Hillary Clinton Thread

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cider
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Lily_Bernans said:
The DoJ’s computers were hacked. Hacking really isn’t all that hard. I can’t do it! But I have relatives who can, though they work in cyber security; they aren’t hackers and wouldn’t commit illegal acts. But companies pay them handsomely to hack into their systems and find the weak areas and shore them up.
Click to expand...
Who were the hackers that Hillary Clinton hired to test the security of her home-brewed server? What security protocols did she install to raise her server’s security higher than the Dept of State?
Lily_Bernans said:
Then no one is because all the candidates were using home computers. Trump’s not qualified for other reasons.
Click to expand...
This is a stunningly intellectually dishonest comment. Hillary Clinton did not “use a home computer”. She set up a private email server to avoid FOIA laws and while doing so, sent and received a large amount of secret and top secret information. Which of the other candidates did something similar? Please be specific.
Lily_Bernans said:
Targeting a server “more aggressively” isn’t going to do a thing if you’re not doing the right thing.
Click to expand...
So foreign governments and hackers target Bob White’s home server that he uses for his small business just as much as they target the Department of State?
Monkey1976 said:
Security on a system is directly related to the sensitivity of the information on that system. The “Top Secret” system the kid broke into was the HR database. Call me naive, but I don’t think knowing the exact salary of a director is a national security issue. 🤷
Click to expand...
It is not highly critical info, but certainly don’t want that info getting out.
 
zz912 said:
Who were the hackers that Hillary Clinton hired to test the security of her home-brewed server? What security protocols did she install to raise her server’s security higher than the Dept of State?

This is a stunningly intellectually dishonest comment. Hillary Clinton did not “use a home computer”. She set up a private email server to avoid FOIA laws and while doing so, sent and received a large amount of secret and top secret information. Which of the other candidates did something similar? Please be specific.

So foreign governments and hackers target Bob White’s home server that he uses for his small business just as much as they target the Department of State?

It is not highly critical info, but certainly don’t want that info getting out.
Click to expand...
How do you know Hillary want to avoid the FOIA? Did she tell you that? Are you speculating? Is it just idle gossip from Fox News?
 
zz912 said:
Who were the hackers that Hillary Clinton hired to test the security of her home-brewed server? What security protocols did she install to raise her server’s security higher than the Dept of State?

This is a stunningly intellectually dishonest comment. Hillary Clinton did not “use a home computer”. She set up a private email server to avoid FOIA laws and while doing so, sent and received a large amount of secret and top secret information. Which of the other candidates did something similar? Please be specific.

So foreign governments and hackers target Bob White’s home server that he uses for his small business just as much as they target the Department of State?

It is not highly critical info, but certainly don’t want that info getting out.
Click to expand...
Great post. Agree 100%
 
Lily_Bernans said:
How do you know Hillary want to avoid the FOIA? Did she tell you that? Are you speculating? Is it just idle gossip from Fox News?
Click to expand...
Or maybe from CNN, or MSNBC or ABC or CBS or NBC or maybe Media Matters. Why are liberals so afraid of FOX?
 
Lily_Bernans said:
How do you know Hillary want to avoid the FOIA? Did she tell you that? Are you speculating? Is it just idle gossip from Fox News?
Click to expand...
Personally, I don’t think she had any specifically nefarious intentions. I think she just figured she could do what she wanted because of her position and name. Less evil queen, more entitled noblewoman.
 
mary_bobo said:
Or maybe from CNN, or MSNBC or ABC or CBS or NBC or maybe Media Matters. Why are liberals so afraid of FOX?
Click to expand...
I don’t think Democrats are afraid of Fox any more than Republicans are afraid of MSNBC. It’s just that if there’s a evil rumor floating around about a Democrat, it’s likely it started at Fox.
 
Monkey1976 said:
Personally, I don’t think she had any specifically nefarious intentions. I think she just figured she could do what she wanted because of her position and name. Less evil queen, more entitled noblewoman.
Click to expand...
I don’t think she had any nefarious intentions, either. I think it was just more convenient for her, and she didn’t see the harm in it. Other government officials did it, so she did, too. Not the wisest decision, as she’s said, but far from nefarious.
 
Lily_Bernans said:
I don’t think she had any nefarious intentions, either. I think it was just more convenient for her, and she didn’t see the harm in it. Other government officials did it, so she did, too. Not the wisest decision, as she’s said, but far from nefarious.
Click to expand...
It will be awhile before it’s known to any of us how nefarious it was, that is to say, whether any laws were broken. If she’s indicted, she’ll be indicted and then she’ll be tried or make a plea bargain long after the election is over. If she’s not indicted, then the FBI will leak the details they feel themselves able to leak, and that might be past the election too.

What we do know is that she was trading intelligence with a person with business interests in Libya about Libya; a person the W.H. told her was not to be made privy to State information and who was a sometime employee of the Clinton Foundation. We do know she was an influence peddler. We do know her evasion of the prescribed government network was massive; far beyond what anybody else ever did.

