Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

User avatar
Whatever4
Posts: 13393
Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 6:36 am
Location: Mainely in the plain
Occupation: Visiting doctors.

Re: Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

#251

Post by Whatever4 »

Emails: Now You Really Need to Know This

Everyone sending Clinton classified emails deliberately broke the same rule (not law) that she broke without knowing it. That’s why they didn’t mark their Secret info as Classified. But, none of them broke the law, because none had any criminal intent to damage national security.
:snippity:

The FBI’s first objective was to uncover classified emails on unclassified systems like Clinton’s personal email server (Report p.1 [A]). But they also found:

All classified emails on Clinton’s server “were drafted on UNCLASSIFIED systems.” (p.20 )
Many drafted on unclassified systems came the CIA, NSA, etc., and even the FBI. (p.21 [C])
No emails identified by the FBI as “classified when sent” were marked Classified. (pp.2 & 20)
Clinton contributed to only 11 of the 81 classified email chains. (p.22 [D]) (And these “contributions” appear to be only unclassified questions and comments.)


Very interesting details that link back to the FBI reports.

“Authors of the e-mails stated that they used their best judgment in drafting the messages and that it was common practice at State to carefully word e-mails on UNCLASSIFIED networks so as to avoid sensitive details or “talk around” classified information.” (FBI Report page 24)

Apparently this was also common practice at the CIA, NSA, FBI etc. One official “stated the right method of communication was whichever method allowed for the fastest possible dissemination of the message.” (FBI Report p. 23)

One official told the FBI (p. 23), the “information he received from other USG agencies was ‘technically probably classified’ but that ‘you can’t do business that way.”

This is why once every two or three weeks, someone sent Clinton classified information from their unclassified server and didn’t mark it as classified. Usually, they tried to disguise the classified info. With all these deceptive signals from experienced experts, you can see why Clinton did not realized that 0.6% of her emails should have been marked classified.


http://zfacts.com/clinton-fake-email-scandal
"[Moderate] doesn't mean you don't have views. It just means your views aren't predictable ideologically one way or the other, and you're trying to follow the facts where they lead and reach your own conclusions."
-- Sen. King (I-ME)
User avatar
RVInit
Posts: 9805
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2016 4:31 pm

Re: Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

#252

Post by RVInit »

Whatever4 wrote:Emails: Now You Really Need to Know This

:snippity:
Very interesting details that link back to the FBI reports.
“Authors of the e-mails stated that they used their best judgment in drafting the messages and that it was common practice at State to carefully word e-mails on UNCLASSIFIED networks so as to avoid sensitive details or “talk around” classified information.” (FBI Report page 24)

Apparently this was also common practice at the CIA, NSA, FBI etc. One official “stated the right method of communication was whichever method allowed for the fastest possible dissemination of the message.” (FBI Report p. 23)

One official told the FBI (p. 23), the “information he received from other USG agencies was ‘technically probably classified’ but that ‘you can’t do business that way.”
:snippity:
http://zfacts.com/clinton-fake-email-scandal
This really puts things into perspective. Comey has broken with common practice deliberately to do everything he could to put Clinton in as bad light as possible. After the election Obama will probably "accept his resignation with gratitude for his years of service". If so, good riddance. Of course, he will probably offer to serve up more Clinton bashing, Mika and Joe would salivate over that prospect. And, there's always Faux "news". I never watched MSNBC but during DISH network contract dispute with CNN they replaced the normal CNN station with MSNBC and I think I tried watching Morning Joe once or twice. I decided I was better off without it, they really seriously suck, IMO.
"I know that human being and fish can coexist peacefully"
--- George W Bush

ImageImage
User avatar
Kriselda Gray
Posts: 8667
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 4:17 am
Location: FEMA Camp 2112 - a joint project of the U.S. and Canada
Contact:

Re: Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

#253

Post by Kriselda Gray »

Is Huma's name pronounced like "hyou-muh," "hoo-muh" or some other way?
Ignorance and prejudice and fear walk hand in hand... - "Witch Hunt" by Rush


Thor promised to slay the Ice Giants
God promised to quell all evil
I'm not seeing any Ice Giants... :thor:
User avatar
June bug
Posts: 6347
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 3:29 pm
Location: Northern San Diego County

Re: Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

#254

Post by June bug »

Thanks for the zfacts link, W4 - good information, well presented.

