National Security rules dictate Hillary MUST lose her clearance.

[MarathonMike]

At a minimum, Hillary should have already had her security clearance revoked. When you have that high a level of a security clearance, there is no excuse for mishandling of classified information. NONE. You can't play dumb and say "Garsh I just don't know about all that digital server stuff. I thought you just wiped it with a cloth hyuk hyuk". Why is that a big deal? Because you can't be President without a clearance.

 

[Lakhota]

What "classified" information did she "mishandle"? Please provide "credible" proof.

 

[rightwinger]

Hillary had the permission of her agency. Any violation would be on the State Department for allowing it

 

[Obiwan]

Hillary had the permission of her agency. Any violation would be on the State Department for allowing it

And who the hell ran the State Department??? The janitor???

Face it, the blame rests squarely on Hillary's shoulders...

 

[SwimExpert]

Why is that a big deal? Because you can't be President without a clearance.

The constitution provides the requirements to be President.

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

It says nothing about having a pre-existing security clearance.

 

[OKTexas]

Hillary had the permission of her agency. Any violation would be on the State Department for allowing it

That's a lie, the State Dept policy says any sensitive but unclassified or any classified information, including communications with foreign officials, be conducted on a secure network. She could a personal email for the fluff stuff, but not the other.

 

[rightwinger]

Hillary had the permission of her agency. Any violation would be on the State Department for allowing it

And who the hell ran the State Department??? The janitor???

Face it, the blame rests squarely on Hillary's shoulders...

Makes no difference, she can't make up her own security rules

She was authorized a private server for insecure traffic. The agency bears the burden

 

[rightwinger]

Hillary had the permission of her agency. Any violation would be on the State Department for allowing it

That's a lie, the State Dept policy says any sensitive but unclassified or any classified information, including communications with foreign officials, be conducted on a secure network. She could a personal email for the fluff stuff, but not the other.

She received authorization, just like Colin Powell had

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Hillary had the permission of her agency. Any violation would be on the State Department for allowing it

Nice obfuscation and swerve.

 

[rightwinger]

Hillary had the permission of her agency. Any violation would be on the State Department for allowing it

Nice obfuscation and swerve.

First question in court

Were you authorized a private server?
Answer: Yes I was

Case closed

 

[healthmyths]

Colin Powell on how he used email...
"So we put in place new systems, bought 44,000 computers and put a new Internet capable computer on every single desk in every embassy, every office in the State Department. And then I connected it with software."
Republican Colin Powell Deals a Death Blow to Hillary Clinton Email Scandal


The misleading Democratic spin on Hillary Clinton’s e-mails
In addition, electronic record archiving regulations were clearer and more modernized by the time Clinton took office than when Powell did. In 2005, after Powell left office, the State Department updated the Foreign Affairs manual to say that day-to-day operations should be conducted on the authorized system. (Click here for a full timeline of the Clinton e-mail controversy and evolution of State Department rules.)
But it does mean that Clinton was held to a more definitive standard. Moreover, this common defense among her supporters is used to deflect the central issue: that Clinton exclusively used a personal account, and did not provide records until she was requested to, after she left office.
That is the most relevant point, so the Democrats earn Three Pinocchios.
The misleading Democratic spin on Hillary Clinton’s e-mails

A) Powell et.al. were as the above working under less stringent less clear State Department rules.
B) Clinton as the HEAD of the State Department had to know about these to sign security clearances.
C) If Clinton didn't know then she proves her incompetency to become the Chief Executive of the United States.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Hillary had the permission of her agency. Any violation would be on the State Department for allowing it

First question in court

Were you authorized a private server?
Answer: Yes I was

Case closed

/QUOTE]
ent business on private servers

Ahhhh, if it were only that easy. Conducting classified or secured information on governm
Nice obfuscation and swerve.[

Hillary had the permission of her agency. Any violation would be on the State Department for allowing it

Nice obfuscation and swerve.

First question in court

Were you authorized a private server?
Answer: Yes I was

Case closed

Ahh, if it were only that easy. It is illegal to conduct government business with your private server, classified material and secured data especially. That was the first thing that I learned in orientation before working for the feds. Punishable by fines and prison.

 

[healthmyths]

Hillary had the permission of her agency. Any violation would be on the State Department for allowing it

Nice obfuscation and swerve.

First question in court

Were you authorized a private server?
Answer: Yes I was

Case closed

More Spin on Clinton Emails

• By Eugene Kiely
• Posted on September 8, 2015 | Corrected on September 8, 2015

In minimizing her unusual email arrangement, Clinton glosses over the big difference between those who knew she had a personal email account and those who knew she was using it exclusively for government business. She has used variations on this theme — claiming, for example, that previous “secretaries of state” did the “same thing,” but as we have written before only Colin Powell used personal email for official business and there’s no evidence that he maintained a personal server.
More Spin on Clinton Emails

 

[mudwhistle]

What "classified" information did she "mishandle"? Please provide "credible" proof.

Don't have to.......the FBI is doing it for us. Besides, you'll just say it's all a vast rightwing conspiracy anyway.

This email scandal has nothing to with Republicans. This scandal began in the White House.

 

[rightwinger]

Hillary had the permission of her agency. Any violation would be on the State Department for allowing it

First question in court

Were you authorized a private server?
Answer: Yes I was

Case closed

/QUOTE]
ent business on private servers

Ahhhh, if it were only that easy. Conducting classified or secured information on governm
Nice obfuscation and swerve.[

Hillary had the permission of her agency. Any violation would be on the State Department for allowing it

Nice obfuscation and swerve.

