US vs Flynn

[Thunk]

One thing that's been great about the Flynn case...it's brought out tons of info about the coup attempt against president Trump.

Sydney Powell (flynns lawyer) was just on TV saying more documents are being UNredacted and UNclassified...they should come out tomorrow or wednesday.

Everything so far in this case has proven that russian collusion was a lie from the beginning & the FBI knew it...yet they chose to "investigate" in an attempt to overthrow the POTUS.

The FBI also hid evidence from the court exonerating Flynn, page, popadopolis, stone, Manafort, and others.

Reporter KT McFarlan fled the country and went into hiding in europe because the muller team was about to do to her what they had done to manafort and the others.

 

[colfax_m]

He lied under oath. He was pressured by the DOJ which was, and is, headed up by republicans.

Comey admitted on TV that he sent people into the Trump administration when it was 3 days old in order to sabotage it.

Can you tell me what Flynn supposedly lied about?

I didn't think so.

How long his shoe laces were perhaps? Maybe he said his car was red when the dealership lists the color as "crimson"

“In 2017 he pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI in relation to the Special Counsel's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 elections.”

Hillary lied under oath too.

Fuck this one-sided shit.

Amazing how she was never charged for your imaginary allegations

Comey said confidential mail was found.

She said it wasn't there.

Fuck off.

Not just low level bullshit confidential material that shouldn’t even be confidential, they found plenty of that. But they found the highest level confidentiality where you aren’t allowed to create it digitally, you’re only allowed to read a hardcopy in a special room surrounded by a faraday cage where all electronics are banned. She was told that it could not be sent in email, that she had to read it in the special room, berated the person who told her that and made them send it in an email anyway...to her special server that we know was hacked by the Chinese. Which is one of the reasons we made the law that you have to use a government email address for work. Another reason is so you can’t destroy the evidence, which she also did. Compare the actual crime Hillary committed to the crimes they have to keep doing mental gymnastics to say that trump committed. It’s bonkers.

None of this is true.

View attachment 328727
View attachment 328728
From the IG himself. SAP, Special Access Privilege, is the term for the room I was talking about. Post proof before you make dumbass claims. Even if this wasn’t true, there’s minimum mandatory sentencing for even the lowest level classification. It was a crime to use her service for government work in the first place. She initially denied she did that, said it was personal stuff only. That was a lie. It morphed into she never used it for classified emails. That was a lie. She deleted 33,000 that she said were personal before she turned them over, which the FBI would never allow anyone else to do EVER, which also turned out to be a lie. I know the left has a magical ability to re-write history in their minds and block out whats reality like they’re in some sort of Scientology cult...but the real history is out there.

I'm aware that some of the information on her server was deemed SAP. However, that was not copied from any files, but a reference was made to this information. The part of your claim which was bullshit was her being told specific information could not be put in an email and berating people for not doing so. The other bullshit claim is that it was hacked by the Chinese, no such information exists. Another bullshit claim is that there is a law that you must use government email for work. Another bullshit claim is that she destroyed evidence.

She never claimed her server was only for personal use. She didn't delete 33,000 emails that were personal before she turned them over.

You've really jumbled up details.

The 33,000 emails were deleted after her lawyer sorted out and submitted the work related ones. It is not illegal to use personal email for government business. No then, not now. Government employees, up to and including Trump's own family continue to do so to this day. There was a reference of her emails being forwarded to a "Chinese" IP, a report which was based on misunderstanding and poor information. Emails were forwarded as part of a server migration.

Oh you have to be fucking kidding me. A “misunderstanding” or “glitch” caused Hillary’s emails to be forwarded to servers to a Chinese company with Chinese hardware and software that’s banned for use by government employees because we already know they are filled with spyware. All because that spokesperson of that state run company says “don’t worry, we no spy”. Her server was not approved, and she lied about classified emails being on there, as well as lied about classified emails being in the 33,000 deleted ones. The Olympic level of mental gymnastics here a astounding. Don’t believe the evidence in front of your eyes...just listen to how Hillary’s lawyers say it went down. Name another instance where the FBI subpoenaed evidence, let the party in questions lawyers comb over it and select what evidence to send over? FBI are the only ones who determine what is pertinent and what isn’t in every single case. This was the one case where they let the guilty party’s lawyers determine that, and then delete everything else. Why is that?

No glitch caused the emails to be forwarded because they weren’t forwarded to a Chinese company. This was a false report put out by shoddy right wing media and shot down by Republicans.

Senate investigators find no evidence China hacked Clinton server | CNN Politics

A long-running Republican-led investigation into the handling of classified information on Hillary Clinton's private email server did not find any evidence that China had successfully hacked the former secretary of state, confirming the findings of the FBI, according to a memo released by two...

www.cnn.com

The FBI never subpoenaed Clinton for emails. At the time Clinton told her staff to delete those emails, no one else did either.

Anytime anyone is subpoenaed, their lawyers determine what is relevant. That’s how subpoenas work.

Congressional investigators find irregularities in FBI’s handling of Clinton email case

Republicans on key congressional committees say they have uncovered new irregularities and contradictions inside the FBI’s probe of Hillary Clinton’s email server.For the first time, investigators …

thehill.com

yet we have all these one-offs in handling this "one" case you say isn't that important.

Timeline of Hillary Clinton's email scandal

A timeline of Hillary Clinton's email scandal.

www.cnn.com

2014
2014 -- The State Department requests that all former secretaries of state "submit any records in their possession for proper preservation."
Also in 2014, at the request of the State Department, Clinton hands over 55,000 pages — approximately 30,000 emails. Left out were emails deemed by her and her staff to be "personal."

why does SHE get to decide what is PERSONAL?

and i'm not going to play one sided word games. the state dept asked for them and her "delete" activities came after this point.

Everyone in government decides what is and isn’t personal and what needs to be submitted. Do you think the government employs people to do this for every employee? Obviously not. This is pretty standard.

Virtually all people in government use a personal email, for personal things, and a work email for work things....like most people do. It’s a lot easier to keep the spam out of your work email.

He lied under oath. He was pressured by the DOJ which was, and is, headed up by republicans.

Comey admitted on TV that he sent people into the Trump administration when it was 3 days old in order to sabotage it.

Can you tell me what Flynn supposedly lied about?

I didn't think so.

How long his shoe laces were perhaps? Maybe he said his car was red when the dealership lists the color as "crimson"

“In 2017 he pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI in relation to the Special Counsel's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 elections.”

Hillary lied under oath too.

Fuck this one-sided shit.

Amazing how she was never charged for your imaginary allegations

Comey said confidential mail was found.

She said it wasn't there.

Fuck off.

Not just low level bullshit confidential material that shouldn’t even be confidential, they found plenty of that. But they found the highest level confidentiality where you aren’t allowed to create it digitally, you’re only allowed to read a hardcopy in a special room surrounded by a faraday cage where all electronics are banned. She was told that it could not be sent in email, that she had to read it in the special room, berated the person who told her that and made them send it in an email anyway...to her special server that we know was hacked by the Chinese. Which is one of the reasons we made the law that you have to use a government email address for work. Another reason is so you can’t destroy the evidence, which she also did. Compare the actual crime Hillary committed to the crimes they have to keep doing mental gymnastics to say that trump committed. It’s bonkers.

None of this is true.

