# I have changed my mind about the Clinton email scandal (and so should you) **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [March 29, 2016, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-changed-my-mind-about-the-clinton-email-scandal-and-so-should-you/750514 "2016-03-29T13:31:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 24
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2016, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-changed-my-mind-about-the-clinton-email-scandal-and-so-should-you/750514/461 "2016-06-23T19:33:25Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > And it strikes me as telling that in the same series of posts in which you deny that her judgment about information security issues matters, you ask us to rely on her judgment about information security issues. I’ve been saying for months on this message board that Clinton exercised poor judgment in setting up a private email server, regardless of whether her emails dealt with classified information. I’ve also said that it is possible that she broke the law, but that the known facts seem to indicate that her actions would have had to be far more negligent than what has been made public so far to meet the “gross negligence” or “knowingly” mishandled standards established under a couple different sections of title 18. If you’d like me to cite my posts on these issues, going back several months, I can do that. But the charge that I said “we should trust Clinton on information security issues” can only be something told to you by the Great Gazoo, not me. ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2016, 7:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-changed-my-mind-about-the-clinton-email-scandal-and-so-should-you/750514/462 "2016-06-23T19:51:51Z")
> [@CarnalK](#): > > That isn’t true. Most would not describe using “password” for your password then leaving the reminder sticky note on your monitor as illegal or unethical, just stupid or lazy. And she did a lot more than that by using her own poorly secured server. If you are going to fool yourself into thinking the poll results I posted indicate a collective “meh” then I will just leave you to your hyperpartisan bubble. One of the questions repeatedly asked in this thread is “why isn’t this getting more attention” and my recent responses were merely to address that issue. The fact that these reasons do not rise to the level needed to dismiss them in your POV, makes them neither “(un)true” or “hyperpartisan”. I’m sorry that people neither care about this issue or care more about other issues, but that’s the way it is appearing. Even a simple review of some news web pages such as politico or [cnn.com](http://cnn.com) shows no traction for the email issue even after Trump’s “blistering” speech on this very topic just 2 days ago. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2016, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-changed-my-mind-about-the-clinton-email-scandal-and-so-should-you/750514/463 "2016-06-23T20:08:08Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > But the charge that I said “we should trust Clinton on information security issues” can only be something told to you by the Great Gazoo, not me. In post #445, you noted that the proof that her insecure server contained information marked as classified was just an email that she received and did not delete, and that the anodyne nature of her response and the unredacted subject matter suggested that nothing really sensitive was involved. I thought your implied inference was that the only classified emails she would have similarly retained and replied to would have been ones that were similarly over-classified. And that is an appeal to her judgment about such things. If, instead, you did not mean to imply that, then I think your rebuttal comes across as quite weak. If you don’t think Hillary had good judgment about what information needed to be secure and which didn’t, then it is pretty damning that she did in fact receive and store messages that other people marked classified. I ascribed to you the stronger and more well-reasoned, albeit implied, position. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2016, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-changed-my-mind-about-the-clinton-email-scandal-and-so-should-you/750514/464 "2016-06-23T20:09:43Z")
So your cite that it has no traction is that it’s not currently front page of CNN? You are seriously saying this didn’t get much attention? And you handwave away that large chunks of the population think her behaviour was unethical or illegal? Don’t be sorry for me. I’m fine. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [June 23, 2016, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-changed-my-mind-about-the-clinton-email-scandal-and-so-should-you/750514/465 "2016-06-23T21:06:26Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > In post #445, you noted that the proof that her insecure server contained information marked as classified was just an email that she received and did not delete, and that the anodyne nature of her response and the unredacted subject matter suggested that nothing really sensitive was involved. > > I thought your implied inference was that the only classified emails she would have similarly retained and replied to would have been ones that were similarly over-classified. And that is an appeal to her judgment about such things. > > If, instead, you did not mean to imply that, then I think your rebuttal comes across as quite weak. If you don’t think Hillary had good judgment about what information needed to be secure and which didn’t, then it is pretty damning that she did in fact receive and store messages that other people marked classified. I ascribed to you the stronger and more well-reasoned, albeit implied, position. Let’s recap this thread of exchanges. In 431, **sleestak** linked to a version of that email as concrete proof that Clinton lied when she said that she never emailed anything that was marked classified. In 433, I pointed out that the classified marking that **sleestak** pointed to was, in fact, marked two years after the email was sent, so that this smoking gun evidence was being