I guess you need it made simple for you, too, tard.
Both sides do it, they are all hypocrites.
When they decide to run, their campaign managers ask them; "Are you willing to lie, cheat, steal and be hypocritical?"
From the article; "Cummings said would constitute a "major security breach."
Didn't seem he was too concerned about a security breach a few years back when a Democrat was doing the same thing, eh?
Politicians. . .
Hillary wasn’t using WhatsApp. She was using a secure private server, set up for a former US President.
My question would start with ....WHY?
Both sides do it, they are all hypocrites.
When they decide to run, their campaign managers ask them; "Are you willing to lie, cheat, steal and be hypocritical?"
From the article; "Cummings said would constitute a "major security breach."
Didn't seem he was too concerned about a security breach a few years back when a Democrat was doing the same thing, eh?
Politicians. . .
Hillary wasn’t using WhatsApp. She was using a secure private server, set up for a former US President.
My question would start with ....WHY?
That one is easy. The government email system use of which exploded at the turn of the century was wholly inadequate, and the technology was advancing so quickly that the government was hard pressed to keep up with it. Each government worker was allocated something like 25 megabytes of storage (which is nothing for any high traffic office), and servers were slower than slow as they quickly became overwhelmed. Even at my office, I didn't have office email until 1998, and up until that point we were still communicating by fax.
By 2003, I working in a firm with 800 people. We had 4 servers for 800 staff, with basically unlimited storage capacity. It took 10 minutes to log into our email, because of the 10's of thousands of emails within our access group. One lawyer in our group had 50,000 emails. It took half and hour to load the program in the morning. Imagine having woefully inadequate servers, and longer wait times than that. Plus you have to preserve and turn over all of your work, and keep your PC under 25 megabytes stored.
After 2008 things got worse. The fiscal sequestration meant there was no money to upgrade the servers, and staff just had to live with what they had. Senior Officials in a high enough position to work off a private server, did so. That includes W and Cheney. Hillary asked Colin Powell what to do about her email, and he suggested using Bill's private server. His email to her on the subject was one of the ones that were published.
She believed that because she only used her work email to communicate with other government employees, that she didn't have to retain copies of these emails because they were already ON the government servers of the recipients. While not an unreasonable assumption, it was not how she was supposed to do things. So she gave State copies of the stuff she sent to NGO's and independent contractors, but deleted stuff to her staff.
If you look at everything that happened within the context of the times, nothing about what she did looks nefarious at all. Reading the 50,000 Clinton emails that WikiLeaks published, they create a portrait of a woman who was hardworking, who took her job seriously, and showed a genuine interest leaving the world a better place than she found it. She is a genuiine policy wonk who understood what she needed to be doing, and how to do it. Traits that are both sorely lacking in this President.
A tad slow on the uptake this morning? No, but it has already been determined by the FBI and DOJ to be a no harm, no foul when Hillary and Obama did it. The question is why bother investigating or holding someone accountable NOW when the precedent has already bee set that it is nothing?
Not that. I'm begging here. In retrospect Hillary was the less bad choice. By now we'd have President Kaine, and he'd be a one termer. LOLBoth sides do it, they are all hypocrites.
When they decide to run, their campaign managers ask them; "Are you willing to lie, cheat, steal and be hypocritical?"
From the article; "Cummings said would constitute a "major security breach."
Didn't seem he was too concerned about a security breach a few years back when a Democrat was doing the same thing, eh?
Politicians. . .
Hillary wasn’t using WhatsApp. She was using a secure private server, set up for a former US President.
My question would start with ....WHY?
That one is easy. The government email system use of which exploded at the turn of the century was wholly inadequate, and the technology was advancing so quickly that the government was hard pressed to keep up with it. Each government worker was allocated something like 25 megabytes of storage (which is nothing for any high traffic office), and servers were slower than slow as they quickly became overwhelmed. Even at my office, I didn't have office email until 1998, and up until that point we were still communicating by fax.
By 2003, I working in a firm with 800 people. We had 4 servers for 800 staff, with basically unlimited storage capacity. It took 10 minutes to log into our email, because of the 10's of thousands of emails within our access group. One lawyer in our group had 50,000 emails. It took half and hour to load the program in the morning. Imagine having woefully inadequate servers, and longer wait times than that. Plus you have to preserve and turn over all of your work, and keep your PC under 25 megabytes stored.
After 2008 things got worse. The fiscal sequestration meant there was no money to upgrade the servers, and staff just had to live with what they had. Senior Officials in a high enough position to work off a private server, did so. That includes W and Cheney. Hillary asked Colin Powell what to do about her email, and he suggested using Bill's private server. His email to her on the subject was one of the ones that were published.
She believed that because she only used her work email to communicate with other government employees, that she didn't have to retain copies of these emails because they were already ON the government servers of the recipients. While not an unreasonable assumption, it was not how she was supposed to do things. So she gave State copies of the stuff she sent to NGO's and independent contractors, but deleted stuff to her staff.
If you look at everything that happened within the context of the times, nothing about what she did looks nefarious at all. Reading the 50,000 Clinton emails that WikiLeaks published, they create a portrait of a woman who was hardworking, who took her job seriously, and showed a genuine interest leaving the world a better place than she found it. She is a genuiine policy wonk who understood what she needed to be doing, and how to do it. Traits that are both sorely lacking in this President.
Quit digging. You're in a hole so deep already that you can't get out. Maybe you can find a tweet to be offended over and post about that instead.Translation: As long as Trump officials did not use their personal accounts on a Tuesday, after 7 pm, on a full moon, in a month with six letters, THEN THIS IS DIFFERENT!Translation: IT'S OKAY WHEN TRUMP DOES IT!™Better a personal email than a whole goddamned SERVER!!!!Which part of "used personal email and messaging accounts to conduct government business" did you not understand, blind man?Unless they decide it is personal business. They can just have their staff go through it all and delete what ever they don't feel like handing over apparently. . . .
They already admitted to it.
Translation everyone gave HRC a pass and now we want others not to have a pass. Stupid. These arguments are stupid.
