|
posted to rec.boats
|
|
external usenet poster
|
|
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Nov 2013
Posts: 2,563
|
|
It's not about servers
On 3/5/2015 8:17 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...
"According to Section 1236.22 of the 2009 NARA requirements, which
Schmidt provided in an email, "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 recordkeeping system."
And Hillary did not ensure her official electronic mail messages as SofS
were preserved in the "appropriate agency" (meaning federal) record
keeping system.
And you know this how? And what's the time limit for "ensuring?"
This just shows how the "requirement" is weak.
Without going into reasons "why" she used her own server for emails - I
can think of many - what is "official?"
Think about that in the realm of Dept of State, which is rife with
"personal" relationships.
The Dept of State can *never* operate entirely via gov email.
She kept them on her own, private server. Only now ... 2 years since
she resigned and the emails have been discovered is she offering her
screened and approved releases to the State Department.
You get what you get. So it is. That's why you have "memoirs."
I'm sure "official business" has all been preserved.
The intent of the law was to make official government related emails
available and preserved on government servers, not her own. Government
officials and employees are supposed to use a government email address
for these correspondences.
Yes. For "official" business. And I'm sure that business has all been
appropriately captured on gov systems.
What is it that you want?
First, she tried to claim that if she sent an email from her personal
email server address to a government email address ... it would be
preserved. But that doesn't account for them all.
What is "all of them?" A "Happy birthday!" to Angela Merkel?
Remember that Joe Scarborough would demand that too.
I'm not a fan of the Clintons. But I am resistant to to seeing unfair
attacks on anybody. And this just smells like...Benghazi, Benghazi,
Benghazi.
Only liberals would use a deal like Benghazi as a pejorative to mock
another crime. Seems military and other officials don't really matter to
dems and party line guys like you.
|