Title: Hillary trainwreck: It was “inconvenient” to carry two devices for two e-mail accounts. Also, I destroyed tons of e-mails. Source:
[None] URL Source:http://hotair.com/archives/2015/03/ ... o-i-destroyed-tons-of-e-mails/ Published:Mar 10, 2015 Author:BY ALLAHPUNDIT Post Date:2015-03-10 20:56:09 by A K A Stone Keywords:None Views:776 Comments:11
Believe it or not, America, today’s newfangled gizmos are capable of accessing multiple e-mail accounts from the same device. You don’t need separate iPhones for your Gmail and work mail. And even if you did, even if the State Department’s security tech required a dedicated device for e-mail, what kind of goon would conclude that the “inconvenience” of carrying two devices (or having a lackey carry two devices for you) instead of one trumped protecting national security at the cabinet level? What kind of politician would admit that? Who would dare even attempt a “convenience” argument knowing that the public already knows she took the much more inconvenient step of setting up a private server at home? Her personal e- mail operation was more sophisticated than what 99-point-whatever percent of the public will ever use. Not only is the inconvenience excuse horrible politics, it’s transparently false.
And why is she claiming an aversion to two devices when she admitted to using two devices on camera just a few weeks ago?
Her team had a week to cook up some spin and this diarrhea is what they came up with?
It got worse. She admitted that she deleted e-mails — lots of them, although she insists that they were personal ones and therefore she wasn’t required to turn them over to State. For instance, she said, sometimes she e-mails with Bill. How do we know she’s telling the truth about that? We don’t. You’ll have to trust her. (Incidentally, Bill says he doesn’t use e-mail. Oops!) Will she turn over her server for independent analysis and verification that there’s nothing on there? Nope. “The server will remain private.” You’ll have to trust her. How do we know she was telling the truth today when she said most of her e-mails were to fellow State Department employees, which means they’re already in the archives? And why does that matter given that, even if it’s true, it still means we’re potentially missing every exchange she had with other private accounts, whether operated by other State employees, foreign leaders, etc?
You’ll have to trust her. Even though she’s one of the least trustworthy people in American political life and gave you zero reason today to adjust that opinion. In fact, the first question she took was from a Turkish reporter who asked her, surreally, whether a similar fuss would be made over her e-mails if she was a man. That may have been the only honest moment at the presser: It was so nakedly a planted question, designed to reinforce her opening pander about celebrating women’s rights to the UN — code to progressives watching that they should cut the First! Woman! President! some slack on this — that it didn’t even qualify as subterfuge. It was just Hillary and her sympathizers playing cynical games to distract from the fact of her own corruption.
This whole presser was her own personal expression of the “who gives a sh*t” non-spin that Democrats have been pushing for the past week. There’s no defense to what she did. She did it to evade accountability, at great risk to national security, and everyone understands it. The plan here isn’t to explain it away; there’s no explanation. The plan is to feign accountability by giving a presser, even if it’s a trainwreck, and then wait for the media to get bored in the knowledge that voters, supposedly, will simply say “who gives a sh*t.” She might as well have walked out there today, said that, and then walked off. If Democrats can’t field a primary challenger to her after this disaster, they deserve her.
I’m now moving the 2016 election from “likely Democratic” to “toss-up.” At least Bill is a good liar.
Update: Via the Standard, unbelievable.
Update: Two devices is one too many for her, huh? Judicial Watch claims that not only did she operate multiple devices, she insisted on using Apple products even though State’s IT people told her that their enhanced security is designed for Blackberry only.
On at least half a dozen occasions Clinton’s top aides asked the State Department’s Office of Security Technology to approve the use of an iPad and iPhone, according to JW’s inside source. Each time the request was rejected for security reasons, the source confirms. The only mobile device that meets the agency’s security standards is the BlackBerry, JW’s source said, adding that the Office of Security Technology—Bureau of Diplomatic Security’s Directorate of Countermeasures must approve all equipment such as cameras, phones and communication devices for all officials.
Evidently set on using the popular Apple devices, Clinton repeatedly challenged the ban and asked management in the Office of Security Technology to allow their use. The executive secretariat responsible for all communications and information technology always rejected the requests, JW’s source affirms. “From day one Hillary was trying to get the iPhone and the iPad approved,” the State Department official told JW. “She kept trying and trying to get us to approve the iPhone and the iPad, but we wouldn’t do it. Technology security experts tested the iPhone and the iPad several times because she constantly wanted them approved, but it never happened.” They never approved her for iPhone/iPad use, allegedly. Did she end up using those devices anyway?
Update: Here’s video of the full presser. I’d forgotten in my haste to get this up that she went after the Senate GOP over its Iran letter at the beginning, another little dog whistle to lefties to circle the wagons for her on this. She’s being a good soldier for Obama, now they need to be good soldiers for her.
