Breaking Down the 2016 POTUS Race Contenders & Issues

[Ivan Seeking]

It is pure fantasy to claim this hasn't been a factor all along. Denying this and other driving forces in the Republican party has led to Trump. He has risen to power in the right wing based on a racist, xenophobic platform.

It isn't hard to see why even after all that Trump has said and done, so many Republicans still support him. He wants to kill innocent family members of terrorists, use forms of torture that go beyond even waterboarding, and he wants to carpet bomb the ME, but the right would have us think an email server is a bigger issue.

 

[Evo]

We need to stay in 2016 and on the topic of who is running now.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

No charges for Clinton even after the FBI scolded her. I am never trump but very hard to stomach Clinton right now. Anyone else goes to prison.

 

[russ_watters]

No charges for Clinton even after the FBI scolded her. I am never trump but very hard to stomach Clinton right now. Anyone else goes to prison.

Link:
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/05/polit...nd-charges-against-hillary-clinton/index.html

FBI Director James Comey said Tuesday that he would not recommend charges against Hillary Clinton for her use of a private email server while she was secretary of state -- but he added Clinton and her aides were "extremely careless" in handling classified information.

"Our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case," Comey announced after a lengthy recap of the investigation the FBI conducted.
Comey's decision not to recommend charges likely removes the threat of prosecution in the middle of Clinton's campaign for the presidency...

My understanding of communications security rules is that "careless" is itself a crime, but it still looked pretty clear-cut to me that what she did was well-beyond "careless": that she knew the rules and broke them any way -- because it was more convenient than following them.

But this doesn't shock me. It's the same phenomena as referees of a game in sports calling the game "loose" at the end or during the playoffs because the stakes are so high: they don't want to be in a position to have an impact on the outcome.

 

[jim hardy]

It's the same phenomena as referees of a game in sports calling the game "loose" at the end or during the playoffs because the stakes are so high: they don't want to be in a position to have an impact on the outcome.

It's a Machiavellian principle

Every action the prince takes must be considered in light of its effect on the state, not in terms of its intrinsic moral value.
http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/prince/themes.html

"The Prince" is quite an interesting little book, i recommend it to anybody tying to make sense of the times

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/10/opinion/why-machiavelli-matters.html?_r=0..

Yet Machiavelli teaches that in a world where so many are not good, you must learn to be able to not be good. The virtues taught in our secular and religious schools are incompatible with the virtues one must practice to safeguard those same institutions. The power of the lion and the cleverness of the fox: These are the qualities a leader must harness to preserve the republic.
......
If Machiavelli’s teaching concerning friends and allies in politics is deeply disconcerting, it is because it goes to the bone of our religious convictions and moral conventions. This explains why he remains as reviled, but also as revered, today as he was in his own age.

Too bad Trump and Clinton are so ideologically opposed. , what a Lion and Fox team they'd make.

 

[jim hardy]

No charges for Clinton even after the FBI scolded her. I am never trump but very hard to stomach Clinton right now. Anyone else goes to prison.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793

(f)
Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

Some animals are more equal than others.

 

[Evo]

No charges for Clinton even after the FBI scolded her. I am never trump but very hard to stomach Clinton right now. Anyone else goes to prison.

Palin used her personal yahoo e-mail account for state business when she was Governor.

Palin's use of a private account was arguably improper and perhaps a violation of state guidelines. Why should news organizations and citizens have to pay extra because the governor had decided to engage in state business on a private email account?

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/06/sarah-palin-email-saga

She was vetted for VP candidate and if had won, would be one step away from becoming POTUS had anything happened to McCain. I think that, at least in the past, this sort of thing was not uncommon , it just wasn't discovered. Just a guess.

 

[phinds]

I think that, at least in the past, this sort of thing was not uncommon ...

There have been news stories pointing out that several others in high government positions did it. Colin Powell I remember for sure did the same thing, although I don't think his was in his house. That doesn't make it a good idea (in fact I think it's a terrible idea), but I don't remember any Republicans screaming about Powell having done it.

