So it's a fact that she set up her own server and networked it to the state department when all she had to do was VPN into the state department's server. Is that it?

What does the president do when he's out of town? Can he check his email if he's not in the White House? Can't you see how silly this must sound to someone that is not a security expert?

You still don't get it!

- You CANNOT use a personal server to conduct official government business.

- You CANNOT use your own personal devises (PC, Tablet, etc.) to transmit sensitive government correspondence.

- You CANNOT use an internet connection (server) that is not maintained and cleared by the United States government to send sensitive information.

- You CANNOT use anything other than your government assigned email address to send official correspondence. The means that you CANNOT use CenturyLink, GMail, Yahoo, AOL, nor any other email address JUST because it is more convenient for you.

Did you even bother to read the link that you provided? I did, and it either CLEARLY states or implies much of what I have just stated here. You are either unwilling or unable to see the significance of Hillary's blatant security violations...or maybe you are just plain stupid.

I will no longer continue to respond to your posts on this topic - it is obviously pointless.

You, like so many other Liberals, clearly have your head buried in the sand with regard to Hillary and her numerous violations of the law.

Just curious, what academic degrees do you hold?

First you have to define and educate them on what "classifed" means. Then you have to explain the benefit to them of National Security, etc.

So all Hillary had to do was ask someone to install a government computer in her house and all this would have been avoided?

Why is everybody spending millions on this investigation when you figured it out for nothing and manged to explain it so someone you think is stupid.

So all Hillary had to do was ask someone to install a government computer in her house and all this would have been avoided?

Why is everybody spending millions on this investigation when you figured it out for nothing and manged to explain it TO [not so as previously entered] someone you think is stupid.

You may not be able to grasp the logic, but the government does not install government servers in private residences. They are only installed in secure government facilities which conform to Communication Security (COMSEC) reguirements.

As important as Hillary may be to you liberals, she does not qualify to have her own government server in her New York residence. As lavish as her home may be, it does not meet COMSEC requirements. Sorry.

Whether or not it was permissible for Clinton to use her personal account to conduct official business as secretary of state, it was probably not a smart move for her to do so—and it also was bad staff work to allow her to evade (partly) the requirement that her emails be maintained within the State Department's system. The rap on the Clintons, fair or not, is that they act outside the rules, that they are excessively secretive, and, in the case of Hillary Clinton, that she has not always surrounded herself with savvy staffers who can prevent problems like this one. Perhaps Clinton was not aware of the rule regarding the preservation of her emails, and maybe the record keepers at Foggy Bottom were slow at the switch. But certainly someone in her circle ought to have been on top of this.

This matter, like anything Hillary-related, immediately has become part of the ongoing life-and-death political slugfest between the Clintons and their detractors. To her critics, it is more proof she is diabolical. To her champions, it is another sign the media and her opponents will trump up anything to thwart her. But this is the sort of problem that a person who was (possibly) running for president the day she entered the State Department should have been able to avoid.

How Hillary Clinton May Have Violated Government Rules on Emails | Mother Jones

This makes sense.

I wonder why she just didn't have what we use to call a "dumb terminal" installed in her house. Didn't Powell and Rice also receive classified information through personal email accounts?

Had she use a "dumb terminal", her correspondence would still reside in the main server and consequently a matter of public record. As you are probably aware, having her own private server gave Hillary the ability to delete any controversial and potentially incriminating correspondence (32,000 emails in her case) from the server and public record.

This advantage was not lost on Hillary, and is probably why she chose to set up a private server the first place. She has never been able to provide a valid reason for doing so, other than being matter of convenience.

Many of you who are wondering why she did or did not do what ever seem to be missing one very fundamental point.

She wanter her server to be able to manage and control the content....otherwise she would come under the rules and guidelines of the government server.

Some make it sound like it was a convenience issue. That is partisan BS.

Pure and simple it was knowingly done for Clinton's control of content. Knowing illegal. Knowing nothing done by the powers that be in government that did nothing about it.....but knowingly allowed it to continue.

That is why Clinton is currently safe and under the radar. The list of those who are complicit in what she did is very long and very top heavy.

Do ya think when Obama was communcating with her via email he and his staff knew where the email was going. Hence he is complicit as well.

The ONLY reason she is not in jail now!

Have you read this?
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/brief...3/email-facts/

It answers a lot of questions brought up earlier.

for example:
Why did Clinton use her own email account?

When Clinton got to the Department, she opted to use her personal email account as a matter of convenience. It enabled her to reach people quickly and keep in regular touch with her family and friends more easily given her travel schedule.

That is the only reason she used her own account.

Her usage was widely known to the over 100 State Department and U.S. government colleagues she emailed, consistent with the practice of prior Secretaries of State and permitted at the time.

As Clinton has said, in hindsight, it would have been better to just have two accounts. While she thought using one account would be easier, obviously, that has not been the case.

Was it allowed?

Yes. The laws, regulations, and State Department policy in place during her tenure permitted her to use a non-government email for work.

I read the article that you referenced. And as you said, it clearly states that employees of the government were allowed to use there personal email accounts at work, provided that no classified information was sent or received on their personal accounts and that any emails send or received had to be sent on a system which allowed archival of those documents for public record.

Unfortunately, at least 32,000 of Hillary's deleted documents did not meet a least one of those requirements (no archival for public record)) and possibly both (the classification of the content). We will never know since they were conveniently deleted and only have her word that none of them were classified. With her track record of lying, I am suspect.

