Vast Anti-Clinton Conspiracy Industry Loses Another Battle

[Procrustes Stretched]

Vast Anti-Clinton Conspiracy Industry Loses Another Battle​

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/12/u...-authority-to-delete-certain-emails.html?_r=0

Justice Dept. Says Hillary Clinton Had Authority to Delete Certain Emails
By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDTSEPT. 11, 2015

“There is no question that former Secretary Clinton had authority to delete personal emails without agency supervision — she appropriately could have done so even if she were working on a government server,” the filing said. “Under policies issue both by the National Archives and Records Administration and the State Department, individual officers and employees are permitted and expected to exercise judgment to determine what constitutes a federal record.”

...

Mr. Pagliano’s lawyer has contended that there is no incentive for his client to cooperate with investigations into Mrs. Clinton’s email account. Two senior Republican senators, Charles E. Grassley of Iowa and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, said on Tuesday that they were considering giving Mr. Pagliano immunity.

In a letter to Mr. Pagliano’s lawyer, they said that they “will certainly respect and defer to any legitimate assertion of an individual’s constitutional rights.”

They added, “With that being said, the committees also need the unique information you likely have in order to exercise their oversight functions under the Constitution, which are unrelated to any potential prosecution or criminal inquiry.”​

the witch hunt will continue when the kangaroo court of public opinion comes out of recess

 

[Sallow]

Doesn't matter if it's the executive branch that classifies information, Secretary Clinton, at the time, being part of the branch.
Doesn't matter if Colin Powell did basically the same thing.
Doesn't matter if Bush/Cheney did basically the same thing.
This will never, ever end in the mind of a conservative.
They are still postulating a 2nd Civil war.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

The current Justice Department will never pursue a case against any top Democrat.

 

[Bassman007]

Vast Anti-Clinton Conspiracy Industry Loses Another Battle​

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/12/u...-authority-to-delete-certain-emails.html?_r=0

Justice Dept. Says Hillary Clinton Had Authority to Delete Certain Emails
By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDTSEPT. 11, 2015

“There is no question that former Secretary Clinton had authority to delete personal emails without agency supervision — she appropriately could have done so even if she were working on a government server,” the filing said. “Under policies issue both by the National Archives and Records Administration and the State Department, individual officers and employees are permitted and expected to exercise judgment to determine what constitutes a federal record.”

...

Mr. Pagliano’s lawyer has contended that there is no incentive for his client to cooperate with investigations into Mrs. Clinton’s email account. Two senior Republican senators, Charles E. Grassley of Iowa and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, said on Tuesday that they were considering giving Mr. Pagliano immunity.

In a letter to Mr. Pagliano’s lawyer, they said that they “will certainly respect and defer to any legitimate assertion of an individual’s constitutional rights.”

They added, “With that being said, the committees also need the unique information you likely have in order to exercise their oversight functions under the Constitution, which are unrelated to any potential prosecution or criminal inquiry.”​

the witch hunt will continue when the kangaroo court of public opinion comes out of recess

Not at all, in fact the FBI is still investigating the e-mail trail, and looking to see how many foreign hackers intercepted these e-mails. Now that the justice dept is defending Hillary, we know that they also are scared, as it was their job to keep their e-mails safe and secure, and they did not even have Hillary's e-mail address. The Justice Dept. is now being sued Why I'm suing the State Department over Hillary Clinton's email scandal

If it is now policy to allow private lawyers to hoard potentially classified information, the public is entitled to know the authority by which such policies are maintained, and who is permitted such generous treatment. The public is owed an explanation for blind eyes turned, in the case of Kendall and Clinton, to the obvious dangers to national security. Did no one at State object to this? And if so, who overruled those objections?

To find out, Kel McClanahan and I have filed suit against the U.S. State Department. Our lawsuit is the result of a Freedom of Information Act request for records concerning State's decision-making in this matter. The State Department first acknowledged our request, and agreed to expedite its processing. Then they ended all correspondence. Americans have the legal right to these records, and our goal is to compel State to hand them over.