 

[Greg Bernhardt]

Here some critical points
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/05/politics/fbi-clinton-email-server-comey-damning-lines/index.html

 

[jim hardy]

Is the coverup the greater sin ?

18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally
...
(b)
Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

amateurishly wiping the server ?

 

[phinds]

Is the coverup the greater sin ?

I certainly think so. In addition to being the greater sin, the whole mess is SO tone-deaf. Just like Bill's airport visit with the AG. Those folks just don't seem to THINK sometimes. Of course, I think Trump is much worse.

 

[Evo]

On the bright side, we know it's a mistake we don't have to worry about her making again.

 

[mheslep]

...
My understanding of communications security rules is that "careless" is itself a crime, but it still looked pretty clear-cut to me that what she did was well-beyond "careless"...

I don't know if the term "careless" is accurate or not wrt Clinton, but I doubt it's a crime in connection to most classified information. My sense is that in large organizations where most people have clearances, there is a careless mishandling mistake, or two, going on nearly every day: a safe left unlocked, the paperwork for entering n closing the safe not filled out, having a conversation in a conference room that strays over the line a bit into the classified, a minor classified document that's carried around for days at the office is taken home, forgotten in a briefcase.

All of these things can get a clearance revoked or cause loss of employment, sometimes does, and certainly will if the behaviour becomes a pattern. But nobody gets arrested for the above that I know of.

[fixed the quote - Russ]

 

[mheslep]

It's a Machiavellian principle

...

It's helpful to know some more of the history. Machiavelly wrote in a time when Italy was overrun repeatedly by its neighbors for generations, after Italy's city state armies had become only show pieces unable to defend against real threats. The mind focuses on how to survive. He wrote on how best to keep your head down, be smart, and to go along to get along to keep the current tyrant in place. A change in tyrants likely meant the sacking of cities, and a counselor to the defeated prince might well have his head on a pike too.

So, "preserve the state" in The Prince does not mean preserve our representative democracy because it is most in keeping with the values of liberty. The Prince is about power, how best to keep your side in power, period, because in his time that was the good.

 

[jim hardy]

The Prince is about power, how best to keep your side in power, period, because in his time that was the good.

As i said, i recommend it to anyone trying to understand the(se) times.

 

[mheslep]

On the bright side, we know it's a mistake we don't have to worry about her making again.

Why not? Why would she not continue to go forth and do likewise tomorrow? The only reason the private server was discovered was due to Benghazi investigation?

 

[Evo]

Why not? Why would she not continue to go forth and do likewise tomorrow? The only reason the private server was discovered was due to Benghazi investigation?

Because I don't think she realized what she was doing the first time, she does now. McCain didn't even know how to use a computer much less send an e-mail when he was running for President, he relied on his wife and daughter and people wandering around to show him things, oh that's much safer.

John McCain 'technology illiterate' doesn't email or use internet
Senator John McCain, the Republican presidential candidate, has admitted that he never uses email and that his staff has to show him websites because he is only just "learning to get online myself".

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...-illiterate-doesnt-email-or-use-internet.html

We tend to forget that our politicians are not as tech savy as we'd expect.

 

[mheslep]

Because I don't think she realized what she was doing the first time, she does now. McCain didn't even know how to use a computer much less send an e-mail when he was running for President, he relied on his wife and daughter and people wandering around to show him things, oh that's much safer. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/new...-illiterate-doesnt-email-or-use-internet.html

We tend to forget that our politicians are not as tech savy as we'd expect.

Clinton realized she had a private server installed in a residence at her direction for State and other communications. She realized that she had large swaths of the traffic deleted after the discovery, wedding and yoga emails as she described them. This is not the same thing as computer illiteracy.

 

[Evo]

Clinton realized she had a private server installed in a residence at her direction for State and other communications. She realized that she had large swaths of the traffic deleted after the discovery, wedding and yoga emails as she described them. This is not the same thing as computer illiteracy.

Which I think backs what I said, she won't do it again.

 

[jim hardy]

she had large swaths of the traffic deleted after the discovery,

What Nixon should have done with the tapes.

Having used the server seems officially excused.

and the coverup wasn't even mentioned.

Pretty slick, i'd say.

