Clinton to hand over email server to FBI

[Newell Steamer]

Let the DoJ do their investigation, determine whether any laws were broken, and then prosecute if and as appropriate. Unfortunately, waiting doesn't fit the RNC agenda. They need a duhversion -- now -- from the train wreck within their party.

Yeah, but the Arm Chair Experts (sprinkled about in this very thread) know better than some "Department" of "Justice".

All buffoonery aside, yes, let the DoJ figure out what happened and what needs to happen next.

On the concept of duhversions, well, thats expected. It's a shame though that the Freethinkers and the "Telling It Like It Is" crowd is partaking and proving they are anything but (again, sprinkled about in this very thread).

 

[Jhhnn]

Don't forget Rice and Powell. They also used personal email while at State.

The fundamental issue here that the Obama Clinton bashers ignore is that classified information is not supposed to leave DoS/DoD secure networks. It isn't allowed in insecure email, regardless of whether Clinton used personal email or the State Department email system. Neither system is appropriate for classified information. That onus is on the sender, not the receivers.

Of course this begs the question as to whether the discussion at issue was truly classified at all, especially at the time it happened. In spite of the usual bellicose assertions from the RNC propagandists, that has yet to be determined. It's just supposition and innuendo. Let the DoJ do their investigation, determine whether any laws were broken, and then prosecute if and as appropriate. Unfortunately, waiting doesn't fit the RNC agenda. They need a duhversion -- now -- from the train wreck within their party.

Their whole ideology is a trainwreck. That's why they have to give the appearance that the opposition is a bigger trainwreck.

It's remarkable how quickly they forget. What happened to Richard Armitrage who blew Plame's cover in a story that the White House confirmed at the time? To the White House source? That was a real breach of security, not one purely hypothetical in nature. Hillary's email per se hasn't done that- it has not been shown that any of it actually fell into the wrong hands other than Congressional Repubs... or that any public disclosures have occurred.

It's all they've got atm, so they'll wring as much mud out of it as possible, of course.

 

[TheGardener]

Their whole ideology is a trainwreck. That's why they have to give the appearance that the opposition is a bigger trainwreck.

It's remarkable how quickly they forget. What happened to Richard Armitrage who blew Plame's cover in a story that the White House confirmed at the time? To the White House source? That was a real breach of security, not one purely hypothetical in nature. Hillary's email per se hasn't done that- it has not been shown that any of it actually fell into the wrong hands other than Congressional Repubs... or that any public disclosures have occurred.

It's all they've got atm, so they'll wring as much mud out of it as possible, of course.

Makes it harder to determine if the top secret and classified information fell into the wrong hands, when you destroy the evidence.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Makes it harder to determine if the top secret and classified information fell into the wrong hands, when you destroy the evidence.

They don't give a shit about how she jeopardized national security...they're merely lemmings incapable of objective thought. That's how they roll here.

 

[HumblePie]

I'm not saying what she did or didn't do, nor am I trying to conjecture upon her actions.

However, to further go along with my previous posts...

1) If her server was unintentionally used to send meta information in relation to classified info, thus making that info classified, that in itself is not a crime.

2) If upon realizing her server was used that way she had locked it down by complete shutdown and disconnection; then handed it over to authorities it would probably have not even made the news.

3) Trying to deny there was any potential classified info and waiting a very long time to turn over her server and then having the FBI find classified info is a bigger problem. Not one that will land her in jail, if the info is not a major threat level release, but definitely would get the average person fired from their job, fined, and never trusted again with classified info.

4) If she tried to delete evidence of classified info sent in her server then she is screwed. That's a major federal crime and she should do time for that. You just don't DO that at all no matter who you are.

I'm not stipulating at this point she intentionally deleted potentially classified info, but if she did then she should be rotting in prison for it.

 

[ivwshane]

Hilary clinton...a computer mastermind? According to the right...yes!

 

[Hugo Drax]

Why did she not just hand over the server untouched right from the beginning? If you have nothing to hide as a public official why not just hand the server over.

All this just reminds me of Watergate and Nixon. It does not make her look honest.