This goes beyond politics. If the State Department wants to pick and choose which private citizens get to store classified material at their homes or offices, the public needs an explanation of how such decisions are made, and why. Once we know that, we might know just how poorly our secrets are really being kept.

This story now involves the entire Obama administration.

 

[Bassman007]

The current Justice Department will never pursue a case against any top Democrat.

Well and simply stated.

 

[TheOldSchool]

All this e-mail "scandal" tells me is that the Benghazi witch hunt must have completely fallen apart. They're resorting to this much more boring story and hoping they can drag it out to November 2016. And then I'll bet you anything, just like the Ebola terror of last year, it will vanish the second the election's over.

Unless the investigations are allowed to be concluded once they find zero wrong-doing.

 

[PredFan]

Here let me fix the title of this thread for you. There seems to be a typographical error:

"Truth Loses Another Battle"

 

[OKTexas]

Vast Anti-Clinton Conspiracy Industry Loses Another Battle​

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/12/u...-authority-to-delete-certain-emails.html?_r=0

Justice Dept. Says Hillary Clinton Had Authority to Delete Certain Emails
By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDTSEPT. 11, 2015

“There is no question that former Secretary Clinton had authority to delete personal emails without agency supervision — she appropriately could have done so even if she were working on a government server,” the filing said. “Under policies issue both by the National Archives and Records Administration and the State Department, individual officers and employees are permitted and expected to exercise judgment to determine what constitutes a federal record.”

...

Mr. Pagliano’s lawyer has contended that there is no incentive for his client to cooperate with investigations into Mrs. Clinton’s email account. Two senior Republican senators, Charles E. Grassley of Iowa and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, said on Tuesday that they were considering giving Mr. Pagliano immunity.

In a letter to Mr. Pagliano’s lawyer, they said that they “will certainly respect and defer to any legitimate assertion of an individual’s constitutional rights.”

They added, “With that being said, the committees also need the unique information you likely have in order to exercise their oversight functions under the Constitution, which are unrelated to any potential prosecution or criminal inquiry.”​

the witch hunt will continue when the kangaroo court of public opinion comes out of recess

So what did they say about the work related emails she destroyed or attempted to destroy?

What did they say about her perjury, stating she turned over all work related email in a sworn deposition, when she didn't?

What did they say about her failure to secure classified information, the law doesn't care if it was by intention or neglect, both carry the same penalty?

What did they say about her sending and receiving sensitive but unclassified information over unsecured systems?

Right, all that is still being investigated, isn't it?

Your attempt to focus on just personal, non-work related email is a laughable deflection. Carry on partisan hack.

 

[Bassman007]

Vast Anti-Clinton Conspiracy Industry Loses Another Battle​

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/12/u...-authority-to-delete-certain-emails.html?_r=0

Justice Dept. Says Hillary Clinton Had Authority to Delete Certain Emails
By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDTSEPT. 11, 2015

“There is no question that former Secretary Clinton had authority to delete personal emails without agency supervision — she appropriately could have done so even if she were working on a government server,” the filing said. “Under policies issue both by the National Archives and Records Administration and the State Department, individual officers and employees are permitted and expected to exercise judgment to determine what constitutes a federal record.”

...

Mr. Pagliano’s lawyer has contended that there is no incentive for his client to cooperate with investigations into Mrs. Clinton’s email account. Two senior Republican senators, Charles E. Grassley of Iowa and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, said on Tuesday that they were considering giving Mr. Pagliano immunity.

In a letter to Mr. Pagliano’s lawyer, they said that they “will certainly respect and defer to any legitimate assertion of an individual’s constitutional rights.”

They added, “With that being said, the committees also need the unique information you likely have in order to exercise their oversight functions under the Constitution, which are unrelated to any potential prosecution or criminal inquiry.”​

the witch hunt will continue when the kangaroo court of public opinion comes out of recess

So what did they say about the work related emails she destroyed or attempted to destroy?

What did they say about her perjury, stating she turned over all work related email in a sworn deposition, when she didn't?

