Top Senate Democrat urges Clinton to address private email controversy

[Revmitchell]

The top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee urged former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to give a full explanation of why she used a private e-mail account for all her official correspondence during her four years as America's top diplomat.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., told NBC's "Meet the Press" Sunday that Clinton "needs to step up and come out and say exactly what the situation was," adding that from "this point on, the silence is going to hurt her."

Feinstein is the first major Democrat to urge Clinton to share details of the account's contents, some of which have been subpoenaed by a special House committee investigating the 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/201...-clinton-to-address-secret-email-controversy/

 

[777]

Well, Hillary is going to hold a brief press conference after some speech soon, so it sounds like she's listening to her old pal Di. But I don't expect her to say much, except maybe it was improper or stonewall it, like the Clintons tend to do.

The MSM is not on her side right now, but this press conference may allow Hillary to say in 2016 that she addressed the issue a year ago and answered all questions. *If* she gets away with it, then she was right all along that the Clintons are above the law.

 

[carpro]

Her comments will be somewhere along the lines of "What difference does it make?" If she comments at all.

 

[Don]

Her comments will be somewhere along the lines of "What difference does it make?" If she comments at all.

And that's pretty much what it was.

 

[Zaac]

And that's pretty much what it was.

This is a waste of time. There are no emails implicating her in anything. I don't even know why they are asking.

She goes four years using here own email account and they REALLY thought they were gonna find something she didn't want them to find.

Moving on.

 

[Don]

This is a waste of time. There are no emails implicating her in anything. I don't even know why they are asking.

She goes four years using here own email account and they REALLY thought they were gonna find something she didn't want them to find.

Moving on.

Oh, ye of short-sightedness.

They ALREADY found something. They found that she issues directives that she doesn't follow herself (do as I say, not as I do). They found that in violation of governmental directives, she chose to use a personal internet service (which, historically, do NOT employ the same security policy measures that government email systems use). They found that she backed up her email on a private server, which is in violation of ALL governmental records-keeping requirements and guidelines.

If we want to follow our potential commander-in-chief's example, then we should discontinue requiring our military and intelligence agencies from having to use government-controlled secure networks. Instead of requiring that our government/military use specific network servers, let's let them use whatever they want. I mean, what difference, really, does it make?

Seriously, Zaac, if you don't see the problem with this situation, then you're not nearly as smart as I was giving you credit for.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

Naw, he blew that. Every time I give him some credit, he makes me sorry.

If you can possibly suffer for for twenty minutes, the press is actually on her about this. There are some obvious plants in this Q&A session, but she is shown as a horrible speaker, and a complete slime ball.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_0ap9FPu5dk#t=652

 

[church mouse guy]

Doesn't this look like some sort of witch hunt?

 

[Don]

Doesn't this look like some sort of witch hunt?

There was a theory on some radio talk show last night that the Dems are actually looking for a way to sabotage Hillary, because they want Elizabeth Warren as the nominee....

 

[Zaac]

Oh, ye of short-sightedness.

They ALREADY found something. They found that she issues directives that she doesn't follow herself (do as I say, not as I do). They found that in violation of governmental directives, she chose to use a personal internet service (which, historically, do NOT employ the same security policy measures that government email systems use). They found that she backed up her email on a private server, which is in violation of ALL governmental records-keeping requirements and guidelines.

If we want to follow our potential commander-in-chief's example, then we should discontinue requiring our military and intelligence agencies from having to use government-controlled secure networks. Instead of requiring that our government/military use specific network servers, let's let them use whatever they want. I mean, what difference, really, does it make?

Seriously, Zaac, if you don't see the problem with this situation, then you're not nearly as smart as I was giving you credit for.

Now where on earth did you read that I don't see a problem with it? :laugh:

I'm just saying it's a waste of time. There is nothing there. Like anyone is surprised that government officials break the law.

When is the last time Congress passed a budget? They all do what they want when it suits their needs.

This is about politics and there's nothing there that's gonna implicate her in anything.

