Hillary Clinton exclusively used personal emails at st dpt

Page 10 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

rudder

Lifer
Nov 9, 2000
19,441
86
91
Hillary says "the server will remain private".

Well Hillary did say the server was secure (the secret service guarded it) and never was hacked, and that she only deleted personal emails. So do we need to continue this witch hunt? Hillary has been nothing but honest her whole political career why would she change now?
 

Attic

Diamond Member
Jan 9, 2010
4,282
2
76
Trust but verify. Generally that's how to operate with government. With government trust is built on transparency, not in spite of it.


Fairly easy lynch-pin undoing Clinton and her lies here are her reliance on a lack of transparency. The lynchpin is she hid emails, all her talk after this fact are lies crafted for distraction in press and for consumption by goober political hacks.

After her most recent press where she ran the continued lie about "convenience",... it's a bit shameless, but smart folks think going with that line of lies was best. The corruption of language used by politicians is endless.

Folks don't understand technology and similar line of thinking worked with the lies used in the Lois Lerner email scandal.

Reasons for lying? Basic, most folks lie to cover up some information or otherwise mislead people. There can be good reasons for it, but with government it leads to Iraq and general pain and suffering of innocents.

In Clinton's case this is being done to cover up something (information).


It will work. It already has. Exposing the lies now or later is totally irrevalant to the fact that information will remain hidden no matter what.

No.
Matter.
What.

Did she turn over the server immediately? Has she turned over all emails? No of course not. The goal is not to be transparent, it's to pretend to be while in reality hiding information. Bit of a mind fuck for some, most of us don't lie or expect to be lied to with such ease and confidence as we see from politicians and government in general.

The entire point of her using email that couldn't be archived or traced in full (most important point of the whole thing), was to avoid transparency. The idea about convenience being the reason,... well somewhat clever because it can be argued and is believable.

But always important to remember with politicians,... their first rule.

Tell people what they want to hear. Never tell them the truth.


This how the game is played. One set of rules for you and I, another for the entitled leaders. This setup is implemented to protect those in power from responsibility in their actions/failures. Clinton has lots of company here.

Most impressive thing in this scandal so far is the transparency with which:
1) Clinton is obviously hiding information
2) Everything is done to allow for the information to remain hidden (consistency here should be watched and valued)
3) Obvious lies to distract simple minded people

Similar to what happened with the Lois Lerner scandal. There again it was all about hiding information, and there again it worked. The distractions are not that great in either case, but the beginning and end of these are the desire to and ability for hiding information by those in privileged positions of power.


There is equality in truth. That's the saddest arbiter of our time.
 
Last edited:

waggy

No Lifer
Dec 14, 2000
68,143
10
81
LOL

The same ones defending Hillary are some of the ones going after GOP for writing a letter.

Then some of the ones going after hillary are the ones defending the gop.


fucking politics. it's amusing and sad at the same time.
 

boomerang

Lifer
Jun 19, 2000
18,883
641
126
Bolded and edited, so that maybe you get it

See, this started with your posting a blog post by some random dude and interpreting that as "HILLARY OBVIOUSLY DONE FOR."

You have never been able to gauge context and validity in the various "sources" that you use to fill your noggin with fluff. Your initial post, that I responded to, was the flippant kind of drivel that would never warrant serious consideration.
And yet you were compelled to respond to it. Seems like some form of consideration was given on your part. Nothing a hot shower won't cure I hope.

If she's your hopeful, you need to embrace her warts and all. I'll point out the warts every opportunity I get and you can do the embracing. You need to remember that the embrace is a choice you've consciously made. I respect your right to be enamored of her and maybe someday you'll embrace my right to free speech even when it knots your panties up. For the time being I still control my own narrative and I like it that way.

Oh and the author, the dude? Not a dude.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
I'll bet according to the talking heads at Fox, it's Benghazi...:rolleyes:

Could be since it was the Benghazi investigation that turned up this bit of info about her having only a private email account. The committee seemed to think it odd that the State Dept had no record of emails for her during the period of Benghazi.

There's also questions about communications with foreign countries regarding donations to the Clinton Foundation, among other things.