What did they say about her failure to secure classified information, the law doesn't care if it was by intention or neglect, both carry the same penalty?

What did they say about her sending and receiving sensitive but unclassified information over unsecured systems?

Right, all that is still being investigated, isn't it?

Your attempt to focus on just personal, non-work related email is a laughable deflection. Carry on partisan hack.

The FBI has not said anything yet that I am aware of, they also just got another 30,000 e-mails handed to them from an eastern European hacker who had no problem intercepting them, so they are getting no break. This is huge because every e-mail is another network and name to check.

The FBI has already confirmed with the CIA that there was classified information sent to Hillary, and the senders removed classified labels, thus Hillary had classified material sent to her by criminals. The great thing though, is if the receiver does not report this to the authorities they become the criminal too, as this violates espionage laws. She did all of this, and told people to send her this info, it's a crime as it was deliberate.

 

[BIG YANK BAL 1976]

Doesn't matter if it's the executive branch that classifies information, Secretary Clinton, at the time, being part of the branch.
Doesn't matter if Colin Powell did basically the same thing.
Doesn't matter if Bush/Cheney did basically the same thing.
This will never, ever end in the mind of a conservative.
They are still postulating a 2nd Civil war.

Go ahead please let's have another civil war so the North can kick your inbred sorry ass poor destitute Southern asses AGAIN!! BRING IT

 

[Auld Phart]

Doesn't matter if it's the executive branch that classifies information, Secretary Clinton, at the time, being part of the branch.
Doesn't matter if Colin Powell did basically the same thing.
Doesn't matter if Bush/Cheney did basically the same thing.
This will never, ever end in the mind of a conservative.
They are still postulating a 2nd Civil war.

Go ahead please let's have another civil war so the North can kick your inbred sorry ass poor destitute Southern asses AGAIN!! BRING IT

You think the next Civil War will be between the North and the South?

More likely between the Left and the Right, with no way to tell the soldiers apart,

more likely a race war, which I'll gladly sit out.

 

[BIG YANK BAL 1976]

The Clinton's own the Garbage right, just like Obama does, slick Willie won 2 landslides as President, and that Ben Gazzi, and email Bullshit didn't amount to a can of beans, LOL.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The current Justice Department will never pursue a case against any top Democrat.

Really?

What planet are you living on?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Bassman007

Vast Anti-Clinton Conspiracy Industry Loses Another Battle​

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/12/u...-authority-to-delete-certain-emails.html?_r=0

Justice Dept. Says Hillary Clinton Had Authority to Delete Certain Emails
By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDTSEPT. 11, 2015

“There is no question that former Secretary Clinton had authority to delete personal emails without agency supervision — she appropriately could have done so even if she were working on a government server,” the filing said. “Under policies issue both by the National Archives and Records Administration and the State Department, individual officers and employees are permitted and expected to exercise judgment to determine what constitutes a federal record.”

...

Mr. Pagliano’s lawyer has contended that there is no incentive for his client to cooperate with investigations into Mrs. Clinton’s email account. Two senior Republican senators, Charles E. Grassley of Iowa and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, said on Tuesday that they were considering giving Mr. Pagliano immunity.

In a letter to Mr. Pagliano’s lawyer, they said that they “will certainly respect and defer to any legitimate assertion of an individual’s constitutional rights.”

They added, “With that being said, the committees also need the unique information you likely have in order to exercise their oversight functions under the Constitution, which are unrelated to any potential prosecution or criminal inquiry.”​

the witch hunt will continue when the kangaroo court of public opinion comes out of recess

(1) Not at all, in fact the FBI is still investigating the e-mail trail, and looking to see how many foreign hackers intercepted these e-mails. Now that the justice dept is defending Hillary, we know that they also are scared, as it was their job to keep their e-mails safe and secure, and they did not even have Hillary's e-mail address. The Justice Dept. is now being sued Why I'm suing the State Department over Hillary Clinton's email scandal

(2) If it is now policy to allow private lawyers to hoard potentially classified information, the public is entitled to know the authority by which such policies are maintained, and who is permitted such generous treatment. The public is owed an explanation for blind eyes turned, in the case of Kendall and Clinton, to the obvious dangers to national security. Did no one at State object to this? And if so, who overruled those objections?