 

[Rick21383]

Because I don't think she realized what she was doing the first time, she does now. QUOTE]

http://memesvault.com/wp-content/uploads/Facepalm-Meme-Picard-14.jpg

 

[Ivan Seeking]

What Nixon should have done with the tapes.

He did. But he was hiding evidence of the break in at the Democratic headquarters.

and the coverup wasn't even mentioned.

Cover up of what? If there were critical emails showing a cover up of something, they would have existed in more than her server. And Comey specifically stated that there was no evidence of a cover up or intent to break the law.

Pretty slick, i'd say.

As opposed to the alternative? Trump wants to kill innocent people - the family members of terrorists. Here we are talking about emails. Surely you aren't suggesting that these are issues of equal importance.

 

[jim hardy]

Cover up of what? If there were critical emails showing a cover up of something, they would have existed in more than her server. And Comey specifically stated that there was no evidence of a cover up or intent to break the law.

You don't think wiping the server was intentional destruction of evidence?
Not to mention violation of this particular law ?

18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally
...
(b)
Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

which i posted a page or so back ...?

As opposed to the alternative? Trump wants to kill innocent people - the family members of terrorists. Here we are talking about emails. Surely you aren't suggesting that these are issues of equal importance.

i responded to that the last time you posted it, both your assertion and my reply were censored.
Do you think we're not killing innocents with drones?
Do you think we didn't supply arms that are being used to slaughter innocents as well as overthrow Assad ?
Small wonder they got rid of the emails.

 

[Dr Transport]

I don't know if the term "careless" is accurate or not wrt Clinton, but I doubt it's a crime in connection to most classified information. My sense is that in large organizations where most people have clearances, there is a careless mishandling mistake, or two, going on nearly every day: a safe left unlocked, the paperwork for entering n closing the safe not filled out, having a conversation in a conference room that strays over the line a bit into the classified, a minor classified document that's carried around for days at the office is taken home, forgotten in a briefcase.

All of these things can get a clearance revoked or cause loss of employment, sometimes does, and certainly will if the behaviour becomes a pattern. But nobody gets arrested for the above that I know of.

[fixed the quote - Russ]

It does happen more than we like to think, people are walked out the door everyday for infractions like these. Arrests are made, not too often, if a safe is left open or a room isn't locked and alarmed, but having a classified document at your house gets you arrested every time. What Clinton did, having a private server in her house for business sake was illegal, and the fact that she had classified documents on it (it doesn't matter if they are not marked, it is still classisifed) makes it a felony. The fact that she didn't turn over all the documents before leaving office is also illegal.

Too many red flags on this one, the FBI just gave her a huge pass, if she gets elected, she'll get away with it, if not, most likely an independent investigator will be hired to re-look at all of this and it'll come to trial.

 

[mheslep]

but having a classified document at your house gets you arrested every time.

A search of a residence by authorities will, but an inadvertent trip home and back to secure storage the next day, later reported, probably not.

if not, most likely an independent investigator will be hired to re-look at all of this and it'll come to trial.

Independent investigator? After the FBI-Comey's conclusions, no chance. She could be denied a future clearance without resort to prosecution, but if she loses, so what.

 

[russ_watters]

Good op-ed in everyone's favorite right wing rag about hairsplitting the difference between "gross negligence" and "extreme carelessness":
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2016...reless-his-recommendations-make-no-sense.html

Since I'm not shocked by the outcome, it does tickle me (more than anger me) to see Hillary supporters fall all over each other to proclaim just how stupid Hillary is -- and how ok that is!

I should start a meme or two...

 

[RonL]

As a last act, will the president just simply make a pardon ? I think I have seen it happen in the past.

 

[phinds]

As a last act, will the president just simply make a pardon ?

Pardon who for what?

 

[RonL]

Hillary, but I guess she is without blame at this point, statement withdrawn :)

 

[Dr Transport]

A search of a residence by authorities will, but an inadvertent trip home and back to secure storage the next day, later reported, probably not.

True, but taking home a document then returning it the next day and self reporting is still a violation, and the company I used to work for is now using that as grounds for immediate dismissal, it helps them reduce staff. In that world right now, any security violation will pretty much get you fired and your clearance yanked.