 

[Jhhnn]

Makes it harder to determine if the top secret and classified information fell into the wrong hands, when you destroy the evidence.

Yeh, but we can fantasize, right? What we're talking about is information about information that somebody decided later should have been classified at the time but wasn't. Well, maybe some of it that was deleted, anyway, stuff you say shouldn't have been there in the first place. Whoop-ti-freaking-doo. Maybe you can weave it into the Benghazi spiel, ya know?

They don't give a shit about how she jeopardized national security...they're merely lemmings incapable of objective thought. That's how they roll here.

Jeopardized national security in what way, exactly? It has not been shown that the Clinton's server was in any way vulnerable, more vulnerable than govt servers or more vulnerable than the private servers used by the GWB White House. If anything, it gained security through obscurity & the fact that the house is secured by the Secret Service.

Ever notice how trumped up Repub "Scandals" seem to last forever but never bear fruit? They do seem to get stale after awhile, even for true believers, so the perps are always looking for something fresh, some new conspiracy theory to keep the media speculating & the base in regurgitated raving mode.

I'm entirely pleased that the FBI is looking into it because whatever dirt they pull out won't be about any person or persons in particular but rather about the way that such security is organized in general. I'm pretty sure that Judicial Watch & the Inspectors General would find the same sort of issues in Condi's & Colin's email as well, not to mention the rest of that Admin.

Nonetheless, the Faithful Base is all over it like Gollum on the Precious. Shiny!

 

[Brian Stirling]

Don't talk about what publicly? Rules of what game? I worked in a top secret space for about five years and I don't remember any rule like what you're talking about.

I also worked in top secret space for some years and we were constantly reminded not to talk about it. It was also made clear that we were not only to avoid talking about secret things but also about anything related, classified or not.

The point is, people looking to gain intelligence more often than not gain most of that intelligence through analysis of non classified data they get. Much of the modern world of analytics that companies like Google use extract a great deal of in depth knowledge by putting together a shit ton of seemingly unrelated info.

The further point is that even if Hillary's server only ever had unclassified information it would still be of value to a foreign government.

I suspect the in the wake of this case we are likely to see a review of current practices and the upshot, in my view, is that government officials with access to classified information will not be able to use a non-government server even for private communication. That is, I think before long officials will be required to terminate the use of private communications such as emails and social media use will likely also be curtailed with some exceptions.


Brian

 

[Brian Stirling]

No, if someone sends you classified information, the fault is theirs. The government has a set of secure networks, not connected to the Internet, that are the only acceptable homes for classified information (electronic, of course). The State Department email system is on a non-classified network that is connected to the Internet. Classified information is not permitted in insecure email, whether it is the DoS email system or something external. IF the staffers in this story used email to discuss classified information, they were at fault.

And yet Hillary's server had top secret intelligence info on it -- how so?

Sorry, but when you setup a private server and classified data gets on it the blame does fall to the person that set it up...


Brian

 

[Brian Stirling]

Hilary clinton...a computer mastermind? According to the right...yes!

More like a simpleton that didn't think through the consequences.

As I've said many times before, getting data on her server that was either classified or would become classified was FORESEEABLE!


Brian

 

[Angry Irishman]

But this is Hillary and she is obviously exempt from those pesky safeguards related to classified materials. She was only Sec of State, why should she be knowledgeable or accountable about anything that would put the average citizen regularly dealing with classified data in deep shit given the same actions.

Also she is the Democratic candidate so fuck all to common sense and what actually matters. Got to keep the party line! If it were old Jeb they'd be all up his ass about it. He would deserve punitive action as well.

 

[werepossum]

Don't talk about what publicly? Rules of what game? I worked in a top secret space for about five years and I don't remember any rule like what you're talking about.

How fortunate for us that we have an expert on the thread subject. What are the odds of that?

Oh yeah . . . 100%.

Makes it harder to determine if the top secret and classified information fell into the wrong hands, when you destroy the evidence.

Jhhnn only recognizes Republicans and conservatives as the wrong hands. Iranians? Salt of the earth. Putin? Only responding to American aggression. Red China? Victims of the conservative war on Americans. To him, by destroying the information on her private server, thus keeping it from any Congressional oversight, she heroically kept from the only wrong hands.

