A Question for Hillary…
Why? To make a determination upon entering a cabinet-level government position that you will disregard, that you will in fact violate government policy, and possibly federal laws, by choosing to ignore the secure, encrypted federal email system assigned to you and use a non-secure commercial email system for all your official communications, smacks of prior intent. A Cabinet secretary does not simply, willy-nilly, decide to use a risky commercial means of communicating top secret materials. A military counterpart, a four star general or admiral, doing so would be court-martialed and dismissed from service if not imprisoned for such a breach of security.
You had to have known that and to have weighed the consequences of future discovery, so why? What was so important to you that you determined that it was to your advantage to hide all your government communications from possible discovery? With so many millions of Americans having witnessed the decades of corruption surrounding the political careers of you and your husband, it requires no great intuitive leap to suspect your true motive. There has perhaps been no female political figure in the history of this nation who has so brazenly coveted the idea of being the first woman president. Shameless political ambition has been the hallmark of your life and when I say shameless, I’m saying you set new low standards for that term when you, a supposed feminist, aided and abetted a known sexual predator of young and old to rise to the highest political office in the land that he shamed for all history with his predatory practices.
So you hid your emails, Hillary, all of them. Why? Most of us out here know the answer to that. You wanted to be able to control your record in the highest federal office you’ve ever held so that nothing in that record could be turned against you in your long-planned presidential run. For your own selfish political ambitions you chose to disregard federal security policies regarding frequently top secret communications so that you now can, during your campaign, control the release of revelations from your term as secretary of state to only those favorable and helpful.
There’s just one problem, Hillary. Somewhere out there in a mother’s basement is an advance degreed but serially unemployed and very unhappy young nerd who sees you as a wealthy establishment sell-out not nearly as far to the left as he believes his future president should be. To him Fauxahontas is a far more appealing embodiment of his growing socialist views and he wants to help her campaign. Of course, unemployed and all, he can’t help the senator financially but hey, he has considerable computer skills honed during the many years of his $150,000 leftist brain-washing. So Pajama Boy begins to drill down into those email communications that, fortunately, don’t carry the prohibitive risk of hacking into secure government communications systems and invoking federal prosecutorial wrath, nor are they as securely encrypted as those government accounts.
Multiply Pajama Boy by a few thousand, Hillary and I’ll ask you again: Why?
Crossposted at American Thinker
Category: Politics
Why? Because she ain’t nearly as smart as she thinks she is. That’s why.
BINGO! That was my answer.
Plus, it’s now being reported that the email server she was running her private emails out of was located in her own house.
Yeah, that doesn’t look bad at all, does it.
It might be a good thing. A public server would have essentially no real security whatsoever.
Ordinarily DSS provides security for the SEC STATES residence. And the Secret Service probably provides security as well as since Bill shares in the ownership of there residences.
Having the server in the home facilitates both physical security and allows additional digital security features to be implemented that would not be available on a public server.
Not saying it happened but I would be happy to hear it did.
But her server was public, because it was publicly registered to her. As public as Microsoft or Google. That’s how it was outed.
You believe that a private server has higher security than the government servers?
News flash: It doesn’t.
Also, what makes you think that it was physically secure and/or had better digital security than a corporately-owned public server? You don’t really know, and neither does the government (likely Hillary doesn’t know either) what security measures are implemented on it.
The only reason for this was to be as transparent… sorry, as opaque as possible with her upcoming Presidential run. Now, if there was anything bad sent or received in her emails, the voters will never know.
Come on, folks, Lars is hanging onto the only thing that, to lefties, seems plausible. Not that it is, in any way, but a drowning person will cling to anything that floats, even if only for a few minutes.
Makes you wonder if there is an email on her server that says, in essence, “Madame Secretary, al-Qaeda just breached the walls and they’ve dragged Sean Smith into the courtyard and are killing him, I’m headed for the safe room”.
Let the hacking begin!!!! I have my popcorn ready for this one.
Same reason Bush administration officials used the RNC mail servers to discuss firing attorneys, to maintain a level of privacy and security in discussions of confidence. This whole thing is much ado about nothing for me, when the attorneys got canned under Bush it was revealed they had several email servers they were using that were not government servers, in fact gwb43.com had no domain attached it was just an email server…sitting somewhere not part of the white house email system. There are many reasons Ms. Clinton should not be elected, maintaing some private email accounts isn’t one of them. She should suffer the same consequences as were doled out for the 5 million potential emails that were non-recoverable under Bush, which as I recall was zero consequences. If there was no penalty for those potential violations of the Presidential Records act of 1978 and the Hatch act…one would be hard pressed to explain how this would be so very different. For me executive privilege should sometimes outweigh the public’s right to know consequently I think the presidential records act and the Hatch act are perhaps not appropriate law. Obama was never going to have a transparent government, only fools believed that statement as there was not a shred of historical evidence to support his claim. Things that presidents like Bush and Obama discuss with high level officials are often sensitive, I understand that some of those conversations are also only hypotheticals. I would not like all of my hypothetical discussions to become public record, and I respect the concept that president’s and their administrations might have some discussions along those lines. I would not conduct my business via email in a public capacity, to this day sensitive discussions are not part of my email and I refuse to be drawn into emails that are such. Anything I deem sensitive is discussed face to face without recording devices and never on the phone or email. If a discussion needs to be delayed, so be it. We once conducted an entire global conflict without benefit of email…I’m pretty sure we could… Read more »
NIPRNet and SIPRNet (and their DOS analogues) are not public last time I looked.
