Two scenarios on Trump-Russia investigators — and neither is comforting

[iceberg]

Great. New topic now. Should I go look all this up for point of reference, validate my side with links and data so you can just use right wing bullet points to respond to?

Not going to bother with in depth again for awhile dude. If you are not going to read my points then I see no point in providing them in discussion.

They spied. The left is pissed cause that carry connotations they don't like. Tough.

 

[iceberg]

I believe someone is lying.

If wording was changed at the request of the DOJ is that a foul?

But yes I believe the fbi covered this up. Everyone involved is now no longer there. Barr will see if this is true and we go from there.

Look up Platt river networks, bleachbit and Clinton and you'll find that post was found to be referencing hillarys mail server.

So I ask again after directly answering your question, is it OK to alter what the gov has asked before and pick and choose what to send? Timelibe provided. Exactly what she did.

If Barr turns up nothing are you still going to stick to your belief that there was a cover up or would you accept that perhaps your narrative is flawed?

Won't matter at that point. I'll hope we are done and I'm willing to accept results.

Would that the left could do the same.

It should matter. If you believe there are real crimes covered up by the FBI then that’s a big deal. If that’s not what really happened then whatever info you used to draw those conclusions were misleading and flawed. If that’s the case you should learn from that and change your sources or skepticism levels, perhaps even accountability for spreading fake news

So an award winning journalist is wrong. You are right.

Got it.

At least she did her legwork but hey we call it flawed and move on.

And now you accuse me of spreading fake news.

Fuck this.

 

[Slade3200]

I believe someone is lying.

If wording was changed at the request of the DOJ is that a foul?

But yes I believe the fbi covered this up. Everyone involved is now no longer there. Barr will see if this is true and we go from there.

Look up Platt river networks, bleachbit and Clinton and you'll find that post was found to be referencing hillarys mail server.

So I ask again after directly answering your question, is it OK to alter what the gov has asked before and pick and choose what to send? Timelibe provided. Exactly what she did.

If Barr turns up nothing are you still going to stick to your belief that there was a cover up or would you accept that perhaps your narrative is flawed?

Won't matter at that point. I'll hope we are done and I'm willing to accept results.

Would that the left could do the same.

It should matter. If you believe there are real crimes covered up by the FBI then that’s a big deal. If that’s not what really happened then whatever info you used to draw those conclusions were misleading and flawed. If that’s the case you should learn from that and change your sources or skepticism levels, perhaps even accountability for spreading fake news

So an award winning journalist is wrong. You are right.

Got it.

At least she did her legwork but hey we call it flawed and move on.

No she might be just fine. I’m just saying there are a variety of narratives out there and both you and Bri posted different ones. Should I post Don Lemons take on the matter and we can compare the three?

I’m not saying anybody is wrong or right. I’m just saying I take it all with a grain of salt when it comes to the media

 

[iceberg]

I believe someone is lying.

If wording was changed at the request of the DOJ is that a foul?

But yes I believe the fbi covered this up. Everyone involved is now no longer there. Barr will see if this is true and we go from there.

Look up Platt river networks, bleachbit and Clinton and you'll find that post was found to be referencing hillarys mail server.

So I ask again after directly answering your question, is it OK to alter what the gov has asked before and pick and choose what to send? Timelibe provided. Exactly what she did.

If Barr turns up nothing are you still going to stick to your belief that there was a cover up or would you accept that perhaps your narrative is flawed?

Won't matter at that point. I'll hope we are done and I'm willing to accept results.

Would that the left could do the same.

It should matter. If you believe there are real crimes covered up by the FBI then that’s a big deal. If that’s not what really happened then whatever info you used to draw those conclusions were misleading and flawed. If that’s the case you should learn from that and change your sources or skepticism levels, perhaps even accountability for spreading fake news

So an award winning journalist is wrong. You are right.

Got it.

At least she did her legwork but hey we call it flawed and move on.

No she might be just fine. I’m just saying there are a variety of narratives out there and both you and Bri posted different ones. Should I post Don Lemons take on the matter and we can compare the three?

I’m not saying anybody is wrong or right. I’m just saying I take it all with a grain of salt when it comes to the media

So you've experienced trumps "lies" personally.

 

[Slade3200]

If Barr turns up nothing are you still going to stick to your belief that there was a cover up or would you accept that perhaps your narrative is flawed?

