Straining Credulity ~ Hillary Clinton’s Emails

Much ado over recent revelations that Hillary Clinton, serving as Secretary of State, did not use a .gov email, but rather, chose to create and maintain her very own personal server and her very own private email to facilitate her email correspondence. Huh.

When these reports began to surface, following on the heels of foreign companies and individuals contributing to the Bill, Hillary & Chelsea Clinton Foundation while she was Secretary of State, it seemed clear that, at the very least, there might be a conflict of interest. Huh.

There are many contradictions in this story beginning with Hillary Clinton’s own statements, some during her brief press conference and from her staff and the State Department attempting to clear up the contradictions arising from past interviews and the recent press conference, as well as exactly what did happen with the emails and the servor.

Here’s the thing: I worked in law for 25 plus years, my last position in the Finance Legal Department of a major bank, before transitioning over to the Washington State Military Department Emergency Management Division’s Alert & Warning Center (does not fit easily on a business card or application, trust me). Information Technology (IT) rules those worlds for both security purposes and public records. From your very first day, then at least once a year (more, if the policy changes), you must endure training on what can and cannot be kept on a business or government computer and what must be retained. You are tracked from that first day until your last day for compliance and IT is relentless in grinding you into compliance. Except, apparently, at the United States State Department.

Mind, our State Department has a long track record of disdaining the need for security and/or intelligence. I’ve a vivid memory of Secretary of State Henry Stimson (1929) shutting down the Cipher Bureau (cryptology) because, “Gentlemen do not read other gentlemen’s mail.”

20 thoughts on “Straining Credulity ~ Hillary Clinton’s Emails

  1. what amazes me are her answers: I don’t want to lug two laptops or phones around with me…huh? Is she that technically stupid or think we are? answer: the secret service guards my server….huh? they are standing around at yahoo or google or guarding their premises? Lies, lies, and damn lies. The same old Democratic Chicago way of doing business. No wonder Benghazi happened.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. Sadly, nothing will happen except some kind of smoke and mirrors slight of hand to make us think everything has been taken care of. One day, there just won’t be anymore room under the rug.


  3. At the time Hillary was Secretary of State, there was no requirement for her to use a gov provided e-mail. If any republican wanted to push this issue during the time she held the position of Secretary of State, they clearly had enough time to bring to attention the issue with Hillary using a private e-mail account.
    We now have a total of 762 White Papers on the Benghazi situation and not one concludes with charges or even a suggested reprimand for Hillary. Yes, they contain reprimands but at individuals never mentioned in any press release.
    I for one would like to see the media go away and allow our candidates run for office. We’ll never have anyone in office as long as the media gets away with reporting the slanted crap they do. We have hundreds of capable individuals who could run our country but they will never step forward because they will never put their families through the crap that comes with holding or even trying to be elected to office.
    I personally used 3 different e-mail accounts during the 20 years I worked for the Federal Gov and many of my documents were Top Secret and Eyes Only. I wouldn’t have accomplished a thing if I’d used gov e-mail. It leaves the user hung out to dry 24/7!

    Liked by 1 person

    • Sheri, I bow to your Federal knowledge of government rules vs. my knowledge of private industry, banking and state government that I wrote of above.

      I do take exception to the Benghazi mess – she has not answered, nor has President Obama, nor Susan Rice for her five interviews the weekend following the Benghazi attack, for their claims about the video film being the cause of it all – they held to that, up to and including doing a long apologetic statement and airing it in Pakistan for the supposed video. To say, as Hillary Clinton did in her testimony, “What does it matter now?!” makes my head want to explode.

      Other than that, everything you said, I will bow to or agree with, especially where the media and good candidates are concerned.

      Liked by 1 person

          • Something to think about – – – Those who get things done with the best interest of the people [and I’m speaking of those that believe in the constitution and a strong middle class] are primarily products of living through the 60s. We are not our parent’s generation and we are not of the morals of our grandparents. We’ve faced some of the hardest decisions set before man and still survived to serve. I’ve never met a perfect human – but that would involve a discussion based on theology and my dear Huntie, I have no intention of going there. I love we can remain friends and be a million miles apart in our political beliefs. For the record, I’ll go on the record with, the 2 Bush presidents drove us over the financial cliff and Obama didn’t and still doesn’t have a clue in how to fix anything. He’s surrounded himself with idiots and people without government experience. Shame on him.
            Tom took a turn for the worse – I’ll call soon – I promise. Love you, Huntie. This caregiver needs a break. Keep posting intelligent articles to feed my hungry mind. You give me an opportunity to think about something other than mad-max medicine.

            Liked by 1 person

  4. Thank you – I thought it might just be me who couldn’t wrap my head around how incredibly stupid this story really is.

    I worked in IT security for many years. The shame is not Clinton’s alone. The shame also belongs to the security people who declined to reinforce rules and regulations on appropriate use of technology. In our organization, flagrant disregard for security was grounds for immediate dismissal.

    The quote at the end makes me shake my head for so many reasons 😦

    Liked by 2 people

  5. Yes, yes Joanne – I so agree. In the gov operations I’m still involved in, if I ran my shop with such a cavalier notion as many in government do these days – I would deserve whatever anyone threw at me. I have my IT guys locked into a contract wherein they not only monitor all security from off-site but they paid me a 3 hour visit last night just to insure everything was on the up and up. If we don’t pay due diligence, who will?

    Liked by 1 person

  6. I must say this sounded a little fishy to me too even though I don’t follow much US politics.
    How is Huntie today? I hope she is doing better – sending healing thoughts . . .


Come talk with me...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s