thoroughly misread. In 441, **EvilEconomist** linked to a different version of the email without that post-dated marking, noting that there was information not present in **sleestak** ’s link that was marked Confidential. In 445, I pointed out that Clinton didn’t write the part with the classified bits, that someone else typed it up and sent it to her and she responded. In 445, to put my response in slightly different terms (but the same spirit as I intended my post), if the smoking gun evidence that Clinton lied about never sending an email that was marked with classified information is that she replied to someone who did break the rules, then this isn’t really compelling evidence that Clinton was lying in her statement. In this case, it’s pretty clear that the email’s original author broke the rules, and to assign Clinton blame for replying to the email, as though this is the best evidence of her wrongdoing, is… meh. There may be other examples where Clinton did something really bad. But between **sleestak** totally not understanding what he was linking to, and **EvilEconomist** commendably adding better information to the mix… this is supposed to be the damning evidence against Clinton? Like, that’s it? In my mind, the poor judgment of setting up a private email server for official government use is self evident, and the two links to that email are pretty weak sauce for the charge of mishandling classified information. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 3:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-changed-my-mind-about-the-clinton-email-scandal-and-so-should-you/750514/466 "2016-06-24T03:34:16Z")
Latest news: [http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/06/23/clinton\_failed\_to\_hand\_over\_key\_email\_to\_state\_department\_130993.html](http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/06/23/clinton_failed_to_hand_over_key_email_to_state_department_130993.html) > [@](#): > > WASHINGTON (AP) – Former Secretary Hillary Clinton failed to turn over a copy of a key message involving problems caused by her use of a private homebrew email server, the State Department confirmed Thursday. The disclosure makes it unclear what other work-related emails may have been deleted by the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee. If anyone is shocked that Clinton would delete emails that might be embarrassing, please don’t vote. Ever again. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 3:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-changed-my-mind-about-the-clinton-email-scandal-and-so-should-you/750514/467 "2016-06-24T03:39:33Z")
And the spin is just so adorable. See, now, rather than claiming she turned over all work-related emails, she’s turned over all work related emails “still in her possession”. Boy, she really thinks you’re stupid. Honest mistake, that’s all. Except that’s why the private account was problematic, among other reasons: records retention. She can’t claim “honest mistake” on this one. As if anyone actually believed that. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 4:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-changed-my-mind-about-the-clinton-email-scandal-and-so-should-you/750514/468 "2016-06-24T04:46:50Z")
So now they’re making up new categories of “secured” and “work-related” which aren’t actually secured or work-related, and trying to pin that to the cork-board. Not impressed. Come back when you have some actual wrong-doing. Until now, you only have the Secretary of State going against the rules that the Secretary of State decides. You have this weird fantasy that this has some kind of meaning in the real world, and it just plain doesn’t. It’s Swift-Boating all over again. Keep repeating lies (not **adaher** , but the right-wing talk-show hosts) until it starts to attain some kind of cultural reality. What’s sad is that some people ( **adaher** ) are falling for this trash. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 5:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-changed-my-mind-about-the-clinton-email-scandal-and-so-should-you/750514/469 "2016-06-24T05:30:26Z")
She didn’t turn over all her work emails. This is once again her having to change her spin as new facts came out. When we started, she had supposedly turned over all work emails and had not had any classified information pass through her server. She’s had to walk back an awful lot since this started. Now your standard might be actual, proven wrongdoing. That’s fine. Most voters expect better from their Presidential candidates. Thank your lucky stars her competition is Donald Trump and third parties. She might still blow it anyway. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 10:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-changed-my-mind-about-the-clinton-email-scandal-and-so-should-you/750514/470 "2016-06-24T10:41:49Z")
It’s infuriating not to have any evidence of what you \*know \*to be true, isn’t it? It’s over. You lost. You’re wrong. Now move on. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 10:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-changed-my-mind-about-the-clinton-email-scandal-and-so-should-you/750514/471 "2016-06-24T10:51:32Z")
This word “evidence”, I don’t think it means what you think it means. The State Department and State Dept IG said she didn’t turn over all her work emails. Her own spokesman admits as much by again moving the goalposts. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 10:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-changed-my-mind-about-the-clinton-email-scandal-and-so-should-you/750514/472 "2016-06-24T10:56:48Z")
Straw-grasping. And it’s a mighty small straw. It’s over. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 11:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-changed-my-mind-about-the-clinton-email-scandal-and-so-should-you/750514/473 "2016-06-24T11:17:16Z")
Perhaps, but only because she got lucky with her opponent. She won’t have any coattails if she only wins 40% of the vote. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 11:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-changed-my-mind-about-the-clinton-email-scandal-and-so-should-you/750514/474 "2016-06-24T11:32:12Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Perhaps, but only because she got lucky with her opponent. She won’t have any coattails if she only wins 40% of the vote. You think Johnson is going to get 20% of the vote? ---