More like a simpleton that didn't think through the consequences.

As I've said many times before, getting data on her server that was either classified or would become classified was FORESEEABLE!

Brian

Disagree. She very much thought through the likely consequences to everyone she actually gives a damn about.

 

[Bowfinger]

And yet Hillary's server had top secret intelligence info on it -- how so?

Sorry, but when you setup a private server and classified data gets on it the blame does fall to the person that set it up...


Brian

So you, too, will continue to ignore the fact that the official State email system was insecure and not authorized for classified information. The fundamental problem here is that staffers allegedly mentioned classified information while discussing a newspaper article in email. If so, it would have been inappropriate regardless of Clinton's email preference. Do you understand this?

I'll also point out that we know the State email network has been compromised. We do not know Clinton's email server was ever compromised. This rather nullifies the whole faux outrage about Clinton jeopardizing national security.

Realistically, I expect both systems have been repeatedly compromised, and I can virtually guarantee the State network has hackers running free within it right now. Such is the state of cyber security today. This is exactly why you must never put classified information on any system connected to the Internet.

Finally, for the record again, I agree it was inappropriate for Clinton to use a personal email account for official business. I simply refuse to board the GOP smear machine where they (yet again) try to pervert a smaller issue into a major scandal. It's dishonest partisan propaganda.

 

[Jhhnn]

I also worked in top secret space for some years and we were constantly reminded not to talk about it. It was also made clear that we were not only to avoid talking about secret things but also about anything related, classified or not.

How dim. Explain how that applies to the SoS.

 

[Jhhnn]

Jhhnn only recognizes Republicans and conservatives as the wrong hands. Iranians? Salt of the earth. Putin? Only responding to American aggression. Red China? Victims of the conservative war on Americans. To him, by destroying the information on her private server, thus keeping it from any Congressional oversight, she heroically kept from the only wrong hands.

Quote me on that, OK?

It's remarkable how you can quote absurdity & use that as a segue into personal attack over unrelated issues.

You're getting desperate, and it shows.

 

[Brian Stirling]

How dim. Explain how that applies to the SoS.

Jesus that's about as amazing a statement as I've seen here. What, in essence your implying is that the rules of information security do not apply to SoS. That protection of plans, schedules, intentions and the like are for little people but that the leadership need not do so.


Brian

 

[Jhhnn]

Finally, for the record again, I agree it was inappropriate for Clinton to use a personal email account for official business. I simply refuse to board the GOP smear machine where they (yet again) try to pervert a smaller issue into a major scandal. It's dishonest partisan propaganda.

Dishonest partisan propaganda is the essence of modern Republicanism. They need to constantly redirect the conversation away from the results of their own ideology & policy.

What are they supposed to say? That Reaganomics has flattened the middle class? That the Ownership Society was the greatest financial looting spree in history? That they've radically reduced opportunity for a whole generation? That the invasion of Iraq served Israeli interests exclusively? That the WoD/tough on crime policy they love has created a monstrous prison population? That opposition to gay marriage isn't bigotry? That strict voter ID isn't just another facet of Jim Crow? That they don't recognize women's constitutional right to abortion?

They can't talk about any of that expecting to win the argument so they turn other molehills into mountains to keep the base nicely irrational.

How do I know? Witness how they refuse to acknowledge this issue as an ongoing problem since at least the GWB years- they make it all about the evil Hillary, refuse to even comment on the fact that it was the same problem with Condi & Colin.

 

[Brian Stirling]

So you, too, will continue to ignore the fact that the official State email system was insecure and not authorized for classified information. The fundamental problem here is that staffers allegedly mentioned classified information while discussing a newspaper article in email. If so, it would have been inappropriate regardless of Clinton's email preference. Do you understand this?

I'll also point out that we know the State email network has been compromised. We do not know Clinton's email server was ever compromised. This rather nullifies the whole faux outrage about Clinton jeopardizing national security.

Realistically, I expect both systems have been repeatedly compromised, and I can virtually guarantee the State network has hackers running free within it right now. Such is the state of cyber security today. This is exactly why you must never put classified information on any system connected to the Internet.