(3) To find out, Kel McClanahan and I have filed suit against the U.S. State Department. Our lawsuit is the result of a Freedom of Information Act request for records concerning State's decision-making in this matter. The State Department first acknowledged our request, and agreed to expedite its processing. Then they ended all correspondence. Americans have the legal right to these records, and our goal is to compel State to hand them over.

This goes beyond politics. If the State Department wants to pick and choose which private citizens get to store classified material at their homes or offices, the public needs an explanation of how such decisions are made, and why. Once we know that, we might know just how poorly our secrets are really being kept.

This story now involves the entire Obama administration.

(1) Ohhhh, a non-criminal investigation and what could turn out to be a frivolous lawsuit by a veteran who writes fiction novels!

And you are also saying the Justice Dept did not have the email address of the Secretary of State? Sounds like the Clinton's hiding in plain sight

(2) Political rant

(3) ... Oh! you are quoting a piece without attribution? Looked at first like you have the ability to form coherent thoughts of your own.

Please provide a link to an article and next time indent or something so it is clear from the very first paragraph that you are using the material of others

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

OKTexas

Vast Anti-Clinton Conspiracy Industry Loses Another Battle​

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/12/u...-authority-to-delete-certain-emails.html?_r=0

Justice Dept. Says Hillary Clinton Had Authority to Delete Certain Emails
By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDTSEPT. 11, 2015

“There is no question that former Secretary Clinton had authority to delete personal emails without agency supervision — she appropriately could have done so even if she were working on a government server,” the filing said. “Under policies issue both by the National Archives and Records Administration and the State Department, individual officers and employees are permitted and expected to exercise judgment to determine what constitutes a federal record.”

...

Mr. Pagliano’s lawyer has contended that there is no incentive for his client to cooperate with investigations into Mrs. Clinton’s email account. Two senior Republican senators, Charles E. Grassley of Iowa and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, said on Tuesday that they were considering giving Mr. Pagliano immunity.

In a letter to Mr. Pagliano’s lawyer, they said that they “will certainly respect and defer to any legitimate assertion of an individual’s constitutional rights.”

They added, “With that being said, the committees also need the unique information you likely have in order to exercise their oversight functions under the Constitution, which are unrelated to any potential prosecution or criminal inquiry.”​

the witch hunt will continue when the kangaroo court of public opinion comes out of recess

(1) So what did they say about the work related emails she destroyed or attempted to destroy?

(2) What did they say about her perjury, stating she turned over all work related email in a sworn deposition, when she didn't?

(3) What did they say about her failure to secure classified information, the law doesn't care if it was by intention or neglect, both carry the same penalty?

(4) What did they say about her sending and receiving sensitive but unclassified information over unsecured systems?

(5) Right, all that is still being investigated, isn't it?

(6) Your attempt to focus on just personal, non-work related email is a laughable deflection. Carry on partisan hack.

(1) Work related emails Hillary Clinton destroyed or attempted to destroy? You do know anyone she emailed has copies on their servers? Did you make this up or is it a Right Wing Noise fabrication?

(2) Perjury? Hmm... Wonder why she hasn't been charged with such a horrendous crime? Maybe it never happened?

(3) Hmm... I wonder if you know what you are talking about here.

(4) What about it? The NYT has been all over it. So much for left wing media protecting the Clintons Oh, a high crime or misdemeanor!!!

(5) Ohhh, investigations! Somebody call FOX News

(6) Only focused on an article with facts, not an article with baseless accusations and innuendos. Sorry, just the facts ma'am

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Vast Anti-Clinton Conspiracy Industry Loses Another Battle​

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/12/u...-authority-to-delete-certain-emails.html?_r=0

Justice Dept. Says Hillary Clinton Had Authority to Delete Certain Emails
By MICHAEL S. SCHMIDTSEPT. 11, 2015

“There is no question that former Secretary Clinton had authority to delete personal emails without agency supervision — she appropriately could have done so even if she were working on a government server,” the filing said. “Under policies issue both by the National Archives and Records Administration and the State Department, individual officers and employees are permitted and expected to exercise judgment to determine what constitutes a federal record.”

