FBI Takes Possession of Hillary's Home Server
- Thread starter wvkeeper(HN)
- Start date
Yeah sorry keep.c the original article I read just said thumb drive, the one I just read mentioned the server. Sorry
Man o man, the Dem Party is really trying to take her out. How long before bat shit crazy Uncle Joe declares his candidacy and the most victimized woman in politics get kicked to the curb by her own party again???
I think she may be done, though the Clinton's are resilient. General Patraeus was ousted over less than this. She'll play the victim card, but anyone not named Clinton would be in a heap of trouble for this.
Since you think Joe Biden is bat shit crazy, which republican do you think would do a better job??
Extra - that was posted back in April. The new news is implying more wrongdoing, but I'm not well read on this so maybe your link still holds up. I'm not sure, though.
From the article you linked:
"At a news conference last month, she cited "convenience" as the reason. She said she did not want to carry around two mobile devices, though she acknowledged it "might have been smarter" to have done so."
This is the worst excuse ever. If she and her handlers/IT team can't figure out how to put two email accounts on one smart phone, then they can't run the country. Period.
I don't believe they're that dumb.
Do I think she intentionally used her private server for nefarious means? No. Do I think she just did whatever she wanted because she's a Clinton and she didn't care about protocol or security? Yes. There are rules for regular people. There are rules for politicians. And then there are rules for the Clinton family.
From the article you linked:
"At a news conference last month, she cited "convenience" as the reason. She said she did not want to carry around two mobile devices, though she acknowledged it "might have been smarter" to have done so."
This is the worst excuse ever. If she and her handlers/IT team can't figure out how to put two email accounts on one smart phone, then they can't run the country. Period.
I don't believe they're that dumb.
Do I think she intentionally used her private server for nefarious means? No. Do I think she just did whatever she wanted because she's a Clinton and she didn't care about protocol or security? Yes. There are rules for regular people. There are rules for politicians. And then there are rules for the Clinton family.
This was the only point I was offering...............
"The bottom line is this: No one will likely ever know what was deleted from Clinton's server. Barring one of the 30,000 emails Clinton turned over to the State Department being deemed "classified," it's also unlikely she will ever be found to have violated the letter of the law."
Your point is now wrong since 4 of the 40 emails selected by the IG were shown to be classified, 2 of which were top secret
“None of the emails we reviewed had classification or dissemination markings,” wrote Inspector General I. Charles McCullough in the letter to Congress."
http://www.wsj.com/articles/clinton...e-at-state-department-review-finds-1437779884
http://www.wsj.com/articles/clinton...e-at-state-department-review-finds-1437779884
LMAO......ANY Republican would do a better job. These idiots have done far worse than Bush, and all you can do is try to defend the Morons!
The question really is... When where the emails "marked" as classified. Before or after the former Secretary of State sent them...
It doesnt matter if they had markings on them or not. They contained classified info at the time of production. Its like universal precautions within the health care industry.
Any of them. However, in all fairness...I'm not a fan of Cruz or Paul for various reasons. Cruz reminded me of the revival preachers I was forced to listen to every summer. However, he graduated from Harvard Law, and to many that's the ultimate pinnacle in choosing a President. Anyway.....any of them would most likely be better than Joe. Their experiences are varied and diverse and much more coherent. None seem to be like the nursing home patient jacked up on Viagra the way Joe does.
Interestingly, the political party that prides themselves on diversity has one of the least diverse tickets I've ever seen. If joe gets in, you could sum the Dem ticket up perfectly......"old and white".
Just like the southern plantations they used to run.
Last edited:
Pj from reports I've read yes I'm fairly certain what I typed is correct. And come on guys don't be so naive to think hat the freakingg sec of state NEVER ever discussed anything that was classified. Just about everything she would discuss would have some sort of national security interest
429... I don't disagree with what you are saying at all.. I imagine there is a crap ton of classified info being discussed by any Sec of State... Now as to was that info being passed over the internet via an open source email... While that is a whole different question... I imagine there are very secure networks that the US Government passes encrypted data over... And I imagine that the Sec of State and more so her staff had access to those secure encrypted data netowrks. And there is the key... encrypted data network that requires an encryption device. Not open source data sharing. Believe it or not there are very professional people who work for the Federal Governtment that get paid well to ensure electronic data security protocols are followed and enforced... Time will tell that this is once again another GOP witch hunt...
