New York Times drops bombshell on Hillary Clinton’s use of private email at State Department

a reply to: angus1745

Neither of your assertions is a searchable record without a warrant, so if she is not brought up on charges, then her personal emails cannot be seized. Government email accounts, on the other hand, can be reviewed at any time by the federal government--crime or no crime.

It doesn't take a genius (and I'm absolutely not implying she is one) to know those facts and use them to plan a way to avoid emails being seized.

But I do think that there has to be an official email account for her--it's standard protocol to set one up for any new hire (or appointee, as the case may be). Whether or not it was used for her most incriminating correspondence, that's doubtful. She probably learned from her husband on that one.

a reply to: SlapMonkey

Are they her personal emails when she is acting as Secretary of State?
Property of the Government regardless, they are not her personal emails.

Passing classified information on Hotmail?

a reply to: burntheships

I'm quite certain that this is a grey area, but could be wrong. But I would agree that, at the level of Secretary of State, all official correspondence, whether private text or snail mail, should be searchable without a warrant.

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
This story continues to blow my mind. I just realized that Obama HAD to have known about this! Did Hillary have his balls in a vice or what? Why didn't he DEMAND that she obey the law? If what we're hearing is true (and I believe it is), then he is 100% complicit and should be held responsible.

Everyone knew, most likely the majority of people didn't care. It's a minor thing, and these people aren't technological whizzes. They don't care about things like email security and it's unlikely any of them even understand concepts like Yahoo being extremely unsecure. I would bet every dollar I have and will ever have that other nations were using our backdoors the NSA had put into Yahoo to read Hillarys official email.

Obama probably knew but he's not a techie, remember when he demanded (and got his way) to use a Blackberry despite it being very unsecure? I can give the politicians a pass here, I can't give a pass to the IT people that allowed it.

originally posted by: angus1745
Firstly, there is no way she deliberately set out to use a private e-mail account with a view to later deleting any incriminating correspondence from her account. Nobody in their right mind could assume that no other copies of those e-mails exist anywhere. Not on any server or on any other computer. Hell of a powerful delete button she must have there.

Unlikely. This was almost certainly her reasoning. Every politician in office has various tricks to stop everything from coming out and this was one of hers. She probably even picked it up from someone else while they were in the Senate together.

Um...

Do we know what percentage of her email activity was done on personal accounts? For all we know it might have been a small percentage.

Also, do people understand how email works? If Hillary sends a government employee an email, whatever she sent is in their inbox -- it went through Federal servers. There is record of it, and the government can look at it any time they want.

I'm guessing the contents of her private emails were just that -- private personal life stuff that she didn't feel needed to be transmitted via secure government email accounts. Where she wanted to go for lunch, personal off the record opinions of other people -- things that wouldn't matter to how well she does her job.

originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Granite

This is the most insane thing I've seen on ATS in days and that's quite an accomplishment:

Hillary's move is eerily reminiscent of Bush administration ploys as well. So much wrong with this, starting with the obvious intent of evading accountability and also, perhaps equally troubling is the disregard for security.

Well, I don't really think any intelligent voter would expect anything less from a politician, especially one running for the highest office. Lying, dodging accountability, disregard for security are qualities we should all expect from candidates today. We have come to count on knowing we can believe the opposite of what they say.

What worries me is that the NYT would turn on Hilary like this; it can only mean that they and the Elites they spin for have found someone even worse to put into the White Hut!

According to the news...Hill's non gov email was hacked,
and that revealed she was using it for passing classified information for cryin out loud

The New York Times reported Monday night that, during her tenure at the State Department, Hillary Clinton never used her official e-mail account to conduct communications, relying instead on a private e-mail account.

In March 2013, an adviser to Clinton, Sidney Blumenthal, had his e-mail hacked by "Guccifer" -- the Romanian hacker perhaps best known for revealing George W. Bush's paintings to the world. At the time, Gawker reported that Blumenthal was communicating with an account that appeared to belong to Clinton at the "clintonemail.com" domain. The content of some of those e-mails was published by RT.com.

Washinton Post


Hill is a walking, talking disaster for National Security,
and for that matter security of any kind,
including providing security to Benghazi.

She is incompetent!

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

And...please stop saying things like "politicians and news people both lie". It infers that because we know they lie, that the lying is acceptable.

Maybe you see it as acceptable, I don't. But most people let it go. People should be turning off NBC and whatever O'Reilly is on and letting those who run it know why. But most won't. They do see it as something to overlook.

To bad most people can't figure out that TV news is an opinion and people steering agenda, not news.

