Hillary’s email caper: She had inside help

Loading

hillary shrugs

 

If the following is accurate, someone besides Hillary is in really deep sh*t. Former State Department officials have called Hillary Clinton email assertions “total BS.”

Former State Department security officials don’t buy Hillary Clinton’s latest alibi that she couldn’t tell that government e-mails — which she improperly, if not illegally, kept for several years on an unsecured home server — contained top-secret information because they lacked official markings and weren’t classified until later.

Such messages contain sensitive “keywords” distinguishing them from unclassified information, even if the material didn’t bear a classified heading as she claims.

The secretary would have known better, the department ­officials say, because she was trained to understand the difference when she was “read in” on procedures to ID and handle classified information by diplomatic-security officials in 2009.

Clinton also went through a so-called “read-off” when she left ­office in 2013. In that debriefing, security officials reminded her of her duty to return all classified documents, including ones in which the classification status is “uncertain,” which would have included the e-mails stored on her private server — which she only this month turned over to authorities. The read-off would have included her signing a nondisclosure agreement.

Former Attorney General Mike Muskasey says that it’s “inconceivable” that most of Clinton’s emails weren’t classified.

Courtesy of the Washington Free Beacon, here is a montage of how Hillary Clinton’s email mendacity evolved.

[youtube]https://youtu.be/QMB7vohrBAI[/youtube]

She did have classified information in her emails. Top secret information at that.

At least two classified messages on Hillary Clinton’s home-brew email server contained top-secret intelligence including signal intercepts and information from keyhole satellite conducted by the CIA and the Pentagon’s satellite-spying National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency.

U.S. Intelligence Community Inspector General Charles McCullough reported to Congress on Wednesday that the sensitive information dated from 2006 and 2008, and was ‘classified up to “TO.PSECRET//SI/TK//NOFORN”.’

The last three designations refer to ‘Special Intelligence,’ ‘Talent Keyhole’ – a kind of satellite – and a prohibition on any non-Americans seeing the information.

She is supposed to know when something is “classified.” Her latest defense is that she’s an idiot who can’t recognize sensitive information. The million dollar question is “How did that information get onto her server?” It’s not a small thing. It’s everything.

A member of my family sent me a link to a segment of the Michael Savage show. You do want to listen to it:

[youtube]https://youtu.be/BpXRa4Clb-s[/youtube]

The satellite imagery data had to originate at the Department of Defense. It ended up on Clinton’s server. According to the callers on the audio the DoD intranet is NOT connected with the outside world. Security measures exist to prevent that from being a possibility. In order for Hillary for come into possession of this kind of data on her own homemade server someone would have had to download the information, place it on a device (like a thumb drive or SD card), take the device or card out of the SCIF , upload the information to a conventional server, PC or smartphone, strip off the classified labels and then email it to Hillary Clinton’s private server. It’s called spillage.

All of this is HIGHLY illegal.

If all this is accurate, Hillary had someone on the inside who knew what they were doing and knew it was wrong.

If all this is accurate, we’re going to hit 9 on the Richter scale.

Everyone’s been so focused on Hillary simply having classified information on her server I don’t think anyone’s addressed how that could even happen. Who sent the emails containing the classified information to Hillary? We do need to know. Remember how big a deal Valerie Plame was? This is way, way bigger.

Adding to the mystery- the State Department made no effort to secure Clinton’s server after it was hacked in 2013.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
92 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments


11870798_10153524141189029_5768853545980860497_n

Without reading beyond the first few lines — I for one can categorically STATE that I am really, really sick of hearing that some SOB in WA DC is in “really deep Sh-t” — I have heard this over and over for years — and — ‘blip’ >> NADA!

Actually — I just re-read the headline — “caper” — according to my dictionary is 1: “a playful leap or hop”, or 2: “An antic or prank” or 3: “A criminal undertaking” — or as a verb “to leap about or frolic”.