Last edited:
There's about five different levels of classification, from confidential to TS. Even confidential, which is just every day correspondence can't be sent on computers or phones that aren't government issued. These devices have to meet certain encryption/security requirements and they are constantly updated to remain current. If Hillary wasn't connected to a government network there's no way to ensure her server met those requirements. Also, you can't use the same computer for confidential/unclassified email as you would secret/TS. Secret and TS computers are kept in a SCIF (Secret Compartmented Information Facility). It's a vault built to certain standards with limited access, electronic locks with personalized punch codes, white noise, and so on. The Secret and TS computers connect with their own internet lines (SIPRNET), which is the ONLY way you'd access Secret/TS email accounts (which are completely different than the confidential email accounts). So the hdr22@clintonmail.com can't be used for both types of correspondence, if she did do that she's f*cked. And that's on top of keeping a server with sensitive emails in anything but a SCIF, a Secret Service officer guarding it is just laughable. She's broken every single rule and law about informational awareness and half the country thinks it's a GOP conspiracy.
Last edited:
There is also the fact that she took an oath and was probably "read in" on operations and other items. Which means she signed the docs that would state she would not talk about or reveal info that she was given. If she put that stuff on her private server, her own email, etc. she is hosed.
She has clearly broken the law and may have compromised national security.
She has clearly broken the law and may have compromised national security.
Yep, there's annual online training you have to complete or you'll be locked out of your system. All military personnel, even Privates, have to take this training. It's a DoD requirement so State would definitely fall under this. You take the online course, pass the follow-on test and sign a couple documents that say you understand Information Awareness and won't do stupid sh!t. I doubt Hillary ever did this (kinda like the high ranking Airforce officers who had underlings doing their annual nuclear testing and were fired), and Huma (Anthony Weiners wife), Cheryl Mills, and other Hillary aids probably fall in a grey area between DoD employees and personal assistants to Hillary, so they would side step the requirement. Plus, if they were using .clintonemail they would never be shut out of a DoD network. Also, anyone at State who sent sensitive email to the .Clinton account could be in a world of hurt. Regular Joe admin guys have been fired for loading military payroll programs on their personal computers so they could work from home. Soldiers have also been fired for emailing confidential work related items to their personal Hotmail type accounts for the same reason.
I forgot about the thumb drives. External devices are banned from use. Most DoD computers won't even recognize an external drive, USB ports are limited to printers, scanners and such by the network guys I mentioned above. You can't even install a printer without a work order/tracking ticket from that shop. You have zero admin rights. If there's a no sh*t need for external storage that thumb drive, or whatever, has to be encrypted by the same guys who run network security for your agency, and they won't do it until it's approved by a flag ranking officer. Usually it's the first O-6 in your Command, a full bird COL. The SEC of State probably has that authority, but it's questionable if the thumb drive met DoD encryption standards because it, the server, computers and phones didn't to begin with. And lets not forget Hillary's lawyer having his own thumb drive. I'm sure he never went through DoD IA training.
I would be fired and possibly a felon if I did a fraction of what Hillary did. It's so simple to me and that's what drives me crazy. It doesn't take a congressional committee to recognize this sh!t is unlawful.
I forgot about the thumb drives. External devices are banned from use. Most DoD computers won't even recognize an external drive, USB ports are limited to printers, scanners and such by the network guys I mentioned above. You can't even install a printer without a work order/tracking ticket from that shop. You have zero admin rights. If there's a no sh*t need for external storage that thumb drive, or whatever, has to be encrypted by the same guys who run network security for your agency, and they won't do it until it's approved by a flag ranking officer. Usually it's the first O-6 in your Command, a full bird COL. The SEC of State probably has that authority, but it's questionable if the thumb drive met DoD encryption standards because it, the server, computers and phones didn't to begin with. And lets not forget Hillary's lawyer having his own thumb drive. I'm sure he never went through DoD IA training.
I would be fired and possibly a felon if I did a fraction of what Hillary did. It's so simple to me and that's what drives me crazy. It doesn't take a congressional committee to recognize this sh!t is unlawful.
Some of the regulations regarding email were not put into effect until after Hillary left office.
"In Clinton’s defense, we should note that it was only after Clinton left the State Department, that the National Archives issued a recommendation that government employees should avoid conducting official business on personal emails (though they noted there might be extenuating circumstances such as an emergency that require it). Additionally, in 2014, President Barack Obama signed changes to the Federal Records Act that explicitly said federal officials can only use personal email addresses if they also copy or send the emails to their official account.
