Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
hey - blame the democrats for starting the precedent of "president in their last year can't appoint a judge!" biden, i believe is his name. democrats keep trying to get one-off rules in their favor and they keep backfiring on them.We couldn't get past a day during the election slamming Clinton about private servers...OMG
I call it: First excuse Fake News
The Brazenness of Trump's White House Staff Using Private Email
“Presidential son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner has corresponded with other administration officials about White House matters through a private email account set up during the transition last December,” Dawsey wrote. “Kushner and his wife, Ivanka Trump, set up their private family domain late last year before moving to Washington from New York, according to people with knowledge of events as well as publicly available internet registration records.”
Why they didn't say jack shit when the Senate GOP completely voided the constitution and refused to let Obama fill the empty SCOTUS seat.
They are all so full of shit.
The constitution became an inconvenience after Scalia died and they were happy to let the Mitch and Ted just ignore, buy their pathetic B.S. "reasoning".
The Corrupt Democrat Politicians can always rely upon the ignorance and blind fanaticism of the dumb liberal voters.
Cool, you found a blogger opinion that you liked. Everyone give a round of applause for the mad Google skills. So, when will your team of legal experts be bringing charges?funny what my google found:Here, let me Google that for you.... you rest....:what was the conclusion on the 33k of emails that were deleted?unlike hillary who never knowingly received or fwd any.& last i heard, the question was raised as to whether any of the emails received or sent by trump's klan was classified info, so far.... no comment.
unlike hillary who never knowingly received or fwd any. a teeny tiny (C) embedded in the few that were circulated never had the big blazing official CLASSIFIED header on any of them.
well unless you are hitlery, there is no fking way you can make this statement with a straight face or tripping, but son, this is hilarious bubba. see this is the extreme tactic of the left. wow. Now you personally know what Hitlery knew and knows. when did you have the probes on her brain to know these thoughts? wow just fking wow.
uh-huh. every bit of what was investigated showed that. it was the conclusion of everybody involved. tutt tutt if you don't like it.
just like you won't be enjoying it when all the conspiracy ( not 'collusion' ) will be put to light & captain crazy pants et al will be doing a perp walk sort o' speak.
tic tock....
"
In late 2014, the State Department asked Clinton and other former secretaries of state to hand over any work-related emails they may have.
By then, Clinton had already "deleted some [emails] over time as an ordinary user would," FBI Director James Comey told lawmakers at a July congressional hearing.
And she tasked her legal team to determine which of the roughly 60,000 emails still on her server were work-related.
"Clinton told the FBI that she directed her legal team to provide any work-related or arguably work-related emails to State; however she did not participate in the development of the specific process to be used or in discussions of the locations of where her emails might exist," the FBI concluded in its investigative summary of the case.
Comey testified that the FBI "didn't find any evidence of evil intent and intent to obstruct justice.""
- ABC
From FBI fragments, a question: Did Team Clinton destroy evidence under subpoena?
"Nine days after the attack, on Sept. 20, 2012, the House Subcommittee on National Security, Homeland Defense, and Foreign Operations, which is part of the larger Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, sent a document request to Clinton, who was still Secretary of State. It was a broad request, intended to cover anything written or recorded in any way that might have something to do with Benghazi. It without question covered emails. The State Department produced some material in response, but never any emails from Clinton.
Several months later, on Aug. 1, 2013, the Oversight Committee issued a subpoena covering the documents asked for, but not received, after the Sept. 20, 2012 request.
In May, 2014, the House Select Committee on Benghazi was formed. On July 23, 2014, the State Department agreed to produce records to the committee. The FBI report picks up the story from there:"
I know you're going, Damn, where'd he find that google was supposed to get rid of that.
We couldn't get past a day during the election slamming Clinton about private servers...OMG
I call it: First excuse Fake News
The Brazenness of Trump's White House Staff Using Private Email
“Presidential son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner has corresponded with other administration officials about White House matters through a private email account set up during the transition last December,” Dawsey wrote. “Kushner and his wife, Ivanka Trump, set up their private family domain late last year before moving to Washington from New York, according to people with knowledge of events as well as publicly available internet registration records.”
