General Discussion

MANative

(4,112 posts)

33. You're welcome, friend!

Reply to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #29)

Fri Mar 13, 2015, 06:40 PM

Mar 2015

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

143 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Clinton's lawyers didn't read the 30K emails they deleted. They just hit a button. [View all] leveymg Mar 2015 OP

ctrl f works like a charm. JaneyVee Mar 2015 #1

You have to hit it twice - too labor intensive for Hill's team. leveymg Mar 2015 #2

"it's her turn." So I guess the email thing doesn't matter anyway n/t BP2 Mar 2015 #104

My own emails are boring enough. Benghazi! immoderate Mar 2015 #3

If it didn't contain the term "Benghazi" the message was automatically deleted as "chocolate cake." leveymg Mar 2015 #6

Can't see how it makes a difference. immoderate Mar 2015 #21

It doesnt take a rocket scientist to read to whom the emails was addressed or Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #4

That wasn't the actual critera, apparently. It was either "Benghazi" or into the memory hole. leveymg Mar 2015 #12

Is the Clinton Foundation official mail? A smart person would know if email was from the Saudi Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #17

A lot of grey. That's why a real human (lawyer almost qualifies) should have done the selection. leveymg Mar 2015 #26

The official has the right to delete personal emails, they are not required to have Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #30

Right. And even those using a .gov account have the right do decide pnwmom Mar 2015 #72

Oh, do you think they will allow Hillary make the decisions or will the Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #75

The Clinton Foundation is not part of her job in the State Department. n/t pnwmom Mar 2015 #65

So I would say the emails would be personal unless she was soliciting funds Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #68

There is no evidence that she was doing that, and we have laws protecting pnwmom Mar 2015 #71

I don't think she ever intended to break the rules. I also think her server is as safe as the state Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #76

Not true. It was a list of names and other key words. The name of the Saudi pnwmom Mar 2015 #64

You do realize the Old Navy thing was satire, right? KamaAina Mar 2015 #13

So, if it was so easy, why didn't they assign the emails to someone to go through? leveymg Mar 2015 #19

Why should they? The computer can do that just as well, pnwmom Mar 2015 #63

Computer search is only a tool for e-discovery and disclosure. Lawyers actually read documents leveymg Mar 2015 #126

Yes, I posted there also but again a smart person would realize the from Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #24

Seems to me the email issue is only an issue if someone is alleging she purposely deleted randys1 Mar 2015 #51

Exactly. This was an objective, efficient way to do the sorting. pnwmom Mar 2015 #62

Really? Wat if Hillary was helping US companies like Old Navy penetrate foreign markets? Such assistance apparently was part of her job as SoS. InAbLuEsTaTe Mar 2015 #114

And This is a Big Deal why? bobalew Mar 2015 #5

Because deputizing the task to lawyers would indicate a different standard of review. Yo_Mama Mar 2015 #8

A judge won't be involved because she broke no law pnwmom Mar 2015 #66

There are multiple court cases re FOIA requests right now. Yo_Mama Mar 2015 #83

And the State Department will respond to them, based on pnwmom Mar 2015 #86

Right. The emails the State Dept. has. The emails that Hillary's team took first cut at. morningfog Mar 2015 #88

They're not entitled to her personal emails, either by the old law or the current law. pnwmom Mar 2015 #89

Not exactly. Had she used a .gov account, then State would possess all her emails and would be the morningfog Mar 2015 #92

Had she used a .gov account, she would STILL be the only one to determine pnwmom Mar 2015 #97

She was Secretary of State, and she does have a staff and outside lawyers who have staffs. leveymg Mar 2015 #14

Why? For example: JaneyVee Mar 2015 #16

If Chelsea were still four, that shortcut might work. leveymg Mar 2015 #23

I see ur point. For argument's sake, Chelsea, for example, cudve been soliciting foreign govts for contributions to the Clinton Foundtion InAbLuEsTaTe Mar 2015 #106

This message was self-deleted by its author 1000words Mar 2015 #7

Any message to .gov gets archived. JaneyVee Mar 2015 #18

so what? you think all official SoS business goes through only a .gov address? wow. ND-Dem Mar 2015 #73

