a means to archive email for document retention purposes with the limited size email accounts though I would believe this would have been a more appropriate exception.
  

5 FAM 752 USING THE EMAIL SYSTEM (CT:IM-122; 11-14-2011)

Not saying it will be her answer but it should be! 

 

[jon_mx]

Her answer should be -

• It would be against policy for using my government account for personal emails and I was not making myself an exception 
  
• It would be too impractical to manage local .pst files with my travel schedule as a means to archive email for document retention purposes with the limited size email accounts though I would believe this would have been a more appropriate exception.
  

5 FAM 752 USING THE EMAIL SYSTEM (CT:IM-122; 11-14-2011)

Not saying it will be her answer but it should be! 

Is this the same Clinton who claims to be technologically incompetent?  

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

She would babble on about how everything she did was allowed by the state department and that is what others did   

Unlike the media shaking their heads in violent agreement, the FBI would qursyion her further   

Odds are the average FBI agent is just as frustrated by the same kind of cumbersome "best practices" as those in the State Department and will understand....

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Is this the same Clinton who claims to be technologically incompetent?  

So she just says that the procedure to archive emails using "best practices" was just "too cumbersome".  

 

[jon_mx]

Odds are the average FBI agent is just as frustrated by the same kind of cumbersome "best practices" as those in the State Department and will understand....

Odds are you are completely wrong.  Lots of government practices are frustrating, but when it comes to guarding classified/sensitive information, it is taken very seriously by all levels of government employees. 

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

What questions do you think would be pertinent? I'm not trying to be a wise guy, I haven't followed this whole thing, so I'm genuinely curious. I'm just wondering what the crux of the perceived transgression(s) is (are) here.

Great question. My interest is in seeing politicians respect the law.

However, I think it starts with the timeline of how and why she set up her private server, who paid and approved Pagliano's hiring, but then moves to acknowledging her statement in the NDA she signed, that classified information is classified whether marked or unmarked and that she was trained to recognize classified information in the absence of markings. And I think they will review the highest classified documents (secret and above) that she put on the open web, ask her to acknowledge they are classified per the identification by analysts at the originating agencies.

The FBI always knows the answers to questions before they ask them. If she lies, they will know.

 

[jon_mx]

So she just says that the procedure to archive emails using "best practices" was just "too cumbersome".  

If you had a normal government email account, it is easy.  By 2009 when Hillary was in office, the technology for having mobile devices hooked into the non-classified networks was very routinely available.  Hillary expected special treatment as if she was president.  

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

Odds are you are completely wrong.  Lots of government practices are frustrating, but when it comes to guarding classified/sensitive information, it is taken very seriously by all levels of government employees. 

Odds are I'll eventually be wrong about something on this topic.  Just has't happened yet.

 

[Bottomfeeder Sports]

If you had a normal government email account, it is easy.  By 2009 when Hillary was in office, the technology for having mobile devices hooked into the non-classified networks was very routinely available.  Hillary expected special treatment as if she was president.  

The document I linked  is dated 2011.  And no evidence has been presented that Hillary link into classified networks.  And thanks for confirming that email is on the non classified network.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Odds are the average FBI agent is just as frustrated by the same kind of cumbersome "best practices" as those in the State Department and will understand....

FBI. Will understand. Yes, very understanding group by and large.

 

[jon_mx]

Odds are I'll eventually be wrong about something on this topic.  Just has't happened yet.

You are wrong on this one, and it is not even debateable.   I have been around classier information for decades and never seen anyone not take it seriously or complain about the process being too cumbersome.   When people mess up, it is dealt with and has very serious consequences. 

 

[jon_mx]

The document I linked  is dated 2011.  And no evidence has been presented that Hillary link into classified networks.  And thanks for confirming that email is on the non classified network.

Of course most ordinary email is only non-classified networks.  It would be impossible for Hillary to link her homebrew server to a classified network.   The only way to move information from classified to unclassified is to manually do it.  

 

[MaxThreshold]

Her answer should be -

• It would be against policy for using my government account for personal emails and I was not making myself an exception 
  
• It would be too impractical to manage local .pst files with my travel schedule as a means to archive email for document retention purposes with the limited size email accounts though I would believe this would have been a more appropriate exception.
  

5 FAM 752 USING THE EMAIL SYSTEM (CT:IM-122; 11-14-2011)

Not saying it will be her answer but it should be! 

So you're saying she should continue to lie?

 

[MaxThreshold]

You are wrong on this one, and it is not even debateable.   I have been around classier information for decades and never seen anyone not take it seriously or complain about the process being too cumbersome.   When people mess up, it is dealt with and has very serious consequences. 

BFS is the mouthpiece for Hillary.  In fact, I suspect BFS is actually Huma herself.

