She's running very high unfavorables, in what world is she unscathed from the constant barrage of bad PR over the years?
FBI: Clinton "never deleted, nor did she instruct anyone to delete, her e-mail"
- Thread starter pigeon
- Start date
- Status
She's running very high unfavorables, in what world is she unscathed from the constant barrage of bad PR over the years?
DontBeThatGuy
Member
He should be asking why Trump is getting a pass for his actual scandals, and not these conjured up Clinton ones.
NikonShots
Banned
They are being broken and those people get let go, for example my hospital spends a lot of money on special encrypted phones to give out to certain employees. If they are caught violating HIPAA by using their regular phones instead of their work issued phone, they get let go. No chance to play dumb or act aloof. You just get let go.
No one is saying these rules don't get broken daily, some people don't get caught, when they do, they get in trouble. Did she do anything worth getting arrested over? No absolutely not, no where near it. But did she do something that she disqualify her from having a posistion as high as Secretary of state again? Yeah probably.
One thing is certain, she won't fuck up like this again, not if she wants a second term.
He is not running for president, so like who cares, he shouldn't he given a position of power that involves classified information either though.
PreyingShark
Member
My mom's a director of nursing.
...Long story short, this report is 100% believable to me.
...Long story short, this report is 100% believable to me.
StopMakingSense
Member
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
If Clinton weren't running for President, this would have been a story for a couple of days as a 2 minute mention.
That much anyone cannot deny. Whether that is right or wrong is different but it only matters when an electoral result rides on it.
Trump even specifically had an email scandal involving the deletion of evidence.
Beware inconsistent demands for rigor.
Soooo....the old grandma thing was funny for a bit, but now it's actually being used as justification for her improper behavior, in light of the fact that she was repeatedly warned against it. With that in mind, the thread title suggesting that the FBI has adopted this narrative is extremely misleading (since discussion of Hillary's age has dominated the last page). As far as I know, the FBI had made no mention to Hillary's age.
I think the thread title needs to be changed to something more appropriate.
I think the thread title needs to be changed to something more appropriate.
my point is it isn't even a point in the discussion. Not even tacked on to a point about hillary. Anywhere. Their outrage is over the security aspect, and I get she is running for president but it makes you think - why not ever mention Powell? It is driven by pure hatred for her.
eBay Huckster
Member
i, for one, would like a thread title change to
just to clarify: we're talking about the same Trump who, with multiple pending and resolved lawsuits about 1) housing discrimination along racial lines & 2) a fraudulent scheme of a "for-profit" college, currently has 40% of the American electorate's support in polls? and we're arguing that his campaign would be any more devastated because apparently the roving band of morons that comprises the alt-right is persuadable?
"OT: MIMIC bad at coherent opinions that don't directly interact with Clinton Derangement Syndrome"
just to clarify: we're talking about the same Trump who, with multiple pending and resolved lawsuits about 1) housing discrimination along racial lines & 2) a fraudulent scheme of a "for-profit" college, currently has 40% of the American electorate's support in polls? and we're arguing that his campaign would be any more devastated because apparently the roving band of morons that comprises the alt-right is persuadable?
Are you seriously including Trump in that list? The guy who, as just a tiny sampler platter of PR fiascoes, has been sued by the federal government for racist real estate practices, has proclaimed a desire to date his daughter, has had his wife plagiarize one of the keynote speeches of the RNC from the Democratic First Lady, has pretended to be his own PR man named John Miller or John Barron, and has fired one campaign manager who was facing allegations of assaulting a reporter in favor of another campaign manager who had extensive ties with Vladimir Putin (who then had to be fired yet again for said ties in favor of another campaign manager who happens to run the media outlet Breitbart)? That Trump? That Trump would have been "absolutely devastated" by this email story?
The people being let go are called employees.
And exactly what are these benchmarks for disqualifications? Because all I see is, quite literally, the FBI giving at best a stern wag of the finger.
I think it would be similar to the Patraeus scandal, which was a pretty big deal.
Price Dalton
Member
I'm not sure I buy this excuse:
That's quite outlandish. Didn't she wonder where the parentheticals for the other letters were?
That's quite outlandish. Didn't she wonder where the parentheticals for the other letters were?
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
Trump would have come out and said yeah I did it who fucking cares and move on to his next topic. It would be over before it started.