Won't matter at that point. I'll hope we are done and I'm willing to accept results.

Would that the left could do the same.

It should matter. If you believe there are real crimes covered up by the FBI then that’s a big deal. If that’s not what really happened then whatever info you used to draw those conclusions were misleading and flawed. If that’s the case you should learn from that and change your sources or skepticism levels, perhaps even accountability for spreading fake news

So an award winning journalist is wrong. You are right.

Got it.

At least she did her legwork but hey we call it flawed and move on.

No she might be just fine. I’m just saying there are a variety of narratives out there and both you and Bri posted different ones. Should I post Don Lemons take on the matter and we can compare the three?

I’m not saying anybody is wrong or right. I’m just saying I take it all with a grain of salt when it comes to the media

So you've experienced trumps "lies" personally.

Yeah, I hear them every day. Like when he says a report says No Collusion No Obstruction when it clearly does not say that

 

[iceberg]

Won't matter at that point. I'll hope we are done and I'm willing to accept results.

Would that the left could do the same.

It should matter. If you believe there are real crimes covered up by the FBI then that’s a big deal. If that’s not what really happened then whatever info you used to draw those conclusions were misleading and flawed. If that’s the case you should learn from that and change your sources or skepticism levels, perhaps even accountability for spreading fake news

So an award winning journalist is wrong. You are right.

Got it.

At least she did her legwork but hey we call it flawed and move on.

No she might be just fine. I’m just saying there are a variety of narratives out there and both you and Bri posted different ones. Should I post Don Lemons take on the matter and we can compare the three?

I’m not saying anybody is wrong or right. I’m just saying I take it all with a grain of salt when it comes to the media

So you've experienced trumps "lies" personally.

Yeah, I hear them every day. Like when he says a report says No Collusion No Obstruction when it clearly does not say that

That would be from the grain of salt media however, correct?

Funny. They are right when you want them to be. You can't dismiss them then use them in back to back posts slade.

You dont read my posts for 2 days and still argue against my point.

You tell me the media sucks unless they are bagging on Trump.

I won't bother doing you the respect of trying to put forth well thought discussions with you anymore. Pure waste of time.

 

[Slade3200]

It should matter. If you believe there are real crimes covered up by the FBI then that’s a big deal. If that’s not what really happened then whatever info you used to draw those conclusions were misleading and flawed. If that’s the case you should learn from that and change your sources or skepticism levels, perhaps even accountability for spreading fake news

So an award winning journalist is wrong. You are right.

Got it.

At least she did her legwork but hey we call it flawed and move on.

No she might be just fine. I’m just saying there are a variety of narratives out there and both you and Bri posted different ones. Should I post Don Lemons take on the matter and we can compare the three?

I’m not saying anybody is wrong or right. I’m just saying I take it all with a grain of salt when it comes to the media

So you've experienced trumps "lies" personally.

Yeah, I hear them every day. Like when he says a report says No Collusion No Obstruction when it clearly does not say that

That would be from the grain of salt media however, correct?

Funny. They are right when you want them to be. You can't dismiss them then use them in back to back posts slade.

You dont read my posts for 2 days and still argue against my point.

You tell me the media sucks unless they are bagging on Trump.

I won't bother doing you the respect of trying to put forth well thought discussions with you anymore. Pure waste of time.

That one is actually from his words which I heard him say many times on video and an actually report that we can read for ourselves. Can you show me where it says No Collusion No Obstruction in the report? Cause I can show you many videos of Trump saying that’s what it says.

 

[iceberg]

So an award winning journalist is wrong. You are right.

Got it.

At least she did her legwork but hey we call it flawed and move on.

No she might be just fine. I’m just saying there are a variety of narratives out there and both you and Bri posted different ones. Should I post Don Lemons take on the matter and we can compare the three?

I’m not saying anybody is wrong or right. I’m just saying I take it all with a grain of salt when it comes to the media

So you've experienced trumps "lies" personally.

Yeah, I hear them every day. Like when he says a report says No Collusion No Obstruction when it clearly does not say that

That would be from the grain of salt media however, correct?

Funny. They are right when you want them to be. You can't dismiss them then use them in back to back posts slade.

You dont read my posts for 2 days and still argue against my point.

You tell me the media sucks unless they are bagging on Trump.

I won't bother doing you the respect of trying to put forth well thought discussions with you anymore. Pure waste of time.