 

[Guest]

Great question. My interest is in seeing politicians respect the law.

However, I think it starts with the timeline of how and why she set up her private server, who paid and approved Pagliano's hiring, but then moves to acknowledging her statement in the NDA she signed, that classified information is classified whether marked or unmarked and that she was trained to recognize classified information in the absence of markings. And I think they will review the highest classified documents (secret and above) that she put on the open web, ask her to acknowledge they are classified per the identification by analysts at the originating agencies.

The FBI always knows the answers to questions before they ask them. If she lies, they will know.

Something I thought very interesting from the student's citizen journalism was the revelation that the .gov systems have a mandatory metadata system that ensures the sender verifies the sensitivity.  The speculation was that her home brew had no such safeguards.  So yeah, I'd walk her through all of the 22 top secret and above chains and make sure she gave a statement on the status of each and quiz her on her actions when she sent and received emails in these chains.  Establish the provenance and that regardless of its markings it was classified.  That's a good start.  Then it's time to start delving into intent.  

 

[Mister CIA]

Simple question for Hillary and we can all put this to bed:

Under your administration, will you hold government employees to the same standards as those you adhered to, or higher standards?

 

[Guest]

Hypothetical and not something that would realistically happen, but: At this stage, if the DOJ approached and said they'd guarantee she wouldn't be indicted but only if she dropped out, I doubt she'd take the deal, but she should.  

Although come to think of it, if this gets really bad maybe Obama could pull her aside and say it's bad for the party and he'll pardon her if she steps aside.  That's possible if he's tipped that indictment will be recommended and he smells it either coming down, or the ####storm because of it.

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Odds are the average FBI agent is just as frustrated by the same kind of cumbersome "best practices" as those in the State Department and will understand....

No chance. ANYONE with a .gov address knows exactly what it means when someone says "send that to my .com address please"

Her strategy isn't going to be to try to snow the FBI like she does her supporters, her strategy will be to endure the FBI and then snow her supporters what it means "See? They didn't arrest me so that means the FBI examined every email and exonerated me!"  Supporters "Yay!"

 

[Slapdash]

Some new news on the emails today?

 

[tommyGunZ]

Hypothetical and not something that would realistically happen, but: At this stage, if the DOJ approached and said they'd guarantee she wouldn't be indicted but only if she dropped out, I doubt she'd take the deal, but she should.  

Although come to think of it, if this gets really bad maybe Obama could pull her aside and say it's bad for the party and he'll pardon her if she steps aside.  That's possible if he's tipped that indictment will be recommended and he smells it either coming down, or the ####storm because of it.

Still showing your face in this thread, Geraldo?

At what point does pride kick in?

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Some new news on the emails today?

Yes.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Brad DeLong was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Clinton administration. He wrote this piece on why Hillary should never be president back in 2003.

http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/2003_archives/001600.html

 

[Slapdash]

Brad DeLong was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Clinton administration. He wrote this piece on why Hillary should never be president back in 2003.

http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/2003_archives/001600.html

Sounds like something you could do a find and replace on for Obamacare:

So when senior members of the economic team said that key senators like Daniel Patrick Moynihan would have this-and-that objection, she told them they were disloyal. When junior members of the economic team told her that the Congressional Budget Office would say such-and-such, she told them (wrongly) that her conversations with CBO head Robert Reischauer had already fixed that. When long-time senior hill staffers told her that she was making a dreadful mistake by fighting with rather than reaching out to John Breaux and Jim Cooper, she told them that they did not understand the wave of popular political support the bill would generate.

Thankfully (IMO), Pelosi dragged it across the finish line anyways

 

[NorvilleBarnes]

Brad DeLong was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Clinton administration. He wrote this piece on why Hillary should never be president back in 2003.

http://www.j-bradford-delong.net/movable_type/2003_archives/001600.html

Wrong, dumb, and outdated. 

"She had neither the grasp of policy substance, the managerial skills, nor the political smarts" 

There's are reasons to despise Hillary but grasp of policy and managerial skill don't crack the top 100.

"Perhaps she will make a good senator."  Good call.

 

[The Commish]

My first question would be "Secretary Clinton:  what does it say about your judgment that you found it satisfactory to put an email server in your home rather than have it on the State Department network with it's (the State Department network) existing security measures in place?"  Depending on how she dodged the question, I'd continue.

Her answer should be -

• It would be against policy for using my government account for personal emails and I was not making myself an exception 
  
• It would be too impractical to manage local .pst files with my travel schedule as a means to archive email for document retention purposes with the limited size email accounts though I would believe this would have been a more appropriate exception.
  

5 FAM 752 USING THE EMAIL SYSTEM (CT:IM-122; 11-14-2011)

Not saying it will be her answer but it should be! 

