OMFG

[boston bean]

Caroline Kennedy used a private email for official government business.

http://abcnews.go.com/News/ambassador-caroline-kennedy-private-email-government-business/story?id=33315567

OMG, what is Caroline Kennedy trying to hide? You can't trust her. This shows incompetence. Throw the book at her, keep on investigating Trey!




Understand now how frickin stupid the Hillary email "scandal" is, no matter how you justify your concerns, it's utterly, stupendously ridiculous.

[Scuba]

1. There are lots of good reasons to not want Hillary as POTUS. Her email server isn't one of them.

[Amimnoch]

15. Logical persons like yourself are not the subject target.

However, if you look further down now that more persons have posted, you can see who is.

Thank you for having some sense where others clearly don't.

I respect that you, and others who are supporters of Senator Sanders have their own reasons for not supporting Hillary, just like I have my own reasons for not supporting Senator Sanders.

I do not respect, and will continue to insult those who choose to continue using right wing talking points to attack a Democratic Candidate.. especially the one who does still happen to be the clear front-runner despite Senator Sanders increasing trend.

[blackspade]

22. +1000

[TheBlackAdder]

34. Where have I seen this before? Doingto @ 9:15AM. Yet, it's the copy OP that gets the attention. nt

[GoneFishin]

49. Agreed. Not a fan. But the Republicans are just being dickish morons as usual. If a Republican

did it nobody would have said a word about it.

[Vinca]

2. I've weighed in very little on the email scandal, but what I do think is that

Democrats shouldn't brush it off so lightly. It will probably turn out to be much ado about nothing, but a few things do bother me. I find it odd they would make 50,000 hard copies of emails for one thing. I also wonder why she didn't hand things over right off the bat rather than guarding them with her life. Now she's given them up right in the middle of the campaign which is gold to the GOP even if there's no there there. Yesterday I heard someone wonder aloud whether the POTUS knows something we don't since he's suddenly promoting Biden. Whether or not she sent confidential stuff around the world on an insecure server is almost immaterial at this point. The damage has been done. (FYI, I'm not saying any of this because I'm supporting Bernie. I've always said I would vote for Hillary in the general if she's the nominee.)

[leftofcool]

3. POTUS suddenly promoting Biden is all over Fox news

As well as every other right wing news source. POTUS never endorses or promotes anyone until the primary determines who the candidate will be.

[George II]

14. In a nutshell, all Obama said was basically Biden would be a good President....

....in response to a question. If he was asked the same question about Clinton or even Sanders he'd say the same thing.

[riversedge]

46. And we know (or at least I hope we know) that Fox knows that

Hillary would be formidable against the clown car full of clowns in the general election. But Biden--competitive but....no, IMHO.

[BooScout]

4. Have you seen what they have done with them since she released them?

OMG..............they have seized on every single one to try and drag her through the muck.

[Vinca]

8. I know. So wouldn't it have been better long, long ago,

before the campaign was in full swing, to turn over all the things she recently turned over? It would have been old news by now, but she's given the GOP a giant gift that could cost us the White House. And one other thing, she needs to stop making jokes about it. Given her "trustworthy" ratings, cracking wise is like picking at a scab. It's sure to inflame the damage. At this point she can be totally cleared of any mishandling of information and it won't make much difference in the court of public opinion. All I'm saying is Democrats shouldn't be taking this so lightly.

[boston bean]

10. You make it seem the RW investigation committee had no power over the timing. nt

[Vinca]

45. This is why I would have been better off not commenting.

No matter what suggestion is made that even hints at a Hillary criticism, it's pile on time. I hope you all are right. I really don't want to lose to the GOP a year from November.

[beerandjesus]

16. Wish I could agree with you, but I'm not sure I can.

Fact is, the right-wing extremists in Congress and their brownshirts in the media have been playing this thing for years now. Benghazi was old "news" by the end of 2012, and given that the Democrats HAVE been playing along, but not using their own bully pulpit to ridicule the Republicans' motives, contrast the length of the Benghazi investigation with the length of the 9/11 investigation, etc., it's hard to imagine how the fascists could have been more effectively appeased.

I'm 100% for Bernie, but this email server business is complete bullshit. We should ALL be ridiculing the Republicans, and not just DU or Democrats, but all AMERICANS.