Maybe, but there was actual meat to that story that this story has always lacked. This has always been a connect the dot game and people connect them and make up their own conclusions based on how they feel about her.
So there's nothing incorrect about what I said, just the fact that I said it?
eBay Huckster
Member
oh, there's multiple things wrong with it that have already been discussed at least once in this thread, it's just that you're the most notable of the boys who cried scandal
We don't even have to be hypothetical, because Trump had an email scandal himself and no one cared about it.
chicko1983
Member
My dad was a judge, but still can't use his iPhone. The same one he has been getting familiar with for the last six years.
OK, if you're going hide behind some vague "it has already been discussed" response then I'm just going to assume that your problem is with my statement (and the fact that I made it), rather than it being wrong.
What specifically has been "discussed." That she's old? That old people do old things? That's not a secret (and not really worthy of "discussion," IMO). But the fact that this "old person" sent out information under her own name warning against these old person practices renders that all moot.
old manatee
Banned
Sweet thread title. Sounds like a senility defense.
eBay Huckster
Member
well, mainly the fact that she did "do something about it" (in that she delegated the responsibility for server encryption to someone trusting them to actually do that, after which that someone proceeded to not actually do anything) has already been discussed ad nauseam alongside the fact that she's repeatedly taken full responsibility for everything that transpired, if you're quite done being snarky and would like to actually have a discussion that doesn't entail me needing to give a shit about your pathological inability to look at anything involving hillary clinton in an objective manner
AntraxSuicide
Banned
This is actually completely incorrect. Bush even had a scandal over email where those emails were intentionally deleted and lost forever, and he just threw some attorney under the bus and walked off.
Clinton is getting hit by this more than any predecessor ever has for similar (if not worse) situations.
As a former DoD employee, we never used (C) to flag classified content. I'm not sure how common it is at State, but I certainly wouldn't have known what the hell that meant if someone sent it to me (which would be on their ass anyway for sending it, not me for receiving).
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
If you read the report, it seems a lot more likely an explanation than her nefarious evil mind trying to scheme her next plan to destroy the world.
She's been questioned by the OIG, State Department, DOJ/FBI, and testified in Republican held Congressional Committees.
Also - Prove what you are saying. That her old age rendered it moot. I'll wait.
eBay Huckster
Member
The Bush administration literally intentionally deleted 22 million emails and the only outrage I've seen of any notability has come from liberals on the internet in the last two years, to say nothing about the fact that even the guy W threw out as a scapegoat didn't actually see any real consequences.
The idea that the Clinton server's treatment is somehow commensurate with how earlier wrongdoing has been treated is among the most farcical things I've seen in political threads on this site, alongside the classic "politicians can't be involved in business after they leave office".
The idea that the Clinton server's treatment is somehow commensurate with how earlier wrongdoing has been treated is among the most farcical things I've seen in political threads on this site, alongside the classic "politicians can't be involved in business after they leave office".
Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't the (C) classifications being used in the wrong places (like within the body of an email, as opposed to the subject line) or used inconsistently?
Hillary is hardly unscathed, this whole thing is one of the biggest contributors to her unfavorable ratings. That said, I think you're overstating the "PR fiasco of this magnitude" of this whole just a tad.
Hillary is hardly unscathed, this whole thing is one of the biggest contributors to her unfavorable ratings. That said, I think you're overstating the "PR fiasco of this magnitude" of this whole just a tad.
I feel like I should once again remind everyone that as far as Hillary having the server itself, that was never going to be a criminal issue. It wasn't allowed, yes, but anyone else in the State department who did such a thing would be disciplined by their department, but not be put in prison. And since Hilldawg was the head of her own department...
When asked what the parenthetical C meant before a paragraph within the captioned email, [Clinton] stated she did not know and could only speculate it was referencing paragraphs marked in alphabetical order,
Really? Really. COME ON.
