A review of just 40 of the thirty some-odd thousand emails on her server turned up four that contained classified information.
She has previously stated that she used that price server exclusively her entire tenure as Secretary of State (along with, it turns out, her top aides). Do you a) honestly believe that during her entire tenure as Secretary of State she never received any emails that contained classified information and that b) those four classified, yet not marked as such, emails are the only classified emails her attorneys failed to delete when they reviewed her 60,000 plus emails?
She never should have had the server, she was required to turn over all work-related materials (including, but not limited to her emails) within 60 days of leaving government service, and her inability to prove the emails she did turn over represents all government/work-related emails makes it impossible for her to establish any credibility on the matter.
And no, other Secretaries of State did not do the same thing - forwarding emails to a private account from your government account is not the same thing as never, ever allowing any of your own official emails ever touch a government server.
Try this mental exercise - take any story on Hillary and her private email server and do two things: everywhere it mentions her role as Secretary of State substitute Vice President, and everywhere you see Hillary's name replace it with Dick Cheney...
So the argument is that a politicians placement in google search results influences election results.
I think it's quaint that the authors imagine that American voters are curious enough to look up politicians online in order to inform their vote yet too lazy to read past the first few entries in Google.
The top results in Google are the stories flying around social media, and the stories flying around social media are the only stories most Americans are exposed to.
Norway is drilling like crazy, and will implode when the oil runs out. But until then, it's party time! But, some day, when their own government can no longer rape the country side to pay for it's generous social programs, it's not going to be so nice in Norway.
The US is the only country to have 0 days mandated by law.
Virtually every other country mandates that employers pay for paid sick leave... Wow. The government bravely forces someone else to pay for a benefit they imposed on their employers but take credit for implementing. Neat trick.
My state passed a referendum requiring all employers of a certain size or greater to start offering their workers sick time that they earn at a specified rate.
It may not have increased unemployment, but it also certainly didn't increase employment either.
Such laws make employees more expensive for their employers (if they didn't previously have paid sick leave) - it's simple math. How many employees were never hired to offset the increased cost per employee?
Gun violence... In the US we have a very high death by guns rate, higher than most any other country, but the vast majority of those gun deaths are suicides. Compare our suicide rate with the UK and we have very similar suicide rates, it's just that while in America it's so easy to kill yourself with a gun so most are gun deaths, take out suicide by gun and the US gun violence rates look a lot like in the UK. In the UK their suicides are forced to be more creative - hanging, pills, cutting, etc.
You can pretend that taking guns away would save lives, it would simply force the suicidal among us to be more creative, more resourceful.
Honestly I struggle to think of a small business where losing one employee would be disastrous outside of a small startup, but that dives into the realm of whether women should be expected to set aside their family life for their career. Either way, it is probably poor planning if maternity leave isn't something that your business can handle outside of the lead-up and launch periods.
First off, I can think of LOTS of companies that can't afford to pay for a 12-month no-show job, no matter the wage.
Second, how do you imagine you can limit a company's exposure to only ONE employee on maternity leave at one time? Only hire one woman of chaild-bearing age? Insist that all your women employees be post-menopausal? Imagine a restaurant that has many female waitresses, what prevents every woman on staff from getting pregnant in one year? Or from every man getting his wife/partner/whatever pregnant, qualifying him for a year of paternity leave? Is paternity leave exclusively for married couples? What about folks in a long-term-relationship? What about the fellow that helps his lesbian neighbor become pregnant, does HE qualify for 12 months of paid paternity leave?
Finally, the reality is that when any employee can, at any time, suddenly disappear from your company for up to 12 months and still collect 100% salary, you are risking your business with every new hire.
Seriously, how large must the solar array be to provide a days worth of power for an air conditioner? Air conditioners are notorious power consumers, and I don't think their problem was that they ran on A/C not DC...
Hillary sent an email to every state department employee telling them not to do exactly what she herself was doing, conduct official state department business on private email services... This is the same Hillary that now pleads ignorance of that very policy.
Why would you think that? I've never seen a requirement that would prevent a convicted felon from running for ANY elective office. (Remember Marion Berry in DC?)
Please: a) identify the 'subsidy' you feel the oil industry should lose, and b) explain why the oil industry is to be singled out and denied a tax benefit every other company in every other industry is entitled to.
The so-called 'subsidies' the oil companies enjoy are things like 'research tax credits, depreciating capital investments, etc.
