Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

TwilightGardener

(46,416 posts)
16. Oh, I think she's going down, and it will be well-deserved. Something totally hinky about her
Thu Aug 20, 2015, 04:12 PM
Aug 2015

having a special-exception status carved out for her at the State Dept. while also working for the Clinton Foundation and other side projects. It smells.

BOMBSHELL!!! nt HFRN Aug 2015 #1
Firecracker! Fred Sanders Aug 2015 #57
Tombstone!!...nt SidDithers Aug 2015 #90
You know what the Hillarians are going to be after.. Cherry Creek Native Aug 2015 #2
We are toast vadermike Aug 2015 #3
The admin is partially behind this. Puzzledtraveller Aug 2015 #4
I doubt the admin had anything to do with this cali Aug 2015 #5
I don't think that's it. My question is why the WH apparently knew all this was going on TwilightGardener Aug 2015 #7
True Puzzledtraveller Aug 2015 #11
No other cabinet official was allowed to bring in an entourage of unqualified groupies TwilightGardener Aug 2015 #20
I don't know that they knew that or even paid attention to it. askew Aug 2015 #25
If it was all innocuous "nice to see you yesterday, let's have TwilightGardener Aug 2015 #34
I'd guess you'd be in the minority. askew Aug 2015 #41
I've seen zero indication that the WH knew she was keeping a secret server in her askew Aug 2015 #24
Even Jon Stewart skewered her for truedelphi Aug 2015 #56
It wasn't illegal. MADem Aug 2015 #35
No, it wasn't illegal to use a private account, or have one's own server. TwilightGardener Aug 2015 #40
Why would her aides have had their correspondence destroyed? KoKo Aug 2015 #44
Read that their government issued Blackberries were turned in and destroyed. I don't know TwilightGardener Aug 2015 #45
It is SOP when dealing with classified information. 4lbs Aug 2015 #55
I read that, also. Thought it odd but figured the info was already filed KoKo Aug 2015 #75
If she's communicating w/state employees at their desks, she's already archiving. MADem Aug 2015 #53
If it were on her server it could be viewed as archived by turning it over. Relying on archiving peacebird Aug 2015 #85
The "ultimate" archive is to send it TO the server in the institution. And that's what she did. MADem Aug 2015 #89
It's gonna be Bernie and we'll be just fine. He's a much candidate than Hillary anyway. InAbLuEsTaTe Aug 2015 #86
She probably knew that FOIA's couldn't be sought thru private accounts, so she made it ALL private. TwilightGardener Aug 2015 #6
exactly cali Aug 2015 #8
Because the DoJ lawyer is not working for her jberryhill Aug 2015 #9
No, just wondering why the DoJ lawyer was arguing in defense of her email set-up. TwilightGardener Aug 2015 #12
At the bottom of it all jberryhill Aug 2015 #13
Oh, I think she's going down, and it will be well-deserved. Something totally hinky about her TwilightGardener Aug 2015 #16
She didn't have a "special-exception status carved out for her at the State Dept." jberryhill Aug 2015 #21
It's in a news story on CNN--she got some sort of special government employee status TwilightGardener Aug 2015 #22
No, she didn't. The White House--and JUST the White House--had their own rules. MADem Aug 2015 #36
Yeah, there is definitely an issue there with Huma's employment as special employee askew Aug 2015 #43
CNN is not the best place to learn law jberryhill Aug 2015 #62
jury results for your post grasswire Aug 2015 #77
So the FBI investigation is a ruse, meant to distract us with shiny things while they go after Huma? cherokeeprogressive Aug 2015 #79
We don't know that State allowed it. Clinton campaign refuses to answer questions about askew Aug 2015 #26
I think State did allow it. They would know that she didn't even have a .gov address TwilightGardener Aug 2015 #30
Some peons may have known. But, they weren't in any position to do anything about it. askew Aug 2015 #39
It's because the vague term "government policy" is meaningless. MADem Aug 2015 #27