View attachment 328727
View attachment 328728
From the IG himself. SAP, Special Access Privilege, is the term for the room I was talking about. Post proof before you make dumbass claims. Even if this wasn’t true, there’s minimum mandatory sentencing for even the lowest level classification. It was a crime to use her service for government work in the first place. She initially denied she did that, said it was personal stuff only. That was a lie. It morphed into she never used it for classified emails. That was a lie. She deleted 33,000 that she said were personal before she turned them over, which the FBI would never allow anyone else to do EVER, which also turned out to be a lie. I know the left has a magical ability to re-write history in their minds and block out whats reality like they’re in some sort of Scientology cult...but the real history is out there.

I'm aware that some of the information on her server was deemed SAP. However, that was not copied from any files, but a reference was made to this information. The part of your claim which was bullshit was her being told specific information could not be put in an email and berating people for not doing so. The other bullshit claim is that it was hacked by the Chinese, no such information exists. Another bullshit claim is that there is a law that you must use government email for work. Another bullshit claim is that she destroyed evidence.

She never claimed her server was only for personal use. She didn't delete 33,000 emails that were personal before she turned them over.

You've really jumbled up details.

The 33,000 emails were deleted after her lawyer sorted out and submitted the work related ones. It is not illegal to use personal email for government business. No then, not now. Government employees, up to and including Trump's own family continue to do so to this day. There was a reference of her emails being forwarded to a "Chinese" IP, a report which was based on misunderstanding and poor information. Emails were forwarded as part of a server migration.

Oh you have to be fucking kidding me. A “misunderstanding” or “glitch” caused Hillary’s emails to be forwarded to servers to a Chinese company with Chinese hardware and software that’s banned for use by government employees because we already know they are filled with spyware. All because that spokesperson of that state run company says “don’t worry, we no spy”. Her server was not approved, and she lied about classified emails being on there, as well as lied about classified emails being in the 33,000 deleted ones. The Olympic level of mental gymnastics here a astounding. Don’t believe the evidence in front of your eyes...just listen to how Hillary’s lawyers say it went down. Name another instance where the FBI subpoenaed evidence, let the party in questions lawyers comb over it and select what evidence to send over? FBI are the only ones who determine what is pertinent and what isn’t in every single case. This was the one case where they let the guilty party’s lawyers determine that, and then delete everything else. Why is that?

No glitch caused the emails to be forwarded because they weren’t forwarded to a Chinese company. This was a false report put out by shoddy right wing media and shot down by Republicans.

Senate investigators find no evidence China hacked Clinton server | CNN Politics

A long-running Republican-led investigation into the handling of classified information on Hillary Clinton's private email server did not find any evidence that China had successfully hacked the former secretary of state, confirming the findings of the FBI, according to a memo released by two...

www.cnn.com

The FBI never subpoenaed Clinton for emails. At the time Clinton told her staff to delete those emails, no one else did either.

Anytime anyone is subpoenaed, their lawyers determine what is relevant. That’s how subpoenas work.

Congressional investigators find irregularities in FBI’s handling of Clinton email case

Republicans on key congressional committees say they have uncovered new irregularities and contradictions inside the FBI’s probe of Hillary Clinton’s email server.For the first time, investigators …

thehill.com

yet we have all these one-offs in handling this "one" case you say isn't that important.

Timeline of Hillary Clinton's email scandal

A timeline of Hillary Clinton's email scandal.

www.cnn.com

2014
2014 -- The State Department requests that all former secretaries of state "submit any records in their possession for proper preservation."
Also in 2014, at the request of the State Department, Clinton hands over 55,000 pages — approximately 30,000 emails. Left out were emails deemed by her and her staff to be "personal."

why does SHE get to decide what is PERSONAL?

and i'm not going to play one sided word games. the state dept asked for them and her "delete" activities came after this point.

Everyone in government decides what is and isn’t personal and what needs to be submitted. Do you think the government employs people to do this for every employee? Obviously not. This is pretty standard.

Virtually all people in government use a personal email, for personal things, and a work email for work things....like most people do. It’s a lot easier to keep the spam out of your work email.

Maybe. I won’t comment on how many do and dont do so. The regulations predate email. In the old days, each employee would determine what papers needed to be preserved. Same rules apply here.

same rules say to send all email to a server for archiving.

Fair enough. If you want to accuse her of being in violation of the rules, you'll have no argument for me. But the rules and laws are not the same thing.

yea, but obama sure was creating rules/laws shortly after this first started blowing up.

initially i don't begrudge hillary for pushing the boundaries. she has done that her entire life and if they boundaries don't say DO NOT DO THIS, then it's up to "being pushed". if obama had to create a rule as we enter this phase of our "lives" thats fine. i see no issue with him defining it also.

it's all this "gray area" in the middle where it played out live i have questions with.

had hillary sent all work e-mail to a work address, i have zero problem with her doing whatever the hell she wants to do with her server. e-mail backed up and stored outside of her control. problem solved.

but she didn't do that and as soon as people started going "uh...we need to see what's on there" *things* started to happen. the committee asked for all correspondence and she stalled and sent eventually 300 printed copies.

printed copies would *not* contain e-mail headers to show who sent what where. so she can bring up something, make changes, print. so to me printed copies don't mean much either, but it's a start. but unfortunately from my PoV, it's a start to stalling.

during this "gray area" time her consultants were in reddit asking how to change e-mail header info. there is simply no good reason to do this unless you're hiding it. header meta info is nothing more than how it was routed. who from, who to, and what path it took, subject line.

yet this needed to be altered.

when that was a "can't do it" (and you can't) then it was "how do i permanently delete data from a drive for a very well known person"?

during this time many e-mails were deleted she called yoga and private. however, she got to pick what was deleted *after* being told the committee needed to see them.

in my mind this is up there with someone downloading child porn who gets a tip he will need to turn his computer over, so he deletes it all and goes "here, i'm innocent".

if my brother tried that i would cry foul. i would hope we all would. but hillary does it, she's given the benefit of doubt by "her" side, never forgiven by the "other" side.

so playing word games to me simply don't matter. and we've also gone so far off flynn it's hopeless but it happens.

There's a number of incorrect statements above. For starters, the printed emails have her private email address all over them. The headers on some emails have her email address replaced with the letter H, but a great many of them do not, especially when they're in email chains. Most of the emails were indeed on State Dept servers since the people she communicated with were usually using their State Dept email addresses.

Combetta was on reddit asking to strip out her personal email address from the files. He was not asking how to permanently delete data. Securely deleting drives is trivial. Even I can do it, and I do whenever I get rid of my old hardware.

She did not pick any emails, actually. She instructed her lawyers to sift through them for her. The never told them what to pick or how to do it. She definitely did not "pick" what was deleted after being told the committee needed to see them as she was unaware of the "personal emails" being available to anyone at that time.

It's printed. You can edit and print. However my guess is more these are fine but buying her time. But why look to see if you can alter email headers?

Like I said, "stuff" started happening once discovered.

“Stuff” is not very precise so it can’t be responded to with any accuracy. A lot of the allegations are completely unsubstantiated by any investigation.

The only thing Combetta was seeking to alter was to expunge Clinton’s email address. The messages on reddit bear this out. You’re being overly vague about this point.

 

[colfax_m]

i would think if you're being asked for all work related mail and you go JUST A SECOND and hear furious keyboard strokes going on, there's something to look into.

i don't give a shit WHO is behind the keyboard, my answer would never change. you bring the doubt upon yourself when you pull that shit. so yea, it's different for others. they'd be investigated for tampering with evidence.

Well, good news. It was investigated. Thoroughly and publicly. Before an election. That’s more than we can say for Donnie

then again we also have proof of people who have has less than "gross negligence" or "careless" and still went to jail. period. end of story.

I don’t believe that’s true. Can you substantiate that?

so again yes, it's different for most of us. she should have lost her security clearance for mishandling it to begin with. wouldn't that be a trip. a president who doesn't have security clearance.