So she eats to install 1/2 a billion solar panels at a cost of $60 Billion over ten years... Let's see, that makes each panel cost $120. No, that's the cost of the subsidy, $120/panel... Including all government waste, fraud and abuse - seems like a very low number.
And let me see, where is that $60 billion going to come from? Oh yes, by rolling back 'tax breaks' on oil companies, which will - anybody want to guess? Yes! Raise the cost of gasoline!
I sure hope all those poor and lower-income folks that can't afford even the subsidized solar panels don't mind paying more at the pump so that middle-class suburbanites can pay less for their solar panels...
No previous Secretary of State exclusively used a private email server for all electronic communication - several had emails intended for them sent to their official email accounts on government email servers and forwarded to their private email accounts.
The Republican Party (under Bush'43) set up a private server to handle emails relating to Republican Party business with the intention of keeping party business off federal servers as required by law. Some republicans mistakenly discussed official work on the private email server, but that was the rare exception, as borne out when the 22 million emails were turned over to investigators.
Which brings us to the last point - the Republicans 'lost' 22 million emails... Briefly. Ultimately all 22 million emails were turned over to investigators and ultimately proved what was widely known - Bush administration fired political appointees that serve at the pleasure of the President, for political reasons, and the discussions of those political decisions were found on the...wait for it... Private Republican email server, set up so politicians could discuss political things (like firing political appointees for political reasons) and NOT run afoul of federal regulations requiring that political discussions be kept off government email servers.
People sent her messages that years later - a small percentage of which became classified. At the time they were sent TO her, they were not.
How does that work? How does information 'become' classified after the fact? And, if that is a possibility, doesn't her exclusive use of a non-government email server for ALL emails open her up to the possibility that classified info was sent to her private server?
Colin Powell, like many others in government, had official email FORWRDED to a private email account- every email he got passed thru and was retained on federal servers. Hillary cut out the middle man and had all email directly sent to her own private server - emails that originate outside the U.S. Government email servers and were sent to her private server were never recorded by federal email servers.
Putin, Assad, Quaddafi, etc all could send her emails and the entire conversation would not be recorded/archived by federal systems.
Why would she do that? Maybe in case one of her 'donors' slipped up and mentioned the favor they wanted from her in an email?
Slashdot Mirror
Biden, Warren, then Sanders - in that order.
I bet you that the server was handed over to Obama's DoJ with hard drives manufactured after Hillary Clinton left office...
A review of just 40 of the thirty some-odd thousand emails on her server turned up four that contained classified information.
She has previously stated that she used that price server exclusively her entire tenure as Secretary of State (along with, it turns out, her top aides). Do you a) honestly believe that during her entire tenure as Secretary of State she never received any emails that contained classified information and that b) those four classified, yet not marked as such, emails are the only classified emails her attorneys failed to delete when they reviewed her 60,000 plus emails?
She never should have had the server, she was required to turn over all work-related materials (including, but not limited to her emails) within 60 days of leaving government service, and her inability to prove the emails she did turn over represents all government/work-related emails makes it impossible for her to establish any credibility on the matter.
And no, other Secretaries of State did not do the same thing - forwarding emails to a private account from your government account is not the same thing as never, ever allowing any of your own official emails ever touch a government server.
Try this mental exercise - take any story on Hillary and her private email server and do two things: everywhere it mentions her role as Secretary of State substitute Vice President, and everywhere you see Hillary's name replace it with Dick Cheney...
Still feel the same way about this?
You don't have to be black to identify as black...
So the argument is that a politicians placement in google search results influences election results.
I think it's quaint that the authors imagine that American voters are curious enough to look up politicians online in order to inform their vote yet too lazy to read past the first few entries in Google.
"Post proc, ergo propter hoc"
The top results in Google are the stories flying around social media, and the stories flying around social media are the only stories most Americans are exposed to.
The participation rate, the percentage of Americans working is at a 38 year low.
An economy with fewer Americans working is not 'great'.
Unless you get pregnant while on maternity leave, see Irish Twins
Norway is drilling like crazy, and will implode when the oil runs out. But until then, it's party time! But, some day, when their own government can no longer rape the country side to pay for it's generous social programs, it's not going to be so nice in Norway.
See Greece
Virtually every other country mandates that employers pay for paid sick leave... Wow. The government bravely forces someone else to pay for a benefit they imposed on their employers but take credit for implementing. Neat trick.
It may not have increased unemployment, but it also certainly didn't increase employment either.
Such laws make employees more expensive for their employers (if they didn't previously have paid sick leave) - it's simple math. How many employees were never hired to offset the increased cost per employee?