Except it is false to say that FOIA's can't be sought through private accounts, so her using a pnwmom Aug 2015 #67
Putting her in power will be subjecting us to years of investigations. AppalachianLeftist Aug 2015 #10
Drip, drip, drip, drip, drip... John Poet Aug 2015 #14
Who gives a damn what that judge "thinks", Darb Aug 2015 #15
uh, she alost certainly does, and so do voters. cali Aug 2015 #17
Hillary and her lawyers probably give a damn what that judge thinks. AppalachianLeftist Aug 2015 #18
And stop with the steaming bullcrap about hohow it's carrying right-wing water cali Aug 2015 #19
Nobody cares about email except the republicans and Karl roves little helpers saturnsring Aug 2015 #29
you want to delude yourself, feel free. but that is simply false cali Aug 2015 #33
I'm sorry you're correct republicans care saturnsring Aug 2015 #37
lol. bullshit cali Aug 2015 #47
Google it saturnsring Aug 2015 #50
It is a poor substitute for reasons to vote for their favored candidate, but I guess those arguments MADem Aug 2015 #51
And such seething negativity... LuvLoogie Aug 2015 #80
If that's running in IA, that's fantastic! MADem Aug 2015 #82
Old School Midwestern Democrat--All In LuvLoogie Aug 2015 #83
Well, her only crime is violating US law... nt Romulox Aug 2015 #23
Since when is "may have violated government policy" magically transformed into "violating US law?" MADem Aug 2015 #31
The handling of Top Secret material is regulated by Statutory Law, not mere "policy". nt Romulox Aug 2015 #32
Then why is the judge using the word "policy?" Surely a judge knows the difference. Pffft. nt MADem Aug 2015 #38
I don't think this article is about the classified angle, that's being handled by the FBI and DOJ. TwilightGardener Aug 2015 #42
The poster would do well to not try to convolute issues--it makes it seem as though he is working MADem Aug 2015 #48
I believe they're seeking email between Clinton and her top aides, who all had accounts on TwilightGardener Aug 2015 #52
Didn't she travel with them? Seems a bit like overkill to email someone rather than MADem Aug 2015 #54
Breaches of governmental policy is not breaking the law or a "crime"....folks need to read. Fred Sanders Aug 2015 #59
When there is magical thinking then everything is a crime? Fred Sanders Aug 2015 #58
K & R !!! WillyT Aug 2015 #28
Shame the comment from the judge has no bearing on the actual work surrounding the servers Godhumor Aug 2015 #46
Don't forget about the scandal of whitewater ... Omg whitewater saturnsring Aug 2015 #49
VINCE FOSTER LIVES!!! randome Aug 2015 #60
We need to dig up video of Dan Burton shooting melons simulating his assassination msanthrope Aug 2015 #65
It's pathetic that some of you are so gleeful about the slightest molehill... randome Aug 2015 #61
Judicial Watch..... that's all that need be said. & T msanthrope Aug 2015 #66
This is Larry Klaymen/Judicial Watch bullshit OKNancy Aug 2015 #63
Very sad, very disgusting...unfortunately, predicatable. Some people don't care about either MADem Aug 2015 #69
Judicial Watch? You've now gone to Judicial Watch? That's sad. nt msanthrope Aug 2015 #64
I'm so sick of this email shit kacekwl Aug 2015 #68
She followed the same policy as BlueMTexpat Aug 2015 #70
And now, evidently, it's okay if a Democrat does it.. frylock Aug 2015 #73
There is no there there. BlueMTexpat Aug 2015 #74
Yeah. Been hearing that for months now.. frylock Aug 2015 #76
I'm so old... OilemFirchen Aug 2015 #71
What a shock ! DURHAM D Aug 2015 #72
Doesn't sound right HassleCat Aug 2015 #78
blah blah blah media, politico, this primary is too "boring" ericson00 Aug 2015 #81
I'm not seeing a thread for this so I'll, respectfully, toss it here Babel_17 Aug 2015 #84
What I don't get about these politicians TransitJohn Aug 2015 #87
Ethics work something like keys to door locks HereSince1628 Aug 2015 #88
... SidDithers Aug 2015 #91
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»In FOIA hearing, federal ...»Reply #16