Trump did not "avoid" taxes - he followed the law and took a loss

[Flopper]

Neither Trump or Clinton have been proven guilty of any crimes.

But Hillary Clinton has been transparent about her taxes, her sources of wealth, her charitable deductions-
and Donald Trump has not been transparent about his taxes, his sources of wealth and his charitable deductions.

Tricky Trump- less Transparent than Tricky Dick- quite the standard he is setting.

Hillary Clinton chooses carefully that about which she will be transparent. But you knew that.

Tricky Trump has decided not to be transparent about anything- but you knew that.

But Hillary Clinton has been transparent about her taxes, her sources of wealth, her charitable deductions-
and Donald Trump has not been transparent about his taxes, his sources of wealth and his charitable deductions.

Tricky Trump- less Transparent than Tricky Dick- quite the standard he is setting

HIllary deliberately and without oversight deleted thousands of emails she claims were solely personal in nature, after deliberately mixing official and personal emails together. She is quite selective about what she will be transparent.

Being transparent does not mean she should have turned over personal correspondence to a Republican wolf pack. The first lie about this issue is that she deleted the 30,000 emails. A team of lawyers combed through 60,000 emails deleting personal correspondence. She had every right to do so and doing otherwise would be just plain stupid.

Oh, but of course. You do realize, don't you, that there would have been no need for anyone to comb through anything had she simply dedicated a government email account on government supplied servers to official business, having them secured, automatically backed up and easily made available with no fuss and no controversy? That easy, non-controversial method she did not use. Instead, she deliberately mingled personal and official business on one account on a single server which she alone controlled. How convenient when accountability comes knocking. "So sorry, but I just can't give you any of these emails until I go through and delete everything I don't want you to see". Very convenient.

I think it was a mistake for her to have a private server which she has admitted and takes responsibility. However, even if she had used a government server, she still would have had the option to delete personal emails. Government policy puts the responsible for determining business from personal email on the employee, thus she had every right to delete her personal emails.

The fact is there is so much information available about Hillary, much of it directly from her, the opposition has a goldmine of data to create accusations but not proofs of wrong doing. From the Republican investigation of 1993 White House Christmas Card list to the Clinton Email Scandal today, Republicans have been trying to discredit Hillary for decades but not very effectively.

 

[Flopper]

I recall posts from Hillary sycophants attempting to make the case that she did nothing wrong because she has not been convicted of a crime. Using their standard, Trump's as clean as she is.

Neither Trump or Clinton have been proven guilty of any crimes.

But Hillary Clinton has been transparent about her taxes, her sources of wealth, her charitable deductions-
and Donald Trump has not been transparent about his taxes, his sources of wealth and his charitable deductions.

Tricky Trump- less Transparent than Tricky Dick- quite the standard he is setting.

Hillary Clinton chooses carefully that about which she will be transparent. But you knew that.

Compared to Donald Trump, Hillary has been exceptional transparent. More so than most candidates. While Trump has yet to release a single tax return, Hillary has released over 15 years of tax returns. While Trump has refused to release information about the Donald Trump Foundation, the Clinton Foundation has published details online including tax returns, audited annual reports, top donors and list a of all major projects. Trump refuses to release any information about any of the operations of the Trump Organization other than claims to illustrate his great successes. He even refuses to give a straight answer to inquires of his net worth. As I said, Hillary is the most transparent presidential candidate we have had in 50 years. And Donald Trump remains one of the least transparent.

Well, except for things like making a killing in the futures market (on her first try, then never doing it again), the disappearing (and reappearing conveniently after the statue of limitations ran out) Rose Law Firm records, and of course, the thousands upon thousands of emails deleted with no oversight from the server containing the official emails of the Sec State. But hey, she's transparent all right. With everything she wants to be.

Hillary has addressed this in one her books and probably in interviews. It was also investigated by the Chicago Mercantile Exchange. Republicans raised this issue, accusing Hillary of doing something wrong, although they couldn't decide what, when her husband ran for governor and again when he ran for president. The commodity trade issue came up again when Hillary ran for Senator and now it comes up when she runs for president. Although there is no proof Hillary did anything wrong, Republicans bring it up with each election. We use to call accusations repeated over and over with no proof a smear campaign. However, such behavior is so common today, most candidates and voters tend to ignore it as just more garbage.

 

[hadit]

Hillary Clinton chooses carefully that about which she will be transparent. But you knew that.

Tricky Trump has decided not to be transparent about anything- but you knew that.

But Hillary Clinton has been transparent about her taxes, her sources of wealth, her charitable deductions-
and Donald Trump has not been transparent about his taxes, his sources of wealth and his charitable deductions.