That one is actually from his words which I heard him say many times on video and an actually report that we can read for ourselves. Can you show me where it says No Collusion No Obstruction in the report? Cause I can show you many videos of Trumps saying that’s what it says.

I tried showing my math so to speak.

Didn't work out well.

Like I said don't care now. Trying to rationally discuss this with you was a total waste of 2 days.

 

[bripat9643]

So you are changing the rules.

You said she deleted the mails before they were requested.

You said:
But that’s not how it went down. The 33k emails were deleted in March 2015. The email server investigation was in 2016.

I showed you when the server was discovered in 2014, they asked for all info, a month later her IT guy is asking how to change addresses in stored mail, they turn over 8 messages, they have to ask AGAIN for all mail and now obama is passing laws to stop what she did, she then bleach its her drive then turns over what she feels like with NO DAMN PROOF she ONLY deleted personal mail.

So your "facts" are ever changing slade.

Why is her it guy in a forum asking how to modify headers weeks after bei g asked for mail?

No FUCKING WAY do you allow trump all this frankly bullshit defense.

Fine. PROVE she only deleted personal emails. while you're at it - explain to me as if i'm a federal judge why 6 weeks after being asked for her e-mails her IT guy is out looking for how to change who e-mail came from or went to in the address headers?

maybe you skimmed over:
On July 24, 2014, stonetear posted to reddit:
Hello all- I may be facing a very interesting situation where I need to strip out a VIP's (VERY VIP) email address from a bunch of archived email that I have both in a live Exchange mailbox, as well as a PST file. Basically, they don't want the VIP's email address exposed to anyone, and want to be able to either strip out or replace the email address in the to/from fields in all of the emails we want to send out.

and tell me again you're ok with trump or ANYONE doing this after being asked for their mails. PROVE THIS WAS ONLY PERSONAL.

I was going off the timeline and link that Bripat posted. Apparently you have a link with different information. Goes to why I take everything with a grain of salt. As such, I keep going back to the simple point that the FBI did not take issue with the things you are taking issue with. They are the ones with all the intel about the investigation, you are not.

You make it sound like such an obvious cut and dry crime. If that was reality then she would be arrested. If it was a deep state cover up allowing her to get away with obstruction of justice then the Trump admin could have easily followed through with “Lock her up” after they took over. None of that happened. That has to tell you something.

I just think you are defending her but if trump did the same, you'd want his ass.

Why is her IT guy asking how to remove header info?

You cool with trump altering documentation he's been asked to provide?

Of course not. And if Clinton had headers changed to hide evidence then she should go down. But forgive me if I’m skeptical about the report. If the FBI reported that they found her IT guy modifying work product then I’d be right with you. But where did you hear that from?

Sounds idiotic to me as if they changed a header or deleted a classified emails all the FBI would need to do is find the other copy out there and they have evidence of concealing or changing evidence. Remember all emails have copy’s out there in other servers.

I provided a link to everything I've said. That post was traced to Platt river networks and her own it guy 6 weeks after she was asked to turn her email over.
If you are going to refute my time line at least read it. I made sure to link back to where I got all my info which has only gotten me im just talkng right wing bullet points as if that means they are lies.

So if you believe your narrative is true then you must believe that there was corruption and a cover up by the FBI. Is that right?

No duh? Why do you believe Comey and Strozk were fired?

 

[Slade3200]

No she might be just fine. I’m just saying there are a variety of narratives out there and both you and Bri posted different ones. Should I post Don Lemons take on the matter and we can compare the three?

I’m not saying anybody is wrong or right. I’m just saying I take it all with a grain of salt when it comes to the media

So you've experienced trumps "lies" personally.

Yeah, I hear them every day. Like when he says a report says No Collusion No Obstruction when it clearly does not say that

That would be from the grain of salt media however, correct?

Funny. They are right when you want them to be. You can't dismiss them then use them in back to back posts slade.

You dont read my posts for 2 days and still argue against my point.

You tell me the media sucks unless they are bagging on Trump.

I won't bother doing you the respect of trying to put forth well thought discussions with you anymore. Pure waste of time.

That one is actually from his words which I heard him say many times on video and an actually report that we can read for ourselves. Can you show me where it says No Collusion No Obstruction in the report? Cause I can show you many videos of Trumps saying that’s what it says.

I tried showing my math so to speak.

Didn't work out well.

Like I said don't care now. Trying to rationally discuss this with you was a total waste of 2 days.