Kriselda - I've always heard it pronounced "Hoo-muh".
User avatar
kate520
Posts: 16790
Joined: Mon Oct 26, 2009 3:02 pm
Location: Dark side of the Moon
Occupation: servant of cats, chicken wrangler
Contact:

Re: Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

#255

Post by kate520 »

What junebug said, w4. Why, it's almost as if the entire cadre of nationals reporters decided they didn't have time to read the report so they let Comey give 'em the Cliffs notes. :madguy:
DEFEND DEMOCRACY
User avatar
Kriselda Gray
Posts: 8667
Joined: Fri Aug 14, 2009 4:17 am
Location: FEMA Camp 2112 - a joint project of the U.S. and Canada
Contact:

Re: Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

#256

Post by Kriselda Gray »

June bug wrote:Thanks for the zfacts link, W4 - good information, well presented.

Kriselda - I've always heard it pronounced "Hoo-muh".
Thanks,
Ignorance and prejudice and fear walk hand in hand... - "Witch Hunt" by Rush


Thor promised to slay the Ice Giants
God promised to quell all evil
I'm not seeing any Ice Giants... :thor:
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 28936
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

#257

Post by RTH10260 »

Whatever4 wrote: :snippity: Very interesting details that link back to the FBI reports.
“Authors of the e-mails stated that they used their best judgment in drafting the messages and that it was common practice at State to carefully word e-mails on UNCLASSIFIED networks so as to avoid sensitive details or “talk around” classified information.” (FBI Report page 24)

Apparently this was also common practice at the CIA, NSA, FBI etc. One official “stated the right method of communication was whichever method allowed for the fastest possible dissemination of the message.” (FBI Report p. 23)

One official told the FBI (p. 23), the “information he received from other USG agencies was ‘technically probably classified’ but that ‘you can’t do business that way.”

This is why once every two or three weeks, someone sent Clinton classified information from their unclassified server and didn’t mark it as classified. Usually, they tried to disguise the classified info. With all these deceptive signals from experienced experts, you can see why Clinton did not realized that 0.6% of her emails should have been marked classified.
http://zfacts.com/clinton-fake-email-scandal
To note the very important tidbit, that one can assume that formally unclassified networks were probably still under governmental control and administered to a certain standard of confidentiality, eg separation from the outside world, while the Clinton server was wholly owned by the wilderness of the internet, to the limits of what a contractor deemed 'safe'.
User avatar
esseff44
Posts: 12507
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 12:40 am

Re: Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

#258

Post by esseff44 »

I would not assume that at all. The State Department does a lot of business with the public as do many government departments and a great deal of it is subject to FOIA. That was one of the issues in sorting the e-mails because of FOIA requests from Judicial Watch (Larry Klayman's group of pests).
User avatar
Gregg
Posts: 4371
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2014 6:09 am
Location: Cincinnati, OH USA
Occupation: We build cars

Re: Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

#259

Post by Gregg »

I think I tried watching Morning Joe once or twice. I decided I was better off without it, they really seriously suck, IMO.

What I don't understand about them is why after their little feud, and though it seems to me Mika is incapable of saying his name without an exaggerated retch in her voice, why in the hell are they at the very least leaning Trump as far as I can tell. It brings to mind a phrase I heard long ago about a similar unfathomable situation "someone has a picture of him in bed with either a live man or a dead woman" .

And I propose a new rule, for "surrogates" answering questions in interviews.

From now on, if they ask you how X could have said whatever the hell batshit Cra X is on tape as saying, they cannot answer with 5 random words and then go into 2 minutes of Y is guilty of some totally unrelated crap 17 years ago....I can push a little button on my remote and the surrogate gets tased. If they on for more than 3 seconds after I push the button, the reporter also gets 50,000 volts of correction until they scream "answer the question I asked, dumbass!"
FFS, if you want Kelly Ann Conway's opinion on how Hillary Clinton acted when defending her husband in 1991, the most direct way to get it is to ask her if Donald Trump really said he grabbed women by the naughty bits, directly after playing the tape of him saying it.

It might go something like....

"Well ding dong, I can't speak to that as I don't know what he may or may not have said, you can't SEE him on that tape and it could be faked or Obama might have pumped nitrous oxide into the bus or it might be doctored tape leaked by a Canadian Mounty to Wikileaks, who might be trying to influence our elections, but the real story is how back in Reagan's second term, when the first of many allegations about Bill Clinton came out, a totally unreliable witness who has changed her story more than I have changed my socks since then claimed that Bill Clinton, who by the way, although he has never been CONVICTED of a felony is nonetheless one of only 5 living non-felon natural born citizens in the United States over 35 who is not even eligible to run for President. WHen that poor, crazy lady told version number 15 of her story to the National Enquirer, Hillary passed her in a dental waiting room and glared at her, for full on 30 seconds!"