First question in court

Were you authorized a private server?
Answer: Yes I was

Case closed

Ahh, if it were only that easy. It is illegal to conduct government business with your private server, classified material and secured data especially. That was the first thing that I learned in orientation before working for the feds. Punishable by fines and prison.

Here is your problem......the burden of proof lies with the accuser

Now, in all those Congressional hearings, have Republicans brought the head of Internet security at the State Department and asked......" Were you aware that the Secretary was using a personal server, and did you inform her she was in violation?"

Republicans have not asked that question because they do not like what the answer would be

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Hillary had the permission of her agency. Any violation would be on the State Department for allowing it

First question in court

Were you authorized a private server?
Answer: Yes I was

Case closed

/QUOTE]
ent business on private servers

Ahhhh, if it were only that easy. Conducting classified or secured information on governm
Nice obfuscation and swerve.[

Hillary had the permission of her agency. Any violation would be on the State Department for allowing it

Nice obfuscation and swerve.

First question in court

Were you authorized a private server?
Answer: Yes I was

Case closed

Ahh, if it were only that easy. It is illegal to conduct government business with your private server, classified material and secured data especially. That was the first thing that I learned in orientation before working for the feds. Punishable by fines and prison.

Here is your problem......the burden of proof lies with the accuser

Now, in all those Congressional hearings, have Republicans brought the head of Internet security at the State Department and asked......" Were you aware that the Secretary was using a personal server, and did you inform her she was in violation?"

Republicans have not asked that question because they do not like what the answer would be

I've said repeatedly that R's have been stupid on prosecuting such an easy case. And, after all the shouting, nothing will happen.

 

[rightwinger]

Hillary had the permission of her agency. Any violation would be on the State Department for allowing it

First question in court

Were you authorized a private server?
Answer: Yes I was

Case closed

/QUOTE]
ent business on private servers

Ahhhh, if it were only that easy. Conducting classified or secured information on governm
Nice obfuscation and swerve.[

Hillary had the permission of her agency. Any violation would be on the State Department for allowing it

Nice obfuscation and swerve.

First question in court

Were you authorized a private server?
Answer: Yes I was

Case closed

Ahh, if it were only that easy. It is illegal to conduct government business with your private server, classified material and secured data especially. That was the first thing that I learned in orientation before working for the feds. Punishable by fines and prison.

Here is your problem......the burden of proof lies with the accuser

Now, in all those Congressional hearings, have Republicans brought the head of Internet security at the State Department and asked......" Were you aware that the Secretary was using a personal server, and did you inform her she was in violation?"

Republicans have not asked that question because they do not like what the answer would be

I've said repeatedly that R's have been stupid on prosecuting such an easy case. And, after all the shouting, nothing will happen.

Because there is nothing to prosecute

At best, there was a security violation. The violation was on the part of the department that authorized it

 

[healthmyths]

First question in court

Were you authorized a private server?
Answer: Yes I was

Case closed

/QUOTE]
ent business on private servers

Ahhhh, if it were only that easy. Conducting classified or secured information on governm
Nice obfuscation and swerve.[

Nice obfuscation and swerve.

First question in court

Were you authorized a private server?
Answer: Yes I was

Case closed

Ahh, if it were only that easy. It is illegal to conduct government business with your private server, classified material and secured data especially. That was the first thing that I learned in orientation before working for the feds. Punishable by fines and prison.

Here is your problem......the burden of proof lies with the accuser

Now, in all those Congressional hearings, have Republicans brought the head of Internet security at the State Department and asked......" Were you aware that the Secretary was using a personal server, and did you inform her she was in violation?"

Republicans have not asked that question because they do not like what the answer would be

I've said repeatedly that R's have been stupid on prosecuting such an easy case. And, after all the shouting, nothing will happen.

Because there is nothing to prosecute

At best, there was a security violation. The violation was on the part of the department that authorized it

And that department is ultimately the responsibility of Hillary who was the DEPARTMENT HEAD!
So you must admit then if she doesn't have the competency to at least administer i.e. hire the competent people to run that department how in the hell is
she competent to run the country???
Clinton has no core competency other then accusing other people of the lack of transparency that SHE doesn't practice!
She is obviously not competent.

 

[rightwinger]

/QUOTE]
ent business on private servers

Ahhhh, if it were only that easy. Conducting classified or secured information on governm
Nice obfuscation and swerve.[

First question in court

Were you authorized a private server?
Answer: Yes I was

Case closed

Ahh, if it were only that easy. It is illegal to conduct government business with your private server, classified material and secured data especially. That was the first thing that I learned in orientation before working for the feds. Punishable by fines and prison.

Here is your problem......the burden of proof lies with the accuser

Now, in all those Congressional hearings, have Republicans brought the head of Internet security at the State Department and asked......" Were you aware that the Secretary was using a personal server, and did you inform her she was in violation?"

Republicans have not asked that question because they do not like what the answer would be

I've said repeatedly that R's have been stupid on prosecuting such an easy case. And, after all the shouting, nothing will happen.

Because there is nothing to prosecute

At best, there was a security violation. The violation was on the part of the department that authorized it

And that department is ultimately the responsibility of Hillary who was the DEPARTMENT HEAD!
So you must admit then if she doesn't have the competency to at least administer i.e. hire the competent people to run that department how in the hell is
she competent to run the country???
Clinton has no core competency other then accusing other people of the lack of transparency that SHE doesn't practice!
She is obviously not competent.

Hillary does not make the rules. Security regulations are complex and she is required to follow them whether she is the Secretary of State or just a lowly secretary

Republicans need to ask a simple question......was Hillary informed that she is not allowed to have a private server?

If she was informed and she did so otherwise, Republicans have a valid point

If not, they need to STFU