Presidents don’t get security clearance and they have total authority to grant security clearances. Just ask Jared and Ivanka, who had to have their clearances rammed through by Trump.

 

[iceberg]

He lied under oath. He was pressured by the DOJ which was, and is, headed up by republicans.

Comey admitted on TV that he sent people into the Trump administration when it was 3 days old in order to sabotage it.

Can you tell me what Flynn supposedly lied about?

I didn't think so.

How long his shoe laces were perhaps? Maybe he said his car was red when the dealership lists the color as "crimson"

“In 2017 he pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI in relation to the Special Counsel's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 elections.”

Hillary lied under oath too.

Fuck this one-sided shit.

Amazing how she was never charged for your imaginary allegations

Comey said confidential mail was found.

She said it wasn't there.

Fuck off.

Not just low level bullshit confidential material that shouldn’t even be confidential, they found plenty of that. But they found the highest level confidentiality where you aren’t allowed to create it digitally, you’re only allowed to read a hardcopy in a special room surrounded by a faraday cage where all electronics are banned. She was told that it could not be sent in email, that she had to read it in the special room, berated the person who told her that and made them send it in an email anyway...to her special server that we know was hacked by the Chinese. Which is one of the reasons we made the law that you have to use a government email address for work. Another reason is so you can’t destroy the evidence, which she also did. Compare the actual crime Hillary committed to the crimes they have to keep doing mental gymnastics to say that trump committed. It’s bonkers.

None of this is true.

View attachment 328727
View attachment 328728
From the IG himself. SAP, Special Access Privilege, is the term for the room I was talking about. Post proof before you make dumbass claims. Even if this wasn’t true, there’s minimum mandatory sentencing for even the lowest level classification. It was a crime to use her service for government work in the first place. She initially denied she did that, said it was personal stuff only. That was a lie. It morphed into she never used it for classified emails. That was a lie. She deleted 33,000 that she said were personal before she turned them over, which the FBI would never allow anyone else to do EVER, which also turned out to be a lie. I know the left has a magical ability to re-write history in their minds and block out whats reality like they’re in some sort of Scientology cult...but the real history is out there.

I'm aware that some of the information on her server was deemed SAP. However, that was not copied from any files, but a reference was made to this information. The part of your claim which was bullshit was her being told specific information could not be put in an email and berating people for not doing so. The other bullshit claim is that it was hacked by the Chinese, no such information exists. Another bullshit claim is that there is a law that you must use government email for work. Another bullshit claim is that she destroyed evidence.

She never claimed her server was only for personal use. She didn't delete 33,000 emails that were personal before she turned them over.

You've really jumbled up details.

The 33,000 emails were deleted after her lawyer sorted out and submitted the work related ones. It is not illegal to use personal email for government business. No then, not now. Government employees, up to and including Trump's own family continue to do so to this day. There was a reference of her emails being forwarded to a "Chinese" IP, a report which was based on misunderstanding and poor information. Emails were forwarded as part of a server migration.

Oh you have to be fucking kidding me. A “misunderstanding” or “glitch” caused Hillary’s emails to be forwarded to servers to a Chinese company with Chinese hardware and software that’s banned for use by government employees because we already know they are filled with spyware. All because that spokesperson of that state run company says “don’t worry, we no spy”. Her server was not approved, and she lied about classified emails being on there, as well as lied about classified emails being in the 33,000 deleted ones. The Olympic level of mental gymnastics here a astounding. Don’t believe the evidence in front of your eyes...just listen to how Hillary’s lawyers say it went down. Name another instance where the FBI subpoenaed evidence, let the party in questions lawyers comb over it and select what evidence to send over? FBI are the only ones who determine what is pertinent and what isn’t in every single case. This was the one case where they let the guilty party’s lawyers determine that, and then delete everything else. Why is that?

No glitch caused the emails to be forwarded because they weren’t forwarded to a Chinese company. This was a false report put out by shoddy right wing media and shot down by Republicans.

Senate investigators find no evidence China hacked Clinton server | CNN Politics

A long-running Republican-led investigation into the handling of classified information on Hillary Clinton's private email server did not find any evidence that China had successfully hacked the former secretary of state, confirming the findings of the FBI, according to a memo released by two...

www.cnn.com

The FBI never subpoenaed Clinton for emails. At the time Clinton told her staff to delete those emails, no one else did either.

Anytime anyone is subpoenaed, their lawyers determine what is relevant. That’s how subpoenas work.

Congressional investigators find irregularities in FBI’s handling of Clinton email case

Republicans on key congressional committees say they have uncovered new irregularities and contradictions inside the FBI’s probe of Hillary Clinton’s email server.For the first time, investigators …

thehill.com

yet we have all these one-offs in handling this "one" case you say isn't that important.

Timeline of Hillary Clinton's email scandal

A timeline of Hillary Clinton's email scandal.

www.cnn.com

2014
2014 -- The State Department requests that all former secretaries of state "submit any records in their possession for proper preservation."
Also in 2014, at the request of the State Department, Clinton hands over 55,000 pages — approximately 30,000 emails. Left out were emails deemed by her and her staff to be "personal."

why does SHE get to decide what is PERSONAL?

and i'm not going to play one sided word games. the state dept asked for them and her "delete" activities came after this point.

Everyone in government decides what is and isn’t personal and what needs to be submitted. Do you think the government employs people to do this for every employee? Obviously not. This is pretty standard.

Virtually all people in government use a personal email, for personal things, and a work email for work things....like most people do. It’s a lot easier to keep the spam out of your work email.

He lied under oath. He was pressured by the DOJ which was, and is, headed up by republicans.

Comey admitted on TV that he sent people into the Trump administration when it was 3 days old in order to sabotage it.

Can you tell me what Flynn supposedly lied about?

I didn't think so.

How long his shoe laces were perhaps? Maybe he said his car was red when the dealership lists the color as "crimson"

“In 2017 he pleaded guilty to making false statements to the FBI in relation to the Special Counsel's investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 elections.”

Hillary lied under oath too.

Fuck this one-sided shit.

Amazing how she was never charged for your imaginary allegations

Comey said confidential mail was found.

She said it wasn't there.

Fuck off.

Not just low level bullshit confidential material that shouldn’t even be confidential, they found plenty of that. But they found the highest level confidentiality where you aren’t allowed to create it digitally, you’re only allowed to read a hardcopy in a special room surrounded by a faraday cage where all electronics are banned. She was told that it could not be sent in email, that she had to read it in the special room, berated the person who told her that and made them send it in an email anyway...to her special server that we know was hacked by the Chinese. Which is one of the reasons we made the law that you have to use a government email address for work. Another reason is so you can’t destroy the evidence, which she also did. Compare the actual crime Hillary committed to the crimes they have to keep doing mental gymnastics to say that trump committed. It’s bonkers.

None of this is true.

View attachment 328727
View attachment 328728
From the IG himself. SAP, Special Access Privilege, is the term for the room I was talking about. Post proof before you make dumbass claims. Even if this wasn’t true, there’s minimum mandatory sentencing for even the lowest level classification. It was a crime to use her service for government work in the first place. She initially denied she did that, said it was personal stuff only. That was a lie. It morphed into she never used it for classified emails. That was a lie. She deleted 33,000 that she said were personal before she turned them over, which the FBI would never allow anyone else to do EVER, which also turned out to be a lie. I know the left has a magical ability to re-write history in their minds and block out whats reality like they’re in some sort of Scientology cult...but the real history is out there.

