Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
John Kerry
In reply to the discussion: JK on Clinton emails [View all]MADem
(135,425 posts)23. The NYT article was full of false information. They kept editing it, deceitfully, as their
untruths were exposed. There was no illegality, therefore, none of that Oh The Huge Manatee "dwarfing."
If, when falsehoods are exposed, one continues to hold one's position, there's just no point in continuing a conversation. You use dire words like "wrong" and "ethics" and "troubling" and you ascribe the worst motives to her--when you don't ascribe them to anyone else the SD asked for THEIR emails. And NOTHING was in actual fact, wrong, unethical or troubling at all--except to RNC spinmeisters.
http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/03/03/the-new-york-times-deceptive-suggestion-that-hi/202726
The New York Times Accused Clinton Of Possible Wrong-Doing With Usage Of Non-Government Emails
NYT: Clinton's Use Of Private Email During Time At The State Department May Have Violated Federal Law. In a March 2 report, The New York Times accused former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton of possibly having "violated federal requirements that officials' correspondence be retained as part of the agency's record" with the use of personal email for official government business during her time at the department.The Times reported, "Under federal law, however, letters and emails written and received by federal officials, such as the secretary of state, are considered government records and are supposed to be retained so that congressional committees, historians and members of the news media can find them. There are exceptions to the law for certain classified and sensitive materials." [The New York Times,3/2/15]
But The Law Overseeing Retention Of Private Emails Was Not Changed Until After Clinton Left The State Department
President Obama Signed Update To Federal Records Act In 2014. The Presidential and Federal Records Act Amendments of 2014 became law on November 26, 2014. [Congress.gov, accessed 3/3/15]
National Archives Official: 2014 Federal Records Law Clarified How Private Email Should Be Handled. Among the "major points" in the 2014 law highlighted by the National Archives was: "Clarifying the responsibilities of Federal government officials when using non-government email systems." -Records Express, National Archives, 12/2/14
2014 Federal Records Law Marked "The First Significant Changes To The Federal Records Act Of 1950." According to the National Archives, the 2014 law marked "the first significant changes to the Federal Records Act of 1950." -Records Express, National Archives, 12/2/14
Law Signed "Two Years After Clinton Stepped Down." Criticizing the Times article's insinuation that Clinton violated the law, Daily Banter contributor Bob Cesca pointed out: "The article doesn't say which federal regulation, though. Why? Perhaps because the federal regulations went into effect in late November, 2014 when President Obama signed H.R. 1233, modernizing the Federal Records Act of 1950 to include electronic communications. It was signed two years after Clinton stepped down." [The Daily Banter, 3/3/15]
Rep. Cummings: Even The 2014 Bill "Would Continue To Allow Employees To Use Their Personal Email Account For Official Business." Contrary to claims that Hillary Clinton violated the law by using personal email account while serving as Secretary of State, even a 2014 law that strengthened oversight of the use of personal email by government officials -- passed after Hillary Clinton had left the State Department -- still permitted government officials to use personal email. ...
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
31 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Not sure why people are getting mad at her for doing something that every politician and
MADem
Mar 2015
#16
So, given that the emails were subject to various inquiries, it was ok the SD did not have them?
karynnj
Mar 2015
#17
The SD didn't even ask for them--from her OR her predecessors--until a few months ago.
MADem
Mar 2015
#18
The NYT article was full of false information. They kept editing it, deceitfully, as their
MADem
Mar 2015
#23
Actually for anyone who has actually watched him for any length of time, he has an expressive face
karynnj
Mar 2015
#13
Today's press briefing had several questions on the missing (or partly missing) 15 emails
karynnj
Jun 2015
#28