Quote:
Originally Posted by greywar
So where to begin. That Hillary's use of bleach bit does not appear to be with the intent to hide information perhaps? That it was a contractor that did it because he believed that was what was supposed to be done?
Or that destroying old phones in this way is pretty normal for anyone who has access to things they do not want to have left laying around? I mean if she hadnt then everyone would be screaming about how she let old devices with possible intelligence just left laying around. You can't have it both ways. Or should she always keep all of her old phones on her forever? What nonsense. And those phones were destroyed that way during the normal course of business whenever she got a new one.
Folks on the right have taken a lot of the Clinton stuff and blown it up into some huge conspiracy without ever thinking about things. Or looking into things. The sequence of events that caused the use of bleach bit by a third party vendor for example is just people being dumb-no huge conspiracy here.
What Hannity is doing is clear-destroy the evidence. This is the sort of thing a criminal does. This is Hannity thinking he is under surveillance (probably) using the power of his position to convince others to destroy evidence without him calling them on his phone. This is not defensible.
|
" blown it up into some huge conspiracy without ever thinking about things. Or looking into things. The sequence of events that caused the use of bleach bit by a third party vendor for example is just people being dumb-no huge conspiracy here"
I don't what hole yu have been living in for the past several years but it odes NOT matter HOW she got rid of material.
It does NOT matter who she hired to run her sever.
NONE of what you said matters.
Hillary who HAD instructions on how to handle Classified material PERIOD.
She CHOSE to NOT follow those instructions which are NOT just instruction but WRITTEN LAW.
She CHOSE to have a private non government secure server.
She CHOSE to NOT us a A SCIF which is REQUIRED BY LAW to use when discussing classified material.
By LAW you CANNOT remove Classified material from a SCIF unless you follow very strict instructions.
I worked in a classified compound. We had specially SEALED packages to carry classified material from 1 building to the other WITHIN the compound.
She RECEIVED Classified material on her PRIVATE server. AGAINST the LAW.
She HAD Classified material on her PRIVATE server. AGAINST the law.
She SENT Classified material from her PRIVATE server. Against the law.
No "conspiracy", have no idea what you think is "conspiracy" in this matter, just FACTS.
A simple question for you. ALL federal employees are given access to the gov't email system.
ALL employees who deal in Classified material is given access to an INDEPENDENT from the public, classified network.
So, WHY did she choose to NOT use either of these but, instead set up her OWN email server on the public network NOT under control, or scrutiny of the federal government to handle her government business?
Why does she think she is "entitled" to use her OWN email system instead of what EVERY other federal employee uses, from the President of the United States down to the lowest level clerk?
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