Why are you focusing on sever encryption? I'm talking about the fact that she 1) had a private server, and 2) used a personal email account to conduct official business. Those are the things in which she was warned against doing, and the things the report said she shouldn't have done.
eBay Huckster
Member
i'm focusing on server encryption because it's arguably the only thing that isn't a fucking ex post facto argument on your part
and arguably the only thing that could've rendered this worse than the multitude of actual government hacks over the past decade which you don't give nearly as much of a shit about (perhaps because those can't let you further your Buster-fueled CDS), given that practically every other government server has been breached
and arguably the only thing that could've rendered this worse than the multitude of actual government hacks over the past decade which you don't give nearly as much of a shit about (perhaps because those can't let you further your Buster-fueled CDS), given that practically every other government server has been breached
No, I said the fact that she was warned rendered the old age argument moot.
I thought she was just a secretary.
Those are also the things she's specifically acknowledged that the shouldn't have done and apologized for, so what exactly are you trying to make a point about? That it was bad? That seems fairly obvious.
eBay Huckster
Member
Like I'm not sure what you're even arguing at this point, if it's not that some aspect beyond what has already been hashed and rehashed dozens of times in this thread and the endless sea of preceding threads about the emails is coming off as decidedly Bad. Server encryption is one of those aspects! This thread was literally the first time I'd learned about the task-delegation thing!
Do you want her to resign as the nominee or something? Because that's what you're coming off as.
Do you want her to resign as the nominee or something? Because that's what you're coming off as.
I have no idea at this point.
The policy was in place before she took office, while she was in office, and after she left. And the Inspector General's report said that her actions would be evaluated in those circumstances (meaning the rules applied to her while she was in office)
(and I hope that you aren't trying to make it seem like I'm trying to make a legal argument)
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
It's pretty clear MIMIC wants Clinton to step down and have Sanders step in.
I just want Trump beaten so I wouldn't care and maybe Sanders would do better if he did but I would worry that it would fracture the Dems and Trump would win anyway.
I just want Trump beaten so I wouldn't care and maybe Sanders would do better if he did but I would worry that it would fracture the Dems and Trump would win anyway.
Well people are blaming it on her age, which I don't buy.
Also, she apologized. Great. I still can't discuss it? For one thing, it demonstrates incredibly poor judgment. And just because she apologized doesn't mean that it gets instantly forgotten.
eBay Huckster
Member
The National Archives did not issue their recommendation, and State did not implement a regulation, against using personal email for conducting official business until several months after Clinton left office.
And that's literally half of your argument!
That seems extremely obvious given this controversy has been going on for years now and she has apologized several times for it and yet it keeps being brought up. So again....what is there to discuss? At what point can we actually move on from this and judge the candidates based on other qualifications?
Welp, there ya go.
I think trump is just like the Gish gallop of scandals. I don't think any one can keep up with them.
eBay Huckster
Member
Now, bear in mind that the other half of the argument is valid: the private email server was what violated State policy, and that's definitely not an ex post facto argument. (But it is disingenuous if you want to claim there was any wrongdoing by a standard outside of the department - because, well, there wasn't.)
But being frank here, MIMIC, the fact that we keep going through this Gish Gallop every week regarding the emails is mainly on you.
I, and practically everyone supporting Clinton in PoliGAF and elsewhere on this site, have admitted that at least part of this scandal was due to major wrongdoing on Clinton's part. But we still support her anyway - not because we don't think she did anything wrong, but because we think she'll do a lot of right in spite of that wrong.
You, on the other hand, have either ignored every post that corroborates this or you have conducted yourself in a way that allows you to avoid ever actually listening to any corrections anyone might respond to one of your posts with, because you just leap to a different segment that we haven't really responded to. (We respond to whether she was criminally liable, you switch to something else. We respond to that, you switch to the personal email account. We point out that the personal email account did not violate regulations, you switch to something else. Rinse and repeat until either something that's actually new comes up or one of us just stops posting, having already covered every single aspect of the emails.)
That's, to put it lightly, really fucking obnoxious. That's why I keep bringing up Clinton Derangement Syndrome - because it seems increasingly clear that you aren't actually interested in discussing, you're interested in shit talking.
The FBI, IRM, others all think her use falls within the rules. There is no rule saying you can't have a personal email account! Here's what the FBI report says - "there was no restriction on the use of personal email for official business."
There was even a system to forward personal emails to .gov for record keeping - and State was worried that system itself would leak unclassified but sensitive materials.
So Hillary issued a department-wide recommendation against doing something that was totally fine? Seems like trying to play both sides of the fence to me (especially after you get caught).
- Status