Fern
 

LightPattern

Senior member
Feb 18, 2013
413
17
81
Way to shoot yourself in the foot Hillary!

Yeah, that doesn't look good at all, and will be red meat for her opponents in the coming election maelstrom.

...

I hope this may contribute to a better candidate getting the nod, but in the grand scheme of things I'm grudgingly admitting it might not have feet for long.
I hope this does get people to wake up to an important point:
Bush vs [ALMOST ANY OTHER NAME] is much more likely to bring an excited electorate to the poles than Bush vs Clinton... again.
 

rudeguy

Lifer
Dec 27, 2001
47,351
14
61
Could be since it was the Benghazi investigation that turned up this bit of info about her having only a private email account. The committee seemed to think it odd that the State Dept had no record of emails for her during the period of Benghazi.

There's also questions about communications with foreign countries regarding donations to the Clinton Foundation, among other things.

Fern

These are the same people who would have no problem with the Secretary of state taking foreign donations to her private foundation.

So what if she used a private email for government business, lied about the content of the emails and then only turned over the emails she wanted to?
 

soundforbjt

Lifer
Feb 15, 2002
17,788
6,041
136
These are the same people who would have no problem with the Secretary of state taking foreign donations to her private foundation.

So what if she used a private email for government business, lied about the content of the emails and then only turned over the emails she wanted to?

Would you prefer SoS Powell's method of not keeping any of his emails?
 

soundforbjt

Lifer
Feb 15, 2002
17,788
6,041
136
Could be since it was the Benghazi investigation that turned up this bit of info about her having only a private email account. The committee seemed to think it odd that the State Dept had no record of emails for her during the period of Benghazi.

There's also questions about communications with foreign countries regarding donations to the Clinton Foundation, among other things.

Fern

What's the problem with using private email wrt the Clinton Foundation?
 

theeedude

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,787
6,197
126
These are the same people who would have no problem with the Secretary of state taking foreign donations to her private foundation.

So what if she used a private email for government business, lied about the content of the emails and then only turned over the emails she wanted to?

What is the problem with taking foreign donations for your charitable foundation? :confused:
 

halik

Lifer
Oct 10, 2000
25,696
1
81
On a tech forum, you'd think that most people realize that THE ONLY reason to keep a private email server, on the premise of your house, is to have full physical and legal control over the document retention. Otherwise you'd just use gmail or any/other provider.

LEOs can subpoena companies like google for your emails, but to get it from a computer at your house they'd need a search warrant.
 
Last edited:

rudeguy

Lifer
Dec 27, 2001
47,351
14
61
On a tech forum, you'd think that most people realize that THE ONLY reason to keep a private email server, on the premise of your house, is to have full physical and legal control over the document retention. Otherwise you'd just use gmail or any/other provider.

A very large number of the people in this community have no background or experience in technology.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
39,556
33,109
136
Would you prefer to address the current issue instead of deflecting? Make a thread about Powell. This thread is about Clinton.

I'll address it.

Dick Cheney while @Halliburton had contract with Iran

Both suck
 

OutHouse

Lifer
Jun 5, 2000
36,410
616
126
Nothing to see here, now move along. Thanks for stopping by, and no you cannot examine my server why would you even ask.
 

FerrelGeek

Diamond Member
Jan 22, 2009
4,669
266
126
Well Hillary did say the server was secure (the secret service guarded it) and never was hacked, and that she only deleted personal emails. So do we need to continue this witch hunt? Hillary has been nothing but honest her whole political career why would she change now?

What's really sad is that there are people on this board that believe what you just said about her.
 

wetech

Senior member
Jul 16, 2002
871
6
81
Come on guys, let's be logical here. It's all about convenience. Honestly, which would you rather do?

1) Carry an additional blackberry around.

or

2) -Register new domain
- Self administer (unlikely) / Hire outside admin for new email server.
- Maintain said server, potentially at your home residence.
- Ensure that every email you ever send is cc:'d to gov't employee for retention purposes.
- Ensure that every email ever sent / received does not contain classified info.
- Retain records of all email, and then not turn over to State until asked.
- Sort through 60k emails to determine what's appropriate to turn over (at your discretion).
- Print out 50k+ pages of email and ship them over to the government.