I don't find it acceptable at all...that was my point. And as far as the news goes, I know where you are coming from but I'd attack the politicians first and the news later. I'd rather get BS news from both sides and evaluate the situation for myself than turn it off entirely and allow the politicians to run more wild.

originally posted by: Pimpish
a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

Not when they are controlled by the dems. They just become accomplices of the criminals.

This kind of bi-partisan crap really annoys me. Wake up. Democrats and republicans are both working together to screw you. The republicans aren't any better than the democrats. The democrats aren't any better than the republicans. This whole "my party is better" nonsense is just that, nonsense.

You're right...both are corrupt. But unless you have a workable solution and a method of implementing it, we are stuck with choosing the lesser of two evils.

originally posted by: darkbake
The problem with being so polarized as a nation is that whenever something like this happens on either side it's blown out of proportion... like Blackmarketeer said, top Republicans do the same thing.

I know that both sides suck. But I'll call you on this. Please show me one link where a very high-ranking rep used their personal email account during their entire time of their position.

originally posted by: angus1745

This whole issue is ridiculous for a number of reasons.

Firstly, there is no way she deliberately set out to use a private e-mail account with a view to later deleting any incriminating correspondence from her account. Nobody in their right mind could assume that no other copies of those e-mails exist anywhere. Not on any server or on any other computer. Hell of a powerful delete button she must have there.

Second. It's safe to say with 100% certainty that the NSA will have records of all electronic communications of every single government official, Govt. e-mail account or not. So once you know that you have to concede there was no wrong doing being 'covered up' but when it comes to Hilary you can point these things out till you are blue in the face folk will still accuse the hell out of her. It's the same mentality as that idiotic Obama birth certificate carry-on.

The suggestion that someone using the wrong server to send e-mails cost lives and was some kind of earth shaking security breach is as mind bending as it is absurd. As I said though, because it's her, facts and common sense are jettisoned. Some people actively look for any crap they can throw at her. Things like lack of any evidence are no obstacle to these people. The worst part is the perpetrators of this nonsense are mainly other government officials. It's a schoolyard mentality being financed by our taxes. Funny nobody ever seems to object to that

There is also no way in hell that she used something unsecure like yahoo or hotmail. Another absurd suggestion designed to exaggerate and sensationalise this non-issue.

I'm no fan of Hilary. I do find this whole witch hunt nit-picking horse # ridiculous and annoying though. If it's not her it's the President. It never stops.

Sorry....just NO! The only reason to use a personal email when you aren't supposed to is to hide something or pre-empt the need to hide something. And as far as the NSA, they are at the command of the administration and can easily be told to lose any emails. There was a reason she did this...she isn't stupid. And it isn't a witch hunt looking for her or Obama to do something wrong...it is that they are doing something wrong and therefore, are the witches you speak of. They are both documented liars and therefore, can't be trusted. This is a small part of a huge conspiracy that likely involves both parties...but this one is the administration. So they are the current "king of the hill" and the target. Just as Bush was during his term.

If you have any stocks, or funds anything financial that are involved with YAHOO ; I'd dump them immediately...

I think they're about to have some massive IT issues, and catastrophic hard-drive/server crashes...

Just call it a hunch...

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
Um...

Do we know what percentage of her email activity was done on personal accounts? For all we know it might have been a small percentage.

Also, do people understand how email works? If Hillary sends a government employee an email, whatever she sent is in their inbox -- it went through Federal servers. There is record of it, and the government can look at it any time they want.

I'm guessing the contents of her private emails were just that -- private personal life stuff that she didn't feel needed to be transmitted via secure government email accounts. Where she wanted to go for lunch, personal off the record opinions of other people -- things that wouldn't matter to how well she does her job.

Not if it was sent from personal account to personal account. Then it is only in the cloud. Unless, of course, they were using Outlook or something to connect to their Gmail (or whatever). It would likely remain at Google (in Gmail's case) but the government has no problem telling businesses to provide email...I doubt they would have a problem telling them to lose emails. You know...in the interest of national security.

originally posted by: burntheships
According to the news...Hill's non gov email was hacked,
and that revealed she was using it for passing classified information for cryin out loud

The New York Times reported Monday night that, during her tenure at the State Department, Hillary Clinton never used her official e-mail account to conduct communications, relying instead on a private e-mail account.

In March 2013, an adviser to Clinton, Sidney Blumenthal, had his e-mail hacked by "Guccifer" -- the Romanian hacker perhaps best known for revealing George W. Bush's paintings to the world. At the time, Gawker reported that Blumenthal was communicating with an account that appeared to belong to Clinton at the "clintonemail.com" domain. The content of some of those e-mails was published by RT.com.

Washinton Post


Hill is a walking, talking disaster for National Security,
and for that matter security of any kind,
including providing security to Benghazi.

