Slashdot Mirror
Clinton Regrets, But Defends, Use of Family Email Server
dcblogs writes: Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said Tuesday that, in hindsight, her decision to use a private email server to conduct official business was not the best one. But she is defending it and said the system was secure. Clinton, at news conference in New York, said the email server that she used had been set up for former President Bill Clinton. The system had "numerous safeguards" and is on home property protected by the U.S. Secret Service, she said. "There were no security breaches," said Clinton. "I think the use of that server, which started with my husband, proved to be effective and secure," she said. It still remains unclear about just how appropriate Clinton's system was. As a general rule, government IT policies don't give federal employees the option of using their own email accounts to exclusively conduct government business.
Ms. Clinton can use her private server for anything personal anytime she wants. Her government business, especially cabinet level correspondence, must originate from a state.gov address. During my work for the DoD email messages had to be digitally signed with a government issued smart card (CAC) to provide authenticity. It's a tenant of best practices. I can't imagine the State Department not adhering to the same standard of security when doing the people's business.
Physical security is still an important aspect of overall security.
Section 3 (d), Avoid conducting official Department business from your personal e-mail accounts.
So she was aware of these problems in 2011 and did everything she told other people not to do anyway?
http://www.foxnews.com/politic...
It specifically is illegal actually.
And the destruction of government records is a felony.
news at 11. ;)
Her email records were sopeniaed by congress in the middle of that bengazi thing and they were never provided because the state department didn't have them despite by law having a right to have them.
If government officials can use private email servers to host government emails then there is no way to know who said what to whom when. The whole point was to have the records with a trusted third party that could be audited.
Because she self hosted her own email there is no such third party and we have to "trust" that she didn't delete government emails.
Given that there are gaps of MONTHS in the records she provided there is no way that she didn't unless she didn't send a government email despite being the head of the state department for months.
How fucking likely is that?
I'm not saying she's going to jail. She's too powerful and her political allies are too powerful. That doesn't mean she isn't as of this moment almost certainly a felon.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
They went to jail for that. Do you still want an equal response?
sopeniaed
In case it helps in the future:
You probably know a subpoena is a demand with which you'd be penalized if you don't comply. So, a demand under penalty.
The word subpoena comes from "sub", under, (as in submarine), and poena, punishment, (as in penal system or penalty, in sports).
Maybe that will help you with the spelling. :)
It specifically WAS LEGAL during her tenure as Secretary of State. She's not going to jail because she didn't break any laws. Can we get on to the next conspiracy theory now?
General Petraus just plead guilty to talking CLASSIFIED documents home and giving his biographer access to it.
Note that if Hilary knowingly used even a *federal Internet server* to send *classified* emails, she'd be facing jail.
But go ahead and try to muddy the waters, GOP astroturfer.
What story? Its about hammering her potential as the next president, its simple. I wont vote for her, but this is that simple. These are the same asshats that didn't go after WMD Bush. So please lets drop moral from the conversation.
Source: http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/watch-an-old-home-movie-from-2000-where-hillary-clinton-said#.re86K3GRo
When she became Secretary of State, she had to use e-mail. Hence, she got her own private server (at home where it was under protection of the 4th Amendment).
As the New York Times reported, chemical weapons were indeed found in Iraq.
But you just keep shilling...
There is still no evidence that any federal laws were broken.
You must not know about the federal records act of 1950 and the national archives and records regulations of 1995. NARA (National Archives and Records Administration) adopted regulations in 1995 which required the preservation of official e-mails created on non-official accounts. The Archivist interpreted the Federal Records Act to apply to e-mail records and further provided that “[a]gencies with access to external electronic mail systems shall ensure that federal records sent or received on these systems are preserved in the appropriate recordkeeping system . . .” So as early as 1995, all federal agencies were required to preserve official e-mails, including those created or maintained on “external electronic mail systems.”