About time to drop the powder puffs and take the kid gloves off don’t ya think?

Since when does “caper” ==== ‘treason’? — inquiring minds demand to know!

Treason? You’re delusional. You still haven’t got evidence of anything, let alone treason.

Greg, your preposterous and, dare I say “delusional”, denials are wearing impossibly threadbare. With each passing day it seems the noose is tightening around Madame Secretary’s neck.

The Secretary of State’s very job is to traffic in sensitive, and frequently secret information relating to national security. While you and your ever-dwindling cohort of devoted fans of the Clinton Crime Syndicate are still plugging your ears and screaming “LA-LA-LA”, it is becoming clearer that this story has legs, and that your insistence that there is no there there is becoming more and more shopworn.

She had her server professionally cleansed . The investigation you persist in denying deduced this fact. This does not constitute a lack of evidence, rather it constitutes destruction of evidence and obstruction of an investigation. Just so you know, these are serious violations of the law. Irrespective of what might or might not be on her server, she’s already in a lot of trouble.

While it is too early in the proceedings to hazard a guess as to the specific charges to which Madame Secretary might be indicted, it appears that she is both unfit for our nation’s highest office, and should be measured for an orange jumpsuit. Given that the DOJ would be the ones to prosecute, I doubt the latter, and fervently hope that the former is deemed true by the voting populace.

@Greg: Hillary is going to be spending her time trying to stay out of jail instead of running for POTUS.

@Redteam:

I doubt DOJ will actually prosecute. They should, but I don’t think they will. She’ll more than likely be given a presidential pardon, and spend the rest of her days delivering shrill, unimaginably grating speeches for ridiculous amounts of money. Sucks to be the modern day Marie Antoinette, dontcha think?

@Me, #5:

While it is too early in the proceedings to hazard a guess as to the specific charges to which Madame Secretary might be indicted, it appears that she is both unfit for our nation’s highest office, and should be measured for an orange jumpsuit.

Too early for that, but apparently not too early for a finding of guilty. Guilt of something, Your Honor! No question about it! The verdict of the jury is unanimous! We’ll worry about some specific charges later, when and if we find something…

There’s better logic to be found in the average Marx Brothers movie.

@Wordsmith:
LOL

Unauthorized and not senate confirmed involvement with Hillary and many of her ‘secret’ sidekicks – ala known as Sid Blumenthal, Huma Abedin and also an ex-CIA agent (contractor interested in business related to Libya) – are three people who have the answers although one of them died just recently. Hmmmm…………..
The intelligence headers were removed – maliciously and intentionally – and the deceased individual – Drumheller – would know how to do that. What many also overlook is the fact that some of the ‘content’ of said top-security intelligence was also manipulated before being given to the investigative committee.

Since Huma Abedin triggered this investigation – reading and forwarding manipulated and headers removed top classified information – she has many answers. Who did she forward this data? She openly wrote an email on Hillary’s server about dates, times and places of the movement of Amb. Stevens before he was sacrificed at the altar of the secret Op ‘Zero Footprint’ together with the other americans. Why would Huma give such information on an unsecured server including such secret information.

The rest is history – Stevens did not make it, all overthrown governments in the middle east during Hillary and her 4 yrs being SOS in favor of the muslim brotherhood.

Huma Abedin is an active muslim brotherhood member – is she a ‘double and stealth agent’? Who else did she sent classified/top secret data to and being enabled to do so having access and an account on Hillary’s unsecured server?

Considering that General Ham – was fired – from his position of being the General in the AFRICOM command after attempting to rescue these four americans in Benghazi. It was his command that sent the Top secret satellite data among other and regarding Libya/Benghazi.

Being that the muslim brotherhood was involved in the Benghazi murder of our americans on that fateful day – Hillary and her malicious and intentional criminality can not throw Huma under the bus because she has and I Hillary biggest secret. Hillary wanted money for her family and their wallets and Huma wanted what (we don’t know yet)!
Now we known that her blindness and greed caused damage not only to americans stationed throughout the middle east – but national security as well.
May Huma Abedin be finally unmasked as well?