+1, No kidding. Marr Mar 2015 #27

It's amazing that so many here are proclaiming her guilty of SOMETHING pnwmom Mar 2015 #77

I currently see no basis for questioning Hillary's statements made at her press conference. Besides, they should be easy to verify. InAbLuEsTaTe Mar 2015 #107

A la Nixon's secretary and the missing minutes. ha ha oldandhappy Mar 2015 #9

It was called the "Rosemary Wood stretch" to hit the erase on the tape while sitting at her desk. leveymg Mar 2015 #15

Oranges and apples. Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #25

They both come in crates and stink if left unopened long enough leveymg Mar 2015 #35

Was Nixon at liberty to erase any of the tapes? Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #37

The Presidential Records Act wasn't enacted until 1978. This is covered by the 1950 Federal Records leveymg Mar 2015 #40

This is the information I found Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #58

Yes, but oranges have thicker skins than apples, allowing them to last longer without spoiling. Fact... InAbLuEsTaTe Mar 2015 #108

Privacy for me but not for thee Ron Obvious Mar 2015 #10

Maybe I'm missing it, but I don't see how or why this is relevant. AtomicKitten Mar 2015 #11

She absolutely was NOT required to preserve her PERSONAL emails on State Dept pnwmom Mar 2015 #60

It's from a strange and unusual source. AtomicKitten Mar 2015 #84

That is one of the more egregious editing errors in the NYTimes report. pnwmom Mar 2015 #85

You continue to misstate her obligation as SOS to preserve emails on gov't servers. AtomicKitten Mar 2015 #91

The significant words are "codified by law." The previous law had no time limit pnwmom Mar 2015 #98

No, it's irrelevant and does not negate her obligation to PRESERVE EMAILS ON GOVERNMENT SERVERS. AtomicKitten Mar 2015 #100

The head of the Archives disagrees with your interpretation of the law pnwmom Mar 2015 #101

What she did was against protocol and not okay, and speaks to her proclivity for secrecy. AtomicKitten Mar 2015 #105

I thought Democrats believed in privacy of personal emails. pnwmom Mar 2015 #110

That's why they shouldn't be comingled with official records in single accounts. leveymg Mar 2015 #127

It's relevant because . . . Major Hogwash Mar 2015 #87

A valid point. AtomicKitten Mar 2015 #93

Hadn't thought about that...Excellent point! InAbLuEsTaTe Mar 2015 #115

If she says she had 31k pirate emails, then she had 31k pirate emails AngryAmish Mar 2015 #20

... DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #22

Best reply of the day!! n/t MANative Mar 2015 #28

Thank you, friend. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #29

You're welcome, friend! MANative Mar 2015 #33

Just a few days ago, we were all assured that, since she'd revealed 50k emails, there was Marr Mar 2015 #31

I expect Democrats to complain about Republican peccadilloes and Republicans to complain about... DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #32

I expect hypocrisy from party loyalists, too. Marr Mar 2015 #41

I do have universal standards. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #43

keep gazing into that abyss frylock Mar 2015 #45

and you keep following me around DU, frylock./NT DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #49

don't flatter yourself frylock Mar 2015 #103

It is what it is./NT DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #116

a figment of your imagination frylock Mar 2015 #124

... DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #125

If you openly admit to just barking whatever bullshit makes your leader look best... Marr Mar 2015 #46

If you don't believe Democratic inspired legislation... DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #48

What a deceitful response. Marr Mar 2015 #52

I wear your ad hominem attacks the way my old man wore the Purple Heart he was awarded in WW ll DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #54

It's obvious that these questions are far more complex Trajan Mar 2015 #56

They might have an argument on that score if the primaries were over. Marr Mar 2015 #57

Maybe my concerns are too plebeian for some. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #79

We have not a single declared sadoldgirl Mar 2015 #44

Where did I declare a victor? DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #53

Yes, I heard Joe Scarborough saying he wanted to read all of her emails, classy huh. Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #38

Who gives a shit about Joe Scarborough? Marr Mar 2015 #42

Just saying, he apparently represents the GOP side. I am more interested in Thinkingabout Mar 2015 #69

