I work for the Federal Government (civilian for the Navy), and it’s relatively common for employees to discuss unclassified and non-sensitive work information over non-work email when they’re at home, out of town, etc. (such as “meeting X was productive; I’ll give you the rundown next week”). Sometimes I don’t even notice whether it’s a .gov or .com email address.
OMG Putin totally looks like this hairless cat my aunt once had!
Hey, me too! Turns out, Nair doesn’t make pet shampoo. Who knew?
Wouldn’t there be permanent civil servants whose job it is to look after this sort of thing? Managing upwards is all part of the job.
Just a few thoughts -
Hillary uses two phones. An iPhone and a Blackberry. And she’s two-steps away from being a hoarder and never throws anything away. According to Hillary.
There have been 6 or 7 Benghazi investigations and the findings were that they had not uncovered anything tying Hillary to the screw ups leading up to the incident or the “alledged” coverup afterward.
On Mar 4, 2015, Hillary finally urges the State Department to release her emails. WHAT’S THIS? How is it possible that Hillary’s emails have not been a part of the prior investigations? Who benefits from that? Not the public.
In an act of semi-transparency, Hillary Clinton has handed the State Department 55,000 pages of emails for public release – but in paper, not their original electronic format.
Paper? Really? It appears that Hillary is still trying to stonewall any investigation into her State Department communications.
Who stores Hillary’s emails? Hillary. Who controls who has access to Hillary’s emails? Hillary. Who could have released Hillary’s emails to any of the previous investigations? Hillary.
And I *know *there’s a pony under that tree!
What point(s) are you trying to debate, in the Great Debates forum?
By “that tree”, are you referring to the non-linear data structure of the private server Hillary used to store her government’s emails? The Directory Tree, Decision Tree, or the Expression Tree, perhaps?
What else do you claim to know?
Why is it significant to you that Hillary released her e-mails in paper form?
You know who else kept records in paper form?
It takes more time and money (paper isn’t free, ya know (unless the taxpayers are paying for it 
)) to print a paper copy of an electronic file.
It takes a whole lot more time and money to search paper files than it does to search electronic files.
But that should be obvious to almost everyone in today’s electronic age. Maybe not?
Your claim that the fact that nothing has been found means there’s something to be found.
I recall the same point being made of the GOP / Starr witch hunt - the fact that after all those years they couldn’t find evidence of criminal or corrupt conduct meant that Bill was an expert at hiding it.
(Lawyers work with paper, btw. Not electrons. They’re doing what they do.)
(post shortened)
My claim? Read my post. Where did I make such a claim? Were your responding to someone else’s claim? Did you misread my post?
:rolleyes:
Now change the word “Hillary” to “Christie”, and “Benghazi” to “Bridge”, and see how that reads, hmm?
This is an excellent point but allow me to dissect the claims made by doorhinge in somewhat greater detail. 
Let’s by all means read your post and see if it might contain any hint of partisan bias implying that maybe Hillary is Hiding Something™. I have italicized your comments along with how they might reasonably be interpreted.
… never throws anything away. According to Hillary. [bolding mine]
Implication: Hillary throws away incriminating emails.
*There have been 6 or 7 Benghazi investigations and the findings were that they had not uncovered anything tying Hillary to the screw ups … WHAT’S THIS? How is it possible that Hillary’s emails have not been a part of the prior investigations? *
Implication: Hillary was Hiding Something.
*In an act of semi-transparency, Hillary Clinton has handed the State Department 55,000 pages of emails for public release – but in paper, not their original electronic format. *
Implication: And Hillary is still Hiding Something.
*Paper? Really? It appears that Hillary is still trying to stonewall any investigation into her State Department communications. *
Implication: Hillary is Hiding Something in order to stonewall the Benghazi investigation and all her other henious wrongoings. It’s all in those nefarious secret emails!!
Who stores Hillary’s emails? Hillary. Who controls who has access to Hillary’s emails? Hillary. Who could have released Hillary’s emails to any of the previous investigations? Hillary.
Implication: OK, let’s face it, Hillary is hiding absolutely everything!! The devious secretive bitch is the spawn of the devil and should burn in hell.
Nah, no partisan implication that Hillary might be Hiding Something™ there at all! 
It still reads as if you A) didn’t read my post, or B) can’t answer any of the questions in my post, or C) are trying desperately to create red herrings to avoid any discussion of Hillary’s emails or Hillary’s actions concerning her emails.
ISTM that Hillary is in something of a bind of her own making. She can’t turn over her entire email database because it probably contains a lot of personal and private stuff that she’s understandably not anxious to share with the press and public. OTOH, as long as she doesn’t there’s no way for anyone to know whether she turned over everything she was supposed to. To the extent that you assume she’s not hiding anything (not an unreasonable assumption) it’s going to be based on your assessment of her personally, and not based on any unbiased investigation.
Here’s some discussion of how this compares with normal protocol: Fact check: Clinton e-mails and the privacy 'privilege'
This particular angle might have more legs than the original focus on the use of a private account. Not sure how she can deal with it.
Oh, I understand what you’re saying, probably better than you do.
(post shortened)
Hahahaha. “Reasonably be interpreted.” You’re a hoot. You admit that you can only look for “hints”, or what I might/maybe have been “implying”. You’ve proven that eye didn’t say, or claim, that Hillary is hiding anything, but you still need to create a strawman to avoid answering the questions in my post. Your choice.
It’s my position that there are STILL unanswered questions that Hillary has to answer regarding her emails, her actions to protect or to not provide her emails, and how they relate to her actions as Sec of State.
I’m in favor of investigations. I’m not so sure about you.
That sums up your position better than anything I could say.
But the hyenas can’t focus on *that *without mentioning Jeb Bush, the chosen candidate of the Establishment.