I'm aware that some of the information on her server was deemed SAP. However, that was not copied from any files, but a reference was made to this information. The part of your claim which was bullshit was her being told specific information could not be put in an email and berating people for not doing so. The other bullshit claim is that it was hacked by the Chinese, no such information exists. Another bullshit claim is that there is a law that you must use government email for work. Another bullshit claim is that she destroyed evidence.

She never claimed her server was only for personal use. She didn't delete 33,000 emails that were personal before she turned them over.

You've really jumbled up details.

The 33,000 emails were deleted after her lawyer sorted out and submitted the work related ones. It is not illegal to use personal email for government business. No then, not now. Government employees, up to and including Trump's own family continue to do so to this day. There was a reference of her emails being forwarded to a "Chinese" IP, a report which was based on misunderstanding and poor information. Emails were forwarded as part of a server migration.

Oh you have to be fucking kidding me. A “misunderstanding” or “glitch” caused Hillary’s emails to be forwarded to servers to a Chinese company with Chinese hardware and software that’s banned for use by government employees because we already know they are filled with spyware. All because that spokesperson of that state run company says “don’t worry, we no spy”. Her server was not approved, and she lied about classified emails being on there, as well as lied about classified emails being in the 33,000 deleted ones. The Olympic level of mental gymnastics here a astounding. Don’t believe the evidence in front of your eyes...just listen to how Hillary’s lawyers say it went down. Name another instance where the FBI subpoenaed evidence, let the party in questions lawyers comb over it and select what evidence to send over? FBI are the only ones who determine what is pertinent and what isn’t in every single case. This was the one case where they let the guilty party’s lawyers determine that, and then delete everything else. Why is that?

No glitch caused the emails to be forwarded because they weren’t forwarded to a Chinese company. This was a false report put out by shoddy right wing media and shot down by Republicans.

Senate investigators find no evidence China hacked Clinton server | CNN Politics

A long-running Republican-led investigation into the handling of classified information on Hillary Clinton's private email server did not find any evidence that China had successfully hacked the former secretary of state, confirming the findings of the FBI, according to a memo released by two...

www.cnn.com

The FBI never subpoenaed Clinton for emails. At the time Clinton told her staff to delete those emails, no one else did either.

Anytime anyone is subpoenaed, their lawyers determine what is relevant. That’s how subpoenas work.

Congressional investigators find irregularities in FBI’s handling of Clinton email case

Republicans on key congressional committees say they have uncovered new irregularities and contradictions inside the FBI’s probe of Hillary Clinton’s email server.For the first time, investigators …

thehill.com

yet we have all these one-offs in handling this "one" case you say isn't that important.

Timeline of Hillary Clinton's email scandal

A timeline of Hillary Clinton's email scandal.

www.cnn.com

2014
2014 -- The State Department requests that all former secretaries of state "submit any records in their possession for proper preservation."
Also in 2014, at the request of the State Department, Clinton hands over 55,000 pages — approximately 30,000 emails. Left out were emails deemed by her and her staff to be "personal."

why does SHE get to decide what is PERSONAL?

and i'm not going to play one sided word games. the state dept asked for them and her "delete" activities came after this point.

Everyone in government decides what is and isn’t personal and what needs to be submitted. Do you think the government employs people to do this for every employee? Obviously not. This is pretty standard.

Virtually all people in government use a personal email, for personal things, and a work email for work things....like most people do. It’s a lot easier to keep the spam out of your work email.

Maybe. I won’t comment on how many do and dont do so. The regulations predate email. In the old days, each employee would determine what papers needed to be preserved. Same rules apply here.

same rules say to send all email to a server for archiving.

Fair enough. If you want to accuse her of being in violation of the rules, you'll have no argument for me. But the rules and laws are not the same thing.

yea, but obama sure was creating rules/laws shortly after this first started blowing up.

initially i don't begrudge hillary for pushing the boundaries. she has done that her entire life and if they boundaries don't say DO NOT DO THIS, then it's up to "being pushed". if obama had to create a rule as we enter this phase of our "lives" thats fine. i see no issue with him defining it also.

it's all this "gray area" in the middle where it played out live i have questions with.

had hillary sent all work e-mail to a work address, i have zero problem with her doing whatever the hell she wants to do with her server. e-mail backed up and stored outside of her control. problem solved.

but she didn't do that and as soon as people started going "uh...we need to see what's on there" *things* started to happen. the committee asked for all correspondence and she stalled and sent eventually 300 printed copies.

printed copies would *not* contain e-mail headers to show who sent what where. so she can bring up something, make changes, print. so to me printed copies don't mean much either, but it's a start. but unfortunately from my PoV, it's a start to stalling.

during this "gray area" time her consultants were in reddit asking how to change e-mail header info. there is simply no good reason to do this unless you're hiding it. header meta info is nothing more than how it was routed. who from, who to, and what path it took, subject line.

yet this needed to be altered.

when that was a "can't do it" (and you can't) then it was "how do i permanently delete data from a drive for a very well known person"?

during this time many e-mails were deleted she called yoga and private. however, she got to pick what was deleted *after* being told the committee needed to see them.

in my mind this is up there with someone downloading child porn who gets a tip he will need to turn his computer over, so he deletes it all and goes "here, i'm innocent".

if my brother tried that i would cry foul. i would hope we all would. but hillary does it, she's given the benefit of doubt by "her" side, never forgiven by the "other" side.

so playing word games to me simply don't matter. and we've also gone so far off flynn it's hopeless but it happens.

There's a number of incorrect statements above. For starters, the printed emails have her private email address all over them. The headers on some emails have her email address replaced with the letter H, but a great many of them do not, especially when they're in email chains. Most of the emails were indeed on State Dept servers since the people she communicated with were usually using their State Dept email addresses.

Combetta was on reddit asking to strip out her personal email address from the files. He was not asking how to permanently delete data. Securely deleting drives is trivial. Even I can do it, and I do whenever I get rid of my old hardware.

She did not pick any emails, actually. She instructed her lawyers to sift through them for her. The never told them what to pick or how to do it. She definitely did not "pick" what was deleted after being told the committee needed to see them as she was unaware of the "personal emails" being available to anyone at that time.

It's printed. You can edit and print. However my guess is more these are fine but buying her time. But why look to see if you can alter email headers?

Like I said, "stuff" started happening once discovered.

“Stuff” is not very precise so it can’t be responded to with any accuracy. A lot of the allegations are completely unsubstantiated by any investigation.

The only thing Combetta was seeking to alter was to expunge Clinton’s email address. The messages on reddit bear this out. You’re being overly vague about this point.

great. why? and if this is all he was out to do, how do we go from removing her e-mail address to destroying the drive it sat on?

Time to Give Clinton’s Server Technician the Mueller Treatment | National Review

Trump’s FBI should investigate the technician who erased Hillary Clinton’s emails, using pressure to get the truth out of him.

www.nationalreview.com

what happened in the end was FAR MORE than simply removing her e-mail address.

so - first things first - why would we need to remove her e-mail address if we're simply turning this over to a senate committee?

 

[iceberg]

i would think if you're being asked for all work related mail and you go JUST A SECOND and hear furious keyboard strokes going on, there's something to look into.

i don't give a shit WHO is behind the keyboard, my answer would never change. you bring the doubt upon yourself when you pull that shit. so yea, it's different for others. they'd be investigated for tampering with evidence.

Well, good news. It was investigated. Thoroughly and publicly. Before an election. That’s more than we can say for Donnie

then again we also have proof of people who have has less than "gross negligence" or "careless" and still went to jail. period. end of story.

I don’t believe that’s true. Can you substantiate that?

so again yes, it's different for most of us. she should have lost her security clearance for mishandling it to begin with. wouldn't that be a trip. a president who doesn't have security clearance.