[boston bean]

5. Your main concern is debunked here:

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/03/12/cnn-quietly-updates-sloppy-report-on-clinton-em/202870

[heather blossom]

6. Question

Why doesn't Congress allocate the resources and hire staff to make sure that a government official can email safely? The Government e-mail and other data systems are so outdated. Do you realize that many government employees have sensitive information on their government laptops, if they are lost, stolen or crash the data is lost. Much of the data is stored on laptops and not backed up anywhere. Don't know why the media doesn't address this.

[boston bean]

7. This is a point, i think most miss.

The gov email system is clunky and doesn't work well.

So, they left room for people to use other means. And people did so they could do their job.

Should they be politically hung for doing so? That's not something I would think is fair.

[leftofcool]

11. Good question!

[morningfog]

9. Did she also mix her personal email on the same account,

hand select which ones to produce for FOIA and subpoena requests, scrub the private server, all after sharing classified info on it?

[RiverLover]

12. +1

And no, she didn't. The Clinton camp is grasping at straws.

[Metric System]

18. Clinton camp? The source for this article is an IG report.

[George II]

13. BENGHAZI!

[Sunlei]

17. I agree with C. Powells words about the worse Rs, "fucking crazies". Your "stupendously ridiculous"

is to polite

[Metric System]

19. Of course the Right-Wing crazies on Twitter are making the most of this, which is why it's so

stupid and short-sighted of Dems to do anything but defend Hillary and Caroline. These same people didn't give a shit when millions of emails disappeared from the Bush administration.

[rtracey]

20. and

and think about all the politicians that used personal e-mails for their Ashley Madison accounts....oh wait......

[Gore1FL]

21. My concern is that it reflects poor decision making.

There was a profound lack of concern over data security. On top of it all, it was an elective mistake--they actually had to proactively make this blunder.

If she is the Dem nominee, I will vote for her.

[boston bean]

23. My concern is that a full fledged right wing smear campaign

is being taken seriously by self purported Democrats.

[Gore1FL]

51. I was speaking as an IT professional, not a "self purported Democrat." n/t

[Fred Sanders]

24. Ignoring decades of good decision making....

[Gore1FL]

50. Choosing not to ignore poor decisions is not the same as ignoring good ones. n/t

[Fred Sanders]

52. Some you win, some you lose, are we not all human? Demanding perfection is conceding failure.

[Gore1FL]

57. Fair point.

From what you just posted, I don't think we are really all that far apart on this, actually.

Has the GOP run with this more than they should? Yes. Is the hyperbole and craziness surrounding this story justified? No. Does this disqualify Clinton, in some way from elective office? No. Should it hurt her in the long term? No.

It's too big to dismiss as irrelevant as the "Powell did it too," "This isn't nearly as bad as Bush starting the Iraq war," "It wasn't illegal," etc. arguments being made. I'd rather the campaign come out and borrow a bit from Maya Angelou and say "Now we know better; we will do better."

As I stated earlier, if she is the Democratic candidate, I will absolutely vote for her. She's got a lot of great qualities, and if elected will do a fine job as president.

[Fred Sanders]

59. From your lips to all Democratic Party voters ears....and ballots.

[cherokeeprogressive]

54. Aw Shits and Attagirls. Look into 'em.

[EV_Ares]

25. Actually have not from the beginning paid a lot of attention to this email manufactured investigatio

as just look at it as a way the republicans failed on Benghazi, still failing, have locked on to this now trying to disrupt her campaign for a very clear reason. They know they cannot defeat her at the ballot box or on real issues America faces. Also, if they really cared they would have been concerned about GWB's thousands of deleted emails, Jeb Bush used a personal account, Colin Powell used a personal account so it is quite obvious what this is really about.

As for Hillary, I honestly think if she just hangs in there, this is something that will go away because it is nothing & is only being kept alive for the media. Of course it is something for her to be concerned about but not panic about.

[tularetom]

26. To the best of my knowledge Caroline Kennedy isn't running for anything

So what she does is of little consequence to me.

[djean111]

27. I don't care AT ALL about email-gate. BUT, it will be used against Hillary by the GOP.

And GOP voters, IMO, will not even notice that they are being admonished or whatever. That is what I am concerned about, and that is what I think of as baggage.
Also, FWIW, I saw the Caroline Kennedy thing as just reinforcing that what Hillary did with her emails is just business as usual in Washington DC. Not that Caroline Kennedy was untrustworthy or whatever.

[jeff47]

28. Make sure you skip over the part where Kennedy didn't send classified.

If you leave the classified information angle in the stories, you might realize they are different.

[boston bean]

29. Who knows at this point it's early. She may have

sent retroactive classified emails.

ie, weren't classified when she sent them, but after review are now.