@Greg:

I said it APPEARS that she is unfit for the nation’s highest office, and should be measured for an orange jumpsuit.

You also realize that an indictment and a guilty finding are two different things, do you not?

You really make this too easy!

@cali:

with Hillary and many of her ‘secret’ sidekicks

Anybody know the whereabouts of Sandy Burglar?

@cali: And the White Mosque was in full compliance

@DrJohn:

OK, let’s say that “someone should be in deep sh*t” except for this overwhelmingly corrupt POS regime.

Would like to agree – but why the ‘exception’? would be better – as long as it is a bottomless pit of pig sh-t!

@DrJohn: She has violated the law.

Yes, so what does she do?
She calls it a dumb law:
She Tweeted this out:

Hillary Clinton ‏@HillaryClinton Aug 21
From a former @TheJusticeDept official: “Our ridiculous classification rules” are the real problem: http://hrc.io/1UXaWd7

(Scan down to Aug 21st.)

Great attitude for a president, no?
Laws I don’t like are ”dumb” laws.
So, I’ll just ignore them.
We’ve already had 6+ years of a president with this attitude.
No thanks for any more.

@DrJohn, #10:

She had classified information on her private server.

That assertion has been repeated ad nauseam, but has yet to be established as a fact. Even presumably authoritative sources such as the IG have used vague words couched in uncertainty.

It has not been established that she has broken the law. No one has stated specifically what law has been violated, nor has anyone stated specifically what the violations have been.

@Me: Greg always makes it easy

It wouldn’t be so easy for you to state the specific laws that were broken and list the specific evidence that supports the accusations. You’ve got nothing but second-hand opinions, based on a few vague statements and a lot of intentionally damaging speculation.

WHY did she have the private server in the first place? As much as HOW the classified information got on it, this, too, is a very pertinent (to her character and intentions) to the discussion.

Most likely, it was so she could kill any incriminating or unflattering information. She is scum.

For the same reason that a number of republican presidential hopefuls also had and conducted official business using private servers? For the same reason that the Bush administration made extensive use of private servers?

Using a private server was legal at the time. If we’re going to start assuming nefarious motives, there will be plenty of people to investigate.

She is scum.

The leaders of lynch mobs are scum. Their followers are often only angry and stupid, but that doesn’t absolve them of all responsibility.

You want people to believe Clinton broke the law? Prove it. Accusations are a dime a dozen. Standards have fallen so far that people feel no shame about making them without having a shred of actual evidence to back them up. Knock one accusation down, and it just pops up again somewhere else. The burden of proof, though, still lies with the accuser. Those accused must be proven to be guilty, not innocent. At least in America.

@Greg:

@Greg:

It’s never legal to put classified information on a private server.

@Greg:

Greg

Let’s try this one at a time.

1. Did Hillary have a secret email account?

@drjohn, #24:

Yeah. And there’s still nothing establishing the fact that she actually did so.

@Greg:

Yeah. And there’s still nothing establishing the fact that she actually did so.

So, like all your other responses, “Yes, but no.”

@Greg:

Using a private server was legal at the time. If we’re going to start assuming nefarious motives, there will be plenty of people to investigate.

You have campaigns using private servers. You have individuals using private servers. You have officials using private servers for their personal emails.

Hillary conducted the business of the State Department on a secret, private server. This, of course, AFTER she criticized all the OTHER private servers.

Furthermore, despite all the various ways and excuses you concoct to justify the practice, she had highly classified, sensitive intelligence information on her unauthorized, secret, unsecured server. Some of that intelligence implicates individuals as having providing it. Some of it specifies the methods of collection of the intelligence. Unless you want to make the argument that Hillary is too stupid to know better, she jeopardized national security (time will tell if any actual breaches occurred, but at least one hacking has been documented) for the sake of having the option to delete anything she would not like becoming public.