You are implying that Hillary should open all her personal emails pnwmom Mar 2015 #74

Ping pong paddle peddlers in Paducah. Major Hogwash Mar 2015 #99

My question: howzit possible that Hillary had as many personal emails as work-related ones as the agency head in charge of tens of thousands of employees? InAbLuEsTaTe Mar 2015 #109

Maybe Chelsea REALLY could not decide between seafoam green and apple green TwilightGardener Mar 2015 #111

The numbers just seem off. But, time will tell; let's wait n see what develops...Thankfully, we always have Elizabeth waitin in the wings. InAbLuEsTaTe Mar 2015 #112

That doesn't seem strange to me thesquanderer Mar 2015 #119

No doubt the Teapubbies were up to no good; can't say that bout Hillary based on what we know so far. InAbLuEsTaTe Mar 2015 #113

Good one! leftofcool Mar 2015 #34

BTW, Jeb didn't comply with Florida's stringent "Sunshine Laws" when it came to his e-mail DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #36

... MannyGoldstein Mar 2015 #121

I ain't got no worries. DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #122

Oh well. ellie Mar 2015 #39

put that on a bumper sticker frylock Mar 2015 #47

that's exactly how we got today's GOP BTW MisterP Mar 2015 #96

it's ok I'm sure the media-email hackers already copied what they will use against her next year Sunlei Mar 2015 #50

I'd say I'm surpised... 99Forever Mar 2015 #55

So vaguely worded missives like Erich Bloodaxe BSN Mar 2015 #59

That sounds like an objective way to make the decision. If the key words pnwmom Mar 2015 #61

Not too late for the Dem leadership to rethink their unanimous support for Hillary2016 Dems to Win Mar 2015 #67

I don't really care. The Tealiban is so insane in persecuting Hillary I hope she got rid of every OregonBlue Mar 2015 #70

47 traitors and you bring up OMG Hillary had a private e-mail shit! B Calm Mar 2015 #78

+ 100000. Well Stated. Like paparazzi following the kardashians. misterhighwasted Mar 2015 #80

... DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #81

So, as a non Hillary fan, my take rufus dog Mar 2015 #82

Oh God no!! Beausoir Mar 2015 #90

I'm already storing up with food and planning for the Apocalypse./NT DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #117

Seems legit. TwilightGardener Mar 2015 #94

Message auto-removed Name removed Mar 2015 #95

I do the same thing. napi21 Mar 2015 #102

I managed email for a large public university belcffub Mar 2015 #118

Of course no one personally read 62,000+ emails. randome Mar 2015 #120

In e-discovery, a team of half a dozen lawyers and staff could do it in about two weeks. leveymg Mar 2015 #123

Do you think Hillary sent an e-mail to the Benghazi Terrorists to attack the embassy? B Calm Mar 2015 #128

No. But, that's not the issue, as you are likely aware. leveymg Mar 2015 #130

It's all connected to the made up Benghazi scandal. B Calm Mar 2015 #132

And as was pointed out in the other thread, there is no 'discovery' being undertaken. randome Mar 2015 #129

This is a case where she treated documents in a politically non-intelligent way by deleting them in leveymg Mar 2015 #131

I bet everybody in congress has at the least one private e-mail address. This whole scandal B Calm Mar 2015 #133

Congress exempted itself from rules about saving records. leveymg Mar 2015 #136

LOL +1 of course they did, their finger pointers. . B Calm Mar 2015 #138

Right. Listen to AP and the others. They are only trying to help! randome Mar 2015 #134

Their motives are beside the point. It stuck to the wall. leveymg Mar 2015 #135

I've been on those teams, and I concur in your judgment. amandabeech Mar 2015 #141

Hillary wouldn't of course Bradical79 Mar 2015 #139

One normally doesn't hire lawyers to do routine purging of personal emails. randome Mar 2015 #140

Who here doesn't want a third and fourth term for Obama? Michelle Obama, of course. leveymg Mar 2015 #142

so, law broken or not? Bradical79 Mar 2015 #137

So she has no idea if they were personal or not CanadaexPat Mar 2015 #143