Tricky Trump- less Transparent than Tricky Dick- quite the standard he is setting

HIllary deliberately and without oversight deleted thousands of emails she claims were solely personal in nature, after deliberately mixing official and personal emails together. She is quite selective about what she will be transparent.

Being transparent does not mean she should have turned over personal correspondence to a Republican wolf pack. The first lie about this issue is that she deleted the 30,000 emails. A team of lawyers combed through 60,000 emails deleting personal correspondence. She had every right to do so and doing otherwise would be just plain stupid.

Oh, but of course. You do realize, don't you, that there would have been no need for anyone to comb through anything had she simply dedicated a government email account on government supplied servers to official business, having them secured, automatically backed up and easily made available with no fuss and no controversy? That easy, non-controversial method she did not use. Instead, she deliberately mingled personal and official business on one account on a single server which she alone controlled. How convenient when accountability comes knocking. "So sorry, but I just can't give you any of these emails until I go through and delete everything I don't want you to see". Very convenient.

I think it was a mistake for her to have a private server which she has admitted and takes responsibility. However, even if she had used a government server, she still would have had the option to delete personal emails. Government policy puts the responsible for determining business from personal email on the employee, thus she had every right to delete her personal emails.

The fact is there is so much information available about Hillary, much of it directly from her, the opposition has a goldmine of data to create accusations but not proofs of wrong doing. From the Republican investigation of 1993 White House Christmas Card list to the Clinton Email Scandal today, Republicans have been trying to discredit Hillary for decades but not very effectively.

"Admitted" and "takes responsibility"? Hardly. She deliberately kept her official email traffic off the government network and on her own server, on which she mixed personal with official traffic. Then, when accountability came calling, it was, "So sorry, I simply can't let you see any of these until I delete the ones I don't want you to see".

 

[hadit]

I recall posts from Hillary sycophants attempting to make the case that she did nothing wrong because she has not been convicted of a crime. Using their standard, Trump's as clean as she is.

Neither Trump or Clinton have been proven guilty of any crimes.

But Hillary Clinton has been transparent about her taxes, her sources of wealth, her charitable deductions-
and Donald Trump has not been transparent about his taxes, his sources of wealth and his charitable deductions.

Tricky Trump- less Transparent than Tricky Dick- quite the standard he is setting.

Hillary Clinton chooses carefully that about which she will be transparent. But you knew that.

Compared to Donald Trump, Hillary has been exceptional transparent. More so than most candidates. While Trump has yet to release a single tax return, Hillary has released over 15 years of tax returns. While Trump has refused to release information about the Donald Trump Foundation, the Clinton Foundation has published details online including tax returns, audited annual reports, top donors and list a of all major projects. Trump refuses to release any information about any of the operations of the Trump Organization other than claims to illustrate his great successes. He even refuses to give a straight answer to inquires of his net worth. As I said, Hillary is the most transparent presidential candidate we have had in 50 years. And Donald Trump remains one of the least transparent.

Well, except for things like making a killing in the futures market (on her first try, then never doing it again), the disappearing (and reappearing conveniently after the statue of limitations ran out) Rose Law Firm records, and of course, the thousands upon thousands of emails deleted with no oversight from the server containing the official emails of the Sec State. But hey, she's transparent all right. With everything she wants to be.

Hillary has addressed this in one her books and probably in interviews. It was also investigated by the Chicago Mercantile Exchange. Republicans raised this issue, accusing Hillary of doing something wrong, although they couldn't decide what, when her husband ran for governor and again when he ran for president. The commodity trade issue came up again when Hillary ran for Senator and now it comes up when she runs for president. Although there is no proof Hillary did anything wrong, Republicans bring it up with each election. We use to call accusations repeated over and over with no proof a smear campaign. However, such behavior is so common today, most candidates and voters tend to ignore it as just more garbage.

Of course it keeps coming up, because there is no good answer for her tremendous "beginner's luck", which she apparently never tried to replicate.

 

[MaryL]

He lost nearly a billion dollars. That was not good. He was supposedly worth 10 billion. How many business went under, how many people lost their jobs and homes as a result? I don't want a person that can so flippantly loose so much and then pretend it wasn't a big deal, let alone just use it as an excuse NOT to pay taxes as if it's some kind of saving grace. Like Marie Antoinette said, let them eat cake? Really?

 

[Flopper]

Tricky Trump has decided not to be transparent about anything- but you knew that.

But Hillary Clinton has been transparent about her taxes, her sources of wealth, her charitable deductions-
and Donald Trump has not been transparent about his taxes, his sources of wealth and his charitable deductions.

