Slashdot Mirror
Justice Dept. Grants Immunity To Staffer Who Set Up Clinton Email Server (washingtonpost.com)
schwit1 writes with this news from the Washington Post: The Justice Department has granted immunity to the former State Department staffer who worked on Hillary Rodham Clinton's private email server, a sign the FBI investigation into possible criminal wrongdoing is progressing. A senior U.S. law enforcement official said the FBI had secured the cooperation of Bryan Pagliano, who worked on Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign before setting up the server in her New York home in 2009. As the FBI looks to wrap up its investigation in the coming months, agents will likely want to interview Clinton and her senior aides about the decision to use a private server, how it was set up, and whether any of the participants knew they were sending classified information in emails, current and former officials said. The inquiry comes against a sensitive political backdrop in which Clinton is the favorite to secure the Democratic nomination for the presidency.
This will be interesting.
Its not like the Clintons have not made people disappear when they testify against them.
Information that is "Top Secret" is born classified. Removing markings, headers, footers etc. doesn't change the classified nature of it. If you measure what was done with her server (leaving it in her hands to sift through at her leisure, turning over only that which she felt like doing and then wiping the rest) with what happens to ANYONE else when they are even suspected of breaking clearance rules ...
Good to see that Hillary as President will be more of the same, there are rules for them and rules for us.
They have emails from her telling people to take classification markings off. They have found CIA human intelligence on her private server. They have Special Access Program data which everyone with an IQ above 80 outside of the federal government knows is presumed classified. What she did makes Bradley Manning look like a prankster, since she was a cabinet level appointee responsible for overseeing the protection of classified data.
No matter who you are, you're probably not the fish they want to fry.
Don't incriminate yourself. Then, wait for a deal which allows you to unload on specifically what was asked of you, when, how, and why, and what you said, and what your concerns were.
You're far more important as a neutral observer than as someone who configured a server.
Hire a Linux system administrator, systems engineer,
"Him" being Pagliano? If he's being granted immunity, it means he's probably going to talk. If she still gets in, she'll have him disappeared.
The guy who pushed the buttons was clearly just following orders, which was "set up a mail server", a relatively common task. Moreover, her statement of "it was above board when I did it" was correct, in that it was contingent upon those e-mails being turned over upon her exit from the position, so the initial setup wouldn't have had reasons to raise suspicions of wrongdoing at that time.
I see no reason not to grant immunity in this context.
Well, hopefully, if they find enough evidence, they'll indict her BEFORE she wins any election.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Patraeus was only sentenced to 2 years probation and a $100K fine for giving classified military info to his girlfriend/biographer. Plus, he lied to the FBI when they investigated it. If he got off that easy, then Hillary is not gonna get even so much as a stern rebuke from the administration.
.
The FBI doesn't go around granting immunity unless they need information to justify the immunity grant.
You sure sound like a Cankles supporter.
1. You ignore, deny, or are outright ignorant of the FBI investigation, its scope and the level of people involved.
2. You desperately throw out the "just partisan which hunt" card
Next you'll be recycling the "not marked at the time" mantra.
FTFY!
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
This staffer, on the other hand, who set this system up for her knew exactly what he was doing and by his actions placed government secrets into easy access to foreign players, hackers, etc. As far as I'm concerned he should be charged with treason and not given immunity. Throw him into Leavenworth and don't ever let the sun shine on his pale clammy skin ever again.
If the staffer committed treason on request of Clinton then she committed treason as well, or at least is guilty of conspiracy to commit treason. But really, she didn't commit treason. But there is significant evidence that she broke a lot of rules and regulations around the handling and storage of classified information.
The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
As long as it's a fair investigation, go for it. As crimes go, though, setting up a private server (not explicitly forbidden by the rules) and receiving (not sending) some emails that are retroactively classified, seems to be a fairly minor crime.
Also, given that the email server was unclassified, and Clinton can demonstrate that she understood that and informed her subordinates not to use it to send her classified material, what more could she have done?
Judging from auto correct, your an android user, thus a bernie supporter. BUT JUST FOR COMPLETENESS: No, she won't pardon herself because she will be in jail.
Trump might pardon her anyway since he is as close to a democrat as a republican can get.
I pretty sure everyone will be voting for Trump. -- Except for Romney, who is a loser anyway.
Everyone seems to forget that it was SOP during the Bush years for everyone to use an email server run by the RNC. That means as soon as anyone except Bernie pulls out the email thing against Clinton, the entire Republican Party will be under withering fire for the same issue. It could easily tilt the balance of the election totally against the republicans and end up as a sweep for the democrats.
If the FBI charges Clinton with any sort of crime, it will just serve to further undermine the legitimacy of all law enforcement agencies in the US. It could easily turn into a nationwide war on police.
So everyone needs to tread very carefully and make sure everything gets whitewashed regardless of what the truth really is.
Captcha:imperial
Are we sure slashdot's captcha software isn't some sore of psychic AI?
How many security breaches there were breaking into Hilary's server vs all the other recents attacks on government servers. Her's may have been more secure... ;)
If the FBI charges Clinton with any sort of crime, it will just serve to further undermine the legitimacy of all law enforcement agencies in the US.
You have that exactly backwards. Letting her walk when it's so obvious that she's committed many more counts of the same crime that Patreus was convicted for would demonstrate that some people can avoid consequences for blatant felonies.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Seriously?
Hillary supporters defend her like Nazis defending Hitler as the Soviets were blasting their way into Berlin.
I'll take the integrity of the FBI over Hillary any day.
So GTFO with your pathetic blustering.
Clinton is not a technical person and probably didn't have any idea that this setup was not secure.
Try again.
She's a lawyer, and she knew full well that she was breaking the law.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
So, the little fish, who certainly did nothing wrong in setting up a mail server, gets immunity in exchange for all he knows, or can be persuaded to "remember".
Although I'm far from being a Clinton fan, (either of them), there's something sinister about a justice system that feels it necessary to "grant immunity" (often in exchange for unspecified "co-operation") rather than just being confident enough in itself to say "hey, you've done nothing wrong, but we would like to call you as a witness where your civic duty is to tell the truth".
I usually vote Democrat, you asshole!
Only "simpering fucking retards" think people can't recognize a lying, sociopathic criminal for what she is just because she claims to share some ideology.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Treason has a very specific legal definition in the constitution. If the FBI and the DoJ do their job, she'll be charged with espionage, not treason.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Wait, your argument is:
They did it, so she can too?
Are you a fucking 4 year old?
There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
Yes, they used an RNC server FOR POLITICAL PARTY PURPOSES. It's actually against the law to use Government servers for political party purposes - they are to be used for official Government business only. Now, are you asserting that actual Government work took place on that private server?
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
The are just pushing this forward so that the exoneration will be complete before the Dem convention
This is a set-up to get the gop to look like chicken little once that nothing is found that Hillary can be indicted for
are you asserting that actual Government work took place on that private server?
gwb43.com
"Obvious" and "proven in a court of law" are very different things.
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
She'll get a presidential pardon, and then we will see how low people will go just to keep Trump out of office. "Lesser Evil", right?
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
tracking device the SS will say no to that or cut it off and keep the local Barney Fife at bay.
Making a dress disappear was a bit too much too ask, though.
Caught between the DOJ and the Clintons.
With fair odds she could win the Presidency, what kind of revenge or reward could he be facing? A possible post-election investigation from a Clinton DOJ? Or perhaps on the reward side, a promotion and a posting in a do-nothing job in a pleasant and far away place, like New Zealand?
On the other hand, in the near term having the DOJ breathing down your neck is no small thing.
3. Even though it is reported that it is an "insecure" email server,
If Mrs. Clinton could decide which messages to delete permanently, it was insecure.
Laboring under the delusion that 'little people' laws apply to any of the political elite (and at this level, party affiliation is meaningless).
Of course, if you're a DNC shill, you think she has done nothing wrong, in spite of the ongoing revelations of secret, classified, and beyond classified documents found on an unsecured server. I am sure that if this were an (R) running for President, you'd be calling for his hanging, and not saying "nothing to see here, move along"
Which is why I hate party politics, because people like you only see the Party, and not the crimes.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Bill was holding out for getting it as a Keep Sake, or a Trophy.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
She might be knowledgeable about the law, which would only require something like "correspondence must be handled in a secure manner". Not being a sysadmin, she would not reasonably be expected to know (without further consultation) that her server was not secure.
Similarly, Pagliano may have known that the server setup was not secure, but may reasonably have been ignorant of the security needs the law requires. Since ignorance of the law is not an excuse, anything he said about the lax security of the server would be self-incrimination, and therefore protected under the Fifth Amendment. Granting him immunity removes the risk of self-incrimination, and allows him to present his evidence.
That evidence may include such things as "we never thought the server would be used this way" or perhaps "Mrs. Clinton ignored my warnings about security, and insisted on doing it this way". We'll find out soon enough.
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
I work in aerospace. EVERY email we send has to be marked as Classified, Company Secret, or Unclassified. Even if you are asking your spouse to pick up some milk on the way home.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
2. When Clinton was using the private email server, there was no law or policy that required her to use the government email server.
There were legal requirements. Per the National Archives and Records Administration's Code of Federal Regulations Hillary would have had to cc her official government email every time in order to maintain an official archive. Clearly she did not. This would fall under the section requiring all federal agencies to preserve records and assure the were readily available.
It means there are questions that Pagliano won't answer because he thinks there was wrongdoing.
That does not imply that wrongdoing actually occurred, or that a court of law will find Clinton responsible for it.
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
And if she is ever charged with a Federal crime the chance of her being elected goes to some place around zero.
You have no idea about the stupidity of the American People, There are enough people who will vote for her, no matter what, simply because she has a (D) after her name, and even more because she has a V between her legs.