If y'all screw up this election, you're on your own, I know how to play hockey and I'll be at the front of the line with velvet ropes at the Canadian Embassy, and Chili Dog, too! (my Chili Dog, from the 699th Airborne Assault Dachshund Regiment, not the poster here)
Honorary Commander, 699th Airborne Assault Dachshund Regiment
Deadly Sausage Dogs from the Sky
User avatar
Gregg
Posts: 4371
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2014 6:09 am
Location: Cincinnati, OH USA
Occupation: We build cars

Re: Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

#260

Post by Gregg »

As for how much the users of high end computer security understand the reasons we have to change our stupidly complex password every 30 days...the motorcar company where I work has I would hazard to guess 10,000 normal printers on its 2 (that I have access to) North American domains. I can find a document anywhere in that system that I have authorized access to and print it to any of those printers in the system from y desks, my phone, on the road with a company laptop (not my personal one though) any of the 15,000 odd terminals in 24 plants, 45 office buildings and even a few airplanes they own. With a few arrangements I can add the few hundred "secure" printers to that list up to the one on Bill Ford's desk. Were I really important in the grand scheme of things I could print things in really important people's homes, judging from things I have read in the media (the Forbes account of how Alan Mullaly was hired at least implies this).

For all this, I know jack about how it all works. I know we have thousands of people who handle information we consider very private and very important, but this isn't national security. I'd like to think that cabinet level officials of the US government have at least as much computer security as I do. But I understand how the people with the most important stuff are also the ones with the push to ignore the stuff I consider a serious pain to protect the much less sensitive information I might move around.

You really can't know how much I hate coming up with a new password that is more than so many characters long, has one cap, one little, one number and one special character and cannot have X number of 3 character strings in common with the last 24 passwords you have used..... we're way past using "Gettysburg1863" and next month "Gettysburg1864" the next...which is honestly what I was doing in about 1999 or so.
Honorary Commander, 699th Airborne Assault Dachshund Regiment
Deadly Sausage Dogs from the Sky
User avatar
esseff44
Posts: 12507
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 12:40 am

Re: Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

#261

Post by esseff44 »

You have to appreciate the difference between a private company and the government. One is subject to FOIA requests and one isn't. The push is for more transparency in government, not less. Anything that was not meant for eventual public consumption should have not been transmitted outside of the secure networks.
User avatar
DejaMoo
Posts: 5802
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2011 1:19 pm
Occupation: Agent of ZOG

Re: Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

#262

Post by DejaMoo »

RTH10260 wrote: To note the very important tidbit, that one can assume that formally unclassified networks were probably still under governmental control and administered to a certain standard of confidentiality, eg separation from the outside world, while the Clinton server was wholly owned by the wilderness of the internet, to the limits of what a contractor deemed 'safe'.
We can assume, but we can't be certain. The State Department had outsourced at least some of their email services to Google prior to 2011. For all we know, the unclassified networks may have been under Google's control by then. Those agreements require separation/walling off of the customer's network/data, to the limits of what the contractor and customer agree are 'safe'. The question is: how did Clinton's security compare to that of whatever the State Dept. was then using? In 2011, there were still internal complaints about the State Dept's antiquated technology.

Funding and prioritization is always a problem when it comes to IT, and it's worse in the public sector. That leads and even compels some users to purchase their own equipment and/or figure out workarounds in order to get their work done. Which is what Clinton did. Had the Republicans made security a priority and funded it accordingly, they wouldn't have had the Benghazi and email security issues to make political hay with.
I've heard this bull before.
User avatar
esseff44
Posts: 12507
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 12:40 am

Re: Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

#263

Post by esseff44 »

President Obama expresses his displeasure at the way the FBI has handled the Weiner laptop mess.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/03/us/po ... pe=article
User avatar
Reality Check
Posts: 16552
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 2009 8:09 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

#264

Post by Reality Check »

We need to start a pool on the date Comey gets fired (or resigns to spend more time with his family). I will take November 9th. ;)
"“If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.”