Tricky Trump- less Transparent than Tricky Dick- quite the standard he is setting

HIllary deliberately and without oversight deleted thousands of emails she claims were solely personal in nature, after deliberately mixing official and personal emails together. She is quite selective about what she will be transparent.

Being transparent does not mean she should have turned over personal correspondence to a Republican wolf pack. The first lie about this issue is that she deleted the 30,000 emails. A team of lawyers combed through 60,000 emails deleting personal correspondence. She had every right to do so and doing otherwise would be just plain stupid.

Oh, but of course. You do realize, don't you, that there would have been no need for anyone to comb through anything had she simply dedicated a government email account on government supplied servers to official business, having them secured, automatically backed up and easily made available with no fuss and no controversy? That easy, non-controversial method she did not use. Instead, she deliberately mingled personal and official business on one account on a single server which she alone controlled. How convenient when accountability comes knocking. "So sorry, but I just can't give you any of these emails until I go through and delete everything I don't want you to see". Very convenient.

I think it was a mistake for her to have a private server which she has admitted and takes responsibility. However, even if she had used a government server, she still would have had the option to delete personal emails. Government policy puts the responsible for determining business from personal email on the employee, thus she had every right to delete her personal emails.

The fact is there is so much information available about Hillary, much of it directly from her, the opposition has a goldmine of data to create accusations but not proofs of wrong doing. From the Republican investigation of 1993 White House Christmas Card list to the Clinton Email Scandal today, Republicans have been trying to discredit Hillary for decades but not very effectively.

"Admitted" and "takes responsibility"? Hardly. She deliberately kept her official email traffic off the government network and on her own server, on which she mixed personal with official traffic. Then, when accountability came calling, it was, "So sorry, I simply can't let you see any of these until I delete the ones I don't want you to see".

Clinton of course said nothing even close to what you claim. You're just leveling another accusation with nothing to back it up. Had Hillary released 30,000 personal emails to the Republican controlled House Select Committee to crucifix Clinton, those emails would be in the hands of The Daily Caller and Breitbart within hours with accusations of everything from child abuse to terrorism.

 

[Flopper]

He lost nearly a billion dollars. That was not good. He was supposedly worth 10 billion. How many business went under, how many people lost their jobs and homes as a result? I don't want a person that can so flippantly loose so much and then pretend it wasn't a big deal, let alone just use it as an excuse NOT to pay taxes as if it's some kind of saving grace. Like Marie Antoinette said, let them eat cake? Really?

Forbes put Trump's worth at $2.6 billion, in 1995 ranking him in a 15-way tie for 228th richest person in the world. 21 years later Forbes put his worth at 3.7 billion with his ranking dropping to 343 among billionaires. In simple terms, Donald Trumps average annual growth rate of his business was 1.26%, about what you could get in a good money fund. So if you have wanted to invest in Donald Trump, thing again.

 

[MaryL]

He lost nearly a billion dollars. That was not good. He was supposedly worth 10 billion. How many business went under, how many people lost their jobs and homes as a result? I don't want a person that can so flippantly loose so much and then pretend it wasn't a big deal, let alone just use it as an excuse NOT to pay taxes as if it's some kind of saving grace. Like Marie Antoinette said, let them eat cake? Really?

Forbes put Trump's worth at $2.6 billion, in 1995 ranking him in a 15-way tie for 228th richest person in the world. 21 years later Forbes put his worth at 3.7 billion with his ranking dropping to 343 among billionaires. In simple terms, Donald Trumps average annual growth rate of his business was 1.26%, about what you could get in a good money fund. So if you have wanted to invest in Donald Trump, thing again.

Anyone that can pose losing nearly a billion bucks as astute businesses management has a frigging hole in their head. An the (off topic) comment about PTSD? Trump has proven how unrealistic and out of touch with Americans he is. He's done.

 

[Flopper]

He lost nearly a billion dollars. That was not good. He was supposedly worth 10 billion. How many business went under, how many people lost their jobs and homes as a result? I don't want a person that can so flippantly loose so much and then pretend it wasn't a big deal, let alone just use it as an excuse NOT to pay taxes as if it's some kind of saving grace. Like Marie Antoinette said, let them eat cake? Really?

Forbes put Trump's worth at $2.6 billion, in 1995 ranking him in a 15-way tie for 228th richest person in the world. 21 years later Forbes put his worth at 3.7 billion with his ranking dropping to 343 among billionaires. In simple terms, Donald Trumps average annual growth rate of his business was 1.26%, about what you could get in a good money fund. So if you have wanted to invest in Donald Trump, thing again.