A logical argument does not apply the same standard to you as a citizen and an elected official. Ultimately, they serve the citizens of this republic and are accountable to us. It is the will of the people and the law of the land. HRC acted with malice and forethought to circumvent these protections and should be barred from ever holding public office… including dog catcher!
At this point, what does it matter?
The LIV leftoid zombies will vote for a “historic” candidate anyway.
What I want to know is: Did the Secret Service fly with Bill on Pedo-Bear Airlines during his trips to Perv Island?
Apparently no SECSTATE used the official email until Mr. Kerry. And, further, at least some of the data retention policies that required records weren’t in place during Mrs. Clinton’s tenure in that position.
This doesn’t mean we shouldn’t be supremely annoyed, since clearly any low-level State employee would be fired for such nonsense, but that the ridicule should be more widely directed to all high level sorts from both parties who seek loopholes around the intent of the rules.
That said, I also think VOV has a great point – where do we draw the line on these records? Why do emails necessitate records, but a face-to-face meeting doesn’t require an official stenographer? Or transcripts of any and all phone calls? Copies of all hand-written notes? I don’t have any answers to where that line is, so it tempers my contempt for this a little bit.
LC: it’s because of how Federal law defines “records”. Written materials – including electronic written products or recordings – that meet specified criteria are records under Federal law. Spoken conversations that are not recorded are not. Title 44, Chapter 33 of the US Code covers Federal records. What constitutes a record under Federal law is defined in 44 USC 3301. It’s brief, so I’ll quote it here: As used in this chapter, “records” includes all books, papers, maps, photographs, machine readable materials, or other documentary materials, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received by an agency of the United States Government under Federal law or in connection with the transaction of public business and preserved or appropriate for preservation by that agency or its legitimate successor as evidence of the organization, functions, policies, decisions, procedures, operations, or other activities of the Government or because of the informational value of data in them. Library and museum material made or acquired and preserved solely for reference or exhibition purposes, extra copies of documents preserved only for convenience of reference, and stocks of publications and of processed documents are not included. As I understand it, a Federal employee acting within the scope of his/her official duties and conducting official business meets the criteria to be considered an “agency of the Federal government.” I’ll defer to any of our readers who are practicing lawyers to correct me if I’m wrong, of course. Essentially, if it is a written or recorded item that relates to conducting official business of the Federal government, under Federal law it likely is a record and must be preserved as such until a formal decision concerning retention is made. Destruction of Federal records is prohibited by 44 USC 3314, which is similarly short: The procedures prescribed by this chapter are exclusive, and records of the United States Government may not be alienated or destroyed except under this chapter. Best I can tell, there is no exceptions for documents or recordings generated on personally-owned paper, recording equipment, or IT equipment. If a document or recording is generated in the… Read more »
In my belief, one’s personal crap is their personal crap. Any records though generated, printed, transmitted or received as part of the official duties of a federal officer of the government, belongs to the taxpayers, not the individual. If she wants to write love notes to Bill or anyone else, use Hotmail by all means. If however it is federal business it belongs to US.
The use of email for general communication doesn’t go back all that far. Condi Rice has already said that she almost never used email and the few times she did, she used the federal system. So how many SecDefs have there been since her where this can be claimed? Very few and not a trend I would like to see continue.
As I remember back in the day, email was not considered secure enough for use at the top levels of government, for good reason.
I also remember a story a year or two ago that said Putin has confidential items typed on typewriters, the better to thwart spying.
I think it just demonstrates the sloppiness and arrogance she displayed as a Senator and as Sec of State but completely unrelated to that…..
Whoever coined the name “Hildebeast” has a standing offer of a Ruth’s Cris (KC) steak dinner from me as I have gotten a heck of a lot of amusement from it. It is an absolutely perfect moniker.
She new exactly what she was doing:
clintonmail.com is domain.
The sole purpose was to control the data!
Obviously, there was some other person or persons involved with setting up an email system at home, securing it, etc. What are the odds that such person(s) also works for some other person, organization, or country?
Oops.
As to maintenance of records, expect a hard drive failure, fire, flood, or buffalo stampede shortly before the delivery of any subpoena.
Why? Because she thinks she’s above the law. That’s why. Everything else is irrelevant. Most of these people seem to feel like reincarnations of Leona “Taxes are for the little people” Helmsley.
Didn’t Colin Powell do the exact same thing?
The entire Bush administration did…22 MILLION emails deleted that should have been maintained under the Presidential Records Act. Hackers found some of those…let them loose on this one!
(5 million…stupid fat fingers…)
Well you know if we all do freedom of information request for the emails… think about having to deal with 1000 request for the email… cost to us a form cost to her staff???
I’m thinking Petraeus just received time in jail for having classified info on his girlfriends computer.
I see jail time for Hillary if the law is applied equally. Hillarys computer and many non-secured servers have to be full of classified documents. Snowden didn’t have to steal all those classified cables. As the saying goes, once on the internet always on the internet.
Why would any politician hide or delete emails when they (allegedly) have nothing to hide? They are all crooked as a dogs hind leg…if they weren’t, they would have real jobs…