General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsState Dept spokesman on CNN: No State Dept policy against use of private email account.
We have said in the past, Chris, that there was no policy prohibiting the use of a private email account here at the State Department, and that is still a fact. Now, obviously, we have policies in place now that highly discourage that, and you are supposed to use your government account so that there is a constant, permanent record of it, but at the time she was not violating policy
.I can tell you that there was no prohibition for her use of this, and weve since changed the policy to discourage that greatly, and in fact, the policy is that you have to use your government account for business.
I highly doubt corporate media will allow this simple fact to be heard over the GOP's continual screams of faux rage.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)How about DU?
blm
(113,039 posts)public opinion for or against any of our Democrats.
They have abetted the GOP on every issue: ACA, Benghazi, IRS, Planned Parenthood videos, Iran nuclear deal, etc
.
zappaman
(20,606 posts)Sorry, but if a blogger or an anonymous poster tells me its a big deal...
THEN ITS A BIG DEAL!!!
mylye2222
(2,992 posts)Many people are saying that Hillary was uncarefull in using a private account. Not that she violated the law. Nontheless I, and other think this pra tice can raisd question about openless of politics. And I am glad State is now discouraging it. It is better on terms of open governance matters.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)After all, in the last 35 years, Republicans have raised the "it's not specifically illegal" defense to an art form. While it might seem to be ethically or morally unconscionable for the Reagan Administration to be swapping arms for hostages in Iran and using the proceeds of arms sales to Iran fund the Contras in Nicaragua, there are Republicans to this day who maintain that none of it was strictly illegal. They just didn't announce their actions publicly because they were such honorable self-effacing patriots or something, and not because they were trying to avoid prosecution, so stop saying that.
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)ok
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)I was making the argument (perhaps not very well) that Republicans have for decades made out all kinds of excuses for their criminal behavior, even such odious and infamous crimes as the Iran-Contra Affair. One of those excuses has been on several occasions that the criminal behavior wasn't specifically illegal. If Republicans are willing to swallow that excuse for arming Iran, negotiating with terrorists, and funding other terrorists, then why are they so up in arms about the Secretary of State's e-mail, which knowledgeable people appear to agree was not against the law, or even against department policy.
I don't think a fair reading of my post would lead a reasonable person to conclude that I was equating Secretary Clinton's email practices with trading arms for hostages. So why did you? Is this just a Philly thing, like booing Santa Claus?
JoePhilly
(27,787 posts)Fucking hilarious.
You picked a lame comparison. Own it.
Btw ... Trading arms for hostages was illegal. Still is.
Now, can you provide a single piece of secret info that was leaked by Hillary's server?
Did a CIA operative get outed?
Nope. You can't. Did not happen.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)But you've resolved all the uncertainties I had. Thanks.
mylye2222
(2,992 posts)Look at how now media GOP whores are trying to spread that Kerry and State Dept. are "covering up" email thing.... Those @$$ are surely not aware State opened internal researching and put full time employees to deal with the issue.
When will they get it? The media controls the narrative.