Sorry… that’s scum in my book.

Knock one accusation down, and it just pops up again somewhere else.

Your problem is that not a single accusation has been knocked down yet. Not a one. Every accusation still stands as, if not likely, already proven. Hillary is not worthy to empty the garbage cans in the State Department, much less be responsible for the most highly secret intelligence of the country.

Scum, Greg. Scum.

It’s not the responsibility of an accused person to prove their innocence. It’s up to their accusers to establish that they’re guilty of something. Particularly when their accusers have a long history of making politically motivated accusations, none of which have been proven to date.

@Greg: Do you think that it’s reasonable to assume that Obama is going to order the justice dept to arrest Hillary? That’s the only path to a trial for her. Do you think that all the persons, including you and me that know she has broken laws, will get the chance to testify against her? You imply by your statements that she has committed a crime only if she is tried and convicted. A lot of horse thieves never got trials nor were convicted, but were surely guilty and swung from the nearest tree. It just depends on whether the persons that make decisions in those cases want to bring them to trial.
If a person is robbing a bank and gets shot and killed while committing the robbery and dies. Was he guilty of being a bank robber, technically no because he wasn’t ‘tried’. Was he a bank robber? Definitely. Is the standard of whether Hillary is a crook whether she has committed a crime, or whether she has technically been convicted. We know she has committed crimes, we are not on a jury.

@Greg:

. It’s up to their accusers to establish that they’re guilty of something.

It has been clearly established many times.

DrJohn, it is entirely possible that although the Admin knows all this, as does Hillary and all her minions, Clinton holds information which would be gravely damaging to Obama, . . . on Benghazi, etc. The Clintons can fry Obama’s legacy. Clintons didn’t trust Obama/Jarrett and that is why they kept an off-site private server. Obama let her, but that, IMHO, was a Catch 22 event. 2 fraudsters and liars caught in a web of deception.

I don’t believe for one minute that she has no full and complete copy of her server. She has one somewhere. It holds evidence and that is why she had it off site. One of Slick’s friends probably has it well preserved somewhere safe. There may have been evidence of the back-up to the back-up in Denver, but it’s now long gone. The investigation was launched too late, on purpose.

And this is why Clinton won’t get charged by this Admin. L. Lynch will do as she’s told by Jarrett — proving that she, Lynch, is corrupted.

Obama and Clinton may well be in a stalemate.

She’ll survive, but the damage will make her attempt to ascend to the Oval Office a futile exercise.

@Redteam, #32:

It has been clearly established many times.

The only thing that has been established is that a lot of people are making claims repeatedly without having a single, solitary bit of reliable evidence to back them up. There’s nothing bouncing around inside the echo chamber but hearsay.

You are all wasting your time with Greg. He will always defend his Democrat masters like a good operative troll should. even when his protestations defy all logic and knowledge about how classified information IS to be treated.

The security flags that were illegally removed, were removed by someone who knew that government servers handling is designed to automatically block such flagged emails from being sent from secured systems outside to the unsecured web. This someone can eventually be be found through a computer forensics investigation of government server IP routing records as well as all servers the emails were routed through on their way to Hillary’s computer.. Those persons when found will likely turn evidence on who ordered them to remove the security protections. Wiping Hillary’s server does not remove the IP routing information from any other computer it was in contact with. It is only a matter of time until computer forensic investigators find the evidence. Greg can continue to spread his idiotic pablum all he wants, this is not like the old days when all you had to do was destroy the evidence in your possession to wipe all traces.

Frankly, the only thing I see that could save Hillary, is a presidential pardon. a Hillary enamored crew of experienced hackers, or perhaps a massive EMP attack on the US. I have my doubts that Obama and Jarrett will lift a finger to help Hillary. Although with Obama and Kerry’s dangerous and asinine Iran deal coupled with open borders, the EMP attack scenario is a relatively remote possibility if IRAN and it’s allies can create and smuggle enough suitcase nukes into key areas. I’d give the hackers a better chance of success.