...

Mr. Pagliano’s lawyer has contended that there is no incentive for his client to cooperate with investigations into Mrs. Clinton’s email account. Two senior Republican senators, Charles E. Grassley of Iowa and Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, said on Tuesday that they were considering giving Mr. Pagliano immunity.

In a letter to Mr. Pagliano’s lawyer, they said that they “will certainly respect and defer to any legitimate assertion of an individual’s constitutional rights.”

They added, “With that being said, the committees also need the unique information you likely have in order to exercise their oversight functions under the Constitution, which are unrelated to any potential prosecution or criminal inquiry.”​

the witch hunt will continue when the kangaroo court of public opinion comes out of recess

So what did they say about the work related emails she destroyed or attempted to destroy?

What did they say about her perjury, stating she turned over all work related email in a sworn deposition, when she didn't?

What did they say about her failure to secure classified information, the law doesn't care if it was by intention or neglect, both carry the same penalty?

What did they say about her sending and receiving sensitive but unclassified information over unsecured systems?

Right, all that is still being investigated, isn't it?

Your attempt to focus on just personal, non-work related email is a laughable deflection. Carry on partisan hack.

The FBI has not said anything yet that I am aware of, they also just got another 30,000 e-mails handed to them from an eastern European hacker who had no problem intercepting them, so they are getting no break. This is huge because every e-mail is another network and name to check.

The FBI has already confirmed with the CIA that there was classified information sent to Hillary, and the senders removed classified labels, thus Hillary had classified material sent to her by criminals. The great thing though, is if the receiver does not report this to the authorities they become the criminal too, as this violates espionage laws. She did all of this, and told people to send her this info, it's a crime as it was deliberate.

Really? Wow! Who knew. Where do you get this stuff?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Obama is behind the investigation and just put 50 more guys on it.

Hillary needs to go nuclear on him and spill the beans on how he armed Al Qaeda and ISIS

 

[Statistikhengst]

Doesn't matter if it's the executive branch that classifies information, Secretary Clinton, at the time, being part of the branch.
Doesn't matter if Colin Powell did basically the same thing.
Doesn't matter if Bush/Cheney did basically the same thing.
This will never, ever end in the mind of a conservative.
They are still postulating a 2nd Civil war.

It has become a fix-part of the RWNJ "take our country back!" wet-dream regimen.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Doesn't matter if it's the executive branch that classifies information, Secretary Clinton, at the time, being part of the branch.
Doesn't matter if Colin Powell did basically the same thing.
Doesn't matter if Bush/Cheney did basically the same thing.
This will never, ever end in the mind of a conservative.
They are still postulating a 2nd Civil war.

It has become a fix-part of the RWNJ "take our country back!" wet-dream regimen.

"take our country back!"
Rush Limbaugh's rallying cry in early 2009, a month or two into Obama's Presidency -- before Obama had done a thing.



Rush compares Dean saying "take our country back" with his saying it. He accused Eric Holder of being wrong on hearing the dog whistle when Rush said it. But let us look at the fuller context.

Dean was saying DEAN: We are taking our country back piece by piece from the Rush Limbaughs. You have the power to take back our country so that the flag no longer represents solely Rush Limbaugh. You have the power to take back our country so that the flag never again is the sole property of Rush Limbaugh. We have the power to take back our country so that the flag of the United States is no longer the sole property of Rush Limbaugh. This country does not belong to Rush Limbaugh. Move over. I want my country back again because the flag of this country does not belong to Rush Limbaugh. You have the power to take back the flag so it does no longer belong solely with Rush Limbaugh.​

after years of Rush and Co. claiming America as theirs and holding our flag hostage to right wing nonsense

 

[Statistikhengst]

Isn't it amazing how such a little catch-phrase can suddenly become a cry for bloodlust....?