Because these rules weren’t in effect when Clinton was in office, "she was in compliance with the laws and regulations at the time," said Gary Bass, founder and former director of OMB Watch, a government accountability organization"
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...lary-clintons-email-did-she-follow-all-rules/
Because these rules weren’t in effect when Clinton was in office, "she was in compliance with the laws and regulations at the time," said Gary Bass, founder and former director of OMB Watch, a government accountability organization"
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...lary-clintons-email-did-she-follow-all-rules/
Quote that all you like, but it doesn't include sensitive email exchange. There's a big difference between official business, which is the confidential exchanges I mentioned above, and Secret/TS. The IG confirmed Secret/TS emails were sent to the .clintonemail.com server. There's no denying this, and it's a felony act. We can blow off the 30k confidential emails, but as of now there are 4 TS emails sent and received on the .clintonemail account. That's four felonies. Not only to the receiver but the sender. That's why this is such a big deal.
Ignorance of the law isn't defensible in a court of law.
Ignorance of the law isn't defensible in a court of law.
I have worked for the government for 10 years. Since the day I started, I was told we cannot use our home computers or email to conduct ANY official business. Doing so could subject you to termination and/or prosecution. You would also be required to turn over the equipment to the government.
Sharing sensitive information over a private email broke her security clearance regulations and sworn contract she signed by being read in tone programs she was part of.
Anybody else would already be in Ft Leavenworth.
Anybody else would already be in Ft Leavenworth.
Did Colin Powell have his own home server and delete God knows how many emails? Do you have proof that Colin Powell transmitted classified info on speedo all email account?
I don't have much time to post (promise of more later), but the NPR article link provided is a reminder that a good rule-of-thumb when it comes to reports about law/legal analysis, technology, science, and in the rare instance when two or three of these merge: anticipate the analysis being less-than-complete.
One example - the opening sentence of the last paragraph: "The bottom line is this: No one will likely ever know what was deleted from Clinton's server."
There is a very common and mistaken belief that deleted email (even from a dedicated server) is lost to the ether for eternity. That is simply not true, as an absolute -- it MAY be lost, but the likelihood is that most (if not all) of these emails exist in some form somewhere.
I'm far from a uber-techie, but even I know that email is carved-up and transmitted as packets of information across the Internet/web and at the very least may be stitched back together (esp. by computer forensic experts). Moreover, email tends to linger on host servers and servers of those that receive emails, in addition to the actual emails being retained by the recipient (all of which can be reached by discovery request and/or subpoena). IF the proper entities/agencies want to really get this information, despite the server-wipe, much of it may be retrievable (obviously, through great effort). The idea that this info is irretrievably lost is misleading.
A second example (regarding the Federal Records Act), the author writes: "Watchdog groups conceded that she [H. Clinton] may not have violated the text of the law, but they argue she violated the spirit of it."
No, H. Clinton actually violated the law (esp. if the records are, in fact, irretrievable). The "agency" determines the retention/non-retention of documents/information. H. Clinton is not "the agency", thus, unilaterally deleting the information is a violation of the act. To be clear - an individual cannot constitute a government agency, and as such, unilateral decisions (of this type) are not authorized - and the policy reasons should be obvious.
More later.
One example - the opening sentence of the last paragraph: "The bottom line is this: No one will likely ever know what was deleted from Clinton's server."
There is a very common and mistaken belief that deleted email (even from a dedicated server) is lost to the ether for eternity. That is simply not true, as an absolute -- it MAY be lost, but the likelihood is that most (if not all) of these emails exist in some form somewhere.
I'm far from a uber-techie, but even I know that email is carved-up and transmitted as packets of information across the Internet/web and at the very least may be stitched back together (esp. by computer forensic experts). Moreover, email tends to linger on host servers and servers of those that receive emails, in addition to the actual emails being retained by the recipient (all of which can be reached by discovery request and/or subpoena). IF the proper entities/agencies want to really get this information, despite the server-wipe, much of it may be retrievable (obviously, through great effort). The idea that this info is irretrievably lost is misleading.
A second example (regarding the Federal Records Act), the author writes: "Watchdog groups conceded that she [H. Clinton] may not have violated the text of the law, but they argue she violated the spirit of it."
No, H. Clinton actually violated the law (esp. if the records are, in fact, irretrievable). The "agency" determines the retention/non-retention of documents/information. H. Clinton is not "the agency", thus, unilaterally deleting the information is a violation of the act. To be clear - an individual cannot constitute a government agency, and as such, unilateral decisions (of this type) are not authorized - and the policy reasons should be obvious.
More later.
I have worked for nearly that amount and was going to say the same thing. We had our annual security training yesterday in which it was reiterated that mishandling (using personal email on state issued phone or state email on private phone) would be immediate termination and likely prosecution.
Latest posts
-
-
-
HERDNATION.COM Getting To Know: Jibreel Al-Amin
- Latest: Chris McLaughlin
-
-