I appreciate the way you debate, you back up your statements with supporting links and stick to the facts as you see them. I just don’t agree with some of them on this issue.

For example, if you say Clinton was asked to turn over her personal emails then I’d want to see the subpoena asking her to do so. All I’ve seen are requests for work emails and law enforcement not taking issue with what they collected. I also see damning info in what she turned in as there were classified messages, which the FBI shame her publicly before an elected for having on her server. So if the crime was her concealing classified messages she did a piss poor job at it. If the FBI was covering for her then Comey doing that presser was a piss poor cover up. The cover up thing just doesn’t make sense to me given what went down

 

[Slade3200]

I was going off the timeline and link that Bripat posted. Apparently you have a link with different information. Goes to why I take everything with a grain of salt. As such, I keep going back to the simple point that the FBI did not take issue with the things you are taking issue with. They are the ones with all the intel about the investigation, you are not.

You make it sound like such an obvious cut and dry crime. If that was reality then she would be arrested. If it was a deep state cover up allowing her to get away with obstruction of justice then the Trump admin could have easily followed through with “Lock her up” after they took over. None of that happened. That has to tell you something.

I just think you are defending her but if trump did the same, you'd want his ass.

Why is her IT guy asking how to remove header info?

You cool with trump altering documentation he's been asked to provide?

Of course not. And if Clinton had headers changed to hide evidence then she should go down. But forgive me if I’m skeptical about the report. If the FBI reported that they found her IT guy modifying work product then I’d be right with you. But where did you hear that from?

Sounds idiotic to me as if they changed a header or deleted a classified emails all the FBI would need to do is find the other copy out there and they have evidence of concealing or changing evidence. Remember all emails have copy’s out there in other servers.

I provided a link to everything I've said. That post was traced to Platt river networks and her own it guy 6 weeks after she was asked to turn her email over.
If you are going to refute my time line at least read it. I made sure to link back to where I got all my info which has only gotten me im just talkng right wing bullet points as if that means they are lies.

So if you believe your narrative is true then you must believe that there was corruption and a cover up by the FBI. Is that right?

No duh? Why do you believe Comey and Strozk were fired?

Comey was gored because he wouldn’t drop the Flynn investigation and Strzok because he sent anti trump text messages to a colleague and presented a conflict of interest. Do you disagree with any of that?

 

[iceberg]

You didn't read them til today. You were attributing my statements to someone elses points and calling me wrong because you didn't read my own source.

I don't give a damn about the topic at this point because I've found in time any effort I make to debate you will:

Not read it
Dismiss as media you don't trust
Trust media on trumps lies
Tell me I simply use right wing talking points OF WHICH you'd not know cause you didn't read my posts.

Like I said, I won't bother to do this again. The topic doesn't matter if you are not going to listen to what I am saying or see your own double standards.

 

[easyt65]

At the end of the day, when the Russian sabotage in favor of Trump was discovered,...

That's just it...there never was such a thing..

Trump-haters are so blinded by that hate they either refuse to see or are just to ignorant to understand what a Coy yet-Intelligence Operations is, especially one run by ex-KGB like Putin.

The Russians have gotten more benefit from the massive division in this country, still being affected by the Democrats refusal to let go of / end their failed coup attempt than they would have by any one candidate winning with little to no controversy / division.

How did the Russians try 'sabotage Hillary' and 'benefit' from using social media to con and emotionally manipulate radical Trump-hating snowflakes by getting them to organize and march for them?

How did the Russians try 'sabotage Hillary' and 'benefit' from authoring much of the fake news propaganda in the Dossier and selling it /passing it on to Hillary through the Trump-hating foreign spy Steele?

How did the Russians benefit from the DNC Chairwoman admitting the DNC stacked the deck against Bernie, helped Hillary cheat in debates, and finally giving Hillary the nomination?

 

[Third Party]

At the end of the day, when the Russian sabotage in favor of Trump was discovered, America should have let the attacks continue without investigation. We should have never looked into the guy who the sabotage campaign directly benefitted, who also happens to have deep financial ties to Russia and who’s top officials were outed as criminals.

except we can't find a valid reason to investigate trump except you don't like him.

all the rest of what you say is bullshit and unverifiable without emotions pushing them.

russia trolled the shit out of us. not illegal now is it? if so you'd be banned from this forum in seconds, dude.

we'll see what barr finds. my guess is you're about to start crying like a little girl who's hair got put into the inkwell.

