A Quick Lesson in Clintonese
Turns out the investigation into Hillary Clinton’s email server is actually an investigation and not a security inquiry as Clinton calls it. After all, she learned from the best. It is my hope that no charges will be filed, but sometimes words really have meaning.
Even though Hillary Clinton has repeatedly described the FBI probe over her use of a private email server as a “security inquiry,” FBI Director James Comey today questioned the use of that phrase.
“I don’t know what that means,” Comey told reporters today in Washington, D.C. “We’re conducting an investigation. That’s the bureau’s business. That’s what we do.”
One reporter noted that former Secretary of State Clinton often refers to it as a “security inquiry.”
The word “investigation” — “it’s in our name,” Comey responded. “And I’m not familiar with the term ‘security inquiry.’”
Other people did it too, so it makes it fine
I don’t really care about this, so it’s officially Not An Issue. Or does that require a DL administrator to determine?
Shorter Comey “No, we really are investigating something. Seriously. You don’t spend two years and have nothing to show for it with just a security inquiry.”
OK –yawn– politician spins news about potential legal/moral problems in as positive a manner as possible (cf. Trump on Trump U., Romney on Bane Capital, Gringrich on PAC funded university courses, Obama on his wife’s raises at Chicago hospital).
In other words–dog bites man and Clinton is a politician.
I am shocked, I tell you, shocked.
In this case, nemski, I have to agree with the others: quit reaching.
Others used private email addresses but did not setup private servers, correct? If it is determined that emails mysteriously “disappeared” what then? If anything was lost or hacked (classified or unclassified) it is Secretary Clinton’s responsibility. She requested and approved the alternate process. My question is: if typically 1%,2%,5%, etc of unclassfied emails end up being classified upon later review shouldn’t all emails be treated as classified? Secretary Clinton had no right to establish a private server or use an alternate process. I don’t know why people constantly make excuses. She was wreckless. She was wrong.
@J “Others used private email addresses but did not setup private servers, correct?”
I don’t think that’s correct. I believe that virtually all of the Bush administration top people used private servers (Cheney, Rumsfeld, Powell, Rice,…). In fact, every Secretary of State prior to Kerry used private email. This was SOP.
“Other people did it too, so it makes it fine”
Nope. It just makes it rather routine. We all did it for various reasons. The primary reason is/was that it eliminated the need to carry 2 blackberries one for personal and one for official. When you must always be reachable or in constant contact you work with the systems you have available. You don’t always have access to the closed system except in the office. To all of us who have been in that situation, this is nothing, regardless of who wants to make big deal out of it.
Others rarely used email, some used private email addresses at times but they did not setup private servers. Another example of Secretary Clinton choosing her words carefully. She was wrong. Why can’t we just say that.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/mar/09/hillary-clinton/hillary-clinton-said-my-predecessors-did-same-thin/
“To all of us who have been in that situation, this is nothing, regardless of who wants to make big deal out of it.”
She was Secretary of State. Not a manager at a local financial institution etc. I am a Democrat. And she was wrong.
@J “…but they did not setup private servers.”
That’s a joke. Right???
You know… Cheney basically ran things from a high-secrecy bunker. You know that…. Right?
“Others rarely used email”
That’s another joke… Right???
“And she was wrong.”
Says who, and by what law? I think it was a genius idea to keep control of her email so that it would not become a playground for Republicans of ill will.
…and where are all the Cheney and Rumsfeld emails about the lies that got us into the Iraq war. We were told they could not be found. Why is that???
“You know… Cheney basically ran things from a high-secrecy bunker. You know that…. Right?”
There are no reports of Cheney having a private email server. You know that, right?
I really don’t think this is a big deal, or any deal at all, but that doesn’t stop you from being wrong. Nothing does.
@puck: Here’s a rundown of the laws she potentially broke. Again, I don’t care about this, but here y’all are once again pretending that because you (or in this case we) don’t care about it, nobody should.
http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/04/02/396823014/fact-check-hillary-clinton-those-emails-and-the-law
@a “There are no reports of Cheney having a private email server. ”
There are no reports of Cheney turning over his official emails to the government for record keeping as required by law. You know that Right??
Name another Secretary of State who setup a private server for government communication. Did Dick Cheney establish a private email server for government business that you are aware of? In either case, he wouldn’t be my gold standard. Why can’t we say she was wrong?
I’m sick and tired of hearing about her damn emails!
@LE: Yes, I do. That doesn’t make you right.
It also doesn’t make Hillary right. You know that, right?
By the way, here’s a link to what Cheney deleted from his non-private email:
https://harpers.org/blog/2008/01/the-emails-that-dick-cheney-deleted/
Now perhaps you might understand that Hillary basically did the same as Cheney. Is that our new standard for how our politicians are supposed to act?
@J “Why can’t we say she was wrong?”
OK. She was wrong. Now what? Who cares? Do you care? It doesn’t bother me… and frankly, I think it only really matters to political hacks.
Any email from or to the DOS was saved on DOS computers. So you’re only concerned about emails from one private server to another that may involve official business… Right? Fair concern… but it was still SOP, ever since the early ’80s.
Hillary’s usage was minor compared to what the scoundrels in the Bush admin were doing…
I’m not concerned about any of the email stuff. They hacked the government computers, so what difference does it make?
I’m concerned about people who wave away her weaknesses and then condemn others for mentioning them. Also, too, people who think Clinton is OK because she’s not as bad as Cheney.
This is akin to Pat McCrory defending his trans-bathroom law by saying PayPal should be boycotting Russia.
Yes I care. Maybe others feel I shouldn’t but I do.
Is it a deal-breaker, no. Is it a concern to me that she setup an entirely separate process that now is under investigation, yes. That’s enough from me on the subject. Everyone have a good night.
“Not a manager at a local financial institution etc.”
@jenr. I should have clarified. I was speaking about those of us who were members of various federal agencies. This was in Energy, DoD, NASA, NRO, etc. It wasn’t nefarious. It just what we did to execute the mission. From your perspective, you consider it wrong. From my perspective it was being efficient and effective. You are entitled to your view. I’m just not in agreement with it.
@Jenr – Since you asked..
…Name another Secretary of State who setup a private server for government communication.
Colin Powell and Condi Rice
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/03/07/state-dept-concludes-past-secretaries-of-state/209044
I believed they used personal email addresses but they did not setup private servers.
Wouldn’t that be a distinction without a difference? Even if they didn’t set up their own private server they used a company’s private server, which certainly is less secure because of the sheer number of people who have access to the server.
The private server provides the owner with control of the content. Some may see that as good for political purposes. Others see it as bad. I don’t see why the government should have to ask Secretary Clinton to provide them with emails and content which is theirs.
Grasping at straws I think is the relevant idiom.
My point originally was: why can’t we just say she was wrong? We seem to be unable to do so.
Unless you think she was right. In that case if you think setting up a private server for government communication is fine then we differ.
More than enough on this. I agree there a bigger issues for us to discuss. Everyone have a good day.
“You are entitled to your view. I’m just not in agreement with it.”
I feel the same way about speeding. The law is entitled to its view, I’m just not in agreement with it.
‘memba back when the Bush administration was caught “losing” 22 million emails from a server that was being run by the RNC and nothing happened?
Good times. That was back in 2008. If either party was interested in fixing this problem they could easily just make a law banning the use of non-gov’t email and servers for gov’t business and communication. But since they are not, consider this a made up problem because politicians, by their inaction, are completely ok with the status quo. Then they act outraged when it’s made public then fades away. Which indicates to me that most politicians are likely using private emails for gov’t communication.