Here is a scenario that just might happen. She gets elected, gets sworn in, and pardons herself. And the newly appointed Supreme Court Justice, she appointed will support the notion that a President can pardon themselves, because there is no restriction against it in the Constitution. And the Senate will not be able to impeach her, and the (R) are too stupid / chicken / lame to do anything about it.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
>2. When Clinton was using the private email server, there was no law or policy that required her to use the government email server.
This is incorrect. Her use of a private email server for government business was in direct violation of policy.
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/state-department-email-rule-hillary-clinton-115804
And to those ranting about how the Republicans going back years did the same thing, note that the policy was enacted in 2005. So most, but not all would be outside it. (and any that violated it should be appropriately penalized).
Hillary is in a tough spot.
Her only escape is a No Bill.
A deal or a trial will sink her candidacy, at least if the world still makes sense.
On the other hand, Trump looks to get the GOP nod...so does the world really make sense?
It is going to be as depressing on Nov 4 as "choose the manner of your death".
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Those are BORN Classified.
On an unsecured server? Doubtful.
Congratulations! You have just outed yourself as a fucking Hillary Kool Aid drinker and cult member.
As moderate conservative, I'm voting for Hillary. If Donald Trump becomes the Republican nominee, the neocons will vote for Hillary.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/trump-clinton-neoconservatives-220151
She didn't obviously commit many more counts of the same crime that Patreus did even if everything that has been speculated about this is true. Patreus handed known classified info to a reporter/writer. No one has even suggested that Hillary handed anything top secret to a source outside the government. At worst she knowingly allowed them to be in a less secure manner.
And I really don't like Hillary either, just not a pitch fork and torches kind of guy on this issue.
the Phrase "Marked Classified" is a red herring, and completely irrelevant. Not only that, there is evidence that the markings were REMOVED by her staff (and orders to do so shown), which is ALSO a felony. FURTHER the law doesn't indicate it has to be marked at all. But keep spewing the DNC talking points, as it shows you care more about (D) party than actual security of our people serving overseas (exposed)
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
If evidence exists, the Republican controlled House and Senate can maybe still impeach her. I believe one president was attempted to be impeached for crimes prior to serving in office but was released / acquitted _because_ they occurred prior to office.
Still, it would be an interesting historical sidenote that the first time both members of a married couple were President, they were also the first to both impeached...
Yes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_White_House_email_controversy
House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform[edit]
The House Oversight committee in an interim staff report, released on June 18, 2007:[20]
At least eighty-eight Republican National Committee email accounts were granted to senior Bush administration officials, not "just a handful" as previously reported by the White House spokesperson Dana Perino in March 2007. Her estimate was later revised to "about fifty." Officials with accounts included: Karl Rove, the President’s senior advisor; Andrew Card, the former White House Chief of Staff; Ken Mehlman, the former White House Director of Political Affairs; and many other officials in the Office of Political Affairs, the Office of Communications, and the Office of the Vice President.
The RNC has 140,216 emails sent or received by Karl Rove. Over half of these emails (75,374) were sent to or received from individuals using official ".gov" email accounts. Other users of RNC email accounts include former Director of Political Affairs Sara Taylor (66,018 emails) and Deputy Director of Political Affairs Scott Jennings (35,198 emails). These email accounts were used by White House officials for official purposes, such as communicating with federal agencies about federal appointments and policies.
Of the 88 White House officials who received RNC email accounts, the RNC has preserved no emails for 51 officials.
There is evidence that the Office of White House Counsel under Alberto Gonzales may have known that White House officials were using RNC email accounts for official business, but took no action to preserve these presidential records.
The evidence obtained by the Committee indicates that White House officials used their RNC email accounts in a manner that circumvented these requirements. At this point in the investigation, it is not possible to determine precisely how many presidential records may have been destroyed by the RNC. Given the heavy reliance by White House officials on RNC email accounts, the high rank of the White House officials involved, and the large quantity of missing emails, the potential violation of the Presidential Records Act may be extensive.
"don't understand the difference between what David Petraeus was indicted for and what Hillary Clinton, even by the most maximal interpretation, is accused of. What David Petraeus did was not mishandling classified information. No one ever suggested those were the facts of the case; it was lesser charge that grew out of a plea deal. David Petraeus was in a position of the highest military authority and knowingly shared the highest levels of classified information: secret code words, the identities of informants, war strategy among other things with his mistress, who unquestionably had no right to have access to the information. Even marital infidelity in itself is a serious matter in the military. The breach of trust, vulnerability to blackmail and dereliction of duty are all huge and knowing transgressions. Petraeus could have been indicted for a number of individual crimes. He was pled down to a mishandling charge. Comparing this to insufficiently protecting information that appears not to have even been explicitly classified at the time is silly. "
citation? (genuinely curious, that doesn't dovetail with what I've read, but all of these seem to be coming from unofficial leaks)
Think this through with me, please, think.
Is there anything more dangerous than to indict a popular (within their own political movement) and likely nominee for the office President of the United States?
Well, yes, electing an unindicted felon, one accused of federal crimes that would disqualify them for civil service.
But, if indicted and even convicted, could they be elected anyways? This is an interesting potential constitutional issue.
- Do elections overrule the law, and so require that a President-elect be permitted access to information they have already been found guilty of mishandling in the past?
- If indicted before nomination, and thence nominated, would any states declare the nominee disqualified? If so, how do they replace the nominee? Wait, which states decide the nominee? Don't most states merely oversee primary elections, and parties hold conventions where those delegates chosen decide the nominee?
- If indicted after nomination, would a judge be persuaded to void this indictment as being an improper interference in the election?
I'm proposing that any indictment must occur before nomination, and indeed before the primary process goes far enough to ensure the candidate will be the nominee.
So it is interesting that today two events are noted in the spew:
It is claimed that Bryan Pagliano has been granted immunity by the Justice Department to offer testimony regarding the operation of Hillary Clinton's private email server at her home.
And a former U.S. Attorney, Joseph diGenova, claims he is 'confident' that a grand jury has been convened to investigate the issues regarding the operation of Hillary Clinton;s email servers, the handling of classified material at the State Department during her tenure there, and the possible violation of law.
If this is true, three salient points come to mind:
0. The timing is probably crisis driven. This can't be rushed, but should/must be completed before Hillary is the presumptive nominee. That may happen pretty soon.
1. If true, the empaneling of a grand jury indicates the pressure is irresistible from the various government constituencies to 'do something' about this. If so, I doubt that a grand jury can merely whitewash the affair, for if the public reports are even marginally accurate, she is plainly guilty of several felonies, and the primary question is whether these infractions were intentional. Many groups will probably not care about that, as the results of such errors are the same whether intentional or not- lost lives and lasting harm to our nation and others.
2. And if this is indeed true, then Justice has either been compelled to move on prosecution, or given permission to do so, by the White House.
I'm not hopeful that this is true because I wish to see Hillary discredited and abandon her campaign. I'm hopeful because she needs to be held to account for her actions. She had the misfortune to be the first credible and likely woman to be a nominee for President, only to be up against the first credible black nominee. Now she should experience the self-inflicted misfortune of being forced to abandon her aspirations to the office due to criminal indictment and conviction.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
There's over a thousand items that were classified after the fact, but dozens were top secret or above at the time.
"but it wasn't intentional and it really wasn't her wrongdoing. "
Wasn't intentional? Surely you jest.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
Sadly, that is not a defense against several of the statutes she could be indicted under. It may change the sentence, but the conviction would be the very same.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
There were keyhole satellite spy photos which should not have been shared regardless of content (good way for the enemy to determine our capabilities), as well as a few documents apparently manually transcribed from classified sources by one or more interns. And that's just what has been disclosed. It's a wonder she's still free.
Waiting until Sep/Oct to announce an indictment is flat out screwing the dems, leaving them with no viable candidate for the few weeks leading up to the election.
The dems are screwing themselves by (probably) running someone with a cloud over her head larger than Trumps toupee. Even if she's not indicted, there are still going to be lingering doubts and Trump's camp is going to be hammering that point home.
So what? Even if she was ignorant about security, she damn well knew that non-State Department-controlled servers were categorically disallowed because they could be used to circumvent FOIA requests.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
And items that were classified had their classification removed before being emailed per Hillary's instruction.
She had her staff / interns scan/fax shit, remove the designation, and then email it. When it hit her email it wasn't marked classified. It's the equivalent of painting over a handicapped parking spot then parking on it.
"Her only escape is a No Bill.
A deal or a trial will sink her candidacy, at least if the world still makes sense."
In *my* makes-sense world, there's a saying about criminal offenses that go more or less "innocent till proven guilty".
In *my* makes-sense world, a public person is open to all kinds of abusing due to above standard public scrutiny making even more sense my paragraph above.
NOTE: I'm not implying absolutely anything about the specific Clinton's case.
"It is going to be as depressing on Nov 4 as "choose the manner of your death"."
Well, in USA you live and die for a two-party system: your current situation is a self-inflicted and much looked for one.
I think Trumps' toupee would be of more interest to SETI.
It also usually means the interrogators and prosecutors already know what will be said.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
2. No law that required her to use any email for that matter. That is irrelevant to the context of this case, which has to do with documents and security of the same.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
If the FBI charges Clinton with any sort of crime, it will just serve to further undermine the legitimacy of all law enforcement agencies in the US.
You have that exactly backwards. Letting her walk when it's so obvious that she's committed many more counts of the same crime that Patreus was convicted for would demonstrate that some people can avoid consequences for blatant felonies.
-jcr
If her email server was never compromised then she never committed a single crime.
Seriously?
Hillary supporters defend her like Nazis defending Hitler as the Soviets were blasting their way into Berlin.
I'll take the integrity of the FBI over Hillary any day.
So GTFO with your pathetic blustering.
Integrity of the FBI? What?
The last I heard, the information found that was classified became classified only after the information was sent via email. The government likes to make all kinds of useless garbage "classified" just because they can.
That's the way classified information works. It's not always classified once it's generated, but becomes classified after the fact. Part of the responsibility of holding Classified clearance means you're trained to identify information likely to be classified and treat it accordingly.
