Three facts that prove Clinton wasn't 'careless' with her emails

[StevieM]

~snip~


First, as Clinton repeatedly has stated over the last year, she never received or sent any email that was marked as classified. At Comey's press conference on Tuesday, he appeared to contradict that claim, saying there were "very few" that had classified markings. But then at the congressional hearing on Thursday, he withdrew his claim. He said that three, out of more than 30,000, had a marking of a small "C" — something he said a classification expert would not regard as sufficient to know the document contained classified information.
Not surprisingly, the media on Tuesday and Wednesday hyped the fact that the FBI director had contradicted Clinton's repeated assertions that she had never sent or received emails marked as classified, but then when Comey later withdrew that claim, the media barely covered the reversal.
Second, despite accusations by partisan Republicans to the contrary, there is no evidence — none — that the former secretary of State in fact compromised national security by using a private server. Both the FBI director and the State Department inspector general confirmed that. Comey's statement that it is "possible" is pure speculation — questionable for the head of the FBI to use such a speculative word publicly.
He also did not point out at his press conference or during the hearing that using the State Department server, state.gov, was a known, definite risk; we know that the department server has been hacked multiple times by Chinese and Russian hackers.

Third, Comey used the expression "extreme carelessness" because he said Clinton "should have known" that more than 100 emails that were sent to her private server using nonsecure communications channels contained classified information, albeit without any classification markings. But what he did not say is that more than 300 State Department officials, including many longtime, nonpartisan career professionals and diplomats, also used the same nonclassified channels to send her these emails allegedly containing classified information.

If over 300 State professionals and experts didn't recognize classified information in the emails they sent to Clinton, and they used nonsecure channels to send them to her, then how can Clinton plausibly be accused, alone, of showing "extreme carelessness" because she "should have" known what 300-plus government professionals did not? I don't think she can.

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/13/three-facts-that-prove-clinton-wasnt-careless-with-her-emails-commentary.html

[timlot]

1. I guess. I'm voting for Hillary, but this whole email server issue stinks.

You mean to tell me all the people in government that emailed her at [e-mail] didn't think that was strange?

[drray23]

4. probably not.

since the state department email was such a mess, many others had the same kind of setup minus the private server (gmail, yahoo, etc..). Not only that, many in congress use private email addresses as well (Trey Gody for example..). Until congress budgets the appropriate amount of money to address and modernized the IT infrastructure in the government, we will keep running into these issues.

[lapfog_1]

2. Yes, all true

and the (C) was indicated as being the WRONG classification marking for a "confidential" classification (the very lowest level of classifications).

Every thing you wrote is true.

However, she should not have had a personal email server, or rather, she should not have used a personal email server for government business (either to receive or send State Department emails).

She could have used her personal server to send and receive any personal email to anyone she wished.

She just should not have done it.

[ehrnst]

3. Yes, in hindsight, she should not have done it.

I truly believe that she was reacting to the fact that cyber security in the State Department was really shoddy (as the hacks to their servers show) and that the byzantine maze that one needs to go through within that insecure system was impacting her ability to do her job.

And hindsight shows that her server was more secure.

Perhaps not as secure as the GOP owned server in the GWB White House was, but more secure nonetheless.

[lapfog_1]

5. I don't think her home server had anything to do

with the state of the security of government servers.

I think it had everything to do with her wanting to keep certain emails out of the hands of those wishing to do her political harm. Out of the reach of an FOIA subpoena.

It was her paranoia that got her into the mess. Paranoia justified by years and years of Repuke investigations into Whitewater, travelgate, Bill's White House BJs, etc, etc.