@Greg:

The only thing that has been established is that a lot of people are making claims repeatedly without having a single, solitary bit of reliable evidence to back them up. There’s nothing bouncing around inside the echo chamber but hearsay.

Greg. Have mercy. She DID have a secret server, did she not? One that was only revealed (not turned over by her voluntarily after she resigned as Secretary) by the hacker, Luciffer?

This server DID have classified information on it, did it not?

There were State Department business emails (in possession of Blumenthal) that Hillary did NOT turn over… emails that contained sensitive information… were there not?

She DID have this server professionally wiped clean long after all this controversy and these accusations arose, did she not?

You are simply going to have to face the fact, Greg, that Idol II is a false one as well and she is swirling the drain. Idol I has already annointed her replacement, Genius Joe.

She’s toast. Burnt toast.

@Bill:

And of course having the server wiped, when it can already be proved that classified information was sent to and from it, …well now, Hillary should already know full well that the cover-up of a crime, is itself a crime as is willful destruction of evidence and interfering with an investigation, both of which are; Crimes.

@Bill:

So, like all your other responses, “Yes, but no.”

@Bill:

So, like all your other responses, “Yes, but no.”

Wonder if Greggie has any bananas?

The cover up is to hide her stupidity. The contents and classification of the emails is a decoy. She may wiggle out of this unless her stupidity and total lack of common sense is exposed. This will not be easy to do if they focus only on distractions. Joe Biden may be a designed distraction. The democrats do not want to lose the opportunity to be the party that put the first black man and first woman in the white house in consecutive presidential cycles. It is all hands on deck to make this a reality.

Greg, at #30:

It’s not the responsibility of an accused person to prove their innocence. It’s up to their accusers to establish that they’re guilty of something. Particularly when their accusers have a long history of making politically motivated accusations, none of which have been proven to date.

Perfect thing to tell Sen Harry Reid, Greg. (Remember all his false accusations about Romney?)
Even to this day he gets in front of the Senate so as to lie and be safe from prosecution.
Today it was the tie-in between ticks, moose die offs and global warming.
Actually, lack of hunting moose led to a natural die off because too many moose were competing for the same ecosystem’s food.
Hunting, properly tied to wild populations, keeps a balance between food supply and animal populations.

@Budvarakbar:

well the left has been in control of the dialogue for that amount of time, and they cover for Stalin and openly say they admire mao… so that might explain it for you..

after all barney had a boyfriend who was a male prostitute that ran a business out of his apartment, and when that hit the fan, he got the man hired as a congressional aid (or some similar) and now barney is the head of home loans and all that…

oh… and palin, she didnt abort her child… so she is in the real crapper…

see a pattern?

@Greg:

yeah.. exposing state secrets in an unsecure server ran by people without the added expertise to make it secure is not treason… facilitating the distribution of state secrets is not treason any more than when the rosenbergs distributed state secrets..

oh, and before you say that the server is secure… i work in research computing, and i can tell you that a person who cant operate a fax machine is not the kind of person you want to be in charge of securing state secrets on an unauthorized server which can easily be hacked by outside states… (While being married to a man who went to college in the soviet union on a fulbright scholarship instead of serving in vietnam)

you can be sure that ashley madison had better security…
how so?
look at the expenditure… and that commercial software has backdoors in it, or did you conveniently miss that so that you can assert stupid on a constant flow?