Presidents don’t get security clearance and they have total authority to grant security clearances. Just ask Jared and Ivanka, who had to have their clearances rammed through by Trump.

so you call 2+ years of RUSSIA by someone hellbent on finding SOMETHING - nothing?

and you tell me i am being vague. seems we all do that when it suits our purposes.

 

[colfax_m]

great. why? and if this is all he was out to do, how do we go from removing her e-mail address to destroying the drive it sat on?

Not sure what you mean. These are different issues with pretty clear explanations for each

what happened in the end was FAR MORE than simply removing her e-mail address.

so - first things first - why would we need to remove her e-mail address if we're simply turning this over to a senate committee?

What was “far more”?

At that time, they were turning email over to the State Dept, it was a response to an official request from state. They wanted to obscure the email address presumably to hide the fact that she was using her own account which at the time I don’t believe was publicly known. I think it predates the N.Y. Times story that broke the issue. Anyway, the address was not obscured. The thing you’re upset about didn’t even happen.

 

[colfax_m]

i would think if you're being asked for all work related mail and you go JUST A SECOND and hear furious keyboard strokes going on, there's something to look into.

i don't give a shit WHO is behind the keyboard, my answer would never change. you bring the doubt upon yourself when you pull that shit. so yea, it's different for others. they'd be investigated for tampering with evidence.

Well, good news. It was investigated. Thoroughly and publicly. Before an election. That’s more than we can say for Donnie

then again we also have proof of people who have has less than "gross negligence" or "careless" and still went to jail. period. end of story.

I don’t believe that’s true. Can you substantiate that?

so again yes, it's different for most of us. she should have lost her security clearance for mishandling it to begin with. wouldn't that be a trip. a president who doesn't have security clearance.

Presidents don’t get security clearance and they have total authority to grant security clearances. Just ask Jared and Ivanka, who had to have their clearances rammed through by Trump.

so you call 2+ years of RUSSIA by someone hellbent on finding SOMETHING - nothing?

and you tell me i am being vague. seems we all do that when it suits our purposes.

The investigation was not made public before the election, which is consistent with what I said. The investigation into Trump’s campaign would have been damaging had it been leaked. It wasn’t. If you want to be precise, please read the statements carefully.

 

[iceberg]

great. why? and if this is all he was out to do, how do we go from removing her e-mail address to destroying the drive it sat on?

Not sure what you mean. These are different issues with pretty clear explanations for each

what happened in the end was FAR MORE than simply removing her e-mail address.

so - first things first - why would we need to remove her e-mail address if we're simply turning this over to a senate committee?

What was “far more”?

At that time, they were turning email over to the State Dept, it was a response to an official request from state. They wanted to obscure the email address presumably to hide the fact that she was using her own account which at the time I don’t believe was publicly known. I think it predates the N.Y. Times story that broke the issue. Anyway, the address was not obscured. The thing you’re upset about didn’t even happen.

it's not hard to copy the mailbox to a portable device and go "here".
for hillary this took MONTHS and in this time, combetta was asking all this "how do i destroy XYZ" in reddit. and the only reason they were asking for the mails is BECAUSE they found out about her server. so your "reason" here isn't lining up with when things happened.

they found out.
they asked for mail
obama passed law saying "no more"
hillary turns in 300 printed pages
combetta out in the wild asking how to destroy evidence / alter and strip headers of "very important people"

AND - why is she hiding if she's not going anything wrong?

and i care because they asked. GIVE ME YOUR DATA - "hold on i have to remove / delete stuff" simply isn't a good thing to happen back to back.

period.

 

[bripat9643]

Our Government (the Gestapo-like Mueller Team) pressured Flynn intensely to plead guilty to the crime of lying to 2 FBI Agents, when even the 2 FBI Agents did not think he lied.

They did this by promising to pursue him until they broke him financially AND by threatening to go after his son on some other bogus charge and break him too---financially and emotionally.

In the olden days they used to torture people until they confessed. What they did to Flynn was a type of torture---not physical---but psychological, emotional, and financial.

What has happened in the last few days is that they have finally, at long last, gotten PROOF of what happened out of the corrupt Obama Deep State Bureaucrats.

When they did to Flynn should be a crime; its is Soviet style law enforcement. Flynn will be exonerated, or if the Democrat Judge on his case won't do it, he will be pardoned. And then he should (will) sue the FBI for the Torture they administered.

Stop watching Shit like CNN and you would know what is going on in your Country.
______

Mueller is a lifelong republican and a public servant who has served this nation under both Republican and Democratic administrations.

The way you assholes ( supposedly law and order conservatives ) have taken the side of the corrupt trump administration over our career DOJ cops is simply fucking ridiculous.

Fuck you.

Mueller is a senile Nazi douchebag who wipes his ass on the Constitution.

 

[iceberg]

i would think if you're being asked for all work related mail and you go JUST A SECOND and hear furious keyboard strokes going on, there's something to look into.

i don't give a shit WHO is behind the keyboard, my answer would never change. you bring the doubt upon yourself when you pull that shit. so yea, it's different for others. they'd be investigated for tampering with evidence.

Well, good news. It was investigated. Thoroughly and publicly. Before an election. That’s more than we can say for Donnie

then again we also have proof of people who have has less than "gross negligence" or "careless" and still went to jail. period. end of story.

I don’t believe that’s true. Can you substantiate that?

so again yes, it's different for most of us. she should have lost her security clearance for mishandling it to begin with. wouldn't that be a trip. a president who doesn't have security clearance.

Presidents don’t get security clearance and they have total authority to grant security clearances. Just ask Jared and Ivanka, who had to have their clearances rammed through by Trump.

so you call 2+ years of RUSSIA by someone hellbent on finding SOMETHING - nothing?

and you tell me i am being vague. seems we all do that when it suits our purposes.

The investigation was not made public before the election, which is consistent with what I said. The investigation into Trump’s campaign would have been damaging had it been leaked. It wasn’t. If you want to be precise, please read the statements carefully.

in meetings for awhile but i've got to be honest here, my answer has nothing to do with your statement so not sure what i was replying to when i put this up there. my clearance itself was just a flippant remark, however. not a definition of process.

so my bad on the misfire but i can't catch up til after lunch.

oh - i was addressing the 1st of segmented quotes. sorry - still too busy to answer properly now.

 

[colfax_m]

great. why? and if this is all he was out to do, how do we go from removing her e-mail address to destroying the drive it sat on?

Not sure what you mean. These are different issues with pretty clear explanations for each

what happened in the end was FAR MORE than simply removing her e-mail address.

so - first things first - why would we need to remove her e-mail address if we're simply turning this over to a senate committee?

What was “far more”?

At that time, they were turning email over to the State Dept, it was a response to an official request from state. They wanted to obscure the email address presumably to hide the fact that she was using her own account which at the time I don’t believe was publicly known. I think it predates the N.Y. Times story that broke the issue. Anyway, the address was not obscured. The thing you’re upset about didn’t even happen.

it's not hard to copy the mailbox to a portable device and go "here".
for hillary this took MONTHS and in this time, combetta was asking all this "how do i destroy XYZ" in reddit. and the only reason they were asking for the mails is BECAUSE they found out about her server. so your "reason" here isn't lining up with when things happened.

they found out.
they asked for mail
obama passed law saying "no more"
hillary turns in 300 printed pages
combetta out in the wild asking how to destroy evidence / alter and strip headers of "very important people"

AND - why is she hiding if she's not going anything wrong?

and i care because they asked. GIVE ME YOUR DATA - "hold on i have to remove / delete stuff" simply isn't a good thing to happen back to back.

period.