Gun violence... In the US we have a very high death by guns rate, higher than most any other country, but the vast majority of those gun deaths are suicides. Compare our suicide rate with the UK and we have very similar suicide rates, it's just that while in America it's so easy to kill yourself with a gun so most are gun deaths, take out suicide by gun and the US gun violence rates look a lot like in the UK. In the UK their suicides are forced to be more creative - hanging, pills, cutting, etc.
You can pretend that taking guns away would save lives, it would simply force the suicidal among us to be more creative, more resourceful.
First off, I can think of LOTS of companies that can't afford to pay for a 12-month no-show job, no matter the wage.
Second, how do you imagine you can limit a company's exposure to only ONE employee on maternity leave at one time? Only hire one woman of chaild-bearing age? Insist that all your women employees be post-menopausal? Imagine a restaurant that has many female waitresses, what prevents every woman on staff from getting pregnant in one year? Or from every man getting his wife/partner/whatever pregnant, qualifying him for a year of paternity leave? Is paternity leave exclusively for married couples? What about folks in a long-term-relationship? What about the fellow that helps his lesbian neighbor become pregnant, does HE qualify for 12 months of paid paternity leave?
Finally, the reality is that when any employee can, at any time, suddenly disappear from your company for up to 12 months and still collect 100% salary, you are risking your business with every new hire.
Solar-powered Air Conditioning!
Seriously, how large must the solar array be to provide a days worth of power for an air conditioner? Air conditioners are notorious power consumers, and I don't think their problem was that they ran on A/C not DC...
Hillary sent an email to every state department employee telling them not to do exactly what she herself was doing, conduct official state department business on private email services... This is the same Hillary that now pleads ignorance of that very policy.
Why would you think that? I've never seen a requirement that would prevent a convicted felon from running for ANY elective office. (Remember Marion Berry in DC?)
Please: a) identify the 'subsidy' you feel the oil industry should lose, and b) explain why the oil industry is to be singled out and denied a tax benefit every other company in every other industry is entitled to.
The so-called 'subsidies' the oil companies enjoy are things like 'research tax credits, depreciating capital investments, etc.
The 'Good and Plenty' Clsuse?
are you arguing the Constitution is 'Pro Life'?
Interesting.
So she eats to install 1/2 a billion solar panels at a cost of $60 Billion over ten years... Let's see, that makes each panel cost $120. No, that's the cost of the subsidy, $120/panel... Including all government waste, fraud and abuse - seems like a very low number.
And let me see, where is that $60 billion going to come from? Oh yes, by rolling back 'tax breaks' on oil companies, which will - anybody want to guess? Yes! Raise the cost of gasoline!
I sure hope all those poor and lower-income folks that can't afford even the subsidized solar panels don't mind paying more at the pump so that middle-class suburbanites can pay less for their solar panels...
...for someone else to open a bitcoin exchange first, so they can claim they stole their idea.
So we don't hold federal email servers to the same retention requirements every public company is held to?
Odd. And convenient.
No previous Secretary of State exclusively used a private email server for all electronic communication - several had emails intended for them sent to their official email accounts on government email servers and forwarded to their private email accounts.
The Republican Party (under Bush'43) set up a private server to handle emails relating to Republican Party business with the intention of keeping party business off federal servers as required by law. Some republicans mistakenly discussed official work on the private email server, but that was the rare exception, as borne out when the 22 million emails were turned over to investigators.
Which brings us to the last point - the Republicans 'lost' 22 million emails... Briefly. Ultimately all 22 million emails were turned over to investigators and ultimately proved what was widely known - Bush administration fired political appointees that serve at the pleasure of the President, for political reasons, and the discussions of those political decisions were found on the...wait for it... Private Republican email server, set up so politicians could discuss political things (like firing political appointees for political reasons) and NOT run afoul of federal regulations requiring that political discussions be kept off government email servers.
How does that work? How does information 'become' classified after the fact? And, if that is a possibility, doesn't her exclusive use of a non-government email server for ALL emails open her up to the possibility that classified info was sent to her private server?
Colin Powell, like many others in government, had official email FORWRDED to a private email account- every email he got passed thru and was retained on federal servers. Hillary cut out the middle man and had all email directly sent to her own private server - emails that originate outside the U.S. Government email servers and were sent to her private server were never recorded by federal email servers.
Putin, Assad, Quaddafi, etc all could send her emails and the entire conversation would not be recorded/archived by federal systems.
Why would she do that? Maybe in case one of her 'donors' slipped up and mentioned the favor they wanted from her in an email?