Anyone that can pose losing nearly a billion bucks as astute businesses management has a frigging hole in their head. An the (off topic) comment about PTSD? Trump has proven how unrealistic and out of touch with Americans he is. He's done.

Trump has a gift at finding undervalued and over valued real estate. He is also an incredible good salesman. However, those attributes are not applicable to the job of president. Trump's weakness is management which is why he has his son managing the day to day business of the Trump Organization. Unfortunately most of what a president does is management.

 

[hadit]

HIllary deliberately and without oversight deleted thousands of emails she claims were solely personal in nature, after deliberately mixing official and personal emails together. She is quite selective about what she will be transparent.

Being transparent does not mean she should have turned over personal correspondence to a Republican wolf pack. The first lie about this issue is that she deleted the 30,000 emails. A team of lawyers combed through 60,000 emails deleting personal correspondence. She had every right to do so and doing otherwise would be just plain stupid.

Oh, but of course. You do realize, don't you, that there would have been no need for anyone to comb through anything had she simply dedicated a government email account on government supplied servers to official business, having them secured, automatically backed up and easily made available with no fuss and no controversy? That easy, non-controversial method she did not use. Instead, she deliberately mingled personal and official business on one account on a single server which she alone controlled. How convenient when accountability comes knocking. "So sorry, but I just can't give you any of these emails until I go through and delete everything I don't want you to see". Very convenient.

I think it was a mistake for her to have a private server which she has admitted and takes responsibility. However, even if she had used a government server, she still would have had the option to delete personal emails. Government policy puts the responsible for determining business from personal email on the employee, thus she had every right to delete her personal emails.

The fact is there is so much information available about Hillary, much of it directly from her, the opposition has a goldmine of data to create accusations but not proofs of wrong doing. From the Republican investigation of 1993 White House Christmas Card list to the Clinton Email Scandal today, Republicans have been trying to discredit Hillary for decades but not very effectively.

"Admitted" and "takes responsibility"? Hardly. She deliberately kept her official email traffic off the government network and on her own server, on which she mixed personal with official traffic. Then, when accountability came calling, it was, "So sorry, I simply can't let you see any of these until I delete the ones I don't want you to see".

Clinton of course said nothing even close to what you claim. You're just leveling another accusation with nothing to back it up. Had Hillary released 30,000 personal emails to the Republican controlled House Select Committee to crucifix Clinton, those emails would be in the hands of The Daily Caller and Breitbart within hours with accusations of everything from child abuse to terrorism.

That is the effect of what she did. She deliberately mixed personal and official correspondence on a server over which she had complete control, then when pressured to release official emails, went through all of them and deleted a bunch of them before releasing any. Had she used government supplied hardware and software, none of that would be necessary. Her office would have simply authorized the release of official correspondence and there would have been no deletion of anything, and your latest excuse would be moot, because there would be NO personal emails in anyone else's hands. Do you see how she made it harder on herself by doing this foolish thing, (assuming it was just foolish and not deliberate so as to give her a reason to delete and thus hide official correspondence)?

 

[Flopper]

Being transparent does not mean she should have turned over personal correspondence to a Republican wolf pack. The first lie about this issue is that she deleted the 30,000 emails. A team of lawyers combed through 60,000 emails deleting personal correspondence. She had every right to do so and doing otherwise would be just plain stupid.

Oh, but of course. You do realize, don't you, that there would have been no need for anyone to comb through anything had she simply dedicated a government email account on government supplied servers to official business, having them secured, automatically backed up and easily made available with no fuss and no controversy? That easy, non-controversial method she did not use. Instead, she deliberately mingled personal and official business on one account on a single server which she alone controlled. How convenient when accountability comes knocking. "So sorry, but I just can't give you any of these emails until I go through and delete everything I don't want you to see". Very convenient.

I think it was a mistake for her to have a private server which she has admitted and takes responsibility. However, even if she had used a government server, she still would have had the option to delete personal emails. Government policy puts the responsible for determining business from personal email on the employee, thus she had every right to delete her personal emails.

The fact is there is so much information available about Hillary, much of it directly from her, the opposition has a goldmine of data to create accusations but not proofs of wrong doing. From the Republican investigation of 1993 White House Christmas Card list to the Clinton Email Scandal today, Republicans have been trying to discredit Hillary for decades but not very effectively.

"Admitted" and "takes responsibility"? Hardly. She deliberately kept her official email traffic off the government network and on her own server, on which she mixed personal with official traffic. Then, when accountability came calling, it was, "So sorry, I simply can't let you see any of these until I delete the ones I don't want you to see".

