Link.
UPDATE, 1:43 CT: The news media are waiting for Hillary to show up. Here's a live feed. Hillary is late, and there are hundreds of reporters, so of course, they're all filling the air space with lots of talk about Hillary and her emails.
UPDATE, 1:50: What's up with all the flags in front of Picasso's Guernica? Bad visual jumble, but the setup for Hillary's speaking is to the side of that, with a neutral backdrop.
UPDATE, 2:01: Hillary tries to focus the press onto the Iran letter, then turns to the email controversy. 1. She "opted for convenience." 2. "The vast majority of" her work email went to work email addresses and were therefore preserved. 3. She has provided the State Department with all her emails "that could possibly be work related." She seems to be conceding that she has destroyed her personal email. (How are we to know what she shunted into that category?) 4. There's a fourth point, something about wanting things to become public.
UPDATE, 2:05: The first question is from a Turkish reporter, asking why she didn't use 2 different devices... and also whether she's getting attacked because she's female.
UPDATE, 2:07: Andrea Mitchell asks how she decided which emails were public and why people should accept her being arbiter of what was public. Hillary says she's "very confident of the process that we conducted" and that Americans will be satisfied because they'll see the email that is going to be released. These are nonanswers, of course. The questions make the point and hang there.
UPDATE, 2:09: Hillary is asked if she will say that she made a mistake and, if so, what she's learned from that mistake. She says even if she'd had 2 devices to keep work and personal separate, people could still question her decisions what to put on the personal device. There is no real concession of a mistake. "The server will remain private."
UPDATE, 2:12: A questioner raises the oddness of having her own server. Hillary says it was set up for Bill Clinton's office, which made it secure in a way that other private servers might not be. "I feel that I've take unprecedented steps."
UPDATE, 2:14: How do we know you didn't delete work emails? "I went above and beyond what I was requested to do... and people will judge for themselves." (I'll have to finish this later... I've got to run to class.)
UPDATE, 7:12: I'm back. I've watched to the end. There wasn't much more beyond what I'd already described, and it's really too boring to belabor. Maybe tomorrow morning, I'll make some distanced observations. For now, I'm done with this.
March 10, 2015
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
215 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 215 of 215The reaction after this speech seems to be "nice try, but no cigar"
Rub it in, why doncha.
(Paint any pictures of President Clinton lately?)
garage mahal said...
Republicans write a letter telling Iran that things could change if they gain power.
3/10/15, 4:55 PM
Kinda like Obama telling the Russians that he'd have more "flexibility to negotiate with them after the election". Treason! #44Traitor!
If I were Hillary, I would have replied, regarding possibly classified messages, that all diplomatic or classified messages are transmitted through the State Department's secure diplomatic cable system. Simple email messages cannot really be secure.
That she didn't say that reveals one of two things; either A), she's not as smart as I am, or B) this is a lie that would be too easy to check, or C) both.
Nonapod said... " Re Paper Prinouts of Emails: They should just rent one of those highspeed industrial scanners and OCR the text. It'd probably take some interns like a day to scan 50,000 sheets."
I install and configure those scanners, that model included. I have a spare in my warehouse. It would take 2 days, of which the longest part would be document preparation. If it's all clean paper and not stapled, it can be done. Pulling staples would be the hard part.
Scott M said... " "And the e-mails are not searchable - it's only paper printouts."
The most important fact in the story.
It is. If they were being open and honest, they would have simply sent over the electronic version which would take an IT type minutes, not hours. Instead, they took those files and created hardcopies that are not only harder to search, but add unnecessary steps to the process."
________________
Further, this eviscerates Hillary's "green" cred; wasting 11 reams of paper and a toner cartridge, AND the power to run the printer?
I do not think it is a case of "walking the line" between legal and illegal, so much as all illegal, and when caught at it, throw up a fog of non sequiturs, direct lies, and inconsistencies to thoroughly confuse and overwhelm the questioner.
Then stonewall and say she explained all that in the previous session.
That's why it took Hillary! two years to turn them over to State. It took that long just to print them all out.
Brando wrote -
"For these things I watch the reaction from the left leaning parts of the media--when Hillary loses them, she shows actual damage (Limbaugh or National Review ripping on her is to be expected)."
Good observation and I don't disagree. But pushing your observation to its conclusion, this is all intraparty. So what if Hillary is permanently damaged. It makes no difference. The Democrats will nominate someone, and the media will take a deep breath and then do everything it can to drag that person across the finish line whoever it is.
Hillary is a cipher. A place holder until the party nominates her or someone else. THEN it gets serious.
I don't expect Hillary to be held to account. Hell, I don't expect anyone near the top of the heap to be held to the standards set out for the little people. THAT is what's depressing. She will get away with it. Getting upset while watching her get away with it is just a waste of time and blood pressure.
Truly this is a moment where "What difference, at this point, does it make?" is as apt as it will ever be.
As I read the law, she doesn't get to decide which are personal and which are official.
Isn't the biggest lie that she had a yoga routine?
A document/correspondence doesn't have to be "Classified" to require certain precautions. Its also not possible that the private system had the same security firewall that a state.gov address would. Good? Maybe. Better than state.gov? Theoretically possible but not a risk you are allowed to take on your own.
Thank you Sammy Finkleman.
She showed extremely poor judgement - again. And she put her personal needs above her public duties - again. There is a long term pattern here. The most important duty of a president is to use good judgment and to put the needs of the country first. She is proving herself to be unqualified.
I hope this HRC drama goes on a for a little while before the inevitable happens and HRC! drops out (or fails to enter).
Reason is that Clinton apologists are going to be depleted. Thus it's only a matter of time until we get treated to a heapin' helpin' of James Carville foaming at the mouth on every Sunday AM talking head show.
That's good TV!
There's only one explanation for Hillary's characteristic pattern of ethical outrages, lying, and blame-shifting. She's a psychopath. We need to subject this creature to the Hare Checklist.
Post a Comment