Heather Heyer, November 2016
User avatar
June bug
Posts: 6347
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 3:29 pm
Location: Northern San Diego County

Re: Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

#265

Post by June bug »

Reality Check wrote:We need to start a pool on the date Comey gets fired (or resigns to spend more time with his family). I will take November 9th. ;)
I don't know, RC. IMO Obama and/or Hillary (if elected) will face big political blow back if he leaves for any reason while the e-mail thing is still ongoing. Plus, also, anyone either of them nominates may never be confirmed. Even Comey took forever, even with Republican credentials.
User avatar
RVInit
Posts: 9805
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2016 4:31 pm

Re: Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

#266

Post by RVInit »

Reality Check wrote:We need to start a pool on the date Comey gets fired (or resigns to spend more time with his family). I will take November 9th. ;)
:yeah: I'm guessing Obama will call Comey on Nov 9th and not even have to say anything beyond "hey, it's Barack". But seriously, he probably has already typed his resignation and all he has to do is print it out on Nov 9. No wonder we are seeing tweets from long dormant FBI accounts, Comey wants to do as much damage as possible before the lock on his office door is changed.
"I know that human being and fish can coexist peacefully"
--- George W Bush

ImageImage
User avatar
RoadScholar
Posts: 8954
Joined: Wed Jan 26, 2011 10:25 am
Location: Baltimore
Occupation: Historic Restoration Woodworker
Contact:

Re: Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

#267

Post by RoadScholar »

It would be less vexing if Comey were doing this sort of thing to help someone like McCain or Romney. But he's going to these lengths to help Donald Trump?

Seriously? Merde! :evil:
The bitterest truth is healthier than the sweetest lie.
X3
User avatar
DejaMoo
Posts: 5802
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2011 1:19 pm
Occupation: Agent of ZOG

Re: Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

#268

Post by DejaMoo »

GOP Rep. Jason Chaffetz Reported To FBI For Using Potential Illegal Private Email Server
The Democratic Coalition Against Trump reported Representative Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) to the FBI on Wednesday morning for possibly breaking Executive Order 13526 and 18 U.S.C. Sec. 793(f) of the federal code, which makes it unlawful to send or store classified information on a personal email. As was recently resurfaced by the Democratic Coalition’s #TrumpLeaks program, Rep. Chaffetz lists his personal Gmail address on business cards brandished with the Congressional seal. Rep. Chaffetz sits on the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations, which has jurisdiction over “internal and homeland security,” among other things.

“The mishandling of classified information that concerns the national security of our nation is something that the FBI takes very seriously,” said Scott Dworkin, Senior Advisor to the Democratic Coalition. “The irony is unparalleled- Representative Chaffetz, the person who led the charge against Secretary Clinton’s personal email server use, could actually be the one who is breaking the law and putting our national security at risk in the process.”
So now, if anyone is so inclined to do so, they can examine Chaffetz's gmail account and see if anything classified is found therein.
I've heard this bull before.
User avatar
Karen Walker
Posts: 1911
Joined: Fri Apr 29, 2016 2:31 pm

Re: Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

#269

Post by Karen Walker »

DejaMoo wrote:GOP Rep. Jason Chaffetz Reported To FBI For Using Potential Illegal Private Email Server
The Democratic Coalition Against Trump reported Representative Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) to the FBI on Wednesday morning for possibly breaking Executive Order 13526 and 18 U.S.C. Sec. 793(f) of the federal code, which makes it unlawful to send or store classified information on a personal email. As was recently resurfaced by the Democratic Coalition’s #TrumpLeaks program, Rep. Chaffetz lists his personal Gmail address on business cards brandished with the Congressional seal. Rep. Chaffetz sits on the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland Security, and Investigations, which has jurisdiction over “internal and homeland security,” among other things.

“The mishandling of classified information that concerns the national security of our nation is something that the FBI takes very seriously,” said Scott Dworkin, Senior Advisor to the Democratic Coalition. “The irony is unparalleled- Representative Chaffetz, the person who led the charge against Secretary Clinton’s personal email server use, could actually be the one who is breaking the law and putting our national security at risk in the process.”
So now, if anyone is so inclined to do so, they can examine Chaffetz's gmail account and see if anything classified is found therein.
#4 viewtopic.php?p=836936#p836936
:smoking:

Sadly congress is exempt from FOIA but maybe the DOJ & FBI employees who aren't infected with pro- Kremlin/Trump & anti-Clinton motives will find evidence to criminally charge or at least impeach him.

Prediction: they won't do shit & he'll continue to obstruct democracy & justice. And the RW will hold him up as a hero. :madguy:
User avatar
SueDB
Posts: 27756
Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 2:02 pm
Location: RIP, my friend. - Foggy

Re: Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

#270

Post by SueDB »

About the Government's IT/Mail system and the rest.... "Lowest Bidder Contract"

When Congress doesn't give you the money, you get the Snowdens of the world like the other traitor, thief and wanna be spy in Maryland.