Clinton of course said nothing even close to what you claim. You're just leveling another accusation with nothing to back it up. Had Hillary released 30,000 personal emails to the Republican controlled House Select Committee to crucifix Clinton, those emails would be in the hands of The Daily Caller and Breitbart within hours with accusations of everything from child abuse to terrorism.

That is the effect of what she did. She deliberately mixed personal and official correspondence on a server over which she had complete control, then when pressured to release official emails, went through all of them and deleted a bunch of them before releasing any. Had she used government supplied hardware and software, none of that would be necessary. Her office would have simply authorized the release of official correspondence and there would have been no deletion of anything, and your latest excuse would be moot, because there would be NO personal emails in anyone else's hands. Do you see how she made it harder on herself by doing this foolish thing, (assuming it was just foolish and not deliberate so as to give her a reason to delete and thus hide official correspondence)?

Of course she would have personal correspondence on a government sanctioned server. There would have been no way to avoid it. A person such as Clinton who has to handle 30 to 100 emails a day from hundreds if not thousands of people is not going to maintain two email accounts. Business associates would send personal email to the business email account and personal email to the business account, making two emails accounts ridiculous. This is why the government allow employees to send and receive personal email that is stored on government servers. The rules encourage employees to delete spam, junk, and personal emails so they don't clutter the server with non-goverment correspondence. So whether or not she had a personal server or goverment sever she would be deleting personal emails.

It was foolish of her to have a personal email server. She said she wanted to keep using her Blackberry which would not be supported on the government servers. I really don't buy this. I think she wanted a private server to keep private correspondence out of the hands of political enemies that had been dogging her years.

 

[LaDexter]

If everything was so very legal about her emails, why did she have the servers wiped, and why did she repeatedly lie to the FBI about the servers?

 

[hadit]

Oh, but of course. You do realize, don't you, that there would have been no need for anyone to comb through anything had she simply dedicated a government email account on government supplied servers to official business, having them secured, automatically backed up and easily made available with no fuss and no controversy? That easy, non-controversial method she did not use. Instead, she deliberately mingled personal and official business on one account on a single server which she alone controlled. How convenient when accountability comes knocking. "So sorry, but I just can't give you any of these emails until I go through and delete everything I don't want you to see". Very convenient.

I think it was a mistake for her to have a private server which she has admitted and takes responsibility. However, even if she had used a government server, she still would have had the option to delete personal emails. Government policy puts the responsible for determining business from personal email on the employee, thus she had every right to delete her personal emails.

The fact is there is so much information available about Hillary, much of it directly from her, the opposition has a goldmine of data to create accusations but not proofs of wrong doing. From the Republican investigation of 1993 White House Christmas Card list to the Clinton Email Scandal today, Republicans have been trying to discredit Hillary for decades but not very effectively.

"Admitted" and "takes responsibility"? Hardly. She deliberately kept her official email traffic off the government network and on her own server, on which she mixed personal with official traffic. Then, when accountability came calling, it was, "So sorry, I simply can't let you see any of these until I delete the ones I don't want you to see".

Clinton of course said nothing even close to what you claim. You're just leveling another accusation with nothing to back it up. Had Hillary released 30,000 personal emails to the Republican controlled House Select Committee to crucifix Clinton, those emails would be in the hands of The Daily Caller and Breitbart within hours with accusations of everything from child abuse to terrorism.

That is the effect of what she did. She deliberately mixed personal and official correspondence on a server over which she had complete control, then when pressured to release official emails, went through all of them and deleted a bunch of them before releasing any. Had she used government supplied hardware and software, none of that would be necessary. Her office would have simply authorized the release of official correspondence and there would have been no deletion of anything, and your latest excuse would be moot, because there would be NO personal emails in anyone else's hands. Do you see how she made it harder on herself by doing this foolish thing, (assuming it was just foolish and not deliberate so as to give her a reason to delete and thus hide official correspondence)?

Of course she would have personal correspondence on a government sanctioned server. There would have been no way to avoid it. A person such as Clinton who has to handle 30 to 100 emails a day from hundreds if not thousands of people is not going to maintain two email accounts. Business associates would send personal email to the business email account and personal email to the business account, making two emails accounts ridiculous. This is why the government allow employees to send and receive personal email that is stored on government servers. The rules encourage employees to delete spam, junk, and personal emails so they don't clutter the server with non-goverment correspondence. So whether or not she had a personal server or goverment sever she would be deleting personal emails.

I disagree. I maintain an official email address for my employer and multiple personal addresses. It is EASIER to keep them separate that way. I don't get or send personal emails on my work address, and she shouldn't have either. In fact, it would be ridiculous to have only one address in today's world.