It wasn’t just a lapse in judgment. It was the transfer of secret information that, unless she’s the stupidest person alive, she had to know was sensitive and beyond. And yet, she did it, knowing it might get hacked, knowing she wasn’t supposed to do it and why.

At the absolute minimum it shows contempt for the rules, contempt for our security, even contempt for the administration for which she was working.
 
Lily_Bernans said:
How do you know Hillary want to avoid the FOIA? Did she tell you that? Are you speculating? Is it just idle gossip from Fox News?
Click to expand...
I’m ascribing to her the most charitable explanation that I can. None of her explanations have passed even a cursory smell test, and what she did and carried on doing for 4 years shows it wasn’t an accident or spur-of-the-moment decision. If I were being less charitable, I could assume that she set up the email server so that she could more easily sell favors from her office for bribes and “contributions” to her Foundation.
Lily_Bernans said:
I don’t think she had any nefarious intentions, either. I think it was just more convenient for her, and she didn’t see the harm in it. Other government officials did it, so she did, too. Not the wisest decision, as she’s said, but far from nefarious.
Click to expand...
No, it wasn’t more convenient for her. Please don’t keep spreading such falsehood. If you are ignorant of how complicated it is to set up an email server, please stop commenting about the issue and start listening to those who know a little about technology. And also, please stop spreading the falsehood that other government officials did the same. NO government officials set up their own email servers. NONE.

Setting up an email server is NOT easy, is NOT convenient, and CANNOT possibly be easier than using a State Dept email, which is already set up and has security and IT people working to protect it. They also have specific issued cell phones for accessing these emails which are sufficiently encrypted to protect the information on them. Clinton’s had NONE of those features.

Now PLEASE, stop repeating these falsehoods that it was easier or more convenient for her to set up her own email server. That’s simply NOT true, and falsehoods should not be intentionally spread.
 
zz912 said:
I’m ascribing to her the most charitable explanation that I can. None of her explanations have passed even a cursory smell test, and what she did and carried on doing for 4 years shows it wasn’t an accident or spur-of-the-moment decision. If I were being less charitable, I could assume that she set up the email server so that she could more easily sell favors from her office for bribes and “contributions” to her Foundation.

No, it wasn’t more convenient for her. Please don’t keep spreading such falsehood. If you are ignorant of how complicated it is to set up an email server, please stop commenting about the issue and start listening to those who know a little about technology. And also, please stop spreading the falsehood that other government officials did the same. NO government officials set up their own email servers. NONE.

Setting up an email server is NOT easy, is NOT convenient, and CANNOT possibly be easier than using a State Dept email, which is already set up and has security and IT people working to protect it. They also have specific issued cell phones for accessing these emails which are sufficiently encrypted to protect the information on them. Clinton’s had NONE of those features.

Now PLEASE, stop repeating these falsehoods that it was easier or more convenient for her to set up her own email server. That’s simply NOT true, and falsehoods should not be intentionally spread.
Click to expand...
I know it’s pretty easy to set up an email server. My oldest brother has three set up in his home, and I helped him set up mine, and I consider myself technologically challenged. It might not be easy for you, but it was easy for us, and I don’t doubt that it was convenient for SoS Clinton. It’s convenient for me, and my email volume can’t compare with someone who has 22,000 people working under her.

I think plenty of other government officials have done it:

politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/aug/18/howard-dean/howard-dean-tremendous-number-public-officials-hav/

dailysignal.com/2015/03/08/high-ranking-federal-officials-history-using-personal-email-government-business/

cnn.com/2016/02/04/politics/hillary-clinton-email-classified-colin-powell-condoleezza-rice/

washingtonpost.com/politics/clintons-experience-not-unique/2015/03/03/cf59747a-c1e5-11e4-9ec2-b418f57a4a99_story.html

"A Politifact analysis also confirmed that Clinton’s practices complied with laws and regulations, including support from the former director of a prominent government accountability organization: “In Clinton’s defense, we should note that it was only after Clinton left the State Department, that the National Archives issued a recommendation that government employees should avoid conducting official business on personal emails (though they noted there might be extenuating circumstances such as an emergency that require it). Additionally, in 2014, President Barack Obama signed changes to the Federal Records Act that explicitly said federal officials can only use personal email addresses if they also copy or send the emails to their official account. Because these rules weren’t in effect when Clinton was in office, ‘she was in compliance with the laws and regulations at the time,’ said Gary Bass, founder and former director of OMB Watch, a government accountability organization.”

It’s really just no big deal. Much ado about nothing.
 
Monkey1976 said:
Personally, I don’t think she had any specifically nefarious intentions. I think she just figured she could do what she wanted because of her position and name. Less evil queen, more entitled noblewoman.
Click to expand...
Wasn’t she in the Senate when the FBI or NSA or CIA (one of them) was hacking into the Senator’s stuff?
 