 

[mheslep]

Yes of course, loss of clearance and or termination. The question was about something else entirely, criminal charges.

Companies can be a bit conflicted with security violations. They don't want them to happen or course, but when they take action they're also obligated to report the statistics back to DoD or whoever granted them access. If they report too many, the agency can yank their ticket to have any classified material at their facility.

Former AG Mukasey has an op ed today in which he cites examples of former prosecutions of mishandling classified material:

...And although the FBI may not have been involved, there are indeed reported felony prosecutions of soldiers for putting copies of classified documents in a gym bag and then not returning them out of fear of discovery; placing classified documents in a friend’s desk drawer and forgetting them; tossing documents meant to be destroyed in a dumpster rather than in the appropriate facility...

 

[Dr Transport]

Yes of course, loss of clearance and or termination. The question was about something else entirely, criminal charges.

Yes, but top secret documents were mishandled, every case I know of outside of this one the person was arrested and charges brought forth... I have seen it happen and at least one of the individuals that I know is in prison for it.

The individual(s) who sent those documents to that server at bare minimum should be charged under the appropriate statutes. I suspect that this isn't the end of it, there will be charges leveled in some of the state department employees who initiated the emails.

 

[mheslep]

Yes, but top secret documents were mishandled, every case I know of outside of this one the person was arrested and charges brought forth... I have seen it happen and at least one of the individuals that I know is in prison for it.

I personally know a field tech who took a hard disk, large back in the day, with classified data on it from the office lab out to to a field test under a tight schedule, without any kind of authorization, where the data was required to calibrate the equipment the company was developing, probably in the same way as had been done routinely inside the secure facility. Later he was honest (and cranky) about what he had done when asked the question, "have you ever mishandled ...". Lots of yelling but no criminal consequences.

... I suspect that this isn't the end of it, there will be charges leveled in some of the state department employees who initiated the emails.

There is no shadow government, no secondary FBI to fulfill the role you suggest with the passive tense with "there will be...". It's over with respect to criminal culpability for data going in/out of Clinton's servers.

 

[Evo]

Just the ones we know of. I truly can believe that she was not tech savvy enough to understand and believed it when told that using a private email server, and not using public email would be ok.

All the Other Times a Politician Avoided Official Email

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has been on the defensive ever since the New York Times first reported that she used a private email account for government business.

But Clinton is hardly first government official to breach the public’s trust in this way. Here is a quick review of other officials .

Colin Powell relied on personal emails while secretary of state, Politico, March 2015
Since news of Clinton’s use of private email for White House business broke, an aide to Colin Powell says he “might have occasionally used personal email addresses” to correspond with staff and officials during his tenure as Secretary of State[1].

Continued

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...r_secretary_of_state_is_hardly_the_first.html

Colin Powell relied on personal emails while secretary of state

Like Hillary Clinton, former Secretary of State Colin Powell also used a personal email account during his tenure at the State Department, an aide confirmed in a statement.

“He was not aware of any restrictions nor does he recall being made aware of any over the four years he served at State,” the statement says. “He sent emails to his staff generally via their State Department email addresses. These emails should be on the State Department computers.

Clinton allies have maintained that the presumed Democratic presidential front-runner’s use of a personal email account was not out of step with how former secretaries used email to conduct work related to the State Department.

“Like Secretaries of State before her, she used her own email account when engaging with any Department officials,” said Nick Merrill, spokesman for Clinton, in a statement.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/...email-secretary-of-state-115707#ixzz4DfYJDUja

 

[russ_watters]

Just the ones we know of. I truly can believe that she was not tech savvy enough to understand and believed it when told that using a private email server, and not using public email would be ok.

1. She claims she was told it was OK, but has produced no evidence to support that. At the same time, she was also told it was not ok.

2. Having the private server was merely a starting point - an enabler: the felonies she committed were based on using it to mishandle classified documents. We wouldn't be having this conversation if all she did was use it to handle non-classified business.

3. Colin Powell has not even been accused of the crimes in #2. His actions were not, as far as we know, equivalent to hers.