It was foolish of her to have a personal email server. She said she wanted to keep using her Blackberry which would not be supported on the government servers. I really don't buy this. I think she wanted a private server to keep private correspondence out of the hands of political enemies that had been dogging her years.

I have no problem with that because I have zero interest in what happened at her yoga class or what color flowers her daughter wanted for her wedding. The best way for her to prevent that information from getting into the hands of the vultures would be to do as I have indicated and keep personal separate from official. She deliberately did not do so, putting a cloud over the scandal, under which it is VERY easy to believe she did it to provide cover so she could delete official emails she didn't want exposed.

 

[kaz]

In real estate, you take gains and losses, mainly gains in up markets, losses in down markets.

In the end, your net worth is how you did. Trump didn't get every investment right, but he got a majority, and did darn well.
..

Since we haven't seen his tax returns- you are basing that on Donald Trump's 'word'.

Donald Trump inherited a fortune and still has a fortune- quite the accomplishment.

He might be broke for all we know.

There's a whole lot you don't know

 

[Flopper]

If everything was so very legal about her emails, why did she have the servers wiped, and why did she repeatedly lie to the FBI about the servers?

In the FBI testimony before congress the director repeatedly said that there was no evidence that Clinton or her staff lied. Turning over 30,000 personal emails to a Republican House Committee on a witch hunt would have been almost as dumb as having a personnel server.

 

[Flopper]

I think it was a mistake for her to have a private server which she has admitted and takes responsibility. However, even if she had used a government server, she still would have had the option to delete personal emails. Government policy puts the responsible for determining business from personal email on the employee, thus she had every right to delete her personal emails.

The fact is there is so much information available about Hillary, much of it directly from her, the opposition has a goldmine of data to create accusations but not proofs of wrong doing. From the Republican investigation of 1993 White House Christmas Card list to the Clinton Email Scandal today, Republicans have been trying to discredit Hillary for decades but not very effectively.

"Admitted" and "takes responsibility"? Hardly. She deliberately kept her official email traffic off the government network and on her own server, on which she mixed personal with official traffic. Then, when accountability came calling, it was, "So sorry, I simply can't let you see any of these until I delete the ones I don't want you to see".

Clinton of course said nothing even close to what you claim. You're just leveling another accusation with nothing to back it up. Had Hillary released 30,000 personal emails to the Republican controlled House Select Committee to crucifix Clinton, those emails would be in the hands of The Daily Caller and Breitbart within hours with accusations of everything from child abuse to terrorism.

That is the effect of what she did. She deliberately mixed personal and official correspondence on a server over which she had complete control, then when pressured to release official emails, went through all of them and deleted a bunch of them before releasing any. Had she used government supplied hardware and software, none of that would be necessary. Her office would have simply authorized the release of official correspondence and there would have been no deletion of anything, and your latest excuse would be moot, because there would be NO personal emails in anyone else's hands. Do you see how she made it harder on herself by doing this foolish thing, (assuming it was just foolish and not deliberate so as to give her a reason to delete and thus hide official correspondence)?

Of course she would have personal correspondence on a government sanctioned server. There would have been no way to avoid it. A person such as Clinton who has to handle 30 to 100 emails a day from hundreds if not thousands of people is not going to maintain two email accounts. Business associates would send personal email to the business email account and personal email to the business account, making two emails accounts ridiculous. This is why the government allow employees to send and receive personal email that is stored on government servers. The rules encourage employees to delete spam, junk, and personal emails so they don't clutter the server with non-goverment correspondence. So whether or not she had a personal server or goverment sever she would be deleting personal emails.

I disagree. I maintain an official email address for my employer and multiple personal addresses. It is EASIER to keep them separate that way. I don't get or send personal emails on my work address, and she shouldn't have either. In fact, it would be ridiculous to have only one address in today's world.

It was foolish of her to have a personal email server. She said she wanted to keep using her Blackberry which would not be supported on the government servers. I really don't buy this. I think she wanted a private server to keep private correspondence out of the hands of political enemies that had been dogging her years.

I have no problem with that because I have zero interest in what happened at her yoga class or what color flowers her daughter wanted for her wedding. The best way for her to prevent that information from getting into the hands of the vultures would be to do as I have indicated and keep personal separate from official. She deliberately did not do so, putting a cloud over the scandal, under which it is VERY easy to believe she did it to provide cover so she could delete official emails she didn't want exposed.

A person has no control as to what kind of email they receive. I know for a fact, that it's very common for government employees to get both personal and official email addressed to the same account. God knows how many emails I have received about contract negotiation that included personnel correspondence intermixed. If you have 30,000 employees and hundreds if not thousands of contacts in and out of the government, supplying them with a personal and official email address is a waste of effort because emails particular in chains will have intermixed personal correspondence and official correspondence. This is why the government doesn't require an employee to have separate email accounts and why the employees have the responsibility of deleting emails of a personal nature.