@Greg:

yeah.. and you aplly that kind of thing evenly and without prejudice.. which is why zimmerman was not guilty, why cosby is not guilty, why oj s@Greg:

said the man who thinks stalinist trials are a good thing as long as he is not behind the table being the subject of such legal things.

and you stand up for the duke kids? the fraternities? Cosby? Lattimore who coinned mcarthyism in his book only to be found out a spy… and so on and so on…

tovarish… your loyalty is never rewarded, only used..
the soviets had a saying that fits you (actually they had a lot of them suitable for you):

You cannot break through a wall with your forehead.
[but you can keep trying tovarish]

@Greg:

It has not been established that she has broken the law. No one has stated specifically what law has been violated, nor has anyone stated specifically what the violations have been.

wrong…
what hasnt been established is whether they will prosecute

U.S. Code Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 101, Section 2071
Paragraph (a)
(a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both. [1]

and in terms of serving in office:
Paragraph (b)
(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States.

its been well established that she or one of her people made changes to conceal the status of said emails… that would be cosidered a form of mutilation, concealment, removal, and obliteration… the same can be said of wiping the emals… after all, the alleged criminal cant decide what is evidence or not and delete what they call non evidence without examination, which she ADMITTED she did when she said that these mails were personal. since when do you get to delete personal in an investication… i bet your friend jared from subway restaurant fame wanted to delete his personal stuff too…

she also violated Emoluments Clause…
since your a legal constititional social economic genius, you should understand the point of that.. right? but just in case:

Article VI of the Articles of Confederation
No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

which leads to:
Executive branch employees are subject to restrictions on the gifts that they may accept from sources outside the Government. Unless an exception applies, executive branch employees may not accept gifts that are given because of their official positions or that come from certain interested sources (“prohibited sources”).

A prohibited source is a person (or an organization made up of such persons) who: is seeking official action by, is doing business or seeking to do business with, or is regulated by the employee’s agency, or has interests that may be substantially affected by performance or nonperformance of the employee’s official duties.

which applies to her and her husbands organization which is getting tons of foreign money while she is in office…

Does a foreign government have business with the U.S. State Department?

Is a foreign government generally seeking official action by the U.S. State Department?

Qatar, for instance, spent more than $5.3 million on registered lobbyists while Clinton was secretary of state, according to the Sunlight Foundation. The country’s lobbyists were reported monitoring anti-terrorism activities and efforts to combat violence in Sudan’s Darfur region.

their defense was not that they didnt break the law, but that breaking the law was justified cause they were saving lives…

tell that to
U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens
U.S. Foreign Service Information Management Officer Sean Smith

heck… the last time such deaths occured where back in the 1970s… you know, with the most spectacular death being Ryan, who was a democrat from california visiting communist jim jones who murdered a huge amount of people who drank poisoned koolaid.. but given that jones was a communist, and in with the party, he is your kind of guy… and the senator was just an egg that needed to break to have progress..

Do not dig a hole for somebody else; you yourself will fall into it…

@Greg: Yeah. And there’s still nothing establishing the fact that she actually did so.

“The facts are pretty clear: I did not send nor receive anything that was classified at the time” – Hillary Clinton

except that she turned over how many emails from said account?
afther she said she deleted personal emails from said account?
of which the feds got a warrant without evidence (you do know that a warrant requires certain levels of evidentiary information to be signed and used, right?)

Hillary admited it by claiming she didnt use the account to send or recieve classified emails, which now has been established she did.

ie. saying that you didnt use X for Y and only used X for other things proves by her own admittance that such an account exists…

then going through the emails, finding classified documents she claimed didnt exist, kind of proves that she did use that account to send and recieve such emails, as they are there, and have been published and warrants issued to find more.

The inspector general revealed its findings in a letter to Congress this week, reporting the emails in question contained material from the intelligence community that was classified when it was sent.

when this went out, she then tried to claim that the stuff was not classified yet.
you realize that even her schedule is classified? right?

“What I’m hearing from the discussion that’s going on is that something that wasn’t classified should have been or maybe now should be, That’s a very different issue.” – Hillary Clinton

not really as the assertion was false… they have the originals which had the header, and removing a header violates that other law that forbids her to hold office.

your confusing slow wheels of justice with innocence…

@Budvarakbar:

its not that caper = treason
its that reason is minimized by calling it a caper..