Why they didn't say jack shit when the Senate GOP completely voided the constitution and refused to let Obama fill the empty SCOTUS seat.
They are all so full of shit.
The constitution became an inconvenience after Scalia died and they were happy to let the Mitch and Ted just ignore, buy their pathetic B.S. "reasoning".
the Senate GOP completely voided the constitution and refused to let Obama fill the empty SCOTUS seat.
Can you post the portion they voided?
from the Constitution:
Article 2 Section 2 Clause 2
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
The 2nd Article of the U.S. Constitution
if they refused to even see Garland, then they refused to even 'advise or consent' & therefore violated their Constitutional duty bound job.
Honestly, there are some rather stupid votersThe Corrupt Democrat Politicians can always rely upon the ignorance and blind fanaticism of the dumb liberal voters.
on both sidesHonestly, there are some rather stupid votersThe Corrupt Democrat Politicians can always rely upon the ignorance and blind fanaticism of the dumb liberal voters.
Completely understandable.i may just have my guard up around here - apologies back if i do.I'm not trying to "move your words around", I'm trying to interpret what you said and it appeared that you were attempting to distinguish between the Queen of Corruptions use of a mail server that she owned & managed and WH staffers using private mail hosting services (you used the example of GMAIL), from a federal government perspective there is NO difference. If that wasn't your contention then I misread what you were trying to say and I apologize.Distinction without a difference, PRIVATE is the operative word as in NOT Federal Government owned, managed (i.e. subject to Federal Government information security and systems administrative policy & control) and approved.they are not using their own server. they are using like a gmail account or some other account where they don't control the server, unless i mis-read something.Private Email Server ..
gmail is hosted on PRIVATE servers as in privately owned and managed and in context NOT Federal Government approved.
Not really, any PRIVATE mail hosting provider can choose to nuke mailboxes and their entire contents and history at their own discretion and are under no obligations (other than contractual obligations ) to keep any historical data, if gmail were (for example) used by a business then Federal, State and Local retention laws would apply but the responsibility for compliance is on the business that's using the service not on the mail hosting provider.in other words, if the feds want access to the e-mail, they can get it. i can go nuke my entire account on my own *.personalaccount.net that i have for myself, but my hosting provider will have all my records and can turn them over to them if needed.
in other words, they can't do things like run bleach bit, or lose 33k mails so no comparison really except to giggle and think this is the same.
yes a private one could. i said this and you're just moving words around. however, their backups should still have the mail/account history there.
The only obligation any mail hosting provider has is what is stated in its terms of service or what is specified under contract, that's why using personal mail accounts hosted on them to conduct business is a problem not only for government employees but also for employees of any business that has a rational information systems policy.i did not say much of what you're saying i said so i'll move on. i never said google or a hosting provider was under obligation to make sure the accounts/customers comply. but they will have the mail if called for.
now i can hire a hoster that is a friend and get roughly the same as having a private server - but the hosting provider is now balls down to be responsible for their customers stated "private" needs.
FYI it's not only possible, its done, in this day and age zero time retention (including wiping data clean at the disk level) is desirable for a number of reasons (privacy and information security being the two most important ones), although I would say it's not (yet) common.you're right that the overall retention policies are up to the provider, i believe. however, even if i delete my mail from my account, the record is still going through the server and wiping out your tracks on a hosted solution isn't really "possible".
Yep, if the feds "own" it then it has to comply with Records Act so the retention policy is going to reflect that.if the feds own the server and all around it, they have their own retention policy.
That's pretty much the case since even relying on a provider with a retention policy of zero leaves one open to the provider not following the stated policy by error, omission or on purpose.the only way to really hide yourself is to own your own server and then you control all facets of it - except for who you may have sent mail to. that would still be "pullable" if i knew who to ask/look for.
We couldn't get past a day during the election slamming Clinton about private servers...OMG
I call it: First excuse Fake News
The Brazenness of Trump's White House Staff Using Private Email
“Presidential son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner has corresponded with other administration officials about White House matters through a private email account set up during the transition last December,” Dawsey wrote. “Kushner and his wife, Ivanka Trump, set up their private family domain late last year before moving to Washington from New York, according to people with knowledge of events as well as publicly available internet registration records.”