If Clinton had wanted to hide any government emails she sent on a government server, she could have easily done so just by deleting them because in the State Dept. deleted emails are not archived. Once they are deleted from the trash folder, they are gone. All emails that are not deleted are considered official emails and they are archived.

 

[OnePercenter]

The spin on this is just breathtaking.

If you lose money.... drumroll.... you do not owe taxes... instead you get a WRITE-OFF on future earnings...

Perfectly legal and in no need of "fixing."

Deductions written by Republicans.

 

[hadit]

"Admitted" and "takes responsibility"? Hardly. She deliberately kept her official email traffic off the government network and on her own server, on which she mixed personal with official traffic. Then, when accountability came calling, it was, "So sorry, I simply can't let you see any of these until I delete the ones I don't want you to see".

Clinton of course said nothing even close to what you claim. You're just leveling another accusation with nothing to back it up. Had Hillary released 30,000 personal emails to the Republican controlled House Select Committee to crucifix Clinton, those emails would be in the hands of The Daily Caller and Breitbart within hours with accusations of everything from child abuse to terrorism.

That is the effect of what she did. She deliberately mixed personal and official correspondence on a server over which she had complete control, then when pressured to release official emails, went through all of them and deleted a bunch of them before releasing any. Had she used government supplied hardware and software, none of that would be necessary. Her office would have simply authorized the release of official correspondence and there would have been no deletion of anything, and your latest excuse would be moot, because there would be NO personal emails in anyone else's hands. Do you see how she made it harder on herself by doing this foolish thing, (assuming it was just foolish and not deliberate so as to give her a reason to delete and thus hide official correspondence)?

Of course she would have personal correspondence on a government sanctioned server. There would have been no way to avoid it. A person such as Clinton who has to handle 30 to 100 emails a day from hundreds if not thousands of people is not going to maintain two email accounts. Business associates would send personal email to the business email account and personal email to the business account, making two emails accounts ridiculous. This is why the government allow employees to send and receive personal email that is stored on government servers. The rules encourage employees to delete spam, junk, and personal emails so they don't clutter the server with non-goverment correspondence. So whether or not she had a personal server or goverment sever she would be deleting personal emails.

I disagree. I maintain an official email address for my employer and multiple personal addresses. It is EASIER to keep them separate that way. I don't get or send personal emails on my work address, and she shouldn't have either. In fact, it would be ridiculous to have only one address in today's world.

It was foolish of her to have a personal email server. She said she wanted to keep using her Blackberry which would not be supported on the government servers. I really don't buy this. I think she wanted a private server to keep private correspondence out of the hands of political enemies that had been dogging her years.

I have no problem with that because I have zero interest in what happened at her yoga class or what color flowers her daughter wanted for her wedding. The best way for her to prevent that information from getting into the hands of the vultures would be to do as I have indicated and keep personal separate from official. She deliberately did not do so, putting a cloud over the scandal, under which it is VERY easy to believe she did it to provide cover so she could delete official emails she didn't want exposed.

A person has no control as to what kind of email they receive. I know for a fact, that it's very common for government employees to get both personal and official email addressed to the same account. God knows how many emails I have received about contract negotiation that included personnel correspondence intermixed. If you have 30,000 employees and hundreds if not thousands of contacts in and out of the government, supplying them with a personal and official email address is a waste of effort because emails particular in chains will have intermixed personal correspondence and official correspondence. This is why the government doesn't require an employee to have separate email accounts and why the employees have the responsibility of deleting emails of a personal nature.

Let's be straightforward about something. No official contact is going to email Hillary about her yoga class, nor is she going to email them about her yoga class. Those are the types of emails we're talking about. The whole purpose of a personal email account is for PERSONAL email, and you don't give business contacts your personal email address. Business contacts are not going to flood your inbox with emails about your yoga class. That's just plain silly.

If Clinton had wanted to hide any government emails she sent on a government server, she could have easily done so just by deleting them because in the State Dept. deleted emails are not archived. Once they are deleted from the trash folder, they are gone. All emails that are not deleted are considered official emails and they are archived.

So, she was ignorant of how email worked, didn't ask, and went through all the trouble of setting up her own server for nothing? Sounds incompetent. And, if you seriously believe the government is not copying every email that goes through government networks, I have some ocean front property in Arizona I'll sell you, cheap.