Well, State Dept found out about the server. Not the public. Not the committee at that time. Clinton was asked for her work related emails in October. They provided 50k plus to State less than 2 months later. Turning in paper copies is routine in the archaic system at the State Dept. Although I have little problem saying that Clinton isn’t terribly found of transparency and were not going to do the Republican committee investigating her for the 8th time any additional assistance beyond the bare minimum of what was requested.

Saying Combetta was asking how to destroy evidence is a mischaracterization.

You need to be more specific when you say “they” because I can’t tell who you’re referring to.

 

[lennypartiv]

Pressured to what? Plead guilty?

Sucks to be a victim of the Deep State. Trump should pardon him.

 

[iceberg]

great. why? and if this is all he was out to do, how do we go from removing her e-mail address to destroying the drive it sat on?

Not sure what you mean. These are different issues with pretty clear explanations for each

what happened in the end was FAR MORE than simply removing her e-mail address.

so - first things first - why would we need to remove her e-mail address if we're simply turning this over to a senate committee?

What was “far more”?

At that time, they were turning email over to the State Dept, it was a response to an official request from state. They wanted to obscure the email address presumably to hide the fact that she was using her own account which at the time I don’t believe was publicly known. I think it predates the N.Y. Times story that broke the issue. Anyway, the address was not obscured. The thing you’re upset about didn’t even happen.

it's not hard to copy the mailbox to a portable device and go "here".
for hillary this took MONTHS and in this time, combetta was asking all this "how do i destroy XYZ" in reddit. and the only reason they were asking for the mails is BECAUSE they found out about her server. so your "reason" here isn't lining up with when things happened.

they found out.
they asked for mail
obama passed law saying "no more"
hillary turns in 300 printed pages
combetta out in the wild asking how to destroy evidence / alter and strip headers of "very important people"

AND - why is she hiding if she's not going anything wrong?

and i care because they asked. GIVE ME YOUR DATA - "hold on i have to remove / delete stuff" simply isn't a good thing to happen back to back.

period.

Well, State Dept found out about the server. Not the public. Not the committee at that time. Clinton was asked for her work related emails in October. They provided 50k plus to State less than 2 months later. Turning in paper copies is routine in the archaic system at the State Dept. Although I have little problem saying that Clinton isn’t terribly found of transparency and were not going to do the Republican committee investigating her for the 8th time any additional assistance beyond the bare minimum of what was requested.

Saying Combetta was asking how to destroy evidence is a mischaracterization.

You need to be more specific when you say “they” because I can’t tell who you’re referring to.

who whole premise is - she didn't feel she was doing anything wrong by having her own server. now if doing nothing wrong, why is she hiding this address? and would stripping out the e-mail address be legal in altering potential evidence?

i can't address "routine" as the digital age has presented its own challenges through time that we're still learning the rules of engagement for.

so my premise and belief is that anyone she was dealing with should already have known of her private email address. now that it's getting "wider" in its use and depth, from your own data it took almost 2 months to turn over the data. paper copies were not requested and in my mind it was simply a stall tactic. i'm not sure how we define "Routine" in this instance but i'll table that for now.

so - in any event we do seem to agree that she sought to alter evidence before turning it over. now - why did she want to do that? i won't speculate your answer, that isn't fair to you. but i do feel it's a valid question at this point still.

 

[colfax_m]

great. why? and if this is all he was out to do, how do we go from removing her e-mail address to destroying the drive it sat on?

Not sure what you mean. These are different issues with pretty clear explanations for each

what happened in the end was FAR MORE than simply removing her e-mail address.

so - first things first - why would we need to remove her e-mail address if we're simply turning this over to a senate committee?

What was “far more”?

At that time, they were turning email over to the State Dept, it was a response to an official request from state. They wanted to obscure the email address presumably to hide the fact that she was using her own account which at the time I don’t believe was publicly known. I think it predates the N.Y. Times story that broke the issue. Anyway, the address was not obscured. The thing you’re upset about didn’t even happen.

it's not hard to copy the mailbox to a portable device and go "here".
for hillary this took MONTHS and in this time, combetta was asking all this "how do i destroy XYZ" in reddit. and the only reason they were asking for the mails is BECAUSE they found out about her server. so your "reason" here isn't lining up with when things happened.

they found out.
they asked for mail
obama passed law saying "no more"
hillary turns in 300 printed pages
combetta out in the wild asking how to destroy evidence / alter and strip headers of "very important people"

AND - why is she hiding if she's not going anything wrong?

and i care because they asked. GIVE ME YOUR DATA - "hold on i have to remove / delete stuff" simply isn't a good thing to happen back to back.

period.

Well, State Dept found out about the server. Not the public. Not the committee at that time. Clinton was asked for her work related emails in October. They provided 50k plus to State less than 2 months later. Turning in paper copies is routine in the archaic system at the State Dept. Although I have little problem saying that Clinton isn’t terribly found of transparency and were not going to do the Republican committee investigating her for the 8th time any additional assistance beyond the bare minimum of what was requested.

Saying Combetta was asking how to destroy evidence is a mischaracterization.

You need to be more specific when you say “they” because I can’t tell who you’re referring to.

who whole premise is - she didn't feel she was doing anything wrong by having her own server. now if doing nothing wrong, why is she hiding this address? and would stripping out the e-mail address be legal in altering potential evidence?

i can't address "routine" as the digital age has presented its own challenges through time that we're still learning the rules of engagement for.

so my premise and belief is that anyone she was dealing with should already have known of her private email address. now that it's getting "wider" in its use and depth, from your own data it took almost 2 months to turn over the data. paper copies were not requested and in my mind it was simply a stall tactic. i'm not sure how we define "Routine" in this instance but i'll table that for now.

so - in any event we do seem to agree that she sought to alter evidence before turning it over. now - why did she want to do that? i won't speculate your answer, that isn't fair to you. but i do feel it's a valid question at this point still.

I’ve answered your question. I’ve also described your statement as “altering evidence” as being a misrepresentation. I speculate that Combetta sought to expunge references to her actual email address from the email trove as a means obscure the use of her private server.

 

[Billy_Bob]

One thing that's been great about the Flynn case...it's brought out tons of info about the coup attempt against president Trump.

Sydney Powell (flynns lawyer) was just on TV saying more documents are being UNredacted and UNclassified...they should come out tomorrow or wednesday.

Everything so far in this case has proven that russian collusion was a lie from the beginning & the FBI knew it...yet they chose to "investigate" in an attempt to overthrow the POTUS.

The FBI also hid evidence from the court exonerating Flynn, page, popadopolis, stone, Manafort, and others.

Reporter KT McFarlan fled the country and went into hiding in europe because the muller team was about to do to her what they had done to manafort and the others.

Some people in the know are saying that this release will expose the entire Coup D'e Tat and that some democrats are trying feverishly to stop the release. It must be daming evidence for these people to be panicking so badly.

 

[iceberg]

great. why? and if this is all he was out to do, how do we go from removing her e-mail address to destroying the drive it sat on?

Not sure what you mean. These are different issues with pretty clear explanations for each

what happened in the end was FAR MORE than simply removing her e-mail address.

so - first things first - why would we need to remove her e-mail address if we're simply turning this over to a senate committee?

What was “far more”?