Finally, for the record again, I agree it was inappropriate for Clinton to use a personal email account for official business. I simply refuse to board the GOP smear machine where they (yet again) try to pervert a smaller issue into a major scandal. It's dishonest partisan propaganda.

Yes, hostile governments want to know what we're doing and planning to do just as we seek to learn about there intentions -- nothing new here. When a determined state sponsored hacking interest is after such info they stop at nothing to get it. They have indeed gotten into many system that are suppose to be secure. But, what you're saying is our government system can't be trusted so it's better to roll your own server. Do you honestly think the determined hackers that have gained access to secure government systems were: unaware of Hillary's server; and were unable to hack into it?

Clueless you are!


Brian

 

[Jhhnn]

Jesus that's about as amazing a statement as I've seen here. What, in essence your implying is that the rules of information security do not apply to SoS. That protection of plans, schedules, intentions and the like are for little people but that the leadership need not do so.


Brian

Nice dodge. Read what you wrote the first time. It wasn't about plans, schedules & intentions at all.

 

[Jhhnn]

Do you honestly think the determined hackers that have gained access to secure government systems were: unaware of Hillary's server; and were unable to hack into it?

Are you actually claiming that they did on the basis of no proof whatsoever?

You fairly define belief in conspiracy theory.

 

[Brian Stirling]

Look, I've tried to have a nuanced position on this case and fully appreciate that many of the righties here would like to see her publicly executed. Yes, they will take every distorted scrap of evidence to Benghazi this server issue.

As I've said before and been hammered on by the right for it Hillary is not likely to be prosecuted for this server deal and even if it were proven that classified secrets were on her server (it looks like there were) AND that the server had been hacked into (highly unlikely that could ever be proven), I think the whole event may wind up being a blessing in disguise if for no other reason than that it highlights the threat that foreign interests pose to the life's blood of our security -- information.

We need to do a better job at all levels to limit access to data be it national security related or your doctors records. That supposedly secure government system are vulnerable only serves to remind us that determined smart people with big dollar support can get into most things. It should also be clear that if our secure government systems are not as secure as we would like how much of a challenge would it be for those same talented hackers to break into the server run by Slappy the bait shop guy?

Yes, righties will try to Benghazi this story but as evidenced on this very thread the left will cry foul that anyone should question the tactics of Hillary. As I mentioned before the reason she created this server in the first place was to control her message and messages in order to deny that to prying Republicans. What other reason could there be. Her decision to do so has backfired and unlikely a it is, may doom her election chances.


Brian

 

[Bowfinger]

Yes, hostile governments want to know what we're doing and planning to do just as we seek to learn about there intentions -- nothing new here. When a determined state sponsored hacking interest is after such info they stop at nothing to get it. They have indeed gotten into many system that are suppose to be secure. But, what you're saying is our government system can't be trusted so it's better to roll your own server.

Reading comprehension seems to be a dying talent. I've said nothing of the sort. Let me repeat the key part you're either missing or ignoring:

"The government has a set of secure networks, not connected to the Internet, that are the only acceptable homes for classified information (electronic, of course). The State Department email system is on a non-classified network that is connected to the Internet. Classified information is not permitted in insecure email, whether it is the DoS email system or something external."
​

Do you honestly think the determined hackers that have gained access to secure government systems were: unaware of Hillary's server; and were unable to hack into it?

That is the opposite of what I said. What part of, "Realistically, I expect both systems have been repeatedly compromised" is too hard for you?

Clueless you are!

Projecting, you are!

 

[Art&Science]

Ever hear of David Petraeus?
He only mishandled classified documents.
The claim is Clinton mishandled Top Secret documents - and then lied about it.

Exactly. She should be in prison.

 

[waggy]

I find it amusing that so many are jumping through hoops to defend AND to accuse. yet they can't step back and say. yeah..maybe there is a issue with politics. NOpe. anything as long as they win!


could this hurt the US? WHO CARES!? long as we defend her! wooo!


Is there any proof she intended to do anything wrong? Nope. BUT SHE NEEDS TO BE IN JAIL!