All contract workers. :cry:
“If You're Not In The Obit, Eat Breakfast”

Remember, Orly NEVAH disappoints!
User avatar
p0rtia
Posts: 4231
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 11:44 am
Contact:

Re: Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

#271

Post by p0rtia »

DejaMoo wrote:Because Hillary's last name is 'Clinton',

:snippity: .
Yes yes, you're right, you're right! I believe anything you say, forever, and will be your willing servant for live. Because... Oh-Noes Kitty is baaaack. My heart melteth. :lovestruck:
No matter where you go, there you are! :towel:
ImageImageImage
User avatar
Dan1100
Posts: 3995
Joined: Sat Oct 18, 2014 3:41 pm

Re: Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

#272

Post by Dan1100 »

SueDB wrote:About the Government's IT/Mail system and the rest.... "Lowest Bidder Contract"

When Congress doesn't give you the money, you get the Snowdens of the world like the other traitor, thief and wanna be spy in Maryland.

All contract workers. :cry:
Yes.

Also, after these companies make the lowest bid and get the contract, their main goal in life is to sell extra stuff and then to make their client dependent on that extra stuff. Hillary's IT geek had a financial interest her keeping that server up and running and I think that played a part in her continuing to use it after she became Secretary of State.
User avatar
esseff44
Posts: 12507
Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 12:40 am

Re: Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

#273

Post by esseff44 »

Dan1100 wrote:
SueDB wrote:About the Government's IT/Mail system and the rest.... "Lowest Bidder Contract"

When Congress doesn't give you the money, you get the Snowdens of the world like the other traitor, thief and wanna be spy in Maryland.

All contract workers. :cry:
Yes.

Also, after these companies make the lowest bid and get the contract, their main goal in life is to sell extra stuff and then to make their client dependent on that extra stuff. Hillary's IT geek had a financial interest her keeping that server up and running and I think that played a part in her continuing to use it after she became Secretary of State.
It was not 'her server' in the sense it was not set up for her use originally. It was for the use of Bill Clinton's President's Office which each former President gets to set up and also for the foundation. She used a commercial Blackberry account while she was Senator and did not switch over to the Clinton server until March after her tenure began in January. The reports give the mistaken impression that she was the one who have the private set up for her use but it had already been in use for some time by the President''s Office and continued to be used by Bill's staff as well as Hillary's.
User avatar
RTH10260
Posts: 28936
Joined: Tue Mar 02, 2010 8:52 am
Location: Near the Swiss Alps

Re: Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

#274

Post by RTH10260 »

DejaMoo wrote:
RTH10260 wrote: To note the very important tidbit, that one can assume that formally unclassified networks were probably still under governmental control and administered to a certain standard of confidentiality, eg separation from the outside world, while the Clinton server was wholly owned by the wilderness of the internet, to the limits of what a contractor deemed 'safe'.
We can assume, but we can't be certain. The State Department had outsourced at least some of their email services to Google prior to 2011. For all we know, the unclassified networks may have been under Google's control by then. Those agreements require separation/walling off of the customer's network/data, to the limits of what the contractor and customer agree are 'safe'. The question is: how did Clinton's security compare to that of whatever the State Dept. was then using? In 2011, there were still internal complaints about the State Dept's antiquated technology.

Funding and prioritization is always a problem when it comes to IT, and it's worse in the public sector. That leads and even compels some users to purchase their own equipment and/or figure out workarounds in order to get their work done. Which is what Clinton did. Had the Republicans made security a priority and funded it accordingly, they wouldn't have had the Benghazi and email security issues to make political hay with.
Knowing nothing how Google operates internally, but having over my IT life observed how large IT service firms always had separate divisions to serve the government and its specialities of procurement and fullfilment, I guess Google does isolate the US government with dedicated hardware and networks, but using all their same choices as for the greater public.
User avatar
DejaMoo
Posts: 5802
Joined: Tue Jan 25, 2011 1:19 pm
Occupation: Agent of ZOG

Re: Hillary Clinton's e-mail /Debunking the lies

#275

Post by DejaMoo »

RTH10260 wrote: Knowing nothing how Google operates internally, but having over my IT life observed how large IT service firms always had separate divisions to serve the government and its specialities of procurement and fullfilment, I guess Google does isolate the US government with dedicated hardware and networks, but using all their same choices as for the greater public.
If they do, it must make for an awfully splintered operation, since they are providing this service to numerous government bodies at federal/state/local levels, plus educational institutions, school districts, private companies and corporations, further divided at times by divisions within, and all of whose security needs must (presumably) be separately addressed.

And yet, there have been incredible security breaches caused by end-user error because the end users don't understand how to use a borked system that was originally created to serve individuals instead of institutions.

Don't get me started.

:torches:
I've heard this bull before.
Post Reply

Return to “Presidential Election”