That's not correct. There were document that were classified from the beginning that were on her server. Not documents retroactively classified. This IS a big deal.
If you understood how items get classified you would understand that wether or not someone said it was classified before or after, the information was still classified upon its creation. And if she didn't have a personal server this wouldn't even be an issue... She chose to have the server she chooses to take all responsibility. Even though she's really just trying to say it's a GOP witch hunt... Ironic she said the same thing before her husband was impeached. Turns out it was all legitimate then and it's all legitimate now.
The classification is based on the information, not the markings. People with clearances get briefed on this as part of getting the clearance, and sign an acknowledgement that they understand this. Certain types of information are ALWAYS considered classified, and encountering them in a non-classified setting mandates that a person with a clearance report the security breach to their information security office. Claiming otherwise is spin, pure and simple.
Every analysis I've seen (that realizes that current polls don't tell you what will happen in November and extrapolates based on historical data) says that Trump is going to beat either Hillary or Bernie.
In short, you have nothing to back up your opinion.
As in, Trump has a greater than 99% chance of beating either Democratic candidate.
He has 99% of repeating Mitt Romney's performance in 2012, failing to get enough minority and independent voters to win the election.
Rumors that Hillary will face questioning by investigators in a few weeks.
This should be a familiar timeline:
- Rumors that the FBI is interviewing lots of people.
- Immunity granted to a key person of interest.
- Grand Jury empaneled
- Interview the subject of the investigation.
- Compare the interviews.
- Give your results to the Grand Jury
- Indictments.
Whether a prosecution is forthcoming is an open question of course. And plenty of opportunity to fiddle with the interviews to get the outcome you want.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
The only people who made that claim were Hillary reps and State department officials who have been trying to slow the entire review process down and cover her and their own asses.
Of the now thousands of emails found to be classified or above most were classified at the time. Many are what are generally called 'born classified' meaning they contain information that by it's very nature, is always considered classified.
While the State Department can classify/declassify their own internal documents (which has happened) they have been trying, and failing miserably, at getting the various intelligence organizations to agree to retroactively declassify their materials so that they can make the claim that no classified materials exist in her emails.
Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
Those are BORN Classified.
On an unsecured server? Doubtful.
Congratulations! You have just outed yourself as a fucking Hillary Kool Aid drinker and cult member.
As moderate conservative, I'm voting for Hillary. If Donald Trump becomes the Republican nominee, the neocons will vote for Hillary.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/03/trump-clinton-neoconservatives-220151
The laws forbidding using a 3rd party server for communication were put in place AFTER Hilary's email server was shutdown.
You are conflating two investigation. Congress investigated Clinton about Benghazi and subpoenaed her emails. The FBI is investigating the use of a PRIVATE EMAIL SERVER that housed State Department emails, many of which were classified. It's a felony to have classified email on a private email server.
In the United States, many people are accused of crimes and many people are investigated for crimes. In particular, consider the bitter partisanship that we have in 2016 and take that into consideration when thinking about this case.
Now remember innocent until proven guilty.
And consider further the fact that many people that make a plea deal would not have been convicted of any crime. They do so because they're poor, have bad representation, or they made a miscalculation and the prosecution didn't have a solid case against them. Don't consider deals with prosecutors to be evidence of any guilt.
For all anyone knows, she did something wrong, but just because someone is testifying against her, doesn't mean she is guilty of anything.
..or China's Communism...but I guess that's inconvenient to mention that China is a communist country.
The fact that they werent to her whitehouse.gov email address or any official govt address is the whole fucking point.
"But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,..." - Nancy Pelosi
"That evidence may include such things as "we never thought the server would be used this way" or perhaps "Mrs. Clinton ignored my warnings about security, and insisted on doing it this way"."
Still, you left out the most obvious: this server is not on a protected network and shouldn't be used for anything security sensible, mmmok? Ok.
E-Mail, is e-mail and an SMTP server will as gladly manage your market list as your uber-plans to conquer the world. It's up to the sender to choose the channel, not the other way around.
Really Potsy:
"Secretary Clinton specifically instructed aides to send her classified materials on that insecure network. We know of at least one such instruction. We don’t know how many others were redacted by the State Department." http://www.realclearpolitics.c...
Doh!
"But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,..." - Nancy Pelosi
But officer, I didn't see any MARKED speed limit... I don't deny going 150mph, but how was I to know that was not within the law?
Since when is ignorance of the law an excuse? Even more so when the person being investigated is the head of an organization that deals in classified materials... I have no government or military experience. Even I understand that spy satellite photos and the names of operatives within the government intelligence community are probably things I shouldn't share using my personal email account.
Yes it's an anecdote! Were you expecting original research in a Slashdot comment?
Clinton is not a technical person and probably didn't have any idea that this setup was not secure.
Try again.
She's a lawyer, and she knew full well that she was breaking the law.
-jcr
IT was not against the law at the time to use a personal email server. She knows the law better than you do.
Hold on, Tex, she said in an interview that's simply short-hand for cleaning it up for non-classified release, such as removing the classified parts and rephrasing. She said the office worker she sent it to knew what she really (fully) meant because he had done it many times before.
http://hotair.com/archives/201...
If all my internal emails were interpreted by the public/press verbatim, I'd probably be on trial also.
Think about your own internal work emails being read and interpreted by bloggers, pundits, and trolls.
I don't know if her claim is true yet, but until that's determined from the investigation, it should be "innocent until proven guilty".
Further, note that if she had used the "regular" office server instead of her home server, the classified/problematic emails would probably still end up on a server NOT designed for classified materials. The risk/breach would still exist. (There was a separate transmission system for classified stuff, but it wasn't email as we know it.)
The regular office server was no more special or vetted than her home server. Pundits keep implying it is.
I'm not defending her actions, only saying many are jumping to conclusions prematurely. Using a home server is probably not illegal (although the laws are subject to interpretation*), just poor judgement, which she admitted to. Members of the other party made similar errors of judgement.
* Wealthy people are more likely to afford top lawyers who can successfully argue their side of such vague laws, and in that sense, her "privilege" may indeed just get her out of it. But that's life in an unequal society. OJ would probably lose if he were poor.
Table-ized A.I.
Patreus handed known classified info to a reporter/writer.
Who he was sleeping with.
Have you read my blog lately?
So everyone needs to tread very carefully and make sure everything gets whitewashed regardless of what the truth really is.
Did you really just suggest that justice should NOT prevail because (insert something scary)?
On the other hand, Trump looks to get the GOP nod...so does the world really make sense?
Trump makes perfect sense if you understand what the people actually care about, and not what the talking heads keep telling the masses they *should* care about.
Housing classified information on a personal server is illegal.
According to HuffPo (take it for what you will) the deadline appears to be May which will be pretty far along in the cycle. What I will be curious to see is if Sanders has enough balls to actually capitalize upon this, not too many voters are gonna want to waste a vote on someone who could be disqualified for a felony conviction and give the election to Trump by default.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
It's worse: " Because her server was private, the State Department’s records did not include its contents when responding to Freedom of Information Act requests. The department wrongly told FOIA applicants that no such materials existed. Not only did the materials exist (on Clinton’s server), senior officials knew it and allowed false denials to be made." http://www.realclearpolitics.c...
[...] it's hard to understand why you just didn't click to post anonymous and save some face.
I stand behind my opinions, right or wrong. I welcome anyone to prove me wrong. If I stand corrected, I will say so. There's an old Japanese saying: "The nail that sticks out the most, gets hammered the most."
Patreus handed some classified materials to his biographer who also happened to have classified clearance, just not the right ones for some of the materials she apparently was given.
Some of the emails released, though heavily redacted (up to 100%), from Hillary's emails cache were code-word classified meaning they were generally only to be seen by a very short list of people and only in a secure viewing room. Some of it was so highly classified that the IGs doing the initial investigation weren't even permitted to read them and had to go to the source organizations to have them reviewed.
The fact that these were on her unsecured server, shared with several underlings without codeword clearance as well as then handed to her lawyer (who also did not have all the required clearances) who stored them in his office without the proper level of security for the types of documents that existed on the storage drive shows a complete disregard for the proper and legally required handling of classified materials.
Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
"beyond classified"? Pray tell, what's that?
Religion is what happens when nature strikes and groupthink goes wrong.
You mean like Bernie Sanders who beats Trump in all the national polls.
Hillary also deleted her emails originally, then destroyed the servers, then handed over printed copies of the emails she deemed worthy of review. It was only after initial investigations had begun that it was found that she had given a copy to her lawyer and that drive was taken into custody.
She's cooperated much in the same way an inmate on death row 'cooperates' during his execution; never by choice, only because she was forced into having no alternatives.
Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
He has to talk or be in contempt of court. This is the situation Susan McDougal found herself and for which she spent 18 months in jail.
On the other hand, Trump looks to get the GOP nod...so does the world really make sense?
Trump's got his own fraud trial coming up.
The Clinton have far too many suicides of partners in their history. If the FBI doesn't protect the witness, that one will surely die as well.
If he was willing to talk there wouldn't be any need. This is what the government does when you refuse to testify and they would otherwise be unable to compel you because of the 5th amendment.
This wouldn't be happening if he didn't have damaging testimony.
I love Trump because he's the DeadPool of Politics. :)
~ People that think they are better than anyone else for any reason are the cause of all the strife in the world.
See how stupid it sounds you shill.
Anyone who has an opinion opposite to your own opinion must be a shill. What a lonely world you live in, AC!
I'm not sure she would beat Trump regardless. Lots of people, both Democrats and Republicans, dislike Clinton. Republican voters are energized and coming out in large numbers. Democrats are not turning out. So in the general election Clinton may lose to Trump. If he could turn down the crazy, he'll kill her.
Did they use it for government business, and can anyone prove it? Did it ever have emails that contained classified information?
Nice try.
You have it exactly backwards. What would undermine their legitimacy is for them to ignore obvious criminal behavior.
