Are CA Democrats concerned by the Clinton e-mail scandal? (San Jose: how much, house)

[cb73]

Cheryl Mills testimony from last week was just released. Interesting.

She stated that Hillary's private Blackberry did not work in the actual State Dept. office in Washington, DC because it was not secure. They had encouraged Hillary to use a secure State Dept. Blackberry at least while in the office--she refused because it would then be subject to FOIA requests.

So while she was in her office and needed to make a call or send a text she went downstairs to another floor to do so.

Seriously. Who does stuff like this?

If she's elected, will she continue doing this? Scary.

[sourdough]

Transcript of Key Hillary Aide Released in Email Case
During the deposition, a Judicial Watch attorney cited an e-mail to Mills in 2011 about the possibility of giving Clinton, who carried a personal BlackBerry with her private e-mail, a device that would use the official State Department e-mail system.

In that message Stephen Mull, a department official who’s due to be deposed on June 3, wrote Mills that such a BlackBerry would have an “operating State Department e-mail account, which would mask her identity but which also would be subject to FOIA requests.”

“I don’t recall having a conversation with him with respect to her use in e-mail and FOIA,” Mills responded. Asked if she had reason to believe Clinton had set up her private-e-mail system “to avoid FOIA,” Mills said, “Absolutely not.”

In the end, Clinton never received a BlackBerry with a State Department e-mail address.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation is examining whether classified information was illegally transmitted in Clinton’s e-mails. None of the e-mails that Clinton turned over contained information marked classified at the time they were sent. Yet more than 2,000 messages included information that was deemed classified retroactively when the State Department examined them for release, including 22 messages that were withheld because they were found to contain top-secret information.

another excerpt
https://theconservativetreehouse.com...df-transcript/

MILLS: So the State Department had advised — their diplomatic security team had advised that she could not use and none of the staff could use a BlackBerry inside the SCIF. Whether or not it was State or not issued by State, you couldn’t use a BlackBerry inside the SCIF. And so in order to be able to check your BlackBerrys, you needed to leave the seventh floor area where all our offices were. And so if you walked outside in the hallway or if you went to the counsel’s office, in her instance that would be an area that was not inside a secure space, and you could check your BlackBerry, whether or not that was a State BlackBerry or — or not a State BlackBerry…

[CaliRestoration]

Originally Posted by blueskywalker

Say what you want about H.C. but she's at least somewhat presidential and she's not a buffoon.

She's not presidential at all. Large elements of the right and left dislike her. For good reason.

She's widely seen as pandering, light in experience, and with the experience she does have, she's managed to f*** up royally (Benghazi, Email-gate, etc). She's the only presidential nominee to ever be under active investigation by the FBI. She's about as trustworthy as a Zyklon B Chemist.

Sanders is at least an honest idiot, but he's still an idiot. He would have to build a wall to keep companies from leaving the U.S.

Trump is the only candidate with any actual job creation experience. He would clearly be better for the economy which is why I believe he will win in November.

[MItoBH]

Originally Posted by WRnative

Are the CA newspapers/media considering Clinton's private e-mail system in evaluating her Presidential qualifications?

Clinton email headache is about to get worse

Are CA Democratic primary voters concerned that Trump will use Clinton's e-mail scandal to bludgeon her to death, claiming she showed total disregard for national security, especially if the FBI reports a large number of classified e-mails on the system, as appears likely?

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...rver.html?_r=0

I don't give a damn about the emails . She's going to be the next President, so deal with it.

[CaliRestoration]

Originally Posted by MItoBH

I don't give a damn about the emails . She's going to be the next President, so deal with it.

This is pretty much the attitude of most of the "new" left, they don't care about moral issues, or even criminal ones. Remember, Leland Yee got 10% of the primary vote for Secretary of State while in FBI cuffs.

I don't understand it myself, it's almost cultish. But it does win them a lot of elections.

[DCMann2]

I don't really care, but I never planned on voting for either her or Trump so I guess it's a moot point

[eureka1]

Read the news. NO INDICTMENT. Got any substantive issues to talk about?

[silverkris]

Originally Posted by CaliRestoration

This is pretty much the attitude of most of the "new" left, they don't care about moral issues, or even criminal ones. Remember, Leland Yee got 10% of the primary vote for Secretary of State while in FBI cuffs.

I don't understand it myself, it's almost cultish. But it does win them a lot of elections.

People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

[blueskywalker]

Originally Posted by CaliRestoration

She's not presidential at all. Large elements of the right and left dislike her. For good reason.

She's widely seen as pandering, light in experience, and with the experience she does have, she's managed to f*** up royally (Benghazi, Email-gate, etc). She's the only presidential nominee to ever be under active investigation by the FBI. She's about as trustworthy as a Zyklon B Chemist.

Sanders is at least an honest idiot, but he's still an idiot. He would have to build a wall to keep companies from leaving the U.S.

Trump is the only candidate with any actual job creation experience. He would clearly be better for the economy which is why I believe he will win in November.

I don't like her either but if you think that Trump is more presidential that H.C. then i guess we need to define the word "presidential".

"Job creation experience"? ! Uh huh.
Trump is a charlatan. He's a megalomaniacal, bombastic, self-inflated, dishonest, vindictive / spiteful, mean spirited buffoon.
If elected (God forbid) he will not be able to build a wall (and force Mexico to pay for it ), he will not be able to prohibit Muslims from entering the country, he will not defeat Daesh and so on and so forth. And do you actually think that just because a person who was born into money and made a bunch more of it (and at the expense of many, many people of the "ilk" that now support him btw. He's not a man of integrity .... not at all! He's a cheat .... a sleazy, money grubbing, garish, nouveau riche hedonistic slob) is necessarily equipped to deal with the U.S. and world economy? The assumption that he'll be "better for the economy" is a naive one.

He's a mean spirited idiot who has captured the attention of the minds of many people who are right in wanting change and who are sick of the same ole same ole D.C. b.s. but lack discernment and don't understand that destructive change isn't the solution. He's a destructive and selfish man who doesn't give a d*** about the typical Trump supporter. It's just absurd.

I'm not nearly as disturbed by Trump as by the fact that so many Americans are being duped by him and/or share his nasty and vile attitudes and who are turned on by such a person.

And say what you want about Bernie Sanders but he is certainly not an idiot.
The choice for Bernie Sanders (and it's obviously very unlikely that he'll be nominated) is a choice for a humanitarian and environmentally conscious direction (which is not at odds with the improvement of the economy .... just the opposite under intelligent and skillful guidance) that if we don't take, we're in for a really lousy and rather scary future.
It's not that he'll be able to do much of what he presents in his vision. Not many who run for elections are able to fulfill their promises / vision. It's that his heart, mind and spirit are, imo, pointing in the right / creative / life affirming direction. Revolution-evolution (Sanders) as opposed to just burning down the house out of anger, frustration, fear, closed mind / heart, reaction, lack of discernment, etc..

[BayAreaHillbilly]

I'm a Right leaning Independent and plan to vote for #NeverTrump this fall. If that means Clinton, so be it. Heck if that means Sanders, so be it. Some people are too dangerous to be allowed anywhere near the nuclear football.