Our intelligence agencies unanimously agreed that Russia attacked our election, the attacks were in favor of Trump, Trump has deep financial ties to Russia, Trump’s people had secret meetings with Russians, Trump had criminals at the highest levels of his campaign. All of that is undeniable. Had Trump not tried so hard to obstruct justice, maybe this could have ended sooner for him.

And sadly we’ll never hear from the 12 Russians Mueller wanted to take to court, because the Russian government wants Trump in power.

Wow, what blind faith. I don't believe our intelligence agencies entirely. That's why the Durham investigation is needed-to restore faith in those agencies that seemed to have played fast and loose with the rules. Maybe Trump is less involved than we thought, and maybe Obama is more involved. A little bit of light shined on the whole deal couldn't hurt.

 

[Care4all]

But that’s not how it went down. The 33k emails were deleted in March 2015. The email server investigation was in 2016.

um...no.

Hillary Clinton’s Email: the Definitive Timeline | Sharyl Attkisson

they were asking for any benghazi info in 2014. so by your timeline, she stalled and then deleted them.

2014
May 5: Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., is named head of the House Benghazi Committee to investigate the 2012 terrorist attacks.

May 8: House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, formally announces formation of House Benghazi Committee.

June 13: Judicial Watch files a FOI request with State Dept. seeking Benghazi information and Clinton notes.

August: State Dept. provides House Benghazi Committee with eight emails to or from Clinton that, for the first time, show her use of a private email account.

Sept. 4: Judicial Watch sues State Dept. for failure to respond to a June 13, 2014 FOI request seeking Benghazi records and Clinton notes.

Sept. 17: House Benghazi Committee holds its first public hearing. Topic: implementation of ARB recommendations.

October: State Dept. sends letters to Clinton and her three predecessors as secretary of state seeking work emails related to personal accounts.

Nov. 18: House Benghazi Committee makes additional request for Clinton emails from State Dept.

Nov. 26: President Obama signs into law an updated Federal Records Act requiring public officials to forward all work-related email to their government address.

December: House Benghazi Committee sends request to the White House for documents and communications pertaining to Benghazi.

Dec. 5: Clinton privately turns over copies of 30,490 “work-related” emails to the State Dept. totaling 55,000 printed pages. No date has been provided as to when she deleted her “private” emails, but it is presumed to be around this time frame.

Dec. 10: House Benghazi Committee holds second public hearing. Topic: implementation of ARB recommendations.
-----
so unless you're a better investigative reporter than sharyl, i would discount your time line and go with hers. asked for in mid 2014, deleted and eventually turned over by the end of 2014.

so yes, the government asked for her e-mail, personal and all, and then she deleted it.

https://www.usnews.com/news/article...clinton-emails-may-have-asked-reddit-for-tips

On July 24, 2014, stonetear posted to reddit:

Hello all- I may be facing a very interesting situation where I need to strip out a VIP's (VERY VIP) email address from a bunch of archived email that I have both in a live Exchange mailbox, as well as a PST file. Basically, they don't want the VIP's email address exposed to anyone, and want to be able to either strip out or replace the email address in the to/from fields in all of the emails we want to send out.

I am not sure if something like this is possible with PowerShell, or exporting all of the emails to MSG and doing find/replaces with a batch processing program of some sort.
==========
June 13th they ask for her information.
July 24th this guy is in the forums asking how to delete it - later found to be Platt River Networks IT guy managing their server. and look what he wants to do? HIDE WHO DID WHAT. tell me again how you do this for wedding plans and yoga discussion.
Aug they *start* to provide info and we learn of server.
December - they're "gone"

but hey - this is fine and not fishy at all, right? trump gets same latitude?

Everything you’ve shown me are requests for work related emails. Every email that she was supposed to turn in has copy’s out there in other people’s inboxes. The FBI never found or took issue with the emails that were turned over except for the several classified ones they discovered. That’s where the wrong doing was. I don’t know why her deleting personal emails ever became an issue but that was a Trump/right wing talking point not an issue that law enforcement had.

What the FBI "took issue with" isn't relevant since we know criminals like Comey and Peter Strozk were in charge.

Yes sorry, I forgot about the deep state business. My bad

In the end slade she deleted mail AFTER being asked for it. OF WHICH you said she did 2 years before the server was investigated OF WHICH I proved otherwise, so you bounced off that way opic and rerouted. Moved the goalposts and honestly you've become quite frustrating to talk to now.