**Author:** ![jayjay](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jayjay/32/6765_2.png) [@jayjay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jayjay)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 11:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-changed-my-mind-about-the-clinton-email-scandal-and-so-should-you/750514/475 "2016-06-24T11:37:52Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > You think Johnson is going to get 20% of the vote? \THIS is the year for the Libertarian Party!..Okay, THIS is the year for the Libertarian Party!..all right, then THIS year will be the year for the LP!..etc.\ ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 11:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-changed-my-mind-about-the-clinton-email-scandal-and-so-should-you/750514/476 "2016-06-24T11:44:15Z")
> [@Fear\_Itself](#): > > You think Johnson is going to get 20% of the vote? Could happen. CNN gave him and Weld prime media coverage yesterday. Anything’s possible if the media will give you a platform. Trump proved that. ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 11:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-changed-my-mind-about-the-clinton-email-scandal-and-so-should-you/750514/477 "2016-06-24T11:47:50Z")
If Trump had run for the Libertarian nomination he would have recieved, at best, 2% of the coverage. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 1:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-changed-my-mind-about-the-clinton-email-scandal-and-so-should-you/750514/478 "2016-06-24T13:54:59Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Could happen. CNN gave him and Weld prime media coverage yesterday. Anything’s possible if the media will give you a platform. Trump proved that. “Possible” is not the same as “likely”. ---
**Author:** ![sleestak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/919ad9/32.png) [@sleestak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sleestak)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-changed-my-mind-about-the-clinton-email-scandal-and-so-should-you/750514/479 "2016-06-24T18:19:54Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Let’s recap this thread of exchanges. > > In 431, **sleestak** linked to a version of that email as concrete proof that Clinton lied when she said that she never emailed anything that was marked classified. In 433, I pointed out that the classified marking that **sleestak** pointed to was, in fact, marked two years after the email was sent, so that this smoking gun evidence was being thoroughly misread. > > In 441, **EvilEconomist** linked to a different version of the email without that post-dated marking, noting that there was information not present in **sleestak** ’s link that was marked Confidential. In 445, I pointed out that Clinton didn’t write the part with the classified bits, that someone else typed it up and sent it to her and she responded. > > In 445, to put my response in slightly different terms (but the same spirit as I intended my post), if the smoking gun evidence that Clinton lied about never sending an email that was marked with classified information is that she replied to someone who did break the rules, then this isn’t really compelling evidence that Clinton was lying in her statement. In this case, it’s pretty clear that the email’s original author broke the rules, and to assign Clinton blame for replying to the email, as though this is the best evidence of her wrongdoing, is… meh. > > There may be other examples where Clinton did something really bad. But between **sleestak** totally not understanding what he was linking to, and **EvilEconomist** commendably adding better information to the mix… this is supposed to be the damning evidence against Clinton? Like, that’s it? > > In my mind, the poor judgment of setting up a private email server for official government use is self evident, and the two links to that email are pretty weak sauce for the charge of mishandling classified information. You are correct I linked to the incorrect version of the document (too many windows open, linked to the wrong one). However, you are wrong yet again on what Clinton claimed. Clinton claimed that she never sent or _received_ classified emails. > [@](#): > > I did not send nor receive anything that was classified at the time [Link](http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-clinton-idUSKCN0PZ0S920150726). So, we know that is a lie. Now we also know that the State Department had to disable security software for weeks because of Clintons email server. That is even worse. Her little, half-assed email server caused the entire State Department to decrease their network security and that is fucking major. [Link](http://elections.ap.org/content/emails-key-security-features-disabled-clintons-server). > [@](#): > > State Department staffers wrestled for weeks in December 2010 over a serious technical problem that affected emails from then-Secretary Hillary Clinton’s home email server, **causing them to temporarily disable security features on the government’s own systems** , according to emails released Wednesday. Another [link](http://www.investors.com/politics/commentary/clinton-e-mail-scandal-state-dept-disabled-its-own-security-systems-to-accommodate-hillary/). How ya gonna handwave this one away? That State doesn’t really need all that security? Slee ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [June 24, 2016, 6:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-changed-my-mind-about-the-clinton-email-scandal-and-so-should-you/750514/480 "2016-06-24T18:23:26Z")
Why should I handwave that away? It was obviously a dumb thing to do. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-changed-my-mind-about-the-clinton-email-scandal-and-so-should-you/750514.md?page=23) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-have-changed-my-mind-about-the-clinton-email-scandal-and-so-should-you/750514.md?page=25)