Why they didn't say jack shit when the Senate GOP completely voided the constitution and refused to let Obama fill the empty SCOTUS seat.
They are all so full of shit.
The constitution became an inconvenience after Scalia died and they were happy to let the Mitch and Ted just ignore, buy their pathetic B.S. "reasoning".
the Senate GOP completely voided the constitution and refused to let Obama fill the empty SCOTUS seat.
Can you post the portion they voided?
from the Constitution:
Article 2 Section 2 Clause 2
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
The 2nd Article of the U.S. Constitution
if they refused to even see Garland, then they refused to even 'advise or consent' & therefore violated their Constitutional duty bound job.
Thanks.
I didn't see anything in there about a time limit.
Or anything about having to vote.
Did you have anything more?
Honestly, there are some rather stupid votersThe Corrupt Democrat Politicians can always rely upon the ignorance and blind fanaticism of the dumb liberal voters.
We couldn't get past a day during the election slamming Clinton about private servers...OMG
I call it: First excuse Fake News
The Brazenness of Trump's White House Staff Using Private Email
“Presidential son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner has corresponded with other administration officials about White House matters through a private email account set up during the transition last December,” Dawsey wrote. “Kushner and his wife, Ivanka Trump, set up their private family domain late last year before moving to Washington from New York, according to people with knowledge of events as well as publicly available internet registration records.”
Why they didn't say jack shit when the Senate GOP completely voided the constitution and refused to let Obama fill the empty SCOTUS seat.
They are all so full of shit.
The constitution became an inconvenience after Scalia died and they were happy to let the Mitch and Ted just ignore, buy their pathetic B.S. "reasoning".
the Senate GOP completely voided the constitution and refused to let Obama fill the empty SCOTUS seat.
Can you post the portion they voided?
from the Constitution:
Article 2 Section 2 Clause 2
He shall have Power, by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, to make Treaties, provided two thirds of the Senators present concur; and he shall nominate, and by and with the Advice and Consent of the Senate, shall appoint Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, Judges of the supreme Court, and all other Officers of the United States, whose Appointments are not herein otherwise provided for, and which shall be established by Law: but the Congress may by Law vest the Appointment of such inferior Officers, as they think proper, in the President alone, in the Courts of Law, or in the Heads of Departments.
The 2nd Article of the U.S. Constitution
if they refused to even see Garland, then they refused to even 'advise or consent' & therefore violated their Constitutional duty bound job.
Thanks.
I didn't see anything in there about a time limit.
Or anything about having to vote.
Did you have anything more?
i didn't say a damn thing about voting, did i. noooooooooo............... however to advise would mean to at least hear & to NOT do it is irresponsible & quite obviously as to why. you have no problem with the mango madman being putin's bitch- so why would you respectanything about the process of this democracy.
You lied about her servers being hacked. That's why you provided no link. Don't spread fake news please. Thanks in advance.Her incompetence [and her staffs] led to her servers being hacked ---- Kushner's were not hacked [that we know] . The end result of that hack and similar ones that highlighted her incompetence brought to light multiple questionable emails that had they been obtained legally [via search warrant ] would have lead to a mere mortal - outside the Democratic - leftard sphere of power being prosecuted and more than likely at the very least incarcerated.Nothing except for being continuously vilified by the Republicans and their sycophants in the media to the point that her use of private email for government business became a major contributing factor in her losing a Presidential Election.But nothing was done to hillary.
Once we're seeing that the shoe of hypocrisy does indeed fit both feet.
The law doesn't specify that it applies only to Secretaries of State. Be smart.We couldn't get past a day during the election slamming Clinton about private servers...OMG
I call it: First excuse Fake News
The Brazenness of Trump's White House Staff Using Private Email
“Presidential son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner has corresponded with other administration officials about White House matters through a private email account set up during the transition last December,” Dawsey wrote. “Kushner and his wife, Ivanka Trump, set up their private family domain late last year before moving to Washington from New York, according to people with knowledge of events as well as publicly available internet registration records.”
Oh? Is he the Secretary of State?
he's privvy to all kinds of state secrets. so was bannon.
