Private email server:
WHAT: In March 2015, it became publicly known that Hillary Clinton, during her tenure as United States Secretary of State, had exclusively used her family's private email server for official communications, rather than official State Department email accounts maintained on federal servers. Those official communications included thousands of emails that would later be marked classified by the State Department retroactively.
WHEN: 2015-present, concluded with an FBI investigation that stated Clinton did not act in a negligent manner and declared her cleared of the email server but unfit to have access to classified information.
Find out what's happening in Dearbornfor free with the latest updates from Patch.
QUOTES:
· CBS News: “The highly unusual practice of a Cabinet-level official physically running her own email would have given Clinton, the presumptive Democratic presidential candidate, impressive control over limiting access to her message archives. It also would distinguish Clinton's secretive email practices as far more sophisticated than some politicians…”
Find out what's happening in Dearbornfor free with the latest updates from Patch.
· "What, like with a cloth or something?" Hillary Clinton – when asked about reports that her server had been wiped to remove its prior contents, including her emails, Clinton suggested she had no idea what that would even mean
· "Those messages disappear all by themselves." Hillary Clinton - Clinton jokingly compared her account on Snapchat to her emails in a Friday night appearance at the Iowa Democratic Wing Ding dinner in Clear Lake.
· "No more secrecy. No more zone of privacy. After all, what good did that do for me?" Hillary Clinton - In March, a month before she officially announced her candidacy for president, Clinton joked at Syracuse University's Toner Prize dinner about her emails -- and, more broadly, about her desire to improve her relationship with the political press.
· “The White House wouldn't have been hacked ‘had they been using my server.’ " Hillary Clinton - According to a New York Post report, Clinton addressed the ongoing controversy at a private fundraiser in June after reports of a major cybersecurity breach at the Office of Personnel Management.
· “CLINTON believed the classification level of future drone strikes depended on the context,” the FBI's interview summary said. The U.S. government requires that military plans be classified.
SUMMARY:
In January, 2016, Hillary stated that the report was a “leak” designed to harm her in the presidential race. That there was no evidence of her wrong doing; and, in fact, that “the State Department has confirmed, I never sent or received any material marked classified, and that hasn’t changed in all of these months”. It begs the question: if she had a private server, which she used to exchange business and personal emails, how would the State Department know if she had sent or received classified material on the server? Answer: they don’t, because she kept it secret. Subsequently, it has been revealed that of the 30,000 emails she has turned over to the FBI, 8 chains (of emails) included “top secret” information, 36 chains (of emails) included “secret” information, 8 chains (of emails) included “confidential” information, the lowest level of classification. 2000 emails have been classified “confidential”, 1 email included “secret” information, and 2 included “confidential” information.
There are several issues at stake here, besides the fact that “other secretaries used their own emails”:
· She conducted business on her unsecured site, making it suspectible to potential hackers (as evidenced)
· She lied about the fact that her emails from her private server did not contain any classified information
· She is uncomfortable with current technology and so is a liability as President of the United States
· She has circumvented the process for preserving her legacy into posterity by using her personal server to conduct business (for historical records)
· The State Department has proven to be uncooperative with both FOIA requests and with governmental investigational committee to provide emails; they have attempted to run interference in favor of Hillary Clinton by burying requests or provide requested material
Again, this is another example of the lack of transparency of Hillary Clinton’s entire political life. And another example of the close relationship between the State Department (of which Hillary was Secretary of) and the Clinton Foundation.
Even a simple question requiring a yes or no answer is a classic example of Hillary’s lack of transparency. In December 2012, the House Oversight Committee asked Hillary if she has used a private email account and there is no reply. Later, the state department responds (but) without answering the question (directly).
CBS stated that operating her own server “…afforded Clinton additional legal opportunities to block government or private subpoenas in criminal, administrative or civil cases because her lawyers could object in court before being forced to turn over any emails. And since the Secret Service was guarding Clinton's home, an email server there would have been well protected from theft or a physical hacking.”
In other words, this practice would have allowed Hillary to circumvent the Freedom of Information Act, allowing for a plethora of government business information to be exchanged without fear of the public requesting access.
After her use of a private email system became public knowledge in March 2015, Clinton repeatedly said she did not use it to send or receive classified information. The FBI has since concluded Clinton was wrong to say that: At least 81 email threads contained information that was classified at the time, although the final number may be more than 2,000, the report said. Some of the emails appear to include discussion of planned future attacks by unmanned U.S. military drones, the FBI report showed.
This underlines the fact that Hillary was not transparent in her job as Secretary of State, and further strengthens the argument that she should not be President of the United State. How much will she be transparent then, and, more importantly, answer to the American people? Why vote someone in who is not worthy of trust and has proven how untrustworthy she is?
Ok, so this one is a no-brainer. If a candidate that the FBI has concluded cannot be trusted with classified information, why, then, would she be elected President of the United States? Unless her solution is to do away-with all classified information. Well, do away with all intelligence reports bar the ones that follow Bill Clinton’s tawdry romances and liaisons.
And makes another reason why she is not suitable to be POTUS. The American people need someone who can lead and take responsibility for everything that happens in their administration.
NOTE: It has been revealed that FBI Director James Comey’s brother, Peter Comey, worked for DLA Piper, an international law firm, which performed the independent audit of the Clinton Foundation. Likewise, DLA Piper is a big donor to both the Hillary Clinton 2016 campaign AND the Clinton Foundation. It stands to reason that FBI Director’s handling of the Clinton email server was a conflict of interest and questions his conclusions of the investigation.
SOURCES:
http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/19/politics/hillary-clinton-emails-server-classified-ig-report/index.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/hillary-clintons-email-server-traced-to-home-based-service-ap/
http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/19/politics/hillary-clinton-emails-9-comments-list-2016/index.html