That is reason to doubt anyone. That makes every scenario I've given correxmct and you've not refuted anything with facts or links just keep coming back to me being a right wing nut, again. I'm sick of that bullshit bogus "card" the left loves to play. You can't address my points so you pull this.

I'm out. I may as well be talking to stark hutsky at this point cause facts now just don't matter. i prove one point wrong you gloss over it and ignore it.

No, my dear.... the emails that were deleted, were the personal emails that were left over, AFTER they turned over the 33k govt emails to the State department in December of 2014, of which she had every right to delete them, because she was only responsible for turning over all of her govt emails to the State department, so they could have all of them archived.

That same month, her server was sent by her staff to the computer maintenance company that was handling their account with instructions to delete all of the files off of it....

of which you and I have discussed where I thought it was being prepared for re-use/re-purposed or to be sold, and all of the files on it needed to be completely removed, especially govt files....imo....

Regardless, the computer guy did not do it back when he got the server, then remembered he should have... and then did such at the end of March 2015, two weeks after Clinton got a subpoena from the House of Representatives....

REGARDLESS of him doing such, the deleted private emails, the 30 thousand Trump asked the Russians to find, were not govt emails and were hers to do with, what she wanted...

That's the part that your thick skull can't seem to understand, get.

the Congress committee Subpoenaed Clinton's Benghazi and Libya emails earlier in March, 2015...

they DID NOT ever subpoena the Clinton personal emails, that were deleted and bleach bit in late March by the Platt river Computer maintenance guy.

Even if he were ordered to delete them after the subpoena was delivered in March 2015, they were never subpoenaed by Congress.

Here is the link for the Congressional Subpoena.... brb.

https://archives-benghazi-republicans-oversight.house.gov/sites/republicans.benghazi.house.gov/files/Kendall.Clinton Subpoena - 2015.03.04.pdf

 

[iceberg]

um...no.

Hillary Clinton’s Email: the Definitive Timeline | Sharyl Attkisson

they were asking for any benghazi info in 2014. so by your timeline, she stalled and then deleted them.

2014
May 5: Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., is named head of the House Benghazi Committee to investigate the 2012 terrorist attacks.

May 8: House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, formally announces formation of House Benghazi Committee.

June 13: Judicial Watch files a FOI request with State Dept. seeking Benghazi information and Clinton notes.

August: State Dept. provides House Benghazi Committee with eight emails to or from Clinton that, for the first time, show her use of a private email account.

Sept. 4: Judicial Watch sues State Dept. for failure to respond to a June 13, 2014 FOI request seeking Benghazi records and Clinton notes.

Sept. 17: House Benghazi Committee holds its first public hearing. Topic: implementation of ARB recommendations.

October: State Dept. sends letters to Clinton and her three predecessors as secretary of state seeking work emails related to personal accounts.

Nov. 18: House Benghazi Committee makes additional request for Clinton emails from State Dept.

Nov. 26: President Obama signs into law an updated Federal Records Act requiring public officials to forward all work-related email to their government address.

December: House Benghazi Committee sends request to the White House for documents and communications pertaining to Benghazi.

Dec. 5: Clinton privately turns over copies of 30,490 “work-related” emails to the State Dept. totaling 55,000 printed pages. No date has been provided as to when she deleted her “private” emails, but it is presumed to be around this time frame.

Dec. 10: House Benghazi Committee holds second public hearing. Topic: implementation of ARB recommendations.
-----
so unless you're a better investigative reporter than sharyl, i would discount your time line and go with hers. asked for in mid 2014, deleted and eventually turned over by the end of 2014.

so yes, the government asked for her e-mail, personal and all, and then she deleted it.

https://www.usnews.com/news/article...clinton-emails-may-have-asked-reddit-for-tips

On July 24, 2014, stonetear posted to reddit:

Hello all- I may be facing a very interesting situation where I need to strip out a VIP's (VERY VIP) email address from a bunch of archived email that I have both in a live Exchange mailbox, as well as a PST file. Basically, they don't want the VIP's email address exposed to anyone, and want to be able to either strip out or replace the email address in the to/from fields in all of the emails we want to send out.