So what. He's not the Secretary of State. She was. Hers was an official position defined by the COTUS. His isn't.
sent deliberately?We couldn't get past a day during the election slamming Clinton about private servers...OMG
I call it: First excuse Fake News
The Brazenness of Trump's White House Staff Using Private Email
“Presidential son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner has corresponded with other administration officials about White House matters through a private email account set up during the transition last December,” Dawsey wrote. “Kushner and his wife, Ivanka Trump, set up their private family domain late last year before moving to Washington from New York, according to people with knowledge of events as well as publicly available internet registration records.”
Oh? Is he the Secretary of State?
he's privvy to all kinds of state secrets. so was bannon.
So what. He's not the Secretary of State. She was. Hers was an official position defined by the COTUS. His isn't.
his 'position' doesn't mean squat if state secrets were passed along.... why?
because if they are sensitive.... then they are sensitive.
hasn't anybody LEARNED from the first scandal?
your excuses are stunning.his 'position' doesn't mean squat if state secrets were passed along.... why?
Just like the people that sent and received Classified info from HIllarys server should be punished.
(how many of them were, BTW?)
Kushner's position is an official position. Get smarter.We couldn't get past a day during the election slamming Clinton about private servers...OMG
I call it: First excuse Fake News
The Brazenness of Trump's White House Staff Using Private Email
“Presidential son-in-law and senior adviser Jared Kushner has corresponded with other administration officials about White House matters through a private email account set up during the transition last December,” Dawsey wrote. “Kushner and his wife, Ivanka Trump, set up their private family domain late last year before moving to Washington from New York, according to people with knowledge of events as well as publicly available internet registration records.”
Oh? Is he the Secretary of State?
And the senior adviser doesn't have Top Secret information Westwall?
.
There has been none presented. And, yet again for the learning impaired. His is not a official position, and he is not governed by a shitload of laws. She was, and she ignored them. She committed numerous crimes and you don't care for whatever reason it is that allows you to disengage your brain from reality.
sent deliberately?Oh? Is he the Secretary of State?
he's privvy to all kinds of state secrets. so was bannon.
So what. He's not the Secretary of State. She was. Hers was an official position defined by the COTUS. His isn't.
his 'position' doesn't mean squat if state secrets were passed along.... why?
because if they are sensitive.... then they are sensitive.
hasn't anybody LEARNED from the first scandal?
your excuses are stunning.his 'position' doesn't mean squat if state secrets were passed along.... why?
Just like the people that sent and received Classified info from HIllarys server should be punished.
(how many of them were, BTW?)
Yet, unlike with Hillary, no evidence of breaking laws has been produced. Interesting...Kushner's position is an official position. Get smarter.
They were not "highly classified" at the time of being sent or received. This is why conservatives always end up upset in this kind of argument. Because they can't deny the fact that no classified markings were present as the emails were sent or received from Hillary's email account, therefore killing the "intent" aspect that is required for the crime to be committed.It wasn't simply her use of a private server that she was attacked for, it's the fact that she used it to send and receive highly classified documents. The later is a serious crime.Nothing except for being continuously vilified by the Republicans and their sycophants in the media to the point that her use of private email for government business became a major contributing factor in her losing a Presidential Election.But nothing was done to hillary.
Once we're seeing that the shoe of hypocrisy does indeed fit both feet.
Of course, you're engaging in the typical leftwing tactic of focusing on details that aren't central to the issue.
You think she knew documents not marked "classified" were actually "classified"? Classified by whom?sent deliberately?he's privvy to all kinds of state secrets. so was bannon.
So what. He's not the Secretary of State. She was. Hers was an official position defined by the COTUS. His isn't.
his 'position' doesn't mean squat if state secrets were passed along.... why?
because if they are sensitive.... then they are sensitive.
hasn't anybody LEARNED from the first scandal?
your excuses are stunning.his 'position' doesn't mean squat if state secrets were passed along.... why?
Just like the people that sent and received Classified info from HIllarys server should be punished.
(how many of them were, BTW?)
You think it was an accident?
Evidence as set forth by USMB Special Prosecutor and Nickname in Chief Mr. "Easyt65"Yet, unlike with Hillary, no evidence of breaking laws has been produced. Interesting...Kushner's position is an official position. Get smarter.
