Judge says Hillary Clinton's private emails violated policy

[nageov3t]

Which propaganda would that be? Her using her own server to handle both personal and government emails? Her using a server that was sitting in the bathroom of an unsecured apartment? The fact that classified information was sitting on the server and apparently (based on the Reuters news item just reported) sent and received? You mean all that evil propaganda?

"sitting in a bathroom"? yeah, that propaganda.

it's extremely common to repurpose facilities... I used to work at a world class data center that was located where a department store used to be. I'm sure if you overlaid the maps, you could make the claim that we were running servers out of the ladies underwear department.

 

[PokerGuy]

"sitting in a bathroom"? yeah, that propaganda.

it's extremely common to repurpose facilities... I used to work at a world class data center that was located where a department store used to be. I'm sure if you overlaid the maps, you could make the claim that we were running servers out of the ladies underwear department.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...estions-security-sensitive-messages-held.html

The servers were in a closet off the bathroom

Not that it really matters, it was an unsecured location regardless.

 

[Blackjack200]

I see this for what it is. A political witch hunt of a witch who thinks she is above us all. I dont have any sympathy for shitbags within govt that run on the fringe of the law or policy and then get run over the coals because of it.

If she didn't run a personal server and then decide what to release. The Republicans wouldnt have anything to uncover or persue. She made her bed, now she gets to lie in it.

I have never asked for sympathy for Clinton, and I have stated multiple times that what she did was wrong and worthy of criticism. I'm sick and tired of being told that I need to care about an email server when we have plenty of actual problems to worry about, the press is absolutely pathetic on this one.

Liberals never go to jail.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Jackson,_Jr.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_Blagojevich

I am sure that there are slip ups everywhere.

However to publicly announce that there were no slip ups and you did nothing wrong by ignoring standard procedures ...

Evidence is still coming out that this was not the case and her tap dancing just continues to feed the issue.

The surest sign that there is absolutely nothing to this story is that everybody seems to think "The Real Issue Here" is something different. Some people think it's that she broke the law, some people think it's that she violated policy, some people think it's that she put assets at risk, some people think it's FOIA/Transparency issue, and some, like you, think the biggest problem is how she has conducted herself since the issue surfaced.

 

[nageov3t]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...estions-security-sensitive-messages-held.html



Not that it really matters, it was an unsecured location regardless.

nothing in that article actually speaks to anything about Clinton's email server... it's all from a former employee who didn't even know Clinton was a client and it sounds like had left the company long before she was.

 

[PokerGuy]

The surest sign that there is absolutely nothing to this story is that everybody seems to think "The Real Issue Here" is something different.

Actually in this case, all that's telling you is that there are MULTIPLE "real issues", not just one.

Some people think it's that she broke the law, some people think it's that she violated policy, some people think it's that she put assets at risk, some people think it's FOIA/Transparency issue, and some, like you, think the biggest problem is how she has conducted herself since the issue surfaced.

In terms of politics, that's the biggest problem, it's an image and PR problem. In terms of security, the problem is the assets that might have been compromised. In terms of process, it's the guidelines or laws that were violated. In terms of transparency, it's that emails have been deleted and are no longer subject to review by the public. See how there are multiple issues, and they are all valid issues in their own right? The severity of each of the issues is certainly subject to discussion, but there are definitely multiple potential issues.

 

[Bowfinger]

And a judge just disagreed with you. A lot has happened since August 14th.

No, the judge didn't disagree with me at all. Facts disagreed with you. You disputed that at least one of the Clinton emails discussed a news article about a drone strike. I showed you were wrong. There's nothing in the new NYT story that contradicts what I said and linked.

 

[cabri]

Which propaganda would that be? Her using her own server to handle both personal and government emails? Her using a server that was sitting in the bathroom of an unsecured apartment? The fact that classified information was sitting on the server and apparently (based on the Reuters news item just reported) sent and received? You mean all that evil propaganda?

"sitting in a bathroom"? yeah, that propaganda.

it's extremely common to repurpose facilities... I used to work at a world class data center that was located where a department store used to be. I'm sure if you overlaid the maps, you could make the claim that we were running servers out of the ladies underwear department.

After she left the SoS position, she had Platte River handle the system.
Prior to that, the server was located in downtown NYC in a commercial building, unsecured.