Trying do some research Potsy:
"But the details in those "Classified" stamps — which include a string of dates, letters and numbers describing the nature of the classification — appear to undermine this account, a Reuters examination of the emails and the relevant regulations has found.
The new stamps indicate that some of Clinton's emails from her time as the nation's most senior diplomat are filled with a type of information the U.S. government and the department's own regulations automatically deems classified from the get-go — regardless of whether it is already marked that way or not. "
And items that were classified had their classification removed before being emailed per Hillary's instruction.
Not entirely true, but your point is irrelevant anyway, because...
I used to work in the fun little world of TS and above clearances (specifically in a technical role with what eventually became the F-117A Nighthawk). Our instructions were very clear and simple: if it's marked classified, it never leaves Tonopah Test Range.
And yes, we had email back then - and so did the academic world. If I had so much as thought of doing what she did, *even if I generated/controlled the data in question*, I'd still be sitting in Fort Leavenworth, a quarter-century-plus later. And, no partisan hacks would be on the blogs or the Sunday TV shows trying to defend the act, either.
Therein lies my point - if it would land us peons in prison, then why should the law exempt her for doing the same thing?
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Probably US Fish and Wildlife services.
Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
In theory if she becomes president she can pardon herself. There isn't really any reason for her to drop out of the race - Democrats don't seem to be bothered by criminality on the part of their candidates.
What's the over-under on when he'll have a mysterious "accident"?
There's something sinister about a justice system that feels it necessary to "grant immunity".
I understand your feelings about immunity, but it's a very important and necessary process in obtaining testimony. The Illustrated Guide to Law does a very good job in explaining all the reasons why immunity is used, but here's a short paraphrase:
1) Everyone has the constitutional right to refuse to testify when said testimony can be used to incriminate oneself (now or in the future) of a crime.
2) The only means of forcing a witness to provide self-incriminating testimony is to grant them immunity from incrimination.
3) Deciding whether or not to grant immunity all comes down to what is more important for the prosecuting agent: prosecuting the witness or obtaining the witness's testimony.
In this case, we all know they want to see Clinton hanging from a rope; a low-level tech is not on their radar. They want the testimony, and they want it badly; therefore, they offer immunity.
No one has even suggested that Hillary handed anything top secret to a source outside the government.
This is false. Clinton crony Sidney Blumenthal, who President Obama specifically ordered Hillary not to hire for the State Department, received Top Secret intelligence material pertaining to Libya and the business interests he was cultivating there.
No, the mere fact that the server was used at all is a violation of the Freedom of Information Act.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
If you check out Primary Model [primarymodel.com] it gives Trump an 87% chance against Hillary and that >99% chance against Bernie. It used to give Trump and even higher chance against her but revised it down.
The model is based on past presidential elections being an indicator for future presidential elections. With the turmoil going on in the Republican Party, and Donald Trump pissing off every voter bloc he needs to win the election, I very much doubt this model will remain correct for 2016.
Storing classified material on an unsecure server (which, to be clear, her server was the definition of unsecure) is in fact a serious crime.
From the looks of things it takes a lying sociopathic criminal to win an election. Nobody else seems to be able to pull it off.
“He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
If this was anyone except the presumptive Democrat nominee, they'd be in handcuffs already.
Actually, yeah, I have a lot of trust in Director Comey's integrity. He was the guy who threatened to resign rather than renew the warrantless wiretapping program while AG Ashcroft was in the hospital.
Even if it were true that the markings had been removed before emailing, THAT in itself warrants a major investigation. And we know there is at least one email where someone was instructed to do just that.
There seems to be almost zero chance that this information wasn't compromised to foreign governments. As if Russia and China didn't know about this and have it breached...
Not me. I only had a Secret clearance. And that was while I was in the Army. And that was back in the 80's. So we had Soviets and a divided Germany.
And our instructions were to NEVER talk about ANYTHING work related to ANYONE who did not have a need to know AND a clearance.
It might not seem like important information to YOU but that is because YOU do not know what OTHER information the enemy has.
Or, to quote Hillary Clinton:
If we had done things similar, we WOULD be rotting in Leavenworth.
FUCK! We even had to answer the TELEPHONE with the statement "this line is not secure".
Here's a good place for handling of classified information, along with citations to relevant EOs and US Code.
Since when is ignorance of the law an excuse?
The personal server was set up under existing government policy at that time, and wasn't changed until after Hillary left office.
Even I understand that spy satellite photos and the names of operatives within the government intelligence community are probably things I shouldn't share using my personal email account.
Emails got flagged by CIA as being classified. The same information in the emails were also publicly available in the media. Is this classified or non-classified?
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/officials-new-top-secret-clinton-emails-innocuous-n500586
Spot on. Demonstrating that accountability exists when law enforcement agencies and government officials break the law is the only way they can restore public confidence. Right now, their attempts to wrap themselves in the flag while shitting on the Constitution it represents isn't doing them (or us) any good.
Eagles may soar, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.
Even espionage would be a reach without evidence that she divulged it to non-US actors. I could see a bunch of counts of mishandling of classified information but not much more than that.
People on Slashdot are just as stupid as those on DailKOS.
On the DailyKOS, you can actually have an intelligent conversation with other people. Unlike other comment boards where everyone is too busy calling everyone else shills — or worse.
There is no perfect candidate. The other candidates have either done shady/suspicious things themselves, are too extreme to get elected, or have insufficient experience.
I'm not saying being "extreme" is inherently bad, only that it's pointless to back a candidate who's unlikely to get elected.
Plus, I believe one has to have a bit of a dark side to deal with shady world leaders. A lot of the job is out-jerking jerks. It's why Kirk mad a better captain than Spock.
Table-ized A.I.
I do not think you have ever worked with classified GOVERNMENT information before.
One does not simply "remove" classification markings for "non-classified" release. Once it's classified, it can only be unclassified by the appropriate process, which is not through any means she employed and is not easy to do.
if any of us little people were caught doing what she did, we'd be facing years in prison.
The Tea Party was all about putting the future of the country above any party.
Based on emails from my Tea Party relatives in Idaho, the Tea Party was established as a gut reaction to the president being a [church bells] (to paraphrase Mel Brooks in Blazing Saddles).
I agree with another reply -- what a shill you are.
My opinion is opposite to your own. Therefore, I'm a shill. Yadda, yadda, yadda.
IT was not against the law at the time to use a personal email server. She knows the law better than you do.
It was against the law at the time to store classified data in an unsecure manner. The statute in question is written very specifically:
-Whether the document is marked classified is irrelevant. Satellite imagery is automatically classified, regardless of whether it is specifically marked as such.
-Intent is irrelevant. If you allow classified data in an insecure manner, it doesn't matter if you did so intentionally or through negligence, you have still broken the law.
She probably does know the law better the the average /. reader, she just doesn't care.
Redundancy is good And also good.
This guy knew that he was doing something illegal in setting up a personal mail server for Hillary. They should heat up the deep fryer for him. Now as to Hillary, who gave the orders . . . well . .. you can imagine what I think about her.
Yes, it's easy to imagine - if you want them to fry the IT guy so that he won't cooperate in their case against Clinton, then you must be an advocate of hers. Since they obviously gave him immunity in exchange for full cooperation, that apparently is a problem for your preferred outcome.
I'm surprised based on your posting history.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
Which she may very well be. But throwing around the word "traitor" is fucking absurd.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
Either indict her now, or tell the world you don't intend to. Waiting until Sep/Oct to announce an indictment is flat out screwing the dems, leaving them with no viable candidate for the few weeks leading up to the election.
How many months did she stall before turning over the server, and the USB drive backup she had given to her lawyer? (Who isn't cleared to possess classified data, BTW.) If the timing is "flat out screwing the dems," that's on Hillary, (and on Dem primary voters - it's not like nobody knew this was building while she was stalling the investigation.)
Redundancy is good And also good.
I didn't say she was guilty by marriage. I said she tried to deflect a scandal from her husband by saying it was just politics when it was in fact not a fabrication. She is now doing the same thing again with her own scandal. In no way did I say she is guilty because she was married to anyone who had his own scandals.
I'm just saying it's the same game and they weren't wrong then and they aren't wrong now. She did commit a crime and anyone with any training of clearance knows it.
I'm fully bipartisan on this. Lets bring 'em in and start with thumbscrews and work from there. I generally hate ALL politicians as they are almost all corrupt. I think it's almost time for the guillotine.
As opposed to the people who will vote for the other guy simply because he has an (R) after his name (or a P between his legs)?
And all this is likely moot anyway because she's probably not going to be charged with anything.
look, you can go after Clinton and burn her at the stake but that doesn't change the fact that top secret and above top secret documents are being sent via an insecure email system! i think they need to change their focus from "you broke our security" to "our security is inadequate!" if you are even capable of sending the information somewhere else without having to retype everything on another computer, then you have flawed security.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Here you go. Pretty cut-and-dried illegal action there, requesting that the classified mark be removed and send it non-securely. For anyone else, that's not just a firing offense, but one that will get you prosecuted and probably spending time in prison.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Well, maybe they weren't marked classified because she directed people to remove the markings and send them on a non-secure e-mail server.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
(in the foot, of course)
If the GOP were to manage to somehow knock Hillary out of the race for president, things actually get much worse - not better - for their cause. As much as they hate Hillary, they are overlooking the fact that Sanders beats every GOP candidate in national polling by even larger margins than does Hillary. Knocking her out would only guarantee their defeat.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
And that has what to do with Hillary breaking the law with her e-mail server?
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
As Secretary of State she had the authority to declare when something is classified or not.
Only regarding classified information that originated from the state department.
The laws forbidding placing classified materials on unsecured servers connected to the public internet were in place BEFORE Hilary's email server was created.
Stop confusing FOIA and recordkeeping compliance with classification and information security. They're different issues.
I think this is an excellent view. We should collectively try to rise above petty politics and have an objective look at what she did. She needs to go through the due process just like everyone else, no exceptions.
