State department: Hillary did not comply with policies

[buckshot24]

"Did not comply with policy"

Not

"Violated Laws"

Nice twirly-spinny thingy you did there.

We're not talking about dress code policies here.

 

[ivwshane]

Is the FBI running a made up investigation?

An investigation equals a scandal now? Republican politicians thank you for your susceptibility to propaganda.

 

[ivwshane]

We're not talking about dress code policies here.

No we are talking about systemic issues that have plagued the state department (and probably many government entities) for decades. Are you having trouble following along?

 

[buckshot24]

An investigation equals a scandal now? Republican politicians thank you for your susceptibility to propaganda.

What do you call a proper scandal?

 

[Blackjack200]

Rape is an adventure now?

Donald would know.

 

[buckshot24]

No we are talking about systemic issues that have plagued the state department (and probably many government entities) for decades. Are you having trouble following along?

That wasn't the only thing they found.

 

[Jhhnn]

What do you call a proper scandal?

The Plame affair was a proper scandal, as was Iran-Contra.

 

[buckshot24]

The Plame affair was a proper scandal, as was Iran-Contra.

So how can you tell the difference between a phony one and a real one?

 

[buckshot24]

Donald would know.

Let's not play games.

 

[ivwshane]

What do you call a proper scandal?

Watergate, Iran-contra, things where there is an attempt to cover up wrong doings. And you?

 

[Jhhnn]

So how can you tell the difference between a phony one and a real one?

Start with who's running it & past performance. The world didn't start yesterday. Remember the birth certificate? Fast & furious? Ben-fucking-ghazi? IRS? Jade Helm, fer crissakes? Facebook? A stream of such bullshit dating back a couple of decades?

 

[OrByte]

This is no scandal.

Hillary is as trustworthy as any other politician.

The report isn't all that condemning considering Hillary's offices practice on security and IT seem on par with every other office that operated before her. Now if it comes out that she ran illegal on-line gambling servers on her personal Sec of State server then that would be a big no-no. It sounds like her office administrators made a mistake when they allowed a personal server to be installed that didn't comply with security policies...cheesssus and we call this a scandal?!

Just because you say it is a "scandal" and she is "untrustworthy" doesn't make it so.

Just because Fox News and Company say it doesn't make it true.

 

[buckshot24]

Start with who's running it & past performance. The world didn't start yesterday. Remember the birth certificate? Fast & furious? Ben-fucking-ghazi? IRS? Jade Helm, fer crissakes? Facebook? A stream of such bullshit dating back a couple of decades?

How do you tell the difference between a real scandal and a manufactured one? It looks like from your response it has to involve a Republican.

 

[chucky2]

snip

Hillary is as trustworthy as any other politician.

snip

Really that's all you needed to say lol.

 

[IGBT]

the Hillary is a "criminal in waiting"..everybody knows this going all the way back to Whitewater to Benghazi. And now felonious handling of classified / top secret information.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/25/hillary-clinton-failed-report-several-hacking-atte/


When will a the Federal Grand Jury get busy on this outlaw activity?? Tactical and operational dodging of responsibility.
The 83-page report, obtained by The Washington Times, is devastating in its evaluation of Mrs. Clinton’s behavior, saying it can find no record of her getting approval from either security or legal staffers for her unique arrangement. The report also undercuts many of her campaign’s explanations for her use of the system, dismisses comparisons to her predecessors’ email use, and points to repeated hacking attempts that she failed to report.

 

[OrByte]

Really that's all you needed to say lol.

I know right?!

 

[brycejones]

Meh, the usual suspects making more of this report than it really says. Remember kids she will be indicted within 60 days, 240 days ago (or something like that).

 

[Blackjack200]

Let's not play games.

I mean, I don't think raping your wife is a game. But maybe to Donald it is.

 

[OrByte]

the Hillary is a "criminal in waiting"..everybody knows this going all the way back to Whitewater to Benghazi. And now felonious handling of classified / top secret information.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/25/hillary-clinton-failed-report-several-hacking-atte/


When will a the Federal Grand Jury get busy on this outlaw activity?? Tactical and operational dodging of responsibility.
The 83-page report, obtained by The Washington Times, is devastating in its evaluation of Mrs. Clinton’s behavior, saying it can find no record of her getting approval from either security or legal staffers for her unique arrangement. The report also undercuts many of her campaign’s explanations for her use of the system, dismisses comparisons to her predecessors’ email use, and points to repeated hacking attempts that she failed to report.

are you for real?

In reading the report I think that Hillary is less of a culprit in allowing a personal server setup and the real culprit is the administration that said it was OK to do so.

The report continues: "According to the staff member, the Director [of that department] stated that the Secretary's personal system had been reviewed and approved by Department legal staff and that the matter was not to be discussed any further."

The Inspector General found no evidence that the Office of the Legal Adviser reviewed or approved Clinton's use of a private email server.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...nton-violated-policies-by-using-private-email

Working in the industry, and in the public sector, I can tell you that if a high level official wants some secure means to conduct business he/she isn't going to tell you HOW to do it.

Thats up to the rest of us peons. I think there is a whole group-of people that need to conduct a "lessons learned" from this episode and help secure our nations information by conforming to industry standards.

That has less to do with Hillary and more to do with shaping up our business practices.

And again, there is so far only a policy violation, so good luck trying to convict someone over a law that was broken. These types of policy violations happen alot more than people think.

 

[werepossum]

Are you talking about the current administration that called for the state department to investigate this issue who released this very report?