 

[Zaac]

Doesn't this look like some sort of witch hunt?

Yep.

A waste of time witch hunt. She's smarter than this.

This is free press and it makes it look again like the GOP is desperate and out to get her because they are afraid their potential candidates can't beat her if she's the Dem nominee.

This is textbook Clinton. Stop playing the game.

 

[Zaac]

There was a theory on some radio talk show last night that the Dems are actually looking for a way to sabotage Hillary, because they want Elizabeth Warren as the nominee....

No they don't. That was no doubt leaked by a GOP person trying to generate a story. Hillary is the overwhelming desired candidate in Dem circles. And she will be the nominee if she wants to be.

 

[church mouse guy]

There was a theory on some radio talk show last night that the Dems are actually looking for a way to sabotage Hillary, because they want Elizabeth Warren as the nominee....

Yeah, this is coming from the left and being led by the left. It has found a home in the New York Times, a former newspaper. It looks like some sort of a witch hunt.

I can't see that Cherokee Woman can take the Democrat nomination away from Grandma Hillary.

 

[777]

The NY Times broke the story:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/03/u...department-raises-flags.html?smid=tw-bna&_r=0

Her performance at the press conference, if you can call it that, was stilted and forced.

 

[Zaac]

The NY Times broke the story:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/03/u...department-raises-flags.html?smid=tw-bna&_r=0

Her performance at the press conference, if you can call it that, was stilted and forced.

The story started with the GOP and Benghazi. This woman was SOS for four years. They were well aware that she wasn't using a White House email account.

They should be ashamed to even bring this to a reporters attention.

 

[777]

No, that's not how it went down:

Last October, the State Department, as part of the effort to improve its record keeping, asked all previous secretaries of state dating back to Madeleine K. Albright to provide it with any records, like emails, from their time in office for preservation.

*snip*

The existence of Mrs. Clinton’s personal email account was discovered by a House committee investigating the attack on the American Consulate in Benghazi as it sought correspondence between Mrs. Clinton and her aides about the attack.

Can't twist this one, it's not the GOP's fault that Hillary did this - there ARE Democrats on senate committees after all.

 

[Zaac]

No, that's not how it went down:



Can't twist this one, it's not the GOP's fault that Hillary did this - there ARE Democrats on senate committees after all.

No one said it was the GOP's fault that she used her own private email. Why would anyone say that?

I said the story started with the GOP and Benghazi. Isn't that what you just essentially posted too?

 

[777]

I'm tiring of the subject but it does look like you're just upset that she was caught.

The story started with the GOP and Benghazi. This woman was SOS for four years. They were well aware that she wasn't using a White House email account.

They should be ashamed to even bring this to a reporters attention.

Why should they be ashamed that Hillary broke her own policies, at the very least? Do you expect them to cover up for her again?

 

[Zaac]

I'm tiring of the subject but it does look like you're just upset that she was caught.

You may want to get your eyes checked then. :laugh: I never voted for her husband and wouldn't vote for her either. They fail my litmus test.

I'm upset that the American public is being made to endure a senseless witch hunt over private email when we all know why it's being pursued.

Why should they be ashamed that Hillary broke her own policies, at the very least?

Hillary doesn't create law anymore.

Do you expect them to cover up for her again?

I expect the GOP to keep throwing until something sticks. This just isn't gonna stick.

 

[777]

Well, if it "doesn't stick", it doesn't have legs and there's nothing to worry about then. If.

You may want to get your eyes checked then. :laugh: I never voted for her husband and wouldn't vote for her either. They fail my litmus test.

I didn't say you were a Clinton supporter, just that you were very defensive about this. You do come off as pro-DNC ( GOP is doomed in 2016, Obama is treated unfairly, etc) but since you're still here, what do you think about this?:

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/fox-gues...-inside-job-ordered-by-obama-valerie-jarrett/

mediaite is not a conservative site by any stretch but neither is AP or the NYT for that matter.