Ridgerunner said:
It wasn’t opinion, it was disclosure of why government people do it by a person who was involved in doing it.
Click to expand...
And the analysis completely ignored that team Hillary intentionally shared the classified information with people lacking any security classification, like Sydney Blumenthal.

Though the Petraus affair is sordid, the girl had top secret clearance and I’m sure the final product would have been reviewed before publishing.
 
Lily_Bernans said:
I know it’s pretty easy to set up an email server. My oldest brother has three set up in his home, and I helped him set up mine, and I consider myself technologically challenged. It might not be easy for you, but it was easy for us, and I don’t doubt that it was convenient for SoS Clinton. It’s convenient for me, and my email volume can’t compare with someone who has 22,000 people working under her.

I think plenty of other government officials have done it:

politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/aug/18/howard-dean/howard-dean-tremendous-number-public-officials-hav/

dailysignal.com/2015/03/08/high-ranking-federal-officials-history-using-personal-email-government-business/

cnn.com/2016/02/04/politics/hillary-clinton-email-classified-colin-powell-condoleezza-rice/

washingtonpost.com/politics/clintons-experience-not-unique/2015/03/03/cf59747a-c1e5-11e4-9ec2-b418f57a4a99_story.html

"A Politifact analysis also confirmed that Clinton’s practices complied with laws and regulations, including support from the former director of a prominent government accountability organization: “In Clinton’s defense, we should note that it was only after Clinton left the State Department, that the National Archives issued a recommendation that government employees should avoid conducting official business on personal emails (though they noted there might be extenuating circumstances such as an emergency that require it). Additionally, in 2014, President Barack Obama signed changes to the Federal Records Act that explicitly said federal officials can only use personal email addresses if they also copy or send the emails to their official account. Because these rules weren’t in effect when Clinton was in office, ‘she was in compliance with the laws and regulations at the time,’ said Gary Bass, founder and former director of OMB Watch, a government accountability organization.”

It’s really just no big deal. Much ado about nothing.
Click to expand...
It is impossible to believe that the government has prescribed rules for official email transmission, criminalizes some misuse, but doesn’t actually care whether anyone obeys them or not. It is equally impossible that the FBI would spend months and enormous numbers of hours investigating something they didn’t care about. It’s not as if this didn’t take away very expensive time from other criminal investigations they could have conducted.

The sanguine opinion stated by Hillary Clinton supporters is not shared by many, and
is very deeply questioned by many, including liberal sources.

chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-hillary-clinton-emails-fbi-20160329-story.html
 
Theo520 said:
And the analysis completely ignored that team Hillary intentionally shared the classified information with people lacking any security classification, like Sydney Blumenthal.

Though the Petraus affair is sordid, the girl had top secret clearance and I’m sure the final product would have been reviewed before publishing.
Click to expand...
Some, including liberal sources, also believe the FBI’s attention is as much on the potential for influence peddling as on the misuse of secret information.
 
Ridgerunner said:
It will be awhile before it’s known to any of us how nefarious it was, that is to say, whether any laws were broken. If she’s indicted, she’ll be indicted and then she’ll be tried or make a plea bargain long after the election is over. If she’s not indicted, then the FBI will leak the details they feel themselves able to leak, and that might be past the election too.

What we do know is that she was trading intelligence with a person with business interests in Libya about Libya; a person the W.H. told her was not to be made privy to State information and who was a sometime employee of the Clinton Foundation. We do know she was an influence peddler. We do know her evasion of the prescribed government network was massive; far beyond what anybody else ever did.

It wasn’t just a lapse in judgment. It was the transfer of secret information that, unless she’s the stupidest person alive, she had to know was sensitive and beyond. And yet, she did it, knowing it might get hacked, knowing she wasn’t supposed to do it and why.

At the absolute minimum it shows contempt for the rules, contempt for our security, even contempt for the administration for which she was working.
Click to expand...
Your post bears repeating several times so some can get the message! Not too long ago I posted that I dug into the website of Hillary’s released emails - it was tedious, time consuming, and at times stomach curdling. Numerous emails showed up between the person you mentioned (the close friend with business interests in Libya, a sometime employee of the Clinton Foundation, and a very personal friend of Hillary’s. The subject was the build up of radical forces in the area, etc. Numerous emails were exchanged with subject matter highly suspicious of being in need of security classification. I think I mentioned that my computer caught a virus from reviewing the numerous emails, completely locked up, and had to be cleaned. My exploration hardly made a dent in the email exchanges so it will have to await the FBI’s results to learn how bad it got.

After hearing Obama strut his responses to Chris Wallace regarding Hillary’s “carelessness” it is hard to believe he tried to justify the whole mess by saying: “Well, there is classified information, and then there is classified”. The American
people have been played and hopefully we can recover from all this deceit; its not looking good. :mad:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top