I meant "suspicious" not "suspect''.

Why did Clinton decide not to keep her personal emails?

As Clinton has said before, these were private, personal messages, including emails about her daughter's wedding plans, her mother's funeral services and condolence notes, as well as emails on family vacations, yoga routines, and other items one would typically find in their own email account, such as offers from retailers, spam, etc.

Did Clinton delete any emails while facing a subpoena?

No. As noted, the emails that Clinton chose not to keep were personal emails—they were not federal records or even work-related—and therefore were not subject to any preservation obligation under the Federal Records Act or any request. Nor would they have been subject to the subpoena—which did not exist at the time—that was issued by the Benghazi Select Committee some three months later."


She used her own server for both government and personal use. She deleted her personal email. Everything that she sent with a .gov gets saved on a government server.

Is that the rub. Some people suspect she's a traitor and deleted the emails that would be used to prosecute her?

A KNOWN liar has no credability?

It is too bad so many of you believe she did nothing wrong.

Tis a sign of the permissive, don't offend anybody, don't hurt anybody's feelings, all is OK and not illegal until or if one gets caught.

You do know she is protected by Obama and the WH and the wagons are circled. Incriminating and indicting her would suck in too many that knew what was being done was wrong including Obama sending her emails. And did nothing about it.

Where were all the flags that would go up if you or I tried to do something that illegal.....like Petraeus....in jail.

"Petraeus knowingly handed over classified materials to his biographer, while Clinton followed State Department rules concerning private email use and was unaware of any classified information in her unmarked email correspondence."

http://mediamatters.org/research/201...parison/204751

I don't want to offend ayone but isn't this true?

The rub is that she is a proven liar and according to Politico, more than 1200 emails have surfaced that have been deemed to be classified.

As I stated in a previous post, I question her truthfulness. The FBI investigation is ongoing, lets see how it plays out.

I'm not offended.

Was it in this article?
Hillary Clinton email: FBI contacts Colin Powell as part of probe - POLITICO

I'm anxious to see how it plays out too. My hunch is she will be judged based on criminal intent unless everything was not listed as classified when it was first obtained.

It would be interesting if it came down to Sanders and Trump. Neither one getting money from big business. If it doesn't turn out that way, that would make a great plot.

I enjoy your posts You give me something to think about and look up without being condescending or patronizing.

Time to give the Republicans their dose of reality.

Electionbettingodds.com is now giving Sec. Clinton a 69.2 percent chance that she will be the next President of the USA.

They are giving Donald Trump a 19.2 percent chance.

:coolsmiley:

You could have at least started with a SPOILER ALERT.

And these fake, lying "polls", will convince everyone to vote for one of THEIR bought and paid for candidates. We're such foolish sheep! Believing what professional liars are telling us.

BS!

No, you are wrong again! Electionbettingodds.com is not a poll. It is actual betting odds from a couple of sites that allow the buying and selling of odds on candidates. Go to the site and read about how it is done.

Who cares? Do you think that polls or betting odds are going to convince anyone to vote for a scumbag criminal? Unlike libtards, some of us care about our country.

And the above is meant to underscore their credibility?
You surely jest.
Based on what you have presented they could use that technique on any subject and win every time. Like sporting events?

They must all be rich.

BS!

I wonder how they factored in the black factor?

Black Dems aren’t turning out for Hillary like they did for Obama | New York Post

More chinks in the phony armor to come.
More cracks in the dike coming soon.
The average person who usually does right in their daily lives will continue to do so....including democrats who just will not vote for a dishonest, felounious criminal.

"What is PredictIt?
PredictIt is an exciting new, real money site that tests your knowledge of political and financial events by letting you make and trade predictions on the future.

Taking part in PredictIt is simple and easy. Pick an event you know something about and see what other traders believe is the likelihood it will happen. Do you think they have it right? Or do you think you have the knowledge to beat the wisdom of the crowd?

The key to success at PredictIt is timing. Make your predictions when most people disagree with you and the price is low. When it turns out that your view may be right, the value of your predictions will rise. You’ll need to choose the best time to sell!

Keep in mind that, although the stakes are limited, PredictIt involves real money so the consequences of being wrong can be painful. Of course, winning can also be extra sweet.

For detailed instructions on participating in PredictIt, see How It Works."

https://www.predictit.org/


Who will win the Presidential Election?
Clinton 61¢
Trump 28¢

What exactly does this mean? I don't gamble. Is this correct?
61+28=89 89/61= $1.45 89/28= $3.17
If I bet $100 today and Hillary wins I get $145.
And if I bet on Donald I would get $317 if he wins.

Is that right?

My math is not right because the numerator is 89. The numerator should be 100----Is that correct?

What an idiot. Just vote for Trump and continue whining when he loses.

It's interesting how all the posts stopped. Was it the gambling site?

Sentient folks can only tolerate so much BS before abandoning a thread that has gone stupid.

Or, you can vote for the traitorous criminal and whine when she goes to jail.

......and for what office is Sarah Palin running for this time?

You really need to pull your head out of your butt long enough to listen to the news and find out what is going on in the world around you.

I'll second that.....:thumbup:

Go play outside now and leave your momma's computer alone.

Betting odds don't care who the politician is. It's all business. Ask you father?

You are a sexist! Ask your mother too.