Later NARA regulations merely clarified this requirement. In 2009, after a Government Accountability Office report indicated that certain agencies had lax e-mail practices, the NARA adopted new regulations that provided that any emails created on private e-mail accounts must be preserved. But that regulation merely restated, in perhaps slightly different language, what the 1995 regulation had already mandated, requiring that “[a]gencies 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 record keeping system.”
Now just saying that the other employees with a .gov email address had the emails archived does not meet the criteria of the law. What if other government employees also used personal email? Then there would be no official government archive of the email. What about her official emails to foreign heads of state? Those were not archived either. What about official emails to non .gov addresses in the US? Just these questions show that she did not follow the laws and regulations that were established before and during her time in office.
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/414913/yes-what-hillary-did-was-illegal-and-has-been-20-years-shannen-coffin
"A plan fiendishly clever in its intricacies"- Homer Simpson
What she can't avoid is the memo's she sent out to her own staffers that detailed using private email for public business is a no no.
She even forced out an ambassador in 2012 in part for doing what she did:
http://thefederalist.com/2015/...
The inspector general’s report specifically noted that Gration violated State Department policy by using a private, unsanctioned e-mail service for official business. In its executive summary listing its key judgments against the U.S. ambassador to Kenya who served under Hillary Clinton, the inspector general stated that Gration’s decision to willfully violate departmental information security policies highlighted Gration’s “reluctance to accept clear-cut U.S. Government decisions.” The report claimed that this reluctance to obey governmental security policies was the former ambassador’s “greatest weakness.”
So did she wrongfully remove the ambassador, or did she hold him to a standard she knew she was violating herself?
Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
Laws are for the little people, not them.
The Presidential and Federal Records Act Amendments of 2014 became law on November 26, 2014. Clinton's final day as secretary was February 1, 2013.
The "Law" that everyone keeps claiming that she broke wasn't effective until a year and a half after she left office.
There was absolutely no legal requirement at the time of her tenure to use a government e-mail. Furthermore, she retroactively complied with the records portion of the law by turning over any business related e-mails she had on her home server archive.
Also, previous Secretaries of State, like Colin Powell, used personal email as well. In his case, they didn't even archive it so many of the emails are lost. We'll never have access to his electronic discusssions about, say, the decisions leading for him to give a speech at the United Nations calling for the Invasion of Iraq.
The Presidential and Federal Records Act Amendments of 2014 became law on November 26, 2014. Clinton's final day as secretary was February 1, 2013.
So? How does that excuse her from existing federal regulations? Section 1236.22 of the 2009 NARA regulation clearly says, "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."
... pass along the data to be reviewed? No. She used employees of her family enterprise to print out 55,000 pages of email for them to have to manually wade through (another stalling tactic), and she and only she knows the criteria used to separate those from the 30,000+ messages she says she deleted before hand. Anyone who buys her laughable narrative on this topic is a fool or (more likely, since nobody's that dumb) one of her shills.
She went out of her way to avoid that requirement. She made no provision to have her official emails mirrored over to State's mandated archives. Nor did she lift a finger to do so when she left office. That violates both the letter and the spirit of that crystal clear legal requirement. And when investigators in congress and other FOIA requesters finally understood why her stonewalling was so effective (there WERE no records at State for them to request, because she prevented that from happening!), she did what
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
She's saying its secure when we know it was using self signed certs, exposed OWA, and I saw something this morning that said Qualys scanned it and it was riddled with vulnerabilities. She says there were no breaches, but does she have the extensive instrumentation required to detect a breach, especially one perpetrated by government sponsored entities who would absolutely have an interest in the contents of her email?
It's just so frustrating to see the ignorance, and then to read comments from people defending her. You can say the timing is politically motivated. I personally think this is the State Department's fault much moreso than hers...but don't tell me that it was a.) legal, b.) a good idea, c.) secure, d.) in any way, shape or form compliant with even the most basic security frameworks out there.
I wish I could just not see anything else about this issue, but it's like a magnet for my eyes.