At that time, they were turning email over to the State Dept, it was a response to an official request from state. They wanted to obscure the email address presumably to hide the fact that she was using her own account which at the time I don’t believe was publicly known. I think it predates the N.Y. Times story that broke the issue. Anyway, the address was not obscured. The thing you’re upset about didn’t even happen.

it's not hard to copy the mailbox to a portable device and go "here".
for hillary this took MONTHS and in this time, combetta was asking all this "how do i destroy XYZ" in reddit. and the only reason they were asking for the mails is BECAUSE they found out about her server. so your "reason" here isn't lining up with when things happened.

they found out.
they asked for mail
obama passed law saying "no more"
hillary turns in 300 printed pages
combetta out in the wild asking how to destroy evidence / alter and strip headers of "very important people"

AND - why is she hiding if she's not going anything wrong?

and i care because they asked. GIVE ME YOUR DATA - "hold on i have to remove / delete stuff" simply isn't a good thing to happen back to back.

period.

Well, State Dept found out about the server. Not the public. Not the committee at that time. Clinton was asked for her work related emails in October. They provided 50k plus to State less than 2 months later. Turning in paper copies is routine in the archaic system at the State Dept. Although I have little problem saying that Clinton isn’t terribly found of transparency and were not going to do the Republican committee investigating her for the 8th time any additional assistance beyond the bare minimum of what was requested.

Saying Combetta was asking how to destroy evidence is a mischaracterization.

You need to be more specific when you say “they” because I can’t tell who you’re referring to.

who whole premise is - she didn't feel she was doing anything wrong by having her own server. now if doing nothing wrong, why is she hiding this address? and would stripping out the e-mail address be legal in altering potential evidence?

i can't address "routine" as the digital age has presented its own challenges through time that we're still learning the rules of engagement for.

so my premise and belief is that anyone she was dealing with should already have known of her private email address. now that it's getting "wider" in its use and depth, from your own data it took almost 2 months to turn over the data. paper copies were not requested and in my mind it was simply a stall tactic. i'm not sure how we define "Routine" in this instance but i'll table that for now.

so - in any event we do seem to agree that she sought to alter evidence before turning it over. now - why did she want to do that? i won't speculate your answer, that isn't fair to you. but i do feel it's a valid question at this point still.

I’ve answered your question. I’ve also described your statement as “altering evidence” as being a misrepresentation. I speculate that Combetta sought to expunge references to her actual email address from the email trove as a means obscure the use of her private server.

You answered the first part.

But my question is, if she thought this was OK, as she has stated, why hide it?

And removing her name is in fact altering the evidence. I've never known a potential defendent to be able to determine what was needed to investigate them properly before.

I still don't.

 

[colfax_m]

great. why? and if this is all he was out to do, how do we go from removing her e-mail address to destroying the drive it sat on?

Not sure what you mean. These are different issues with pretty clear explanations for each

what happened in the end was FAR MORE than simply removing her e-mail address.

so - first things first - why would we need to remove her e-mail address if we're simply turning this over to a senate committee?

What was “far more”?

At that time, they were turning email over to the State Dept, it was a response to an official request from state. They wanted to obscure the email address presumably to hide the fact that she was using her own account which at the time I don’t believe was publicly known. I think it predates the N.Y. Times story that broke the issue. Anyway, the address was not obscured. The thing you’re upset about didn’t even happen.

it's not hard to copy the mailbox to a portable device and go "here".
for hillary this took MONTHS and in this time, combetta was asking all this "how do i destroy XYZ" in reddit. and the only reason they were asking for the mails is BECAUSE they found out about her server. so your "reason" here isn't lining up with when things happened.

they found out.
they asked for mail
obama passed law saying "no more"
hillary turns in 300 printed pages
combetta out in the wild asking how to destroy evidence / alter and strip headers of "very important people"

AND - why is she hiding if she's not going anything wrong?

and i care because they asked. GIVE ME YOUR DATA - "hold on i have to remove / delete stuff" simply isn't a good thing to happen back to back.

period.

Well, State Dept found out about the server. Not the public. Not the committee at that time. Clinton was asked for her work related emails in October. They provided 50k plus to State less than 2 months later. Turning in paper copies is routine in the archaic system at the State Dept. Although I have little problem saying that Clinton isn’t terribly found of transparency and were not going to do the Republican committee investigating her for the 8th time any additional assistance beyond the bare minimum of what was requested.

Saying Combetta was asking how to destroy evidence is a mischaracterization.

You need to be more specific when you say “they” because I can’t tell who you’re referring to.

who whole premise is - she didn't feel she was doing anything wrong by having her own server. now if doing nothing wrong, why is she hiding this address? and would stripping out the e-mail address be legal in altering potential evidence?

i can't address "routine" as the digital age has presented its own challenges through time that we're still learning the rules of engagement for.

so my premise and belief is that anyone she was dealing with should already have known of her private email address. now that it's getting "wider" in its use and depth, from your own data it took almost 2 months to turn over the data. paper copies were not requested and in my mind it was simply a stall tactic. i'm not sure how we define "Routine" in this instance but i'll table that for now.

so - in any event we do seem to agree that she sought to alter evidence before turning it over. now - why did she want to do that? i won't speculate your answer, that isn't fair to you. but i do feel it's a valid question at this point still.

I’ve answered your question. I’ve also described your statement as “altering evidence” as being a misrepresentation. I speculate that Combetta sought to expunge references to her actual email address from the email trove as a means obscure the use of her private server.

You answered the first part.

But my question is, if she thought this was OK, as she has stated, why hide it?

And removing her name is in fact altering the evidence. I've never known a potential defendent to be able to determine what was needed to investigate them properly before.

I still don't.

She may have felt that use of the server was permissible, legally speaking. Doesn’t mean she wants the details of the server made public. She wanted to run for president and didn’t want the adverse public perception.

It wasn’t “evidence“. She wasn’t subpoenaed. This was a response to a formal request from the state department. She wasn’t a defendant.

 

[iceberg]

great. why? and if this is all he was out to do, how do we go from removing her e-mail address to destroying the drive it sat on?

Not sure what you mean. These are different issues with pretty clear explanations for each

what happened in the end was FAR MORE than simply removing her e-mail address.

so - first things first - why would we need to remove her e-mail address if we're simply turning this over to a senate committee?

What was “far more”?

At that time, they were turning email over to the State Dept, it was a response to an official request from state. They wanted to obscure the email address presumably to hide the fact that she was using her own account which at the time I don’t believe was publicly known. I think it predates the N.Y. Times story that broke the issue. Anyway, the address was not obscured. The thing you’re upset about didn’t even happen.

it's not hard to copy the mailbox to a portable device and go "here".
for hillary this took MONTHS and in this time, combetta was asking all this "how do i destroy XYZ" in reddit. and the only reason they were asking for the mails is BECAUSE they found out about her server. so your "reason" here isn't lining up with when things happened.

they found out.
they asked for mail
obama passed law saying "no more"
hillary turns in 300 printed pages
combetta out in the wild asking how to destroy evidence / alter and strip headers of "very important people"

AND - why is she hiding if she's not going anything wrong?

and i care because they asked. GIVE ME YOUR DATA - "hold on i have to remove / delete stuff" simply isn't a good thing to happen back to back.

period.

Well, State Dept found out about the server. Not the public. Not the committee at that time. Clinton was asked for her work related emails in October. They provided 50k plus to State less than 2 months later. Turning in paper copies is routine in the archaic system at the State Dept. Although I have little problem saying that Clinton isn’t terribly found of transparency and were not going to do the Republican committee investigating her for the 8th time any additional assistance beyond the bare minimum of what was requested.

Saying Combetta was asking how to destroy evidence is a mischaracterization.

