2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumanti-hillary "liberal" media and her supporters overselling Bernie's email remark?
say it ain't so!!!!
These comments are something of a shift, but the media is also probably overselling them. It's not a gaping contradiction to say that American voters are sick of the media hype over Clinton's emails and the degree to which that hype has crowded out substantive discussion of policy and also say that a nonpartisan investigation (i.e. not the House Benghazi Committee) is reasonable and valid. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/11/05/1445027/-Bernie-Sanders-calls-investigation-of-Hillary-Clinton-s-emails-valid?detail=hide
they would never do anything like that, would they?
JackInGreen
(2,975 posts)Like any bully, they've got a hammer and everything is a nail.
Fred Sanders
(23,946 posts)has been more complicit and eager in pushing the email fraud or any GOP Big Lie, day after day after long day to fill the airtime, than the corporate media?
It was like a bullet to heart to the mass media propaganda campaign to keep ALL races as close as possible until they had wring ever last campaign cash penny out of all the candidates and their donors.
MrWendel
(1,881 posts)Benghazi 2.0 sponsored by Bernie Sanders.
Nitram
(22,890 posts)...actually meant, "If you're tired of the emails, maybe you'd consider voting for someone who doesn't have that problem." Clinton took it for support instead, and that's how it has been viewed ever since.
He was doing very well in the polls at the time he made that remark because he could afford to and look good in the process. Now he's trying to unring that bell.
zalinda
(5,621 posts)so they could discuss issues. All Bernie said was let the investigation continue. The FBI are investigating the emails and will figure out if Hillary did any thing wrong. He didn't say stop the investigation. Again Clinton supporters are muck raking about nothing as usual, trying to make anything stick.
To me, it was stupid, yes, stupid, to have a private email server to conduct government business, and it should be against the law.
Z
Nitram
(22,890 posts)...it can't afford decent email and computer services for either their employees or the Secretary of State herself. Powell, and other previous SOS used their own email because the government one is so slow and clunky. That has been widely reported, and I don't understand why it hasn't been recognized by the public.
zalinda
(5,621 posts)but can we afford it? Apparently they have tried to upgrade the system, but because of the way government contracts are given out, it turned out to be a real boondongle. It had HUGE cost overruns and it still didn't work. I think contractors just give any bid they want and then jack up the price after the project is started, to make the real money. Hell, they might do better by using open source.
Z
frylock
(34,825 posts)our fearless fighting progressive who gets things done opted to circumvent the system out of "convenience".
Nitram
(22,890 posts)Congress makes appropriations for the State Department. I used to think most of what you said actually made sense.
frylock
(34,825 posts)Hey, we really need to do something about upgrading the IT infrastructure at State, she opted for convenience.
Nitram
(22,890 posts)And it was legal when when did it. The only question of legality involves classified information, which is usually sent by cable.
frylock
(34,825 posts)and not much of a leader. But keep making comparisons to Hillary's Republican counterparts at State. It's really helping.
Nitram
(22,890 posts)I know you love Bernie, but you are really clutching at straws here. Instead of Benghazi! Benghazi! Benghazi! you are totally But the Emails! But the Emails! But the Emails! Straight out of the Republican playbook. Keep it up. It's really helping.
frylock
(34,825 posts)I've worked as a sys admin as well as managing and maintaining Exchange Server. What are your credentials?
Nitram
(22,890 posts)Who's been using computers for 41 years, and online since 1982. If you're going to defend your Hillary email obsession with that attempt at "authority", you've kinda run our of steam.
frylock
(34,825 posts)and how does that comport with maintaining an unsecured mail server?
MrWendel
(1,881 posts)sling mud and make anything stick if you were desperate and losing in the polls.
stupidicus
(2,570 posts)you and your imagination?
zalinda
(5,621 posts)for answering these half truths. Okay, then.
Z
Agschmid
(28,749 posts)You'll get through it.
Nitram
(22,890 posts)UglyGreed
(7,661 posts)Nitram
(22,890 posts)"I never tell the truth."
Never was a fan myself.
stupidicus
(2,570 posts)I wasn't paying attention and posted in that ___ group.
last time I enter that _____, even accidently
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)BS supporters are trying to walk the comment back for him.
Thinkingabout
(30,058 posts)Sanders statements, he was against it before he is for it.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)I deal with data theft, email compromise and unauthorized electronic intrusion on a regular basis.
The Secretary of State of the United States used a private server for official State Department communications. OF COURSE there should be an investigation of this situation, to either confirm or disprove the assertion that classified information was at risk.
To suggest that there should be no investigation is to be ignorant of information security protocol.
stupidicus
(2,570 posts)what I heard Bernie saying was what I did throughout the Bush admin it seems -- enough of the missing little blond girls already.
Hearing/reading about the HC email scuttlebutt on a hourly/daily basis is a disservice to the citizenry, period.
Maedhros
(10,007 posts)It may be sleazy, but it does not invalidate the investigation.
stupidicus
(2,570 posts)imo it's similar to but not to be confused with the "sources" argument used by both sides for so long now -- OBL declaring the sky blue doesn't make it pink.
Ultimately/inevitably, the facts don't care who discovers or propagates them.