She is incompetent!

Or...the story (which I haven't heard about) is an excuse. If her account was "hacked", anything there is suspect. Sounds like a good lie to get oneself off the hook. Reasonable doubt.

a reply to: WeAreAWAKE

I believe the phrase you're looking for is, plausable deniability.

In case in matters...

The New York Times' Deceptive Suggestion That Hillary Clinton May Have Violated Federal Records Law

It Was Only After Clinton Left The State Department That The Law Concerning Private Emails Was Changed

President Obama Signed Update To Federal Records Act In 2014. The Presidential and Federal Records Act Amendments of 2014 became law on November 26, 2014. [Congress.gov, accessed 3/3/15]

National Archives Official: 2014 Federal Records Law Clarified How Private Email Should Be Handled. Among the "major points" in the 2014 law highlighted by the National Archives was: "Clarifying the responsibilities of Federal government officials when using non-government email systems." [Records Express, National Archives, 12/2/14]

2014 Federal Records Law Marked "The First Significant Changes To The Federal Records Act Of 1950." According to the National Archives, the 2014 law marked "the first significant changes to the Federal Records Act of 1950." [Records Express, National Archives, 12/2/14]

Law Signed "Two Years After Clinton Stepped Down." Criticizing the Times article's insinuation that Clinton violated the law, Daily Banter contributor Bob Cesca pointed out: "The article doesn't say which federal regulation, though. Why? Perhaps because the federal regulations went into effect in late November, 2014 when President Obama signed H.R. 1233, modernizing the Federal Records Act of 1950 to include electronic communications. It was signed two years after Clinton stepped down." [The Daily Banter, 3/3/15]

In their defense, the NYTimes did say may. Too bad those looking to crucify tend to miss the subtleties and tricks of the media. Or just can't read or reason.

ETA: This most recent outrage is kind of hilarious to me in general as the NSA is probably far more likely to be keeping tabs on private emails than government ones.

a reply to: Willtell

Emailing a foreign government on Yahoo.com

No wonder they knew about the Benghazi arms deals ahead of time !!

No wonder the Administration attempted to blame a video.

originally posted by: WeAreAWAKE

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
Um...

Do we know what percentage of her email activity was done on personal accounts? For all we know it might have been a small percentage.

Also, do people understand how email works? If Hillary sends a government employee an email, whatever she sent is in their inbox -- it went through Federal servers. There is record of it, and the government can look at it any time they want.

I'm guessing the contents of her private emails were just that -- private personal life stuff that she didn't feel needed to be transmitted via secure government email accounts. Where she wanted to go for lunch, personal off the record opinions of other people -- things that wouldn't matter to how well she does her job.

Not if it was sent from personal account to personal account. Then it is only in the cloud. Unless, of course, they were using Outlook or something to connect to their Gmail (or whatever). It would likely remain at Google (in Gmail's case) but the government has no problem telling businesses to provide email...I doubt they would have a problem telling them to lose emails. You know...in the interest of national security.

That ^. "Then it is only in the Cloud". And with that a mushroom cloud
exited each ear. Sending everything or anything conceivable as SoS---
between and maybe including *sensitive diplomatic communications,
and *a recipe to the UN Ambassador to El Salvador for sourdough
biscuits Through the Cloud is beyond appalling.
It would make me, if I was still running the Series One in Pohunk Illinois,
squirt a kitten a minute, claws OUT. The Cloud is the worst idea for
data security since the telephone party line, and implies guilt--- or
a level of technical ignorance that should get her laptops mulched.
I hope everybody who can add single-digit, whole numbers gets a
good whiff of this... and does the proper ghost dance after painting.

I'm sure this will inspire all new tirades about the corruption of the Bush Administration and how dishonest the Republican party is ...

Colin Powell Relied on Personal Emails While Secretary of State

Like Hillary Clinton, former Secretary of State Colin Powell also used a personal email account during his tenure at the State Department, an aide confirmed in a statement.

“[B]He was not aware of any restrictions nor does he recall being made aware of any over the four years he served at State,” the statement says. “He sent emails to his staff generally via their State Department email addresses. These emails should be on the State Department computers. He might have occasionally used personal email addresses, as he did when emailing to family and friends."

And even moreso, the account he used has been CLOSED??? What is he HIDING!!!!

The account he used has been closed for a number of years. In light of new policies published in 2013 and 2014 and a December 2014 letter from the State Department advising us of these polices, we will be working with the department to see if any additional action is required on our part.”

Unbelievable!

ADDED IN EDIT ... wait, you mean (see bolded text) these policies didn't to into place until after Clinton left office???

Huh.