After done smiling, maybe even chuckling a bit:  "Madam Secretary.  Do you expect me to believe you know what .pst files are or that you have the foggiest idea about document retention after your 'you mean with a cloth' comment from a couple months ago or is this just something your lawyers have told you to say?"

"Are you going to answer my question?  None of this speaks to how you believe this reflects your judgment (if at all)"

 

[The Commish]

Still showing your face in this thread, Geraldo?

At what point does pride kick in?

Of all the people to ask a question like this

 

[Henry Ford]

The document I linked  is dated 2011.  And no evidence has been presented that Hillary link into classified networks.  And thanks for confirming that email is on the non classified network.

I don't think you should use Jon's characterization as the gospel on this.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

Still showing your face in this thread, Geraldo?

At what point does pride kick in?

You let us know.  You've made an ### of yourself for years around here and still show like an arrogant political know it all. 

 

[Guest]

Still showing your face in this thread, Geraldo?

At what point does pride kick in?

This is already bad for the Party.  At every turn this now fully blown scandal progresses and gets worse.  And with discovery and FBI interviews being scheduled, it's a trend no reasonable person would expect to reverse between now and the election.

So at what point does this get assessed as a risk to this and future elections? 

These are reasonable scenarios to entertain, in light of a strong probability that she will at least face the recommendation for indictment.  And Obama has to weigh that outcome versus his legacy and the future of his party and at least plan for the worst.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Second Judge Says Hillary Clinton Email Setup May Have Been In 'Bad Faith'
​

World | Reuters | Updated: March 30, 2016 02:03 IST

...​

 

NEW YORK:  A second federal judge has taken the rare step of allowing a group suing for records from Hillary Clinton's time as U.S. secretary of state to seek sworn testimony from officials, saying there was "evidence of government wrong-doing and bad faith."

... He described Clinton's email arrangement as "extraordinary" in his order filed on Tuesday in federal district court in Washington.

Referring to the State Department, Clinton and Clinton's aides, he said there had been "constantly shifting admissions by the Government and the former government officials."

Spokesmen for Clinton did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
...
"Where there is evidence of government wrong-doing and bad faith, as here, limited discovery is appropriate, even though it is exceedingly rare in FOIA (freedom-of-information) cases,"  ...

Another finding of bad faith by a federal judge. This is rare and is a big deal when it happens in any case. Two times now.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Just saw that,. Assume you say Chicago Sun Times opinion piece: problem is on,y going to get worse -- and its her fault alone.

chicago.suntimes.com/opinion/opinion-hillary-clintons-email-problems-will-only-get-worse/

Hey now, this is an LSU & Loyola grad. Also a USAF vet. Salon writer, congrats to him.

Clinton brought this on herself.

This a 1000x. If Tim & Co. could acknowledge this things would go better. Hell if Hillary would acknowledge this things would go better.

It’s also possible that the story has legs, that a scandal could erupt months from now in a heated general election.

... Even in the more likely event that Clinton escapes legal trouble, this won’t go away.  ...

I guess it raises the question of what happens, say, after the DOJ declines to prosecute.

If that minimal wrist slapping occurs, then there will be tap-dancing, plates of crow served (by people who never looked at the facts) but not eaten (by people who did), misrepresentation about what was said and reported and about what it means about what Hillary did, but there will again be the claims that 'now we can move on', 'it's over'. No, more issues will continue to arise. We've been through this 'it's all over' routine now maybe 3-4 times.

But I think any issues will be explored by the press and citizens groups prodding State, the WH and the DOJ through Foia, and maybe via FBI reporting or leaking whatever came out of their investigation. However I have no faith that Trump can cause electoral damage on this. He himself is so damaged and compromised, and he seems to have almost no comprehension of security and foreign policy details, that really all he can do is shout about headlines with almost no depth. I doubt even Donald himself is aware that he will have to turn over his public records, or that he will be severely limited by being president in what he can email, say, and  in what he can use in doing so.

 

[Henry Ford]

Another finding of bad faith by a federal judge. This is rare and is a big deal when it happens in any case. Two times now.

This isn't a finding of bad faith, FYI.  It's a finding that there's legitimate evidence of bad faith, which just means the case for bad faith doesn't get dropped immediately as a matter of law.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

This isn't a finding of bad faith, FYI.  It's a finding that there's legitimate evidence of bad faith, which just means the case for bad faith doesn't get dropped immediately as a matter of law.

Good stuff, Henry, thanks.

 

[Baloney Sandwich]

At this point I don't think the FBI recommending an indictiment of Hillary over breaking the law on classified materials stops her from being President.  I think it will take the FBI bringing public corruption charges against her related to the Clinton Foundation for the wheels to come off.