Posted on 10/27/2016 8:58:41 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
From:jlegum@gmail.com
To: john.podesta@gmail.com
Date: 2015-09-02 22:46
Subject: Hillary's IT guy
Benghazi Dems fearing very bad WashPost story have given us the details so we can be fairer. Anything I should know?
Why wasn’t there a bigger flap about Sen. Clair McCaskel giving Clinton campaign a heads up on State Dept. IG report on Benghazi and offering to run interference with the media?
who is jlegum?
Judd Legum who is an editor at Think Progress.
Its like watching a train wreck in slow motion.
One thing I have noticed in many of these emails is how terse and muddled and obscure the text can be. I’m sure that these people confused each other often with this stuff.
I deal with a lot of email. From people I know. Dealing with situations in which I am involved. Even if I am “in the loop” and really and truly know what is going on, I can still be thrown off by short emails that simply are not clear.
Business communications needs clarity. Our highest government officials seem incapable of this.
I’m hearing rumblings that someone high up in the Clinton Foundation hinted to rich donors that they could write their own Executive Orders is she is elected.
So last fall, when the email investigation was in full swing, they were expressing fears to reach other...by email?
She should lose just for being stupid.
Yeah...crazy, isn’t it. You’d think they would learn....and THEY want to run a super power country? AAAGGGGHHHHHH
One thing I have noticed in many of these emails is how terse and muddled and obscure the text can be. I’m sure that these people confused each other often with this stuff.
I deal with a lot of email. From people I know. Dealing with situations in which I am involved. Even if I am “in the loop” and really and truly know what is going on, I can still be thrown off by short emails that simply are not clear.
Business communications needs clarity. Our highest government officials seem incapable of this.
Good observation. There writing is likely muddy because their thinking is muddy.
Fox often has Tanden on their Sunday roundtable. She’s a pompous, obnoxious bitch.
This is what happens when people grew up texting and don’t have well-developed, trained, old-school business communication skills.
Oh lord you should read her emails she is such an asshole. Unbelievable really.
There is also the opportunity to intentionally be specifically vague when the subject of the communication is of a nefarious nature.
Ever work for a large corporation? I mean 300k+ employees? This is extremely common in Executive Mgmt. Short, concise and to the point with no extra words
“Business communications needs clarity. Our highest government officials seem incapable of this.”
I think it’s intentional, because the last thing you want is clarity if you are discussing dirty dealings in emails that might someday be subpoenaed.
On one hand, I suspect that is true: if the message is obscure, then it’s less dangerous if you wind up in court.
On the other hand, if you’re worried about showing up in court, maybe having all of your communications on an illegal email server isn’t your best move.
They seem to want it both ways.
Here's your sign:
describing Obama's plan to roll back Bushs' EOs
Just wait til Trump does it– this will be handy then Thanks to Doug for the original post
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.