Platte placed her new server in the closet. There has been no indication that anything gov related is on that server. It does seem interesting that one would stand up a new system and not copy/retain information from the old system.

The old server is the problem; the one that was wiped clean before turnover to the FBI.

I have not seen any reports as to when it was actually wiped, who did the wiping (vs deleting the emails).

Any decent system should have had backups made, especially considering what it was hosting. Information on where the backups are/were has not been provided; where they were also wiped.

 

[SP33Demon]

After she left the SoS position, she had Platte River handle the system.
Prior to that, the server was located in downtown NYC in a commercial building, unsecured.

Platte placed her new server in the closet. There has been no indication that anything gov related is on that server. It does seem interesting that one would stand up a new system and not copy/retain information from the old system.

The old server is the problem; the one that was wiped clean before turnover to the FBI.

I have not seen any reports as to when it was actually wiped, who did the wiping (vs deleting the emails).

Any decent system should have had backups made, especially considering what it was hosting. Information on where the backups are/were has not been provided; where they were also wiped.

Read this.
http://www.businessinsider.com/we-n...d-a-small-it-firm-to-handle-her-emails-2015-8

 

[SP33Demon]

No, the judge didn't disagree with me at all. Facts disagreed with you. You disputed that at least one of the Clinton emails discussed a news article about a drone strike. I showed you were wrong. There's nothing in the new NYT story that contradicts what I said and linked.

Learn to read, I didn't say anything about a drone strike nor care. She was emailing classified info as evidenced by the Guccifer hack, and no, it wasn't widely known information either. I'm sure the real classified info has been deleted by now to cover her tracks.

 

[nageov3t]

Read this.
http://www.businessinsider.com/we-n...d-a-small-it-firm-to-handle-her-emails-2015-8

that's all pretty standard stuff that any IT company would do.

once a year or so, my old company would rent an industrial disk shredder and just sell it all for scrap. that was always fun to watch.

 

[Bowfinger]

Which propaganda would that be? Her using her own server to handle both personal and government emails? Her using a server that was sitting in the bathroom of an unsecured apartment? The fact that classified information was sitting on the server and apparently (based on the Reuters news item just reported) sent and received? You mean all that evil propaganda?

Nobody questions that she used her own email server. The possible physical location of the server is based on innuendo, and has little relevance except to her attackers. The presence of then-classified information on her server, who sent and received it, and the significance of the information in question is still being investigated. You have allegations and innuendo, not facts.

There is also the fact the smearbots ignore, that classified information is not allowed in email at all, regardless of whether Clinton used her own email or State email. While that won't make it OK if your allegations are true, it does provide a very different context (for those who care about context rather than merely getting Clinton at all costs).

Government employees and contractors have access to a lot of classified information. They also have access to a lot of public information that various agencies consider classified, even if it is widely publicized. There has to be some sort of rational balance in the huge grey area where those two spheres intersect. Does it make sense to prosecute everyone who says even one word about the classified drone programs everyone knows exist? Not in a sane world, certainly.

That's why I'll say yet again, let the FBI do its job. They'll look at the facts rather than the spin you're swallowing. They'll apply reasonable judgment as to what truly rises to criminal behavior, unlike the smearbots who will cry for prosecution if even one 't' was found uncrossed. If the FBI finds prosecution is warranted, I'll be on board.

 

[Bowfinger]

Learn to read, I didn't say anything about a drone strike nor care. She was emailing classified info as evidenced by the Guccifer hack, and no, it wasn't widely known information either. I'm sure the real classified info has been deleted by now to cover her tracks.

Follow your own advice. Your post #8, in particular. You were wrong. Deal with it.

 

[SP33Demon]

Follow your own advice. Your post #8, in particular. You were wrong. Deal with it.

Wrong, I was quoting someone who mentioned it. You are a petty one, aren't you, crying about a single email when that's just the tip of the iceberg. Would love to see you explain the report today about the 30 new classified emails that were on that server. More and more will be uncovered as this thing blows up.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/21/us-usa-election-clinton-emails-idUSKCN0QQ0BW20150821

In the small fraction of emails made public so far, Reuters has found at least 30 email threads from 2009, representing scores of individual emails, that include what the State Department's own "Classified" stamps now identify as so-called 'foreign government information.' The U.S. government defines this as any information, written or spoken, provided in confidence to U.S. officials by their foreign counterparts.

