quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

It proves nothing other than democrat intransigence and corruption.

Where are the emails motter? Next to Nixon's missing minutes?

Are they government emails?

yes, he was a state department employee. All emails are supposed to be archived into a FOIA repository.
And yet - they're not.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

It proves nothing other than democrat intransigence and corruption.

Where are the emails motter? Next to Nixon's missing minutes?

Are they government emails?

yes, he was a state department employee. All emails are supposed to be archived into a FOIA repository.
And yet - they're not.

No, thats not true. There are many emails outside of that rule. Personal emails by example. No all to it. Again with the lies and the 'trust me'.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

It proves nothing other than democrat intransigence and corruption.

Where are the emails motter? Next to Nixon's missing minutes?

Are they government emails?

yes, he was a state department employee. All emails are supposed to be archived into a FOIA repository.
And yet - they're not.

No, thats not true. There are many emails outside of that rule. Personal emails by example. No all to it. Again with the lies and the 'trust me'.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

wrong. There was no law to give private emails to the government. Paglianu could have written private emails or recieved them on that server.

Regardless of what you think the law might be, you would have to quote that law.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_White_House_email_controversy

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

And just to rub salt in the wound.

national records acta (NARA)
Title 36 → Chapter XII → Subchapter B → Part 1220

Its not the employee's responsibility to determine what records are archived and what are not. Its the purview of the office of the archivist.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

There was not an explicit, categorical prohibition against federal employees using personal emails when Clinton was in office, said Daniel Metcalfe, former director of the Department of Justice’s Office of Information Policy, where he administered implementation of the Freedom of Information Act. High-level officials like Clinton need the flexibility to sometimes use a personal email, such as responding to a national security emergency in the middle of the night.

So it seems she didn’t break a rule simply by using a personal email to conduct business.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

wrong. There was no law to give private emails to the government. Paglianu could have written private emails or recieved them on that server.

Regardless of what you think the law might be, you would have to quote that law.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_White_House_email_controversy

Once again your quote has nothing to do with your statement. Besides just inserting random links into your gibberish, why don't you quote sections you think are relevant.

In other words - how do you think sending government emails on a private server is equivalent to sending private emails on a government server?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

There was not an explicit, categorical prohibition against federal employees using personal emails when Clinton was in office, said Daniel Metcalfe, former director of the Department of Justice’s Office of Information Policy, where he administered implementation of the Freedom of Information Act. High-level officials like Clinton need the flexibility to sometimes use a personal email, such as responding to a national security emergency in the middle of the night.

So it seems she didn’t break a rule simply by using a personal email to conduct business.

Are we talking Clinton the raper or Clinton the rape shamer?

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

wrong. There was no law to give private emails to the government. Paglianu could have written private emails or recieved them on that server.

Regardless of what you think the law might be, you would have to quote that law.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_White_House_email_controversy

Once again your quote has nothing to do with your statement. Besides just inserting random links into your gibberish, why don't you quote sections you think are relevant.

In other words - how do you think sending government emails on a private server is equivalent to sending private emails on a government server?

that is why I have repeatedly said, if he were a student, he'd fail, and if this were his job, he'd be fired.

I can only think that the sole satisfaction he gets out of the process is a place to practice his malevolence.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Phydeaux

I'm not going to bother looking up what should be obvious.

Here's what http://www.factcheck.org/2015/03/clintons-email-and-the-privacy-privilege/ says

"“No one creating records on an official government network has an individual ‘privacy right’ to demand that their emails or e-records should be shielded beyond the reach of public access requests under FOI [Freedom of Information] laws, state or federal,” Jason R. Baron, a lawyer at Drinker Biddle and a former director of litigation at the National Archives, told us in an email.

State Department policy – spelled out in the Foreign Affairs Manual under “Points to Remember About E-mail” – says there is “no expectation of privacy.” Specifically, 5 FAM 443.5 says, in part: “Department E-mail systems are for official use only by authorized personnel” and “The information in the systems is Departmental, not personal. No expectation of privacy or confidentiality applies.”

proving once again.

You are wrong.

Nobody really gives a rats ass what the shyster Jason R Baron says. It proves that you are really toiletlicking, and gobbling felch like there is no tomorrow. She didnt demand shit, she deleted her private emails.

Department E-mail systems are for official use only by authorized personnel” and “The information in the systems is Departmental, not personal. No expectation of privacy or confidentiality applies.”

Just a few laughs before I call you out as the fucking imbecile you are. You are wrong again, there is no law about private emails having to be turned over. It doesnt appear that she was on a department server, or didn't you get the email? The statement here from the manual seems to be at odds with your other cockgargling in that if there is no expectation of privacy, then they will be playing any kind of hell to get up any secrets transferring laws, hah?

So, once again imbecile, you have been proven by your own words a liar, there is no such law, and secondly, you put up some asswipe that has nothing to do with the topic, a shithouse lawyer and then a quote that says nothing about nothing, and are all jacking your dick like you are some good little boy, when in fact, you showed that you are in epic fail wrongness.

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

quote:

ORIGINAL: Nnanji

quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

There was not an explicit, categorical prohibition against federal employees using personal emails when Clinton was in office, said Daniel Metcalfe, former director of the Department of Justice’s Office of Information Policy, where he administered implementation of the Freedom of Information Act. High-level officials like Clinton need the flexibility to sometimes use a personal email, such as responding to a national security emergency in the middle of the night.

So it seems she didn’t break a rule simply by using a personal email to conduct business.

Are we talking Clinton the raper or Clinton the rape shamer?

No, we are talking wilbur the nutsucker and his band of merry felchers. It is English, try to keep up, I know nutsuckers are supporting child molestation, but this is different.