One could of course argue that there are other immoral or illegal actions closely tied to certain politicians (torture to death for example), but the glass shield needs to be broken somewhere. Once you punch through, the whole illusion of privilege tied to high positions in the political system will come down.
-SR
If the indictment comes out before the Democratic convention then it would be very bad for Trump. It is only good for Trump if it comes out after the convention and if Clinton is the Democratic nominee.
We don't see the world as it is, we see it as we are.
-- Anais Nin
I'm not a Trump fan but a civil vs criminal matter wouldn't really be considered comparable. Besides, based on what I've seen so far he'd probably find a way to turn it into a positive -more free publicity.
According to Hillary's own emails, she was having classified information sent to her, stripped of any markings and then sent over a nonsecure channel. That's what happened per the records released from the State Department. Unless you contend that Hillary just put that in there as a troll for the future?
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Not true. Her server was allowed, as it was grandfathered in under the new regulation. What was not allowed, and the center of the discussion, is if classified emails were sent to and from this server. Which was never allowed. It's right to exist was found legal.
The real problem here is the investigative team which is mostly Republicans have been found to have their own email servers, and, surprise, may have also sent classified emails. It's kind of like the prosecutor going after a murderer and being found to have also murdered someone. This case will not make it far at all.
Last I heard, there was various HUMINT (some HCS-O) on the server, which is classified from the moment it starts existing, without any classification authority needing to be involved. But, hey, maybe someone else improperly declassified it before putting it on Hillary's server, so there's still a chance that she isn't the one to blame, right?
This is a fucking embarassment to anyone that holds a security clearance.
Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
Slightly off-topic, but who says Trump will win the nomination? Cruz and Rubio could just as easily get together, pool their delegates, and become a Pres-VP combo, with whichever one having the biggest # of delegates coming out at the top of the billing. Top guy does 4-8 years, VP then does 4-8 years more as President.
Sounds sleazy at first blush, but compared to "Superdelegates"? It's doable and it actually makes sense.
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Why would you say that? Hillary is far and wide the closest Republican the party has had running in the past 20 years.
Let's look at this judgement thing in more detail. Email is relatively new to many gov't agencies. The laws and practices regarding it were still being worked out and evaluated. The "paper-era" laws didn't directly apply.
The "regular" office server was not intended for classified info either. The home/office thing is Chevy-vs-Chevy, NOT Chevy-vs-Lexus. Thus, the home server is NOT clearly a more risky choice. Arguments about which is technically less risky will be full of technical and operational nuances beyond H's background, and probably still subject to diff professional opinions. (Gov't infrastructure support is often shoddy, I would note, in part due to lowest bidding and lack of monitoring by gov't staff.)
And, there was no (clear) law against home servers at the time.
And, she's not an IT expert nor expected to be.
Jeb and C. Powell also used an outside server/service for gov't work emails such that it's clear "best practices" had not been established. "Do what every one else is doing" does not give the answer.
Thus, saying it's an "obviously" bad decision doesn't fly.
What mental computation steps do you imagine she should have taken in her position at that time that would clearly lead to a "no" answer?
I agree it's a poor choice, but not "obviously poor", especially to a non-IT person. It's a nuanced "poor".
Table-ized A.I.
Didn't she brag that we should elect her so she could be the First Felon President? A new first in politics at that level.
Trump only makes sense when he's not talking. When he is talking he's just whipping up the crowd into a frenzy without actually saying anything substantive.
If a venture succeeds then Trump takes full credit and will loudly point to it. If the venture fails, Trump will say he only gave his name to the project but was not personally involved. And his followers think he's a great at running businesses despite all his failures. Sure he's rich but he didn't start at $0. If you start with $200 million you should be at a billion in a few decades but it's unclear that he has that much as he's not releasing his financial details.
I guess his pissing off every voter bloc is the reason he's behind in the delegate count and number of votes cast. I guess he really didn't win in the most Hispanic city in the nation...
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Let me know where in the Constitution, it states that there has to be parties at all?
My supposition is that ALL primaries need to be open, and no parties are allowed. Why should tax payers support parties that we don't agree with? My party doesn't require taxpayer "Primary" elections ;-)
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
If anyone has a majority of delegates at the convention, he wins, no pooling allowed. Only of that doesn't happen do we get a "brokered convention" with all the backroom dealing and shenanigans. I can totally believe Cruz/Rubio coming out of a brokered convention, given the way the wind is blowing.
(Rubio is done as a presidential candidate after last Tuesday, BTW, as the establishment is holding their noses and getting behind Cruz to try to stop Trump, but Rubio likely won't actually drop out, so he'll keep getting delegates).
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Even if she could pardon herself (the prez can't pardon his/herself), it's curious that she would she have to. Barack Obama could pardon her today for any foul deeds of the past, the way Ford pardoned Nixon, and *poof* this mess goes away overnight. The fact that he's not doing that must mean he's not willing to take the political hit like Ford did, or he just doesn't like her much.
Wrong on both counts. First of all, you can go to jail for a misdemeanor. A parking ticket is an "infraction".
But more importantly, what's happening here is multiple felonies. That's something you'd have to take seriously if you were Clinton.
Hillary is in a tough spot.
Her only escape is a No Bill.
Shit, and Bill is one of the best things she has going for her. I'm not sure how she'll get out of this one.
"Our two-party system is like a bowl of shit looking at itself in a mirror." - Lewis Black
I'm not sure if you noticed, but Obama is the President and the FBI is running the investigation.
If her email server was never compromised then she never committed a single crime.
Using the same logic, driving under the influence isn't a crime if you haven't run anyone over. Right?
If you read to the bottom, they do clarify that there are two pretty major unknowns in this argument:
1. Was the contents of the talking points that they were (unsuccessfully) trying to send through the secure fax machine actually secret (at the time), or were they just trying to use it as a convenience?
2. Did the talking points in question ever get sent over insecure email?
Both of these have to be "yes" in order for something illegal to have happened. And, as usual in this debate: we have answers to neither question. You can argue that if #1 is true then there was definitely some inappropriate instructions, but #2 has to also be true for actual transgression to have happened.
I work in aerospace. EVERY email we send has to be marked as Classified, Company Secret, or Unclassified. Even if you are asking your spouse to pick up some milk on the way home.
Classified emails and secret emails are oxymorons.
If the FBI charges Clinton with any sort of crime, it will just serve to further undermine the legitimacy of all law enforcement agencies in the US.
You have that exactly backwards. Letting her walk when it's so obvious that she's committed many more counts of the same crime that Patreus was convicted for would demonstrate that some people can avoid consequences for blatant felonies.
-jcr
If her email server was never compromised then she never committed a single crime.
You clearly have no clue regarding what is and isn't criminal in regard to handling classified material. Please stop talking. Just do it, because you're a fucking idiot.
Just another day in Paradise
Slightly off-topic, but who says Trump will win the nomination?
You're right. I should not ASSume. OTOH I was responding to a post that had already made that assumption and also assumed Clinton would be the Democratic nominee. Perhaps I should not have corrected one assumption without correcting the other one.
Cruz and Rubio could just as easily get together, pool their delegates, and become a Pres-VP combo, with whichever one having the biggest # of delegates coming out at the top of the billing. Top guy does 4-8 years, VP then does 4-8 years more as President.
This seems extremely far-fetched to me. It seems extremely unlikely there would be so much cooperation and even if there were, such a move would tear apart the Republican party (cue a quote from the Lord of the Rings movies about sharing power). The Democrats would have a similar problem if Sanders has the majority of pledged delegates but the superdelegates give the nod to Clinton.
Perhaps one of the reasons I ASSumed Trump would win the Republican nomination was that I had recently read: The rise of American authoritarianism. If they are correct then Trump should easily win the nomination barring unforeseen disasters (although I'm in the camp that sees a Trump presidency as a disaster). This article is the only thing I've read about Trump that makes sense to me. I think most commentators don't understand the situation. TL;DR: Trump appeals to the burgeoning authoritarian wing of the Republican party; fear is the mind-killer.
That article gave me hope that a Trump victory in the general election is not a given, even if he runs against an establishment candidate like Clinton.
We don't see the world as it is, we see it as we are.
-- Anais Nin
You're forgetting the court of public opinion - if she's charged she becomes highly radioactive.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Your world doesn't exist in politics. Serious charges have serious impacts.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
tracking device the SS will say no to that or cut it off and keep the local Barney Fife at bay.
She is not elected, so while the secret service can protect her, they can't remove a court-ordered tracking device.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
FWIW, with Trump as the likely RNC candidate, I initially considered the same. However, in my opinion, the overriding issue is that whoever ends up in the Oval Office will be replacing Scalia, and likely on or two more justices over the next 4-8 yrs. For that reason, and that reason only, I may hold my nose, and vote Rep.
Other than that, I see HRC as the lesser of two evils, in spite of her criminal behavior in handling classified information.
Just another day in Paradise
Clinton is not a technical person and probably didn't have any idea that this setup was not secure.
Try again.
She's a lawyer, and she knew full well that she was breaking the law.
-jcr
IT was not against the law at the time to use a personal email server. She knows the law better than you do.
Liar.
And posting this is pure chicken shit. Grow a pair.
Just another day in Paradise
It WAS against the law to use a personal email server for government business because it thwarts the Freedom of Information Act.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Considering that Hillary was the victim of Bill's philandering, it's unlikely she had any interest at all in covering that up.
Her only interest in being with him for the last 30+ years was to get herself into that office. Do you really believe she wouldn't have left him otherwise? He's been screwing around for ages, and she's sucked it up, and looked the other way.
Just another day in Paradise
1. It only works if you have the proof they need in their case against a "bigger fish"
2. It only works if the political class chooses to not use YOU as a scapegoat (i.e. blame it all on you, jail you, and tell the public that the case is over)
3. It only works if the prosecutors have a good case against their "bigger fish"... if not and if YOU have broken the law then you may be the only one going down.