This sort of information, which the department says Clinton both sent and received in her emails, is the only kind that must be "presumed" classified, in part to protect national security and the integrity of diplomatic interactions, according to U.S. regulations examined by Reuters.

You are clueless if you think this doesn't hurt her campaign, even until "prosecution" from the "FBI". Her trust numbers are tanking, and Americans now trust her less than Trump. Let that sink in for a second. The damage is already done. By the time a "prosecution" is rendered it will be the nail in her coffin.

 

[PokerGuy]

The presence of then-classified information on her server, who sent and received it, and the significance of the information in question is still being investigated. You have allegations and innuendo, not facts.

As I've stated many times, the FACTS already presented are plenty to know it wasn't appropriate. The investigation is looking into possible criminal activity. Two completely different things.

There is also the fact the smearbots ignore, that classified information is not allowed in email at all, regardless of whether Clinton used her own email or State email. While that won't make it OK if your allegations are true, it does provide a very different context (for those who care about context rather than merely getting Clinton at all costs).

Funny how you spinbots trying to defend her at all costs keep bringing that up as if it's relevant. It's not. That is just as relevant as telling the cop "hey, the other guys were speeding too!". Classified information should not be sent on unsecured channels. The fact is that is was happening, and there was classified data on her unsecured server, and now it looks like she both sent and received classified information -- if Reuters is to be believed. Are they part of the evil right wing smear campaign vilifying saint hillary also?

Aside from the true classified info that resides on it's own network, there are also other emails that are not classified, but are still sensitive. If a foreign official sends an email to the sos, it could very likely be sensitive information, not the kind of thing you'd want sitting on an unsecured server.

There has to be some sort of rational balance in the huge grey area where those two spheres intersect. Does it make sense to prosecute everyone who says even one word about the classified drone programs everyone knows exist? Not in a sane world, certainly.

Yes, absolutely. It's not up to each person to decide what classified info is really really classified and what classified info is OK to share. Those handling the information have to follow the rules established for that reason. There is no gray area.

That's why I'll say yet again, let the FBI do its job. They'll look at the facts rather than the spin you're swallowing.

Is this really so hard to comprehend? The FBI is looking into it to see if it's a criminal matter. It doesn't have to be criminal to be wrong. We already know it was wrong and stupid, and we already know she was wrong about classified data not being on the server. The criminal aspect will get addressed in due time.

If the FBI finds prosecution is warranted, I'll be on board.

lol, yeah, sure. And pigs will fly.

 

[CPA]

Obviously the NY Times is now in league with the Tea Party!

Yep, as well as the FBI and Obama's National Archives and Records Administration.

But, libs do what libs do best, spin the blame on the Repubs.

 

[Bowfinger]

Wrong, I was quoting someone who mentioned it. You are a petty one, aren't you, crying about a single email when that's just the tip of the iceberg.

I'm not crying about anything. I simply pointed out you were wrong about that one point, and provided a link demonstrating your error. You're either mature enough to accept this or you're not.

Would love to see you explain the report today about the 30 new classified emails that were on that server. More and more will be uncovered as this thing blows up.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/21/us-usa-election-clinton-emails-idUSKCN0QQ0BW20150821

I have nothing to explain. The FBI will determine if the allegations are true.

You are clueless if you think this doesn't hurt her campaign, even until "prosecution" from the "FBI". Her trust numbers are tanking, and Americans now trust her less than Trump. Let that sink in for a second. The damage is already done. By the time a "prosecution" is rendered it will be the nail in her coffin.

You should again take your own advice about learning to read. I've said not a single word about Clinton's campaign.

 

[ivwshane]

I see this for what it is. A political witch hunt of a witch who thinks she is above us all. I dont have any sympathy for shitbags within govt that run on the fringe of the law or policy and then get run over the coals because of it.

If she didn't run a personal server and then decide what to release. The Republicans wouldnt have anything to uncover or persue. She made her bed, now she gets to lie in it.

Not true at all. Her emails would have been on government servers and they still would have contained classified info. That info still would have been a violation of policy.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Deflection skills 2/10, padawan

as opposed to your hatred of all thing Democratic...hmmmm

 

[ivwshane]

The other aspect that should most concern people is FOIA ( freedom of information act). Her using a private email server as she did denies The People their right under law to request and obtain that information...