Just as, normal business of an abortion center is not an attack when revealed to the public…

@Greg:

Bush administration made extensive use of private servers

what is it with you and moral relativism? not only that but cherry picking moral reletivism that leaves out differences that make a difference… the candidates are not in office, they are candidates, and so are not under the law for records keeping with the state department…

and it doesnt matter what he did.. the SAME CLAIM you make as to needing proof and conviction applies… except that his time to be baked for this crap is OVER and hillaries is still in process…

now here is the catch that you conveniently miss… the law was different in bush era and was changed by the democrats themselves and so, she is under the CURRENT LAW, not the PAST LAW

under the law prior to 2014 the following applied to bush:
Allows the incumbent President to dispose of records that no longer have administrative, historical, informational, or evidentiary value, once he has obtained the views of the Archivist of the United States on the proposed disposal. [does not apply to other offices under president]

Requires that the President and his staff take all practical steps to file personal records separately from Presidential records. [which is why he was not prosecuted and after that incident the democrats changed the law]

Since its passage, presidents have used various methods to avoid complying with the Act, including holding meetings away from the White House and “using non-government email accounts with lobbyists”
and so what did OBAMA do?

Executive Order 13489 – Issued by President Barack Obama on January 21, 2009, restored the implementation of the PRA of 1978 as practiced under President Reagan’s Executive Order 12667 and revoked President Bush’s Executive Order 13233.

so basically the reletivism your using is not accurate… the law was applied and of course presidents are and have different powers than secretary of state… so Obama put BACK the law the way reagan set it.

but then in 2014…
Presidential and Federal Records Act Amendments of 2014
a United States bill, amending the Presidential Records Act, signed into law by President Barack Obama. The act amends federal law regarding the preservation, storage, and management of federal records, specifically towards ensuring, prior to the release of records, the Archivist of the United States gives appropriate notice to both the current President of the United States and the President who was in office at the time the documentation was made

So this is a law the side you defend made and hung themselves with…
as i said the old russian saying..
dont dig a hole for someone else because you will fall into it

The last provision forbids officers and employees of the executive branch from using personal email accounts for government business, unless the employee copies all emails to either the originating officer or employee’s government email, or to an official government record system to be recorded and archived

so, the provision your trying to equate to bush did not exist with bush and did not exist till last year, and so covers current people in office, not people in the past. king george is safe…

The bill would prohibit the President, the Vice President, or a covered employee (i.e., the immediate staff of the President and Vice President or office advising and assisting the President or Vice President) from creating or sending a presidential or vice presidential record using a non-official electronic messaging account unless the President, Vice President, or covered employee: (1) copies an official electronic messaging account of the President, Vice President, or covered employee in the original creation or transmission of the presidential or vice presidential record; or (2) forwards a complete copy of the presidential record to an official electronic messaging account of the President, Vice President, or covered employee not later than 20 days after the original creation or transmission of the presidential or vice presidential record

you wanted the law quoted.. now you have several laws quoted..

Obama changed the law with the DEMS so that people could not do what was being done, and no, there is no granfather clause…. and no, the secretary of state does not get a mulligan

Section five of the bill would revise the definition of “records” for purposes of this Act to include all recorded information, regardless of form or characteristics

and

Section ten of the bill would prohbit an officer or employee of an executive agency from creating or sending a record using a non-official electronic messaging account unless such officer or employee: (1) copies an official electronic messaging account of the officer or employee in the original creation or transmission of the record, or (2) forwards a complete copy of the record to an official electronic messaging account of the officer or employee not later than 20 days after the original creation or transmission of the record. Provides for disciplinary action against an agency officer or employee for an intentional violation of such prohibition

again.. this was made law in 2014… 8 years after bush… so your SOOL (sh*t out of luck)…

why dont you quote law?