I'm not sure you could be a bigger idiot with the amount of idiotic posts you make but then again I haven't seen your newest post.

Going through the motions is not investigating Mrs. Clinton. Obama is merely doing what he has to do to remove this scandal from her head for the general.

Except they already are, including cutting deals and taking depositions. The recommendations to the DoJ aren't probably far off. The civil case may even be worse for her than the criminal one.

Nah. They gave Pagliani immunity before they even realized that all his emails had also mysteriously vanished. There is no investigation worthy of the name. One could make the argument that there cannot be a real investigation, since so many others have broken the exact same laws. Is the FBI going to indict half of D.C.? If not, how could they ethically indict Hillary?

Since you seem to be lazy

TITLE 18—CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
§ 1924. Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material
(a) Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.
(b) For purposes of this section, the provision of documents and materials to the Congress shall not constitute an offense under subsection (a).
(c) In this section, the term ‘‘classified information of the United States’’ means information originated, owned, or possessed by the United States Government concerning the national defense or foreign relations of the United States that has been determined pursuant to law or Executive order to require protection against unauthorized disclosure in the interests of national security.

-- For those who want to complain that the above does not apply let's look at a few other laws.

Section 1236.22 of the 2009 National Archives and Records Administration
(b) 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
18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information
(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer— Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

Noted this from the report.

On January 9, 2011, the non-Departmental advisor to President Clinton who provided technical support to the Clinton email system notified the Secretary’s Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations that he had to shut down the server because he believed “someone was trying to hack us and while they did not get in i didnt [sic] want to let them have the chance to.” Later that day, the advisor again wrote to the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations, “We were attacked again so I shut [the server] down for a few min.” On January 10, the Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations emailed the Chief of Staff and the Deputy Chief of Staff for Planning and instructed them not to email the Secretary “anything sensitive” and stated that she could “explain more in person.

The official Hildabeast line is that since there is no timeline set forth, she has eternity to turn over any official documents. When the hack on Blumenthal proved that she had not turned over all official documents, was there a great hue and cry? Of course not; this is how D.C. functions. She has been by far the most egregious, but you cannot ethically arrest someone for killing ten people whilst insisting that those who killed eight did nothing wrong.

If you doubt this, look at Colin Powell. Not only did he turn over nothing at the end of his term, he has admitted that his emails have all been destroyed. He doesn't even have the Hildabeast defense. Seen any credible reports that Colin Powell will be indicted any day now? Of course not. For the Pubbies, this is nothing more than a useful talking point. For the Dems, this is nothing more than a smokescreen to protect Mrs. Clinton. At the end of the day a report will be issued stating that she violated policy and the whole procedure needs to be overhauled. Team Hillary will declare vindication, Team Trump (well, Team anti-Hillary) will declare that this proves she is Lex Luthor in drag, and absolutely no one who might ever vote for her will care. Not one damn thing will change, and life will go on.

 

[ivwshane]

Going through the motions is not investigating Mrs. Clinton. Obama is merely doing what he has to do to remove this scandal from her head for the general.

Of course! That's why the investigation is still going on. The FBI will file charges after she becomes president so she can pardon herself, right?

lol

 

[JEDIYoda]

http://www.businessinsider.com/state...-emails-2016-5


Whoops

whoops says the guy who has had a permanent hard-on about Hillary!

 

[IGBT]

are you for real?

In reading the report I think that Hillary is less of a culprit in allowing a personal server setup and the real culprit is the administration that said it was OK to do so.

The report continues: "According to the staff member, the Director [of that department] stated that the Secretary's personal system had been reviewed and approved by Department legal staff and that the matter was not to be discussed any further."

The Inspector General found no evidence that the Office of the Legal Adviser reviewed or approved Clinton's use of a private email server.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...nton-violated-policies-by-using-private-email

Working in the industry, and in the public sector, I can tell you that if a high level official wants some secure means to conduct business he/she isn't going to tell you HOW to do it.

Thats up to the rest of us peons. I think there is a whole group-of people that need to conduct a "lessons learned" from this episode and help secure our nations information by conforming to industry standards.

That has less to do with Hillary and more to do with shaping up our business practices.

And again, there is so far only a policy violation, so good luck trying to convict someone over a law that was broken. These types of policy violations happen alot more than people think.

more then likely she violated the espionage act numerous time..it's up to the obama to enforce the law.

 

[Jhhnn]

are you for real?

In reading the report I think that Hillary is less of a culprit in allowing a personal server setup and the real culprit is the administration that said it was OK to do so.

The report continues: "According to the staff member, the Director [of that department] stated that the Secretary's personal system had been reviewed and approved by Department legal staff and that the matter was not to be discussed any further."

The Inspector General found no evidence that the Office of the Legal Adviser reviewed or approved Clinton's use of a private email server.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-...nton-violated-policies-by-using-private-email

Working in the industry, and in the public sector, I can tell you that if a high level official wants some secure means to conduct business he/she isn't going to tell you HOW to do it.

Thats up to the rest of us peons. I think there is a whole group-of people that need to conduct a "lessons learned" from this episode and help secure our nations information by conforming to industry standards.

That has less to do with Hillary and more to do with shaping up our business practices.

And again, there is so far only a policy violation, so good luck trying to convict someone over a law that was broken. These types of policy violations happen alot more than people think.

Did you notice the slant of the article where they attempt to invert the chain of command, assert that the SoS needs to seek approval from their underlings?

It must be that way somewhere in Glenbeckistan, huh?

 

[Guurn]

So much reading fail it is almost comical.