It was intentionally done for a reason. That is what people should care about - is her intentions. Don't give a shit about the emails themselves.

And you know what her intentions were? Were the intentions the same since 1993 when the Clinton's first started using this email? I'm also curious just as to what you think she was hiding at the state department.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Liberals never go to jail.

If that's the case, why are Republicans all about being "tough on crime"? If they opened the prisons, the influx of conservative votes would surely bring them a landslide victory in every election, no?

 

[Blackjack200]

Not true at all. Her emails would have been on government servers and they still would have contained classified info. That info still would have been a violation of policy.

Right, and even if there was nothing wrong with her emails at all, the billion year Benghazi investigation would have found something else to gnaw on.

 

[werepossum]

You created the CBD so you would have something to fear???

lol Yes, he did.

 

[Bowfinger]

As I've stated many times, the FACTS already presented are plenty to know it wasn't appropriate. The investigation is looking into possible criminal activity. Two completely different things.

Yes, they are. You should explain that to the RNC and it's flock of rubes who can't tell the difference. Months ago, in my very first post on this, I said Clinton's use of personal email was inappropriate. It is the question of legality that is still an open question.

Funny how you spinbots trying to defend her at all costs keep bringing that up as if it's relevant. It's not. That is just as relevant as telling the cop "hey, the other guys were speeding too!". Classified information should not be sent on unsecured channels.

Good, you're catching up. I already said that.

The fact is that is was happening, and there was classified data on her unsecured server, and now it looks like she both sent and received classified information

And this is how the smear works, where you conflate fact with allegation and innuendo, as if it's all equal.

-- if Reuters is to be believed. Are they part of the evil right wing smear campaign vilifying saint hillary also? ...

No. The difference between us is I can read what they actually said rather than what the RNC insinuates they said.

Yes, absolutely. It's not up to each person to decide what classified info is really really classified and what classified info is OK to share. Those handling the information have to follow the rules established for that reason. There is no gray area.

Then you're going to need to build a lot more prisons. There is, in fact, a huge grey area, no matter how politically inconvenient it is for you to acknowledge it now. Even the government recognizes it and calls it parallel reporting. The fact that Uncle Sam wants to slap classified labels on anything and everything doesn't mean that much of it isn't already public knowledge.

Is this really so hard to comprehend? The FBI is looking into it to see if it's a criminal matter. It doesn't have to be criminal to be wrong. ...

Again, glad to see you're catching up.

lol, yeah, sure. And pigs will fly.

You continue projecting. I've never been a Clinton fan. I just hate smear campaigns. They're dishonest, distracting, and destructive to American democracy.

 

[Bowfinger]

Right, and even if there was nothing wrong with her emails at all, the billion year Benghazi investigation would have found something else to gnaw on.

Yep. They just know that if they just keep digging -- forever, if necessary -- they will find a blue dress. And the rubes lap up every drop.

 

[PokerGuy]

No. The difference between us is I can read what they actually said rather than what the RNC insinuates they said.

Huh? RNC? I haven't seen anything from the RNC. I simply read the Reuters report here. Are they in on the "smear" too?

A review of emails found on Hillary Clinton's private server has revealed dozens of instances in which she sent and received a type of information which is "born classified", according to the government's own rules

Reuters apparently has been reviewing the emails. Are you saying they are part of the evil right wing smear campaign?

Then you're going to need to build a lot more prisons. There is, in fact, a huge grey area, no matter how politically inconvenient it is for you to acknowledge it now.

No, just like we don't need to build a lot more prisons to ticket speeders. There is no gray area, it's just that resource limitations limit prosecution to a small sample of cases ... just like the cop can only pull over a few people, and then hope such actions act as a deterrent for everyone. You suppose there's a "gray area" too for speeding because so many people do it?

The fact that Uncle Sam wants to slap classified labels on anything and everything doesn't mean that much of it isn't already public knowledge.

If you have a problem with how they classify stuff, that's fine, but it still doesn't mean any individual can simply choose to ignore the rules on handling classified material. Whether you think much of it is already public knowledge or not is not relevant.

I just hate smear campaigns. They're dishonest, distracting, and destructive to American democracy.

:biggrin::biggrin::biggrin: You should consider a career in comedy!