You know, sort of like what happened with Hillary.

More ridiculousness from the clowns in the GOP.

[jeff47]

30. No, they were retroactively marked. Not retroactively classified.

The DNI IG says the information was always classified.

The State department disagrees and says they never were and still are not classified.

No one is retroactively classifying. They are marking the documents as classified until the dispute between the DNI and State is worked out.

[boston bean]

32. lol

so, we are going to accuse Hillary of using private email to send classified stuff, that wasn't classified, and was just now... but not that's not retroactive... OK.

[jeff47]

37. The rules about classified information say the entity who creates the classified

gets to apply their standards to it, and the rest of the government has to follow their classification.

The DNI created the information first. Therefore, their rules applied. Making the information classified.

The correct response from State if they disagreed with this would be to treat the information as classified while challenging the classification. That didn't happen. Instead, Clinton treated the information as unclassified. It isn't known if that was through negligence or an intentional act. So the FBI seized the server and is investigating.

And before you leap to another Republican talking point, that is not a criminal investigation. If we take everything that is currently known and use the "bad for Clinton" result for every disputed part, she couldn't be indicted. The worst punishment available would be loss of her security clearance and getting fired. Since she no longer has a clearance and no longer works for the government, that punishment is moot.

However, not being legally punished does not mean she would not be "electorally" punished.

It actually is a very serious problem, despite all the effort to turn it into another Benghazi.

[boston bean]

38. uh huh... you keep on truckin! nt

[jeff47]

39. I apologize that reality is not conforming to your political views. (nt)

[boston bean]

41. Sounds like something I could have said in return. nt

[DisgustipatedinCA]

53. But you didn't. Jeff47 did, and he directed the statement at you.

[Sancho]

56. They appear to have reclassified at least one...

since it was originally given to the Benghazi committee as "unclassified" and is still there, but now is "classified" a few months later.

https://www.facebook.com/TheBriefing2016/videos/vb.415405165314505/452560401598981/?type=2&theater

The Briefing
By the logic some are applying to Hillary Clinton's emails, if you watch this video, you'll have viewed classified material.

[jeff47]

58. No, it was originally given as unmarked.

Again, markings are not the same as classification.

And yes, that is spillage just like when Clinton stored it on her server. That doesn't make Clinton's spillage OK.

[Kokonoe]

31. A private email for official government business may not be the problem.

Hillary and caroline Kennedy are not the same as the Hillary email scandal.
"Its the Emails stupid", As in "Its the economy stupid".
I think the economy is most important, lets move on.

[Skwmom]

33. Did she wipe a server? If she didn't, obviously she had nothing to hide. n/t

[Metric System]

35. Wouldn't you wipe a server if you're done with it and have no more use for it?

[Sivart]

36. do you mean....

Do you mean, like, with a cloth, or something?

[morningfog]

44. I certainly would if there were subpoenas and FOIA requests for emails on it

and I had sent classified info with the email. Scrub a dub dub.

[AgingAmerican]

48. No

Not if I had nothing to hide. Especially if I was in her position and under investigation.

[Sancho]

55. You know of course that the server was backed up...

during it's use and at the end of it's use. Backed up by Google and McAfee.

The server was erased because it was to be stored away, and for security reasons it was erased before removed from protecting by the secret service.

All according to logic.

Hillary had nothing to hide. When asked, her lawyers provided a back up on a thumb drive of work email. The FBI did not ask for personal emails since they have no right to them.

Hillary's lawyers have not stated that they have a back up of the personal emails, but they likely do. Chances are those personal emails would be covered by attorney privilege and also not subject to FOIA.

In other words, Hillary has been completely transparent and you should be happy to know the facts.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

40. ...

[WI_DEM]

42. Certainly there were Republicans who did the same thing--why isn't the media going after them?

[madville]

43. According to the article the two aren't comparable

It clearly states the Inspector General confirmed Kennedy did not send any classified info over private email while the Inspector Generals referred Clinton's practices to the FBI for review because in their opinion there was classified info residing on Clinton's server and thumb drive backup.

[AtomicKitten]

47. Also Caroline didn't have/use her own server at home.

The IG first looked at a sampling, 40 emails, of Clinton's and found 2 that had classified information. This was referred to the FBI who are now looking at another 305 emails. Reuters reports they have found "dozens" with classified information.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/21/us-usa-election-clinton-emails-idUSKCN0QQ0BW20150821

You are absolutely correct, the two are nowhere in the ballpark of comparable.