I am not sure if something like this is possible with PowerShell, or exporting all of the emails to MSG and doing find/replaces with a batch processing program of some sort.
==========
June 13th they ask for her information.
July 24th this guy is in the forums asking how to delete it - later found to be Platt River Networks IT guy managing their server. and look what he wants to do? HIDE WHO DID WHAT. tell me again how you do this for wedding plans and yoga discussion.
Aug they *start* to provide info and we learn of server.
December - they're "gone"

but hey - this is fine and not fishy at all, right? trump gets same latitude?

Everything you’ve shown me are requests for work related emails. Every email that she was supposed to turn in has copy’s out there in other people’s inboxes. The FBI never found or took issue with the emails that were turned over except for the several classified ones they discovered. That’s where the wrong doing was. I don’t know why her deleting personal emails ever became an issue but that was a Trump/right wing talking point not an issue that law enforcement had.

What the FBI "took issue with" isn't relevant since we know criminals like Comey and Peter Strozk were in charge.

Yes sorry, I forgot about the deep state business. My bad

In the end slade she deleted mail AFTER being asked for it. OF WHICH you said she did 2 years before the server was investigated OF WHICH I proved otherwise, so you bounced off that way opic and rerouted. Moved the goalposts and honestly you've become quite frustrating to talk to now.

That is reason to doubt anyone. That makes every scenario I've given correxmct and you've not refuted anything with facts or links just keep coming back to me being a right wing nut, again. I'm sick of that bullshit bogus "card" the left loves to play. You can't address my points so you pull this.

I'm out. I may as well be talking to stark hutsky at this point cause facts now just don't matter. i prove one point wrong you gloss over it and ignore it.

No, my dear.... the emails that were deleted, were the personal emails that were left over, AFTER they turned over the 33k govt emails to the State department in December of 2014, of which she had every right to delete them, because she was only responsible for turning over all of her govt emails to the State department, so they could have all of them archived.

That same month, her server was sent by her staff to the computer maintenance company that was handling their account with instructions to delete all of the files off of it....

of which you and I have discussed where I thought it was being prepared for re-use/re-purposed or to be sold, and all of the files on it needed to be completely removed, especially govt files....imo....

Regardless, the computer guy did not do it back when he got the server, then remembered he should have... and then did such at the end of March 2015, two weeks after Clinton got a subpoena from the House of Representatives....

REGARDLESS of him doing such, the deleted private emails, the 30 thousand Trump asked the Russians to find, were not govt emails and were hers to do with, what she wanted...

That's the part that your thick skull can't seem to understand, get.

the Congress committee Subpoenaed Clinton's Benghazi and Libya emails earlier in March, 2015...

they DID NOT ever subpoena the Clinton personal emails, that were deleted and bleach bit in late March by the Platt river Computer maintenance guy.

Even if he were ordered to delete them after the subpoena was delivered in March 2015, they were never subpoenaed by Congress.

Here is the link.... brb.

I'll flat out say I don't read your shit but have fun typing.
My dear.

 

[Slade3200]

You didn't read them til today. You were attributing my statements to someone elses points and calling me wrong because you didn't read my own source.

I don't give a damn about the topic at this point because I've found in time any effort I make to debate you will:

Not read it
Dismiss as media you don't trust
Trust media on trumps lies
Tell me I simply use right wing talking points OF WHICH you'd not know cause you didn't read my posts.

Like I said, I won't bother to do this again. The topic doesn't matter if you are not going to listen to what I am saying or see your own double standards.

I read your points but didn’t click the links. Wasn’t dismissing or avoiding what you were saying, I tried to provide direct responses, but you also weren’t directly responding to my points. For example you haven’t shown where the FBI requested her personal emails. But you’ve explained the rest of our conflict in your belief that the FBI was covering up for Clinton. You have every right to believe that, I just don’t agree. I hope after Barr is done you will reconsider your position as I’d be willing to bet nothing improper is found regard the Clinton investigation

 

[iceberg]

You didn't read them til today. You were attributing my statements to someone elses points and calling me wrong because you didn't read my own source.

I don't give a damn about the topic at this point because I've found in time any effort I make to debate you will:

Not read it
Dismiss as media you don't trust
Trust media on trumps lies
Tell me I simply use right wing talking points OF WHICH you'd not know cause you didn't read my posts.

Like I said, I won't bother to do this again. The topic doesn't matter if you are not going to listen to what I am saying or see your own double standards.