The “convenience” nonsense comes right at the beginning. The State Department does allow private e-mail use for official business, she reminds everyone. But that’s a lie too: They allow occasional use of private e-mail, not exclusive use. Her own policies as SoS confirm that. She’s not even trying here.
Update: Right. Never once in four years. Even though the White House acknowledges that she e-mailed with Obama himself more than once.
It was “inconvenient” to carry two devices for two e-mail accounts. Also, I destroyed tons of e-mails.
My serious question is "WHO has power to slap her into line and get her to admit to this?
Anybody that knows anything at all about Bubbette! and her history knows she admits to nothing.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I'm sure the NSA, mossad, and about half of the rest of the world's intel services have copies of those emails. Good luck, however, trying to pull them from their grubby little paws.
Anybody that knows anything at all about Bubbette! and her history knows she admits to nothing.
Why should she be any different? Eighty percent of politicians have openly lied to and insulted the American people for so long and in so many ways that they know the American people have forgotten how to have a healthy reaction to it.
My mom is 81 - and has never, and will not, touch a computer. Not even to dust it.
She uses the TV cable remote. But the DVR - which came with the cable package - must be treated the same as any computer - it must never be touched - because it is clearly 'evil'.
Cell phones / smart phones - no. Just no.
She knows which button to push on the in-house wireless phone system to replay the messages - but only on the base station (it's one button) - it is also (replay) possible on the handsets - but forget it. (To be fair, I forget also - and I figured it out originally.)
She works most basic functions of the microwave oven okay. But 2 (maybe 3) years ago I bought her an HD radio (counter top model) because the reception of her favorite AM news station was so lousy (in the afternoons) that it was un-listen-able. But even after I explained it to her - it was a total mystery. It sat on the kitchen counter for over a year. Then she hid it. I don't think she would have thrown it away - but I don't know where it is.
I love the heck out of my Mom - but mechanical or technological aptitude? She has none - which she freely admits.
It's kinda nice to get older folks to use a gadget or two if they can get over their initial shyness. I noticed years back that it's like half of the over-60 crowd got together and had a secret meeting and pledged never to use those durned gadgets. Anyway, what I've seen is that they are perfectly capable mentally of using them, they are actually just resistant to learning to use them or they don't want to give gadgets any place in their life.
I tend to blame the difficulty of setting up and using VCRs back in the day. So hard to set up that 75% of the VCRs in America would blink 12:00am for the next 15 years. Lots of other Japanese gadgets really were quite horrible to use. Quite often, even techie types would be dumbfounded at how difficult their functions were to use. You almost had to have some Asian blood to deal with these Gadgets From Hell. So I think many of the older generation just gave up on gadgets, not realizing the modern stuff really is much easier to use.
BTW, notice that after all these years of posting, I finally had legitimate occasion to try to use the HTML ‹BLINK› tag? I waited so long that they finally completely removed the BLINKing from HTML. These newer browsers won't display it.
Then you have some seniors like pete who are totally comfortable with gadgets and handle them with the ease of an average person who is 50 years younger than they are. pete isn't intimidated at all.
Then I think of an old retired engineer I knew, designed complex industrial transmissions for a major company for decades. He won't get anything more than a flip phone and only touches the web to check his investments and his email. Obviously, nothing to stop him from using most any gadget with great competence or even doing his own custom gadget hacking (like putting custom ROMs on his cellphone, etc.). But he just has no interest.
One thing my mom uses is Shockwave.com. She likes those kinds of puzzles like Hidden Object or the word square puzzles, even a few jigsaws. I installed Chrome and used AdBlock Pro and now she flits from one game to the next, skipping all the 30 second commercials they try to force you to watch for each puzzle game you play. Probably the most wicked thing my mom ever did in her life, "cheating" Shockwave out of showing her obnoxious ads to play their so-so games. After I mentioned that the puzzles were the cheese in the Shockwave mousetrap, she loves stealing the cheese. Not that she'd ever admit it. : )
Sometimes you can get some people interested in gadgets or computers if you can find just one thing they really like to do. A friend of mine really got into computers and learned a lot because I casually showed him one day how you could rip a DVD and covert it to an SVCD disc and play it in (some) DVD players. He got way way interested and got quite good at video stuff. You just have to find that one thing that gets their attention and that they like.
I tend to blame the difficulty of setting up and using VCRs back in the day.
Childsplay.
“Political correctness is a doctrine, fostered by a delusional, illogical minority, and rapidly promoted by mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end.”
No one was more gadgety than me back in the day. I encountered some gadgets that I thought were incredibly obtuse, just awful designs. I knew other techie guys that thought the same. "Why the hell would they choose to make it so difficult and obtuse?"
This was long before the revolution in gadget design that was largely inspired by Apple's iPhone/iPads.