You need to be more specific when you say “they” because I can’t tell who you’re referring to.

who whole premise is - she didn't feel she was doing anything wrong by having her own server. now if doing nothing wrong, why is she hiding this address? and would stripping out the e-mail address be legal in altering potential evidence?

i can't address "routine" as the digital age has presented its own challenges through time that we're still learning the rules of engagement for.

so my premise and belief is that anyone she was dealing with should already have known of her private email address. now that it's getting "wider" in its use and depth, from your own data it took almost 2 months to turn over the data. paper copies were not requested and in my mind it was simply a stall tactic. i'm not sure how we define "Routine" in this instance but i'll table that for now.

so - in any event we do seem to agree that she sought to alter evidence before turning it over. now - why did she want to do that? i won't speculate your answer, that isn't fair to you. but i do feel it's a valid question at this point still.

I’ve answered your question. I’ve also described your statement as “altering evidence” as being a misrepresentation. I speculate that Combetta sought to expunge references to her actual email address from the email trove as a means obscure the use of her private server.

You answered the first part.

But my question is, if she thought this was OK, as she has stated, why hide it?

And removing her name is in fact altering the evidence. I've never known a potential defendent to be able to determine what was needed to investigate them properly before.

I still don't.

She may have felt that use of the server was permissible, legally speaking. Doesn’t mean she wants the details of the server made public. She wanted to run for president and didn’t want the adverse public perception.

It wasn’t “evidence“. She wasn’t subpoenaed. This was a response to a formal request from the state department. She wasn’t a defendant.

so it was important enough to
1. request all the work related info of of it
but
2. not important enough to ensure she didn't get to pick and choose what that was

important enough that
1. everyone knew about it
but
2. she didn't want anyone to know about it

it was only personal data she's removing but
1. yoga and wedding plans is all her personal stuff is
but
2. she wants her e-mail stripped off of it so she's not associated with it

so at this point i feel i've pointed out (3) contradictions in this "nothing to see here" stance you are taking. so i'll ask now -

if trump did this do you still show the same level of "rage", or lack thereof?

 

[colfax_m]

great. why? and if this is all he was out to do, how do we go from removing her e-mail address to destroying the drive it sat on?

Not sure what you mean. These are different issues with pretty clear explanations for each

what happened in the end was FAR MORE than simply removing her e-mail address.

so - first things first - why would we need to remove her e-mail address if we're simply turning this over to a senate committee?

What was “far more”?

At that time, they were turning email over to the State Dept, it was a response to an official request from state. They wanted to obscure the email address presumably to hide the fact that she was using her own account which at the time I don’t believe was publicly known. I think it predates the N.Y. Times story that broke the issue. Anyway, the address was not obscured. The thing you’re upset about didn’t even happen.

it's not hard to copy the mailbox to a portable device and go "here".
for hillary this took MONTHS and in this time, combetta was asking all this "how do i destroy XYZ" in reddit. and the only reason they were asking for the mails is BECAUSE they found out about her server. so your "reason" here isn't lining up with when things happened.

they found out.
they asked for mail
obama passed law saying "no more"
hillary turns in 300 printed pages
combetta out in the wild asking how to destroy evidence / alter and strip headers of "very important people"

AND - why is she hiding if she's not going anything wrong?

and i care because they asked. GIVE ME YOUR DATA - "hold on i have to remove / delete stuff" simply isn't a good thing to happen back to back.

period.

Well, State Dept found out about the server. Not the public. Not the committee at that time. Clinton was asked for her work related emails in October. They provided 50k plus to State less than 2 months later. Turning in paper copies is routine in the archaic system at the State Dept. Although I have little problem saying that Clinton isn’t terribly found of transparency and were not going to do the Republican committee investigating her for the 8th time any additional assistance beyond the bare minimum of what was requested.

Saying Combetta was asking how to destroy evidence is a mischaracterization.

You need to be more specific when you say “they” because I can’t tell who you’re referring to.

who whole premise is - she didn't feel she was doing anything wrong by having her own server. now if doing nothing wrong, why is she hiding this address? and would stripping out the e-mail address be legal in altering potential evidence?

i can't address "routine" as the digital age has presented its own challenges through time that we're still learning the rules of engagement for.

so my premise and belief is that anyone she was dealing with should already have known of her private email address. now that it's getting "wider" in its use and depth, from your own data it took almost 2 months to turn over the data. paper copies were not requested and in my mind it was simply a stall tactic. i'm not sure how we define "Routine" in this instance but i'll table that for now.

so - in any event we do seem to agree that she sought to alter evidence before turning it over. now - why did she want to do that? i won't speculate your answer, that isn't fair to you. but i do feel it's a valid question at this point still.

I’ve answered your question. I’ve also described your statement as “altering evidence” as being a misrepresentation. I speculate that Combetta sought to expunge references to her actual email address from the email trove as a means obscure the use of her private server.

You answered the first part.

But my question is, if she thought this was OK, as she has stated, why hide it?

And removing her name is in fact altering the evidence. I've never known a potential defendent to be able to determine what was needed to investigate them properly before.

I still don't.

She may have felt that use of the server was permissible, legally speaking. Doesn’t mean she wants the details of the server made public. She wanted to run for president and didn’t want the adverse public perception.

It wasn’t “evidence“. She wasn’t subpoenaed. This was a response to a formal request from the state department. She wasn’t a defendant.

so it was important enough to
1. request all the work related info of of it
but
2. not important enough to ensure she didn't get to pick and choose what that was

important enough that
1. everyone knew about it
but
2. she didn't want anyone to know about it

it was only personal data she's removing but
1. yoga and wedding plans is all her personal stuff is
but
2. she wants her e-mail stripped off of it so she's not associated with it

so at this point i feel i've pointed out (3) contradictions in this "nothing to see here" stance you are taking. so i'll ask now -

if trump did this do you still show the same level of "rage", or lack thereof?

I don't think you're accurately characterizing what I've said, and you're "contradictions" aren't exactly contradictions. Your statements are a bit vague, so I'll do my best.

1. It was important for the State Dept to have the records of her emails. They asked her to submit her records as they would anyone else, as they did with the other former secretaries of state, including Powell. You may find it nefarious that she was able to determine what records she felt were work related (in this case her lawyer did it but you get the jist) but that's exactly how it works.

2. "Everyone" didn't know about it. Some people did, some people didn't. It goes without saying the fact that her server was used exclusively for email was not public knowledge until later.

3. I don't really even understand this point. Someone wanted her email stripped out so that it wasn't super obvious that it was all done on her private server. I don't know what that has to do with her private emails.

Since you drug Trump into this, let's compare.

Let's hypothesize that Clinton and the State Dept refused to comply with any subpoena of records to the Congressional committees investigating. Let's say Clinton refused to testify and Obama forbade anyone from testifying to these committees? That would be consistent with what Trump has done. I can only imagine how you would have felt about that.

Less than hypothetical, let's say that Trump has a habit of destroying memos and papers that are part of presidential records. Yeah, he's done that. Let's say people in the Trump administration use unofficial communication methods to converse with public officials. Not the end of the world, sure. But guess what? Those people choose what to submit as official records. No one is launching FBI investigations into that, are they?

 

[Thunk]

Some people in the know are saying that this release will expose the entire Coup D'e Tat and that some democrats are trying feverishly to stop the release. It must be daming evidence for these people to be panicking so badly.

17,500 pages of documents have been released to sidney powell today...they are being scanned right now so they will be searchable. More documents coming today & tomorrow

Watch for the term "Covington lawyers"...they were flynns lawyers before he fired them and hired sidney powell. They are either grossly incompetent or they were in on setting up flynn.

The leftist coup attempt is being exposed and proven beyond a doubt.

Durham has hired more prosecutors and investigators! His investigation keeps expanding!