Plus the article is a pile of stupid innuendo that conflates what Hillary did with Petraeus providing contemporaneously classified documents to his journalist fuckbuddy.
Further, clearly nobody in government had a contemporaneous problem with it since they saw the email address every time they communicated with Hillary Clinton. Whenever they sent her an email, they saw
Hillary Clinton <[email protected]>
IT staff reported issues with clintonemail going to SPAM folders and insisted Clinton use her .gov account, and she refused. IT staff further complained of security issues with her email server and were ignored.
It is simply not the case that no one had a problem with it. Many people did, and they were told to pound sand.
And in any case, “nobody complained about it” isn’t actually a valid legal defense.
Sure, news sources can be biased and we should be discerning when we look at them, but that doesn't automatically mean that the source is automatically wrong 100% of the time.
http://dailycaller.com/2016/05/26/obamas-fancy-new-mansion-i...
Neither is linking to the LA Times for that matter. I was simply fighting fire with fire.
http://www.ijreview.com/2015/03/264655-3-federal-laws-hillar...
- Executive Order 13526 and 18 U.S.C Sec. 793(f) of the federal code make it unlawful to send of store classified information on personal email.
- Section 1236.22 of the 2009 National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) requirements states that:
“Agencies that allow employees to send and receive official electronic mail messages using a system not operated by the agency must ensure that Federal records sent or received on such systems are preserved in the appropriate agency record keeping system.”
- MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell believes that the use of a personal emails server appears to be a preemptive move, specifically designed to circumvent FOIA: