Colin Powell Says Hillary Clinton's 'People Have Been Trying to Pin' Email Scandal on Him

[GURPS]

Colin Powell Says Hillary Clinton's 'People Have Been Trying to Pin' Email Scandal on Him


"Her people have been trying to pin it on me," Powell, 79, told PEOPLE Saturday night at the Apollo in the Hamptons 2016 Night of Legends fête in East Hampton, New York.

"The truth is, she was using [the private email server] for a year before I sent her a memo telling her what I did," Powell added.

Why does the former diplomat believe this to be the case?

"Why do you think?" he said. "It doesn't bother me. But it's okay; I'm free."

The email scandal has dogged presidential hopeful Clinton for more than a year. But federal officials decided not to pursue criminal charges after a three-and-a-half-hour interview, which was when the Democratic nominee disclosed her alleged conversation with Powell.

 

[PsyOps]

Perhaps Powell ought to demand an investigation on him to clear his name.

 

[Hijinx]

Perhaps Powell ought to demand an investigation on him to clear his name.

Democrats are masochistic, they LIKE to be tossed under the bus.

Hey hey Hillary crap on me next. I love it.say's Colon.

 

[PsyOps]

Democrats are masochistic, they LIKE to be tossed under the bus.

Hey hey Hillary crap on me next. I love it.say's Colon.

I guess Powell is learning the hard way that Obama and the Clintons do not have anyone's best interest in mind but their own; and will lie about anything, and destroy everyone else's lives in achieve their goals. It's a shame someone as smart as Powell couldn't see this before.

 

[Millburn]

I guess Powell is learning the hard way that Obama and the Clintons do not have anyone's best interest in mind but their own; and will lie about anything, and destroy everyone else's lives in achieve their goals. It's a shame someone as smart as Powell couldn't see this before.

So why wasn't it a "crime " as you say when he did it and not just when Hillary does it?

 

[PsyOps]

So why wasn't it a "crime " as you say when he did it and not just when Hillary does it?

I'm not saying it wasn't. In fact, when the Powell thing came out months ago I was saying that if there is something there, he should be investigated. I want our public servants to be held accountable. I'm not one to forget who these people ultimately work for - US.

I can say, based on the plethora of information we have on Clinton, with no doubt in my mind, that she committed several crimes and violated multiple rules for handling classified information. At a minimum she should never be given a security clearance again. Even Comey, in his cowardly dismissal of indictment recommendation against Clinton, admitted that things would play out much differently if this were someone that worked under him. If that's not a HUGE admission of a double-standard I don't know what is.

 

[This_person]

So why wasn't it a "crime " as you say when he did it and not just when Hillary does it?

That the rules changed in 2009 seem to suggest it was at least different for Powell.

 

[Grumpy]

So why wasn't it a "crime " as you say when he did it and not just when Hillary does it?

Do you know the difference between a email account on yahoo, aol, msn, etc and a privately owned email server??

 

[Gilligan]

So why wasn't it a "crime " as you say when he did it and not just when Hillary does it?

Because 1) Powell did not set up a server for his own email and route 100% of all official and non-official mail through it and 2) Very specific directives to NOT do what Hillary did were put in place some time after Powell left office.

 

[Gilligan]

Do you know the difference between a email account on yahoo, aol, msn, etc and a privately owned email server??

Of course he doesn't.

 

[Grumpy]

Of course he doesn't.

Yanno, if Hil was a repub, EVERYONE would know the difference. Another notch in the belt of the partisan Media.

 

[PsyOps]

That the rules changed in 2009 seem to suggest it was at least different for Powell.

However, the rules for handling classified hasn't changed. Everything I've seen about Powell and his use of a private email address on a public domain (which is quite different than having one's own private server on a private domain), he only used that private email address for personal correspondence. No classified was processed over his private address. But again, if there is any doubt about this, he should be investigated.

 

[This_person]

However, the rules for handling classified hasn't changed. Everything I've seen about Powell and his use of a private email address on a public domain (which is quite different than having one's own private server on a private domain), he only used that private email address for personal correspondence. No classified was processed over his private address. But again, if there is any doubt about this, he should be investigated.

He was, and innocuous material was classified. Rather, an ADC never derivatively classified it as "unclassified".

Hillary's e-mails, as you point out, were multiple instances of Top Secret with significant handling instructions beyond that. I fully agree with you.

 

[glhs837]

So why wasn't it a "crime " as you say when he did it and not just when Hillary does it?

When Powell was SecState, State did not have an UNCLASS email system, so he used his AOL account for unclass purposes. She sent %100 of her official correspondence through a private uncontrolled server. See the difference?

 

[PeoplesElbow]

So why wasn't it a "crime " as you say when he did it and not just when Hillary does it?

http://www.weeklystandard.com/why-colin-powells-emails-are-not-like-hillarys/article/2000949

In the early 2000's the email situation with the federal government was still just a pieced together thing with very few rules, the government is slow to react to new technology. I have personal experience of government computing in the early 2000's, there were almost no rules and you could do damn near anything.

Here is one of the best synopsis of the situation
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-make-about-clintons-emails-these-arent-them/

 

[PsyOps]

In the early 2000's the email situation with the federal government was still just a pieced together thing with very few rules, the government is slow to react to new technology. I have personal experience of government computing in the early 2000's, there were almost no rules and you could do damn near anything.

I'm having a really hard time believing this. I worked in comm/IT nearly my entire military career (and as a contractor) and watched the whole internet thing within the government evolve. By the time I got to the AFOSI in 2000 we had well-established networks and well-established rules on how each network (NIPR, SIPR, and JWICS) and the appropriate information classifications were to be handled. I find it hard to believe that the State Dept or any other federal agency was that far behind; except that they chose to be.

 

[Grumpy]

I'm having a really hard time believing this....I find it hard to believe that the State Dept or any other federal agency was that far behind; except that they chose to be.

Believe it, non-DOD govt agencies were the wild west when it came to anything IT until 2005/6. The DOD is light years ahead of govt agencies when it comes to IT security.

 

[SamSpade]

I'm having a really hard time believing this. I worked in comm/IT nearly my entire military career (and as a contractor) and watched the whole internet thing within the government evolve. By the time I got to the AFOSI in 2000 we had well-established networks and well-established rules on how each network (NIPR, SIPR, and JWICS) and the appropriate information classifications were to be handled. I find it hard to believe that the State Dept or any other federal agency was that far behind; except that they chose to be.

I've been a federal worker since 90, and I've seen the same sequence of events - but the truth is, the fear over hacking and Internet security only really came to being after the onset of the wars in the Bush administration. Prior to that, IT departments generally thought their stuff was secure.

The really heavy-handed policies of endless scrutiny of every program has only been a few years old in my area, and emails are only heavily watched if they either contain types of data that look like they might be confidential (say, a stream of data that looks like a Social Security number) or any attachment, which if it contains data is expected to be sent encrypted, sensitive or not. THAT has only been going on for maybe a half dozen years or so.

Many have also learned - by going outside the lines - what happens if you use the mail as your personal chat line. We already have fairly heavily monitored Internet usage.

 

[SamSpade]

Believe it, non-DOD govt agencies were the wild west when it came to anything IT until 2005/6. The DOD is light years ahead of govt agencies when it comes to IT security.

Yep, that's been my experience, and your time line is about right. When Homeland Security really got going, that's when it really came down.

 

[PsyOps]

I've been a federal worker since 90, and I've seen the same sequence of events - but the truth is, the fear over hacking and Internet security only really came to being after the onset of the wars in the Bush administration. Prior to that, IT departments generally thought their stuff was secure.

But the rules for handling classified have not changed; and that's what this is all about with Clinton. I worked in intel in the early 90s and was read in to, and debriefed from compartments just the same as I was in the 2000s. The rules would have been no different with Clinton. And given the even bigger responsibility of her position, I would think even higher expectations would be placed on someone handling enormously more important information. And, given her years and experience in government, she knew full-well what the rules were. This was a deliberate act of mishandling classified for her personal convenience and to hide her dealings in the Clinton Foundation.