4. None of this "works" in four favor, if you are the little guy without a good lawyer and the prosecutor is taking an approach to his or her case that does not require your evidence. If you and your evidence are not very helpful to the prosecution, then you are a co-conspirator and may be doing time at the same time as the "big fish" but in worse facilities and with nobody posting bail and no legal team working on your appeals.
The moral of this story, boys and girls, is that you are always better off doing the right thing and no matter how expedient it may seem to do somebody else's dirty work. You just never know when some cops and lawyers may show up and tell you they are prosecuting somebody for something that happened several years ago and which you might have participated in. Clean hands and a clean conscience are always best.
"According to Hillary's own emails ..."
More like "according to Hotair.com's dodgy interpretation of Hilary's emails." CBS News had a different take:
You accuse me of misogyny?
You are indeed an arrogant bigot. Go away and don't pollute my life further.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
Same here...the thing I'm most concerned about right now, is getting a new justice replacement, that is someone who is a strict constitutionalist, and will look to interpret the Constitution as our forefathers wrote it and meant for it to apply.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
You are a shill, a liar, and you've been called out by numerous people for lying.
I'm being called a shill because my opinion is opposite to what some people want to believe. Insulting me does not change my opinion — or shut me down.
Tea party started by Rick Santelli on CNBC, period (by accident).
I've seen that video. I've seen the Republican Establishment cynically co-opted the Tea Party to rally the base. I've seen Donald Trump run off the cliff with the Tea Party crowd following him like lemmings.
You obviously have lost countless debates on politics with tea party people because you resort to calling them racists when they clearly are not.
I'm not running a tally of whether or not I "won" or "lost" debates. I'm just expressing opinion. If you don't reply back to this comment, I'll forget all about you and move on. As for the racism, Donald Trump traded in those dog whistles for a megaphone to tell the whole world what the Republican Party tells people in private. You got a problem with that, take it up with him.
Except neither Cruz nor Trump are GOPe. So they have exactly ZERO reason not to savage Hillary over this. Why, it's almost as if there's several internal movements within the GOP that virulently disagree with the way the leadership is acting.
Classified information that is made public (for example, by publication in a newspaper or other medium) is still classified.
If you read the article I linked to in my comment, the CIA marked emails as classified because the Afghanistan drone program were mentioned in passing by various State Department officials. None of the emails had classified information. If the CIA classified my grocery list, that doesn't mean that my grocery list contains classified information. If the CIA has its way, ALL INFORMATION would be classified.
I guess his pissing off every voter bloc is the reason he's behind in the delegate count and number of votes cast.
He's winning 35% to 45% of the votes for each election. If he continues to win by that margin, will the other 55% to 65% of Republican voters vote for him or stay home in the general election? I'm curious to see what will happen. But I suspect many Republicans will stay and Hillary will win by a landslide.
I guess he really didn't win in the most Hispanic city in the nation.
Trump has to do better than Mitt Romney in 2012 with black and Hispanic voters. Otherwise, he won't win. The numbers so far don't look good for him.
I'm the voter who's going to decide who becomes the next POTOUS.
Looks like someone has tickets on themselves here...
Yep. Taking any headings off of something that is supposed to be sent via secured channels, and transmitting it via non-secure methods is totally legit!
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
Hillary is far and wide the closest Republican the party has had running in the past 20 years.
I think that honor should go to Obama. He got most of the Bush tax cuts made permanent, approved the operation that got Osama bin Laden killed, enacted the conservative health plan based on an American Heritage Foundation proposal and Romneycare in Massachusetts, and extend many aspects of the Bush foreign policies. He took a page of the Bill Clinton playback by co-opting the Republican agenda as his own.
[...] a strict constitutionalist, and will look to interpret the Constitution as our forefathers wrote it and meant for it to apply.
The Constitution isn't the Bible. One of the reasons why there are so many Christian churches in the world today is that no one knows how to set up 1st century church in a 21st century world where the Romans are long gone. A literal reading and applying of the Bible won't work today's world. Too many things have changed. The Constitution is not a static document and the Founding Fathers are long gone..
Likely it will all be over by then. I smell the stink of deleted 'personal' emails. So is it a personal email or a public email when you start negotiating kick backs, it is a personal email or a public email when you start appointing cronies, is it a personal email or a public email when you use the office of the state department to gain political advantage in your egoistic run for 'Total Power'. So who did most the the deleting and did they keep copies just in case, as life insurance and how many more emails are going to be released from the, 'purposefully secret from the rest of government and investigatory agencies', email servers. It could be far bigger than just naughty email servers.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
And items that were classified had their classification removed before being emailed per Hillary's instruction. She had her staff / interns scan/fax shit, remove the designation, and then email it. When it hit her email it wasn't marked classified. It's the equivalent of painting over a handicapped parking spot then parking on it.
You have evidence for this claim? Perhaps a link?
An image of the email in question, from Hillary. The text says: "If they can't, turn into non paper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure." Technically, that's a federal crime punished by 10 years in prison.
Q: What does the "B." in Benoit B. Mandelbrot stand for? A: Benoit B. Mandelbrot
She was the Secretary to State and I'm pretty sure had the right to change the classification status of something generated to the department of state. So, yes, she can give those instructions.
You are incorrect. Neither indictment nor conviction are impediments to the presidency. In a legal sense they do not matter.
If you would ever vote for Nader you were never a republican in the first place.
insufficiently protecting information that appears not to have even been explicitly classified at the time
Long ago proven false. Some of the information was of the highest possible level of classification, "born classified" and not anything that could be mistaken for unclassified material. Things like source names and satellite photos.
Q: What does the "B." in Benoit B. Mandelbrot stand for? A: Benoit B. Mandelbrot
Funny how it was proudly called Obamacare, by the DNC, and passed with out a SINGLE GOP vote for it.
You're overlooking to 200+ amendments that the Republicans sponsored or cosponsored. In fact, they wrote one-third of the bill. The only reason they didn't vote for the final bill was that the Democrats had enough votes. In short, they had their cake and ate it too. Now that's what I call crony capitalism.
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2013/11/10/obamacare-study-republican-contribution/
But now that it is the absolute failure and killer of the middle class and that has become obvious you claim the GOP wrote and passed it.
Before ObamaCare passed, my health insurance was was $500 per month. The exchange had it slightly cheaper for $350 per month. My employer just switched to a new HR provider and my healthcare plan is now $150. Woo-hoo! Thanks, Obama!
Do you realize everyone here is laughing at you?
Do I care? Nope.
[...] you probably lose every political debate you ever have and have to resort to name calling so you can feel better about yourself after you are ridiculed by everyone else.
You mean like Donald Trump? Sorry, I don't stoop that low.
Correct, the Constitution is not a static document. That is why there is, within the document itself, a process to change said document. It's almost like he founders knew that times change and that when truly necessary, the Constitution should have a way to change as well.
Maybe. But was she with Obama or Biden at the time?
I also wouldn't be surprised if the SoS has special dispensation around that. If there was one person other than the POTUS or VPOTUS who would have such dispensation, it would be the SoS.
But if not, then, yeah, throw the book at her.
No, the mere fact that the server was used at all is a violation of the Freedom of Information Act.
Plus, erasing all those emails counts as destruction of public records. Unless anyone thinks she had thousands of emails about yoga appointments.
Q: What does the "B." in Benoit B. Mandelbrot stand for? A: Benoit B. Mandelbrot
If Hillary gets elected, everything will be a "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy" or "Sexism" !
If Hillary wins, she will have defeated both. That will be a bitter pill for many who made a career out of both.
His immunity means one of two possible things.
Either he's going to take the fall hard ("it was totally my fault, she had no idea, etc.") or he's dragging her down hard.
Either way, there's going to be some resolution soon.
This signature is false.
The thing I love about leftists is the more certain they are the more you can be sure they're wrong. Oliver North wasn't granted immunity by the courts, he was granted immunity by Congress. And they granted him immunity for exactly the same reason the FBI worked out an immunity deal for Hillary's sysadmin - they wanted to put his boss in jail.
Rush Limbaugh was never granted immunity for anything. Do you just make this shit up as you go along?
OK...Girlfriend is Company Secret since she works downstairs.
Mistress is classified.
Fuck buddy, is unclassified since she joins in with the Mrs. ...and then I work up.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
If you would ever vote for Nader you were never a republican in the first place.
You have no sense of humor. No one in his right mind would vote for Nader.
According to another comment that linked to a different article, the email was about talking points. If the talking points contain no classified information, they email wasn't classified and it was safe to transmit over a non-classified network.
And IF you are and you will vote for Hillary, then you are a fucking asshole.
Of course, I'm an asshole. Most voters are!
Because she stands against everything Republicans theoretically believe in.
I used to be a Republican. Since moderate conservatism isn't popular with the right-wing extremism of today's Republican Party, I saw the writing on the wall and I shifted my allegiance.
I could never vote for Hillary because by setting up a private server, she was knowingly trying to skirt around FOIA. This plus all the other backroom DNC deals to ensure her nomination leads me to believe her presidency will just be more backroom deals we'll never know about. I just can't do it. I'll vote 3rd party before I vote Clinton.
That's because it's a monoculture there. It's like talking to yourself.
As opposed to a cesspool where everyone is spewing out at everyone else?
You called tea party people racists.
You have never heard of the Southern Strategy?
In American politics, the Southern strategy refers to a strategy by Republican Party candidates of gaining political support in the Southern United States by appealing to racism against African Americans.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy
When you get called out for lying, you don't just repeat the lie and hope no one noticed.
I responded to over 40 comments. I think everyone noticed. If calling me a liar makes you feel better, I'm not going to stop you.
It makes you lose all credibility.
I have credibility with the people who know the facts. You're not one of them.
And yes, we had email back then - and so did the academic world. If I had so much as thought of doing what she did, *even if I generated/controlled the data in question*, I'd still be sitting in Fort Leavenworth, a quarter-century-plus later
At that point you would be disseminating information, not just receiving it. Do you have any proof that she was sending out classified information through her private email server? It was less-than-brilliant of her to set up an email server where she could receive work email that could potentially be classified, but if she actually sent out classified material through it that is another problem.