I read your points but didn’t click the links. Wasn’t dismissing or avoiding what you were saying, I tried to provide direct responses, but you also weren’t directly responding to my points. For example you haven’t shown where the FBI requested her personal emails. But you’ve explained the rest of our conflict in your belief that the FBI was covering up for Clinton. You have every right to believe that, I just don’t agree. I hope after Barr is done you will reconsider your position as I’d be willing to bet nothing improper is found regard the Clinton investigation

I did. You just said sharyl is right wing and moved on.

Pretty hard to debate people who do that.

 

[Slade3200]

Everything you’ve shown me are requests for work related emails. Every email that she was supposed to turn in has copy’s out there in other people’s inboxes. The FBI never found or took issue with the emails that were turned over except for the several classified ones they discovered. That’s where the wrong doing was. I don’t know why her deleting personal emails ever became an issue but that was a Trump/right wing talking point not an issue that law enforcement had.

What the FBI "took issue with" isn't relevant since we know criminals like Comey and Peter Strozk were in charge.

Yes sorry, I forgot about the deep state business. My bad

In the end slade she deleted mail AFTER being asked for it. OF WHICH you said she did 2 years before the server was investigated OF WHICH I proved otherwise, so you bounced off that way opic and rerouted. Moved the goalposts and honestly you've become quite frustrating to talk to now.

That is reason to doubt anyone. That makes every scenario I've given correxmct and you've not refuted anything with facts or links just keep coming back to me being a right wing nut, again. I'm sick of that bullshit bogus "card" the left loves to play. You can't address my points so you pull this.

I'm out. I may as well be talking to stark hutsky at this point cause facts now just don't matter. i prove one point wrong you gloss over it and ignore it.

No, my dear.... the emails that were deleted, were the personal emails that were left over, AFTER they turned over the 33k govt emails to the State department in December of 2014, of which she had every right to delete them, because she was only responsible for turning over all of her govt emails to the State department, so they could have all of them archived.

That same month, her server was sent by her staff to the computer maintenance company that was handling their account with instructions to delete all of the files off of it....

of which you and I have discussed where I thought it was being prepared for re-use/re-purposed or to be sold, and all of the files on it needed to be completely removed, especially govt files....imo....

Regardless, the computer guy did not do it back when he got the server, then remembered he should have... and then did such at the end of March 2015, two weeks after Clinton got a subpoena from the House of Representatives....

REGARDLESS of him doing such, the deleted private emails, the 30 thousand Trump asked the Russians to find, were not govt emails and were hers to do with, what she wanted...

That's the part that your thick skull can't seem to understand, get.

the Congress committee Subpoenaed Clinton's Benghazi and Libya emails earlier in March, 2015...

they DID NOT ever subpoena the Clinton personal emails, that were deleted and bleach bit in late March by the Platt river Computer maintenance guy.

Even if he were ordered to delete them after the subpoena was delivered in March 2015, they were never subpoenaed by Congress.

Here is the link.... brb.

I'll flat out say I don't read your shit but have fun typing.
My dear.

Wow, after the lecture I just got for not checking your links?!

 

[Slade3200]

You didn't read them til today. You were attributing my statements to someone elses points and calling me wrong because you didn't read my own source.

I don't give a damn about the topic at this point because I've found in time any effort I make to debate you will:

Not read it
Dismiss as media you don't trust
Trust media on trumps lies
Tell me I simply use right wing talking points OF WHICH you'd not know cause you didn't read my posts.

Like I said, I won't bother to do this again. The topic doesn't matter if you are not going to listen to what I am saying or see your own double standards.

I read your points but didn’t click the links. Wasn’t dismissing or avoiding what you were saying, I tried to provide direct responses, but you also weren’t directly responding to my points. For example you haven’t shown where the FBI requested her personal emails. But you’ve explained the rest of our conflict in your belief that the FBI was covering up for Clinton. You have every right to believe that, I just don’t agree. I hope after Barr is done you will reconsider your position as I’d be willing to bet nothing improper is found regard the Clinton investigation

I did. You just said sharyl is right wing and moved on.

Pretty hard to debate people who do that.

It was a blog by a reporter. That’s fine and dandy but I bet I can find a half dozen of those with differing accounts. i also didn’t dismiss it, I don’t think her account was in conflict with any of the substantive points I was making. You used her link as a counter argument to a statement I made using the info from Bripats politifact link. I’m fine using hers if you’d like to, I don’t think it changes the core of my arguments