 

[Flopper]

Clinton of course said nothing even close to what you claim. You're just leveling another accusation with nothing to back it up. Had Hillary released 30,000 personal emails to the Republican controlled House Select Committee to crucifix Clinton, those emails would be in the hands of The Daily Caller and Breitbart within hours with accusations of everything from child abuse to terrorism.

That is the effect of what she did. She deliberately mixed personal and official correspondence on a server over which she had complete control, then when pressured to release official emails, went through all of them and deleted a bunch of them before releasing any. Had she used government supplied hardware and software, none of that would be necessary. Her office would have simply authorized the release of official correspondence and there would have been no deletion of anything, and your latest excuse would be moot, because there would be NO personal emails in anyone else's hands. Do you see how she made it harder on herself by doing this foolish thing, (assuming it was just foolish and not deliberate so as to give her a reason to delete and thus hide official correspondence)?

Of course she would have personal correspondence on a government sanctioned server. There would have been no way to avoid it. A person such as Clinton who has to handle 30 to 100 emails a day from hundreds if not thousands of people is not going to maintain two email accounts. Business associates would send personal email to the business email account and personal email to the business account, making two emails accounts ridiculous. This is why the government allow employees to send and receive personal email that is stored on government servers. The rules encourage employees to delete spam, junk, and personal emails so they don't clutter the server with non-goverment correspondence. So whether or not she had a personal server or goverment sever she would be deleting personal emails.

I disagree. I maintain an official email address for my employer and multiple personal addresses. It is EASIER to keep them separate that way. I don't get or send personal emails on my work address, and she shouldn't have either. In fact, it would be ridiculous to have only one address in today's world.

It was foolish of her to have a personal email server. She said she wanted to keep using her Blackberry which would not be supported on the government servers. I really don't buy this. I think she wanted a private server to keep private correspondence out of the hands of political enemies that had been dogging her years.

I have no problem with that because I have zero interest in what happened at her yoga class or what color flowers her daughter wanted for her wedding. The best way for her to prevent that information from getting into the hands of the vultures would be to do as I have indicated and keep personal separate from official. She deliberately did not do so, putting a cloud over the scandal, under which it is VERY easy to believe she did it to provide cover so she could delete official emails she didn't want exposed.

A person has no control as to what kind of email they receive. I know for a fact, that it's very common for government employees to get both personal and official email addressed to the same account. God knows how many emails I have received about contract negotiation that included personnel correspondence intermixed. If you have 30,000 employees and hundreds if not thousands of contacts in and out of the government, supplying them with a personal and official email address is a waste of effort because emails particular in chains will have intermixed personal correspondence and official correspondence. This is why the government doesn't require an employee to have separate email accounts and why the employees have the responsibility of deleting emails of a personal nature.

Let's be straightforward about something. No official contact is going to email Hillary about her yoga class, nor is she going to email them about her yoga class. Those are the types of emails we're talking about. The whole purpose of a personal email account is for PERSONAL email, and you don't give business contacts your personal email address. Business contacts are not going to flood your inbox with emails about your yoga class. That's just plain silly.

If Clinton had wanted to hide any government emails she sent on a government server, she could have easily done so just by deleting them because in the State Dept. deleted emails are not archived. Once they are deleted from the trash folder, they are gone. All emails that are not deleted are considered official emails and they are archived.

So, she was ignorant of how email worked, didn't ask, and went through all the trouble of setting up her own server for nothing? Sounds incompetent. And, if you seriously believe the government is not copying every email that goes through government networks, I have some ocean front property in Arizona I'll sell you, cheap.

I worked as a consultant for the federal government and my son works for the DOD. I know for a fact that once you delete your trash it's gone. The data blocks may still reside on disk until they are over written but from a practical standpoint retrieving deleted emails after weeks or months is nearly impossible. The government archives all government documents and official correspondence on email but it relies on employees to determine what are government documents and what is official correspondence. In the State Dept. email that is not deleted or so flagged is achieved. Although employees are encouraged to delete personal correspondence, spam, and other junk mail a lot of if get's archived.

Before Hillary became Secretary of State she had a private server in her basement which she used to store email from her Blackberry. After she became Secretary of State she wanted to continue using her Blackberry however she was told it could not be supported on the goverment servers. There was a number of meetings between her staff and various groups. The bottom line being she just continued using her Blackberry and the server in her basement. She did not put in a server with any malicious intent to do anything. It was already there long before she became Sec. of State. She just continued doing what she had been doing which she should not have done.

She should have allowed the government tech people to convert her to a state.gov email account and change devices. At the time, the only devices supported on the government servers were desktop computers, laptops, and a blackberry like device used by the president. She did not want a laptop because she was constantly traveling so she requested several times a device like the president had but she never received it. It looks like she will get it now.