As the saying goes, don't assume malice when stupidity can explain it.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
If she wins the primary and this blows open then Trump's gonna be president.
About 90% of your statements are outright factually incorrect. Yes, I've worked for the government before, and different programs have different rules, depending on exactly what information is protected and the operational requirements of the program. The most glaring omission from your rant is the existence of composite information, where multiple pieces of information are unclassified individually, but when present in the same container (like a document or a server's hard disk) become classified. Two separate emails could have been unclassified when sent, but their presence on the same system makes them classified upon receipt.
It's not possible to twist the situation in anyway that makes what she did with her server legal.
I've never suggested that what she did was legal or not. I'm suggesting the apparently-preposterous idea that the FBI's investigation is actually following procedures established by the Constitution and legal precedent. This grant of immunity doesn't actually mean anything at all as far as Clinton's guilt or innocence is concerned. It just means the government isn't going to use Pagliano's testimony against him.
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
They were labeled classified. The SOS cannot unilaterally decide to remove the classified label on information. Sorry, she asked for something to happen that was clearly illegal.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
That would be a different crime. The FBI's investigation is still just an investigation. They've removed the option of using Pagliano's testimony against him, but they haven't formally charged Clinton with anything yet. I'd be surprised if they didn't ultimately find something worth prosecuting, but at this point, she's still innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
You fucking moron. I don't have to claim it because they don't even bother to hide it. If you think Goldman Sachs is showering the bitch with money because they care about the poor you're the biggest fucking idiot on the internet. Unlike you idiots that slavishly eat the shit of your particular brand of political hacks I have no problem sloughing off on the shit stains that pollute my side.
...the ONLY reason he could need the immunity is because he was asked to set up a private e-mail sever that he KNEW Hillary would be using for 'government business' and at THAT point Pagliano should have declined or otherwise sought approval from his boss because it is no longer 'a friend doing a friend a solid' but an 'underlying doing government work'.
That's precisely why the immunity is granted. In the situation you describe, any testimony from Pagliano would be self-incriminating, and Pagliano could simply enact his Fifth Amendment rights and refuse to testify. Now that his testimony cannot be used against him, he can be compelled to testify if needed.
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
The thing I love about leftists is the more certain they are the more you can be sure they're wrong.
This is totally off topic but I read that and can't resist asking: what is your opinion on climate change?
You have to actually intend to damage the United States.
Nope. You can be charged with espionage even if your actions were merely negligent.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
crackpots like you
Fuck you, snowflake. You're the one who's trying to argue away thousands of felonies with nothing more than an emphatic "nu-uh!"
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
It would be an incredible opportunity for third parties if BOTH of the Ruling Party candidates were on trial during the election.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Classified is both a designation for identifying classified materials and a classification of the materials itself. Classified is one of the lower ranked classifications where there are classifications levels beyond that which require special handling and limits who can see or use and for what reason.
Therein lies my point - if it would land us peons in prison, then why should the law exempt her for doing the same thing?
So, you're saying that it isn't because she is from the Democratic Party or her name is Clinton that you are up in arms, but because the law should apply equally to all? It is a noble sentiment with which I agree; but do you feel it applies to also to those who are on the same side as you, politically? How about if the perpetrator was somebody really close to you, somebody you have always looked up to? Would there be any leniency in you world view - any room for humanity, with it's inevitable frailties? In my view, priciples are good and right, but people often matter more; things are never black and white.
This is the justice department doing this. It's head is appointed by Obama who is a democrat. Ideally the justice department is not political in operation but you cannot claim republican conspiracy on this. Any attempt to do so would be little more than a distraction from the truth.
Trump makes sense to everyone who thinks the government is out for themselves at the expense of the people. He makes sense to people who do not like jobs going over seas- even when they remain in America (did you train your H1B replacement yet? ). He makes sense to a lot of people who seem to have been burned by the "establishment" who do whatever they want and to hell with what the people want.
That might very well be a third of the population. I think it is more considering Bernie's success. You call it retarded bigots, I call it a big problem. I'm also betting that you are part of what they see as the problem.
Knowing the Clinton protocol for handling individuals such as him, he might want to consider having protection from her as well.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Let's give Mrs. Clinton the benefit of the doubt and assume she didn't send anything out. She still has a responsibility to report any compromise of classified material (known as "spillage"), to include classified information showing up on her private email server, to the security office of the Department of State. The DoS would have opened an investigation to trace the source and wiped all the computers involved with the spillage to ensure there was no information left on it. Mrs. Clinton knew she had a duty to report. She failed that duty. End of story.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
Wrong again. 18 U.S. Code 798 - Disclosure of classified information. She can go to jail for ten years on each count.
people who cross the Clintons have a tendency to wind up dead
Donald 'Duck' Dunn: We had a band powerful enough to turn goat piss into gasoline.
> And our instructions were to NEVER talk about ANYTHING work related to ANYONE who did not have a need to know AND a clearance.
If you're the Secretary of State, choosing what secret information to reveal, and when, is part of the job.
> Ideally the justice department is not political in operation
Law enforcement is by its very nature political. It's enforcing the will of those who make the laws on the population. The ideas that it law enforcement is supposed to be dispassionate, or even-handed, or to ignore the wealth and political status of the accused are themselves political in nature.
The problem you still have with that though is you are assuming she knows the status of everything sent to her, and more importantly knows that there is something of classified status being sent to her there. At that point you are entering a meta zone where you are making assumptions about what a person knows, when you cannot prove it one way or the other.
I'm honestly not a big fan of hers. I'm just saying that she is being exposed to far more scrutiny than previous secretaries of state, even though we've seen that at least one previous secretary of state did the exact same thing with email while he was there and received no such retaliation for it. To really convince me that something terrible happened here, I need to see that she actually set out to do something nefarious or at the very least was aware that what she was doing was illegal. I have not seen anyone meet that yet.
In other words, this still ain't Watergate.
Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
Going by what her husband did if she wins, and he's rich enough, he'll get a pardon right before she leaves office.
So she didn't set up a private server until she was already running the State Department? And here I thought maybe it was something she just kept using. Looks even worse now.
> But, if indicted and even convicted, could they be elected anyways? This is an interesting potential constitutional issue.
Of course she could. Look into the political career of many politicians who have been convicted, such as Marion Barry.
Oh I have a pretty good idea.
It's shown by all the armchair "experts", including you, posting on this thread, and modding up each other's increasingly ignorant statements of "fact".
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
This is the big difference between the worker bees and the higher ups. The worker bees get an example made of them, just like Manning and Snowden. The higher ups get a wrist slap, at most a demotion and coerced retirement, like Patraeus when he gave his mistress classified info. Consider that Colin Powell and Condeleeza Rice both got classified emails on personal accounts and we don't see them rotting in a cell.
It's a total double standard and Hillary will never set foot in a prison. With the publicity she may even be rewarded for it (book deals, higher fees for public speeches, interviews, etc...). Call it within borders diplomatic immunity.
The SOS cannot unilaterally decide to remove the classified label on information.
The talking points were derived from classified information on a classified network for release to the public at large. If she's not able to turn classified information into non-classified information, she would never be allowed to speak in public. Her job is to communicate to the American public as to what is going on in the world at large.
It would be an incredible opportunity for third parties if BOTH of the Ruling Party candidates were on trial during the election.
-jcr
Well, since both parties are in a battle against non-party members who have only joined their respective races due to our de facto two party system, it could be said that it has already been an incredible opportunity for third parties.
Reports are that the FBI people objecting to the cover-up are career civil service agents and investigators, not appointees. Same in the intelligence and diplomatic communities.
Obama most likely fears retribution from the Clintons.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
Political in a general sense maybe but it transcends or it is supposed to transcend party politics on the national level.
So now they are down to 'Nixon's defense'.
No, everything she does in not legal because of who she is.
Next defense. This is starting to get funny.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
There are now two nearly identical assertions of 'Nixon's defense' on this forum?
Does anybody get the DNC talking points email list that is willing to share?
When did this start getting pushed?
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Three repetitions of 'Nixon's defense'...
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Four times. This must be a DNC talking point. Idiots likely don't remember the last time 'it's legal because of who I am' was asserted.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
No, the Dems would pull out that old, reliable, 'hold elected officials to a higher-standard' argument and claim that the mere accusation alone should invalidate a Republican candidate's campaign - when Democrats are caught in these situations they argue 'innocent until proven guilty'... The most recent examples of this was Rep. Tom Delay (R) and Rep. Charlie Rangel (D). Tom Delay was accused of violating election laws BEFORE they were signed into law and was run out of the House Leadership - he was ultimately found innocent of all charges. Rep. Rangel solicited funds on official stationary, keeping multiple rent-controlled apartments in Harlem (3) including using one for his office, all in violation of rent laws in NYC, and failed to properly file his personal income taxes, including failure to report income from a vacation rental property in the Virgin Islands... He kept his job, and was guilty of all charges.
No he's not. There are no Keynesian. Keynesians save money in good times. There are only 'print and spenders' with a cover story.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
The reality is it is impossible to send information from a secure server to an insecure email server - you can copy & paste info from the secure system to an insecure system but in doing so you have to be aware you are doing so to circumvent security.
She becomes un-electable.
The level of cognitive dissonance required to support her make 'her people' rocks in this regard. They will stick with her to the end, claiming she was railroaded.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
So you believe any post that gives you a way to mentally wiggle out of being wrong?
Your whole thought process is about protecting your ego.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Mentally replace dailyKOS with freerepublic and see exactly who you are.
Don't like it? I'm sure you will respond like a freeper.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
She has girlfriends on the side too, perhaps they shared.
Mutual dirt keeps those two together. Bill can't have liked raising Web's daughter.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
now he won't get diseases.
Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
The Clinton have far too many suicides of partners in their history. If the FBI doesn't protect the witness, that one will surely die as well.
They had the ghost of Vince Foster kill Scalia.
Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
"beyond classified"? Pray tell, what's that?
double secret probation
Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
Of course, if you're a DNC shill, you think she has done nothing wrong, in spite of the ongoing revelations of secret, classified, and beyond classified documents found on an unsecured server. I am sure that if this were an (R) running for President, you'd be calling for his hanging, and not saying "nothing to see here, move along"
Which is why I hate party politics, because people like you only see the Party, and not the crimes.
a lot of people don't see the crimes because there has to be, you know, crimes.
classifying emails as classified, after the fact? not as convincing as if the emails were classified BEFORE they were sent to the server.
in any event, given the evidence of hackers hitting the state department server, not to mention the FBI server and the office of personnel management server, and god knows what else; and the evidence of no hacking from Clinton's server, you'd think pure embarrassment would lead to the end of the witch hunt.
ironically, the people most interested in hillary's theoretical crime involving email servers are the same people who would dismiss a theoretical crime involving a firearm, and vice versa. "OK, so there was no ill effect of your use of a private server/unregistered gun, and granted that some folks who did not do so have been victimized, nevertheless theoretically use of a private server/unregistered gun could lead to a problem and therefore you must be punished."
except for the part where her server was not in fact illegal when set up.
in conclusion, BENGAZARAH!
Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
My supposition is that ALL primaries need to be open, and no parties are allowed. Why should tax payers support parties that we don't agree with? My party doesn't require taxpayer "Primary" elections ;-)
As someone already mentioned, the problem is that the "winner take all" electorial system that is baked into the US Constitution automatically creates a two-party system whether you want one or not. Trying to outlawing politics parties will not solve the problem. You need to change the Constitution to make the electorial system more fair than "winner take all".
A simple introduction to these ideas is available in a few short videos at Politics in the Animal Kingdom. We know what the problem is. We know what the solution is. The difficulty is that whoever is in power has little motivation to drastically change the system that put them in power.
The US Constitution was the prototype. Many of the Countries that followed us learned from our mistakes.
We don't see the world as it is, we see it as we are.
-- Anais Nin
And items that were classified had their classification removed before being emailed per Hillary's instruction. She had her staff / interns scan/fax shit, remove the designation, and then email it. When it hit her email it wasn't marked classified. It's the equivalent of painting over a handicapped parking spot then parking on it.
FACT: None Of The Emails Sent To Clinton Were Labeled As "Classified" Or "Top Secret" FACT: Emails Originated In State Dept. System, And Questions About Retroactive Classification Would Have Occurred Regardless Of Clinton's Server Use FACT: Experts Have Debunked Any Comparison Between Clinton's Email Use And David Petraeus' Crimes FACT: IG Referral To Justice Department Was Not Criminal, And FBI Isn't Targeting Clinton Herself
Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
Even if it were true that the markings had been removed before emailing, THAT in itself warrants a major investigation. And we know there is at least one email where someone was instructed to do just that.
There seems to be almost zero chance that this information wasn't compromised to foreign governments. As if Russia and China didn't know about this and have it breached...
Yes, as proved by today's news that the server logs show no evidence of any hacking.
" Security logs keep track of, among other things, who accessed the network and when. They are not definitive, and forensic experts can sometimes spot sophisticated hacking that is not apparent in the logs, but computer security experts view logs as key documents when detecting hackers."
but you think "almost zero chance", so who needs evidence? that only applies to things like the documented hacking of the official state dept email server by russians.
Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
I think this is an excellent view. We should collectively try to rise above petty politics and have an objective look at what she did. She needs to go through the due process just like everyone else, no exceptions.
One could of course argue that there are other immoral or illegal actions closely tied to certain politicians (torture to death for example), but the glass shield needs to be broken somewhere. Once you punch through, the whole illusion of privilege tied to high positions in the political system will come down.
you realize that there is an investigation ongoing, right?
like the neverending benghazi investigation?
or mr. trump's top operatives' discovery of "unbelievable evidence" that Obama wasn't born in Hawaii?
perhaps well discover that Monica Lewinsky gave Hillary oral sex, and thereby save the Republic from destruction.
Star Trek transporters are just 3d printers.
You have sensitive, then secret, then Top Secret, the code word compartmentalized TS. This way group A with TS does not need nor have access to group B-Z's TS files.
Anything at the TS or higher level is automatically considered TS and can only later have its classification lowered. She knew this and did it anyways. Hell she had to manually copy or photograph files on a air gapped system to email them via her server! This is not an 'oops' issue but a concerted effort to access and share national secrets over an unsecured network.
It looks like a violation of 18 USC Sec. 793 to me.
Q: What does the "B." in Benoit B. Mandelbrot stand for? A: Benoit B. Mandelbrot
Does he have a server backup that he has setup to be delivered to the FBI on his death.
If he doesn't, he's a dead man.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
She absolutely disclosed to her lawyer. She is done unless elected or pardoned. At her age, it's a life sentence.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
There are laws about how to declassify information and it's not just "because the SOS said so"...
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
I completely fail to see any point in what you just wrote. Maybe you failed to see the point in what I wrote as well.
-SR
Your whole thought process is about protecting your ego.
Sorry, I'm not Donald Trump. I was pointing to a fact that I learned elsewhere in this mind-blowing discussion on Slashdot. Take it with a grain of salt.
Someone pointed out to me recently that DoD and State have very different sets of rules regarding classified information.
No. Class information should never be transmitted on an unsecured medium of any kind. Big difference.
There are laws about how to declassify information and it's not just "because the SOS said so".
You did read that link first before posting?
The Chairman, Vice Chairman, and Executive Director exercise downgrading and declassification authority in the FERC.
I was not aware that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission set the classification standards for the State Department.
http://www.ferc.gov/
Maybe this link will provide some insights. Although it doesn't mention who declassifies information, it's reasonable to assume that the person who has the authority to classify information can also declassify information.
In the State Department, original classification authority for top secret info goes to the secretary of state or anyone the secretary has said -- in writing -- can do the job. Past examples include: "Deputy Secretaries, the Under Secretaries, the Counselor, Assistant Secretaries and equivalents; Chiefs of Mission and U.S. representatives to international organizations."
Secret or classified information is decided on by the secretary and/or a senior agency official, who can give classification power to others in writing as well.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/21/everything-you-need-to-know-about-how-the-state-department-classifies-information/
Having the authority for formally start a process to declassify something is not the same thing as having the authority to ignore classification at her whim.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
If the Rs got all 3 it would be just like Obama's first 2 years.
They would go nuts and lose control of a branch at the next election.
So the choice is lose precious gridlock for 2 years or let Hillary get away with it. Very tough choice.
I'm in CA so my vote doesn't matter, Vermin Supreme it is.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
It's funny that Bernie manages to fund his campaign without the oil companies and banks pouring millions into his coffers. Likewise Ron Paul ran with funds raised from mostly individuals. I know you think that Goldman Sachs and Exxon are really just nice guys that like giving millions of dollars to politicians just to help out but the rest of us aren't that simple. Tell me, do you really believe they shower her with all that money and expect nothing in return?
Your comment If the CIA classified my grocery list shows you have never worked in this environment.
I should have contacted the Information Security Officer on duty to request that the CIA declassify my grocery list because it was based on publicly available information (i.e., Food King weekly flyer). No reason for me to starve to death because the CIA has nothing better.
The public information available supports conviction under ;
18 U.S. Code  793(e) and (f)
44 U.S. Code  3106
18 U.S. Code Â1001
18 U.S. Code  1924
18 U.S. Code  2071(b)
18 U.S. Code  641
18 U.S. Code  1505
18 U.S. Code  1519
Some of these are derivatives of other charges, but the first three statutes are all primary offenses, easily supported by the public record, and there is one felony charge available there.
If you wish references and sources, Google is replete with those. You should be offering me complete and sound refutations of the many public statements supporting indictment on any of these charges. Note that some of these do not or require intent, and Hillary was trained in these and other laws and the handling of information while Secretary of State.
deleting the extra space after periods so i can stay relevant, yeah.
If she could pardon herself, Tricky Dick would have already tried the same stunt.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Having the authority for formally start a process to declassify something is not the same thing as having the authority to ignore classification at her whim.
Wouldn't it suck if the staffer submitted the written request to the Information Security Officer on duty and got approval to strip the security headers? Proof! Another smoking gun email goes up in smoke.
After you finish dreaming, acknowledge that they didn't and if they had the process would have taken a month or more. Suck it.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Suck it.
These manufactured scandals don't have a great track record. How is the Benghazi investigation?
We may see a new slogan for a (presidential) election, one not seen before: "Never been indicted"
Reports of it being used in a labor union election are probably a joke or a myth.
There's no time like the present. Well, the past used to be.
So she declassified it. Now prove that isn't in her capacity as Secretary of State.
Honestly, do you really think that if she has the authority to declassify documents, the proper procedure is for her to just order someone to remove classified markings...?
Q: What does the "B." in Benoit B. Mandelbrot stand for? A: Benoit B. Mandelbrot
I disagree, political elites should not be punished the same as us peons. They should be punished much more harshly. Their sentence should be at least twice that of your average citizen. Same for police. Though the death penalty should be reserved for politicians at the federal level. In particular it should only be used when a politician attempts to violate the constitution.
Nixon said he could do anything. I'm saying the SoS has certain powers due to laws that grant them to the SoS. Pretty big difference.
In theory if she becomes president she can pardon herself.
No, she can't. She can pardon anyone else, but under American law, nobody has the power to pardon themselves. If that were possible, Nixon would have let himself off the hook instead of cutting a deal with Jerry Ford to let him walk.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Each of several thousand counts.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
What's your next guess?
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Petraeus wasn't convicted of anything- he pled guilty
Evidently you didn't proofread this. When a defendant pleads guilty, he is convicted without contesting the charges.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."