@Greg: The leaders of lynch mobs are scum. Their followers are often only angry and stupid, but that doesn’t absolve them of all responsibility.

really? So you admit your stupid but still scum?

the KKK was one of the strong arm groups of the Democrat Party of the south… you know, the guys that turned on the hoses and sicced the dogs, liek democrat bull connor?

A Short History of Reconstruction, (Harper & Row Publishers, Inc., 1990) by Dr. Eric Foner, the renown liberal historian who is the DeWitt Clinton Professor of History at Columbia University. Professor Foner is only the second person to serve as president of the three major professional organizations: the Organization of American Historians, American Historical Association, and Society of American Historians. [i am even using a liberal reference so you cant claim otherwise]

“I have never voted for any man who was not a regular Democrat. My father … never voted for any man who was not a Democrat. My grandfather was …the head of the Ku Klux Klan in reconstruction days…. My great-grandfather was a life-long Democrat…. My great-great-grandfather was…one of the founders of the Democratic party.” – Democrat Nathan Bedford Forrest, a Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan

On page 146 of his book, Professor Foner wrote: “Founded in 1866 as a Tennessee social club, the Ku Klux Klan spread into nearly every Southern state, launching a ‘reign of terror‘ against Republican leaders black and white.” Page 184 of his book contains the definitive statements: “In effect, the Klan was a military force serving the interests of the Democratic party, the planter class, and all those who desired the restoration of white supremacy. It aimed to destroy the Republican party’s infrastructure, undermine the Reconstruction state, reestablish control of the black labor force, and restore racial subordination in every aspect of Southern life.”

now what did you say about yourself?
Their followers are often only angry and stupid, but that doesn’t absolve them of all responsibility.

lets continue:
“White gangs roamed New Orleans, intimidating blacks and breaking up Republican meetings,“ wrote Dr. Foner on page 146 of his book. On page 186, he wrote: “An even more extensive ‘reign of terror’ engulfed Jackson, a plantation county in Florida’s panhandle. ‘That is where Satan has his seat,‘ remarked a black clergyman; all told over 150 persons were killed, among them black leaders and Jewish merchant Samuel Fleischman, resented for his Republican views and for dealing fairly with black customers.

and that wasnt the ONLY organization of the dems white supremicy and a racialist policy (the term racism itself was not coined till trotsky said it in his history of the soviet revolution in the 30s, though other terms of race, racialist, etc. did exist]

The Knights of the White Camelia was an American political terrorist organization that operated in the southern United States in the 19th century, similar to and associated with the Ku Klux Klan, supporting white supremacy and opposing freedmen’s rights.

they were the rich mans kkk… and terrorized the blacks… you can read the testimony in the congressional record of eliza pinkerston, whose husband has his throat cut open sounding like cutting leather she said… and who also had her baby drowned… and whom they cut her breasts off, all to prevent these people from voting republican…

now what did you say about yourself?
Their followers are often only angry and stupid, but that doesn’t absolve them of all responsibility.

The more aggressive people joined the White League or similar paramilitary organizations that organized in the mid-1870s

The White League, also known as the White Man’s League,[1] was an American white supremacist paramilitary terrorist organization started in 1874 to turn Republicans out of office and intimidate freedmen from voting and political organizing. Its first chapter in Grant Parish, Louisiana was made up of many of the Confederate veterans who had participated in the Colfax massacre in April 1873. Chapters were soon founded in other areas of the state and in New Orleans. During the later years of Reconstruction, it was one of the paramilitary groups described as “the military arm of the Democratic Party.”[2] Through violence and intimidation, its members reduced Republican voting and contributed to the Democrats’ taking over control of the Louisiana Legislature in 1876

glad your finally taking responsiblity… (what a marooon…)

@Redteam:

perhaps you should have said “Guilty as hell free as a bird?” Ayers on his bombing stuff before helping Obama…