BREAKING! FBI to Reopen Investigation into Clinton Emails

See for yourself wrote:

I keep hoping someone - anyone! - can tell me why Hillary's email use is of such concern but the identical careless email use by members of Congress, which the Washington Post reported last July, is never discussed. And the identical careless use of emails by Colin Powell and Condi Rice got only brief mention. And no demands for investigation, let alone calls to lock them up. I genuinely wonder if anyone can explain the different treatment other than politics.

Here is the link for the Washington Post article:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/07/21/its-not-just-hillary-clinton-members-of-congress-are-careless-with-classified-material-and-their-own-records/

Powell and Rice did not practice the identical careless use of emails. Only Clinton used exclusively a private server. Powell and Rice did not. What members of congress used their own server to send/receive classified information?

leaping lanny wrote:

There is a huge difference here. Hillary deleted emails and destroyed the server AFTER there was a subpoena. Do you really think that is the same as Trump just not being able to produce 10-year-old emails? I would imagine most businesses delete old emails. The large company I work for automatically deletes emails once they are 6-months old. If an email has really important information, you can save it, but otherwise everything is automatically deleted.

No difference at all. Business records are required to be kept for 5-7 years for audit purposes.

Trump is guilty of email destruction. He does it as a matter of course to prevent the government from seeing them.

REPEAT: Trump is guilty of email destruction.

leaping lanny wrote:

Careless Email Destruction wrote:

TRUMP is guilty of destroying emails the demanded by government as part of lawsuit against him.

... more at link below

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/elections/2016/06/13/trump-accused-destroying-email-evidence-lawsuit-10-years-ago-republican-hillary-president/85795082/

There is a huge difference here. Hillary deleted emails and destroyed the server AFTER there was a subpoena. Do you really think that is the same as Trump just not being able to produce 10-year-old emails? I would imagine most businesses delete old emails. The large company I work for automatically deletes emails once they are 6-months old. If an email has really important information, you can save it, but otherwise everything is automatically deleted.

Wrong. Get your facts straight loser.

lax wrote:

not really dude wrote:

No, how someone talks doesn't make them an idiot. Not everyone is a trained speaker or career politician. Stuttering or babbling does not make you an idiot. Not knowing this makes YOU the idiot.

I hate hearing this. Whether you're a leader of a country or a business, public speaking is a critical basic skill. You need to be able to communicate effectively.

Want to lead a country or a company and you're not a natural public speaker? Take a freakin' Toastmasters class.

Interesting thought, but I don't know whether I agree. I at least would argue that being a good speaker doesn't make one a good leader. Look at Obama, he knows how to give a speech but there's not much actual content there. He's consistently pwned by foreign leaders (think "reset with Russia").

Were DJT's emails destroyed after a subpoena to testify?

Careless Email Destruction wrote:

No difference at all. Business records are required to be kept for 5-7 years for audit purposes.

Trump is guilty of email destruction. He does it as a matter of course to prevent the government from seeing them.

REPEAT: Trump is guilty of email destruction.

Apparently Lea wrote:

MarathonMind wrote:

apparently Huma used it to occasionally print work email at home.

More likely is that her soon-to-be ex-husband was spying on her emails to see if she was onto his sexting underage girls.

He could do this by using her email and password for an account using IMAP retention. IMAP are emails which are automatically retained on a server. POP messages can be downloaded and erased from a server. IMAP is how government emails should be sent and received to keep records of them. POP would be a no-no.

Uh, no. IMAP and POP are mail delivery protocols. Mail is sent using SMTP.

You can configure most any mail server to keep copies of emails received independent of the choice of mail delivery agent and protocol.

leaping lanny wrote:

See for yourself wrote:

I keep hoping someone - anyone! - can tell me why Hillary's email use is of such concern but the identical careless email use by members of Congress, which the Washington Post reported last July, is never discussed. And the identical careless use of emails by Colin Powell and Condi Rice got only brief mention. And no demands for investigation, let alone calls to lock them up. I genuinely wonder if anyone can explain the different treatment other than politics.

Here is the link for the Washington Post article:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/07/21/its-not-just-hillary-clinton-members-of-congress-are-careless-with-classified-material-and-their-own-records/

Powell and Rice did not practice the identical careless use of emails. Only Clinton used exclusively a private server. Powell and Rice did not. What members of congress used their own server to send/receive classified information?

According to a CNN report I found online: "The State Department inspector general released a memo after its own review of private email practices by others, reporting it found two emails on Powell's private email and some on accounts of aides to former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that included classified information."

As for the members of Congress, please read the Washington Post link I posted.

Were any of these people issued a subpoena to testify about the emails prior to any deletion?

Rogue Warrior wrote:

Were any of these people issued a subpoena to testify about the emails prior to any deletion?

According to a PBS News Hour report:

"Secretary Powell did not keep any of his emails and has so far ignored requests to look on private servers.

We already knew that Secretary Colin Powell exclusively used an outside, personal e-mail account to conduct State Department business. The report confirmed that Powell “did not retain those emails or make printed copies.”

Powell’s team, like Clinton’s, has said he believed his emails could be found by searching the accounts of the State Department staffers who received them, an idea that is sharply criticized in this report.

The State Department has continued to look for Powell’s emails, requesting to connect with his Internet service provider. But, the inspector general wrote, as of May 2016, the department has not received a response from Powell or his staff."

Obama is so tied to AIPAC he now has the FBI destroying the career of Huma Abedin (a Palestinian Muslim), who is Hillary Clinton's 1st choice for Secretary of State.

Rogue Warrior wrote:

Were DJT's emails destroyed after a subpoena to testify?

Careless Email Destruction wrote:

No difference at all. Business records are required to be kept for 5-7 years for audit purposes.

Trump is guilty of email destruction. He does it as a matter of course to prevent the government from seeing them.

REPEAT: Trump is guilty of email destruction.

There was no way to prove when the subpoenaed documents were destroyed. Trump claimed it was done years ago. Trump has proven to be untrustworthy. The could have been destroyed the day of the subpoena.

I should have added, concerning your subpoena question: Powell apparently was not subpoenaed. The Republican led Congress which pushed the FBI to investigate Clinton, did not subpoena him and Republican FBI Director Comey did not extend his investigation of Clinton to include Powell even though he had handled his emails the same way she handled hers. The obvious question is why her conduct merited investigation by the FBI while his only merited an inquiry by the Inspector General which Powell stonewalled. And his stonewalling did not lead to a subpoena - or to outrage from Trump and the Republican led Congress.

Dude with brain wrote:

Folks. Listen and listen good: This whole thing is just HRC/the media throwing Trump a bone to negate the "rigged" election talk. Guaranteed that by next Sunday, Comey and the FBI come out and state that there was nothing further found proving criminal intent by HRC.

Trump should not buy this, and continue pounding the rigged election talk to negate the negation attempt.

Damn I'm good. PERFECT, actually.

Carl B wrote:

Holy Crap. Do you just repeat whatever self serving nonsense the DNC says when caught in yet another scandal? It's word for word.. Any thoughts of your own on this topic?

How's it looking now Trump robots? Your boy likes "the swamp" just fine.

pop_pop!_v2.2.1 wrote:How's it looking now Trump robots? Your boy likes "the swamp" just fine.

You can't have it both ways! Make up your mind.

Do you want him to hang her, or let her go? He could do either one.