Shrike, you've never handled classified data before, have you? And you're not well versed in the various levels of compliance and auditing required for data transfer, correct?

3/3/2016 6:28:28 PM

Quote :

" Apparently not if she's done it "many many many" times and everyone knows about it."

??? There is an ongoing criminal investigation.

Does your brain have a Clinton implant to distort information in her favor?

3/3/2016 6:32:42 PM

Quote :

"The note she sent to the top aide, Jacob J. Sullivan, instructing him how to strip sensitive material of official markings and send it in a “nonsecure” way is heavily redacted, so it is unknown what the talking points were about."

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/01/09/us/hillary-clinton-email-state-department.html

3/3/2016 6:32:48 PM

^^^Classified data, nope. PHI protected under HIPAA? Yeah, pretty much every day, through servers I secure and administer. Look, I'm not trying to say you have a small dick here, just that they've spent over a year and millions of dollars trying to prove HRC is a criminal. You ain't doing it with one email screenshot.

^^No my brain has an implant that rejects bullshit. It's called my brain.

[Edited on March 3, 2016 at 6:34 PM. Reason : .]

3/3/2016 6:33:35 PM

I'm confused how you came to the conclusion that it's not a crime. Because people know about it and she's not in jail yet?

We do have this due process thing, and there is an ongoing investigation.

3/3/2016 6:38:41 PM

When Bill lied nobody died!

3/3/2016 7:23:17 PM

Somebody let the FBI know that someone inside is leaking their investigation, because he knows things that haven't been made public

3/3/2016 8:47:30 PM

Apparently they gave Pagliano (guy who setup the server) immunity awhile ago and he has been working with them

I bet they are trying to figure out who deleted the documents that were not initially turned over that the FBI recovered

________________

Is Pelosi speaking out against superdelegates related to this, could it be motivated by concern for this?

3/4/2016 9:31:58 AM

So I was out of the country for most of this, and it's still hard for me to wrap my mind around why anybody cares aside from the hysterical response that the Clinton family seems to inspire in some people.

Can anybody tell me what nefarious purpose this e-mail service is supposed to have had? Or is it evil by its very existence? Because that would be dumb.

3/4/2016 10:06:31 AM

The only purpose I could see if Clinton wanting to get around FOIA requests and even then, I don't think that's very likely to be the sole reason. I think she did mostly out of convenience rather than some diabolic reason.

The problem isn't the reason though, it's the sheer negligence she committed in doing this as well as instructing her staff to remove classification headings and send stuff via an unsecured fax. Doing so commits serious security violations and would have the average person thrown into a jail cell and never again eligible for a security clearance. Hell, I watched a guy get a serious reprimand in the military for charging his kindle via usb on a standard NIPR machine (a machine that doesn't hold any classified data). She appears to have routinely talked about information that is classified at birth, ie stuff that wasn't classified retroactively and could have jeopardized human assets or ISR missions. This is insanely bad.

3/4/2016 10:30:20 AM

Quote :

"instructing her staff to remove classification headings and send stuff via an unsecured fax."

Does stuff = classified information here? I'm not sure that's been proven yet. It's unclear if the talking points contained classified information in the first place, and even if so, if that information was still there when transmitted, if that even happened.

Quote :

"The note she sent to the top aide, Jacob J. Sullivan, instructing him how to strip sensitive material of official markings and send it in a “nonsecure” way is heavily redacted, so it is unknown what the talking points were about."

3/4/2016 10:38:53 AM

Because of the redaction, I have no information on whether the talking points were classified or not. However, the fact that email has become so heavily redacts seems to be a good indication that it was. Yes, that is an assumption, however if there is even the slightest hint of negligence, especially in a post Snowden/Manning environment, a normal individual is stripped of their clearance immediately.

3/4/2016 11:06:15 AM

Quote :

"Because of the redaction, I have no information on whether the talking points were classified or not. However, the fact that email has become so heavily redacts seems to be a good indication that it was."

Even if there was classified information in the first place, if it was removed as the email instructed then what are we talking about here? And yeah it's redacted for our viewing, but obviously not for the investigators who make the determination as to what was instructed and what happened.

3/4/2016 11:40:34 AM

^
You talking about the email posted last page? It only says to remove the header, not the contents.

3/4/2016 12:12:36 PM

You can look at the B code for why information is redacted, I posted a link on the last page.

Do we actually have a redacted copy of what she was telling them to strip the header from?

@Grumpy
The potential scandal is that they did not immediately release all the emails, it was only after someone else was hacked that the public learned there were other emails. After that they found more then the FBI found a few thousand more. Related to this is the other issue that is regarding the overlapping relationships between the state department and clinton foundation.

3/4/2016 12:24:26 PM

They also deleted thousands of them. I think some have been recovered.

3/4/2016 12:29:28 PM

Quote :

" Even if there was classified information in the first place, if it was removed as the email instructed then what are we talking about here? And yeah it's redacted for our viewing, but obviously not for the investigators who make the determination as to what was instructed and what happened."

You know, this a good point, I cannot offer 100% proof of Clinton's wrong doing just by that email instruction alone.

However, a secure fax is a pain the ass to use, if her TP were originally going to sent via secure fax there undoubtedly is a reason. In addition, as dntwnral has said, the instructions were to remove the classification headings only, not summarize the unclass portion of documents.

3/4/2016 1:20:58 PM

Quote :

"However, a secure fax is a pain the ass to use, if her TP were originally going to sent via secure fax there undoubtedly is a reason."

Maybe maybe not.

I can't find the quote atm, but it was a state dept spokesperson claiming unclassified information is frequently sent over secure fax, which unsurprisingly is what Hillary claimed she was doing.

[Edited on March 4, 2016 at 3:35 PM. Reason : anybody knows what "make nonpaper" means? mistype maybe?]

3/4/2016 3:32:36 PM

A non-paper is essentially a paper that isn't kept in the official record. You can have things like a white paper (or sometimes called a position paper) that is used to provide an official summary/position of an issue.

Also, sometimes UNCLASS data is sent via secured fax, again, you are correct. However, just because something in UNCLASS doesn't mean that it isn't sensitive, controlled, or not for public dissemination. This data must also be treated in a very secure manner. I'll give you an example, suppose a group of about 100 guys who are deploying to the middle east. Their deployment date could be classified depending on the mission. However, in order for these guys to deploy, they'll be gathering at a hotel in Bangor, Maine waiting for the flight out and need reservations. These reservations need a paper record of payment information. So while this data isn't necessarily classified, because hey, they're just receipts for reservations...it still must be treated in a secure fashion and transmitted via a secure means.



[Edited on March 4, 2016 at 4:21 PM. Reason : a. ]

3/4/2016 4:08:27 PM

So theoretically, let's say Clinton gets the nomination and is indicted and she ends up stepping down (all a pipe dream, I know). How does the democrat nomination work then? Do they have to go back to the delegates? Could they just pick anyone or would Sanders have to get it?

3/5/2016 7:56:37 AM

I'd assume they'd go back to the delegates and they could vote for whomever they want.

3/5/2016 10:30:00 AM

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-hillary-clinton-is-unlikely-to-be-indicted-over-her-private-email-server/2016/03/08/341c3786-e557-11e5-b0fd-073d5930a7b7_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-a%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

She'll skate for sure.

3/8/2016 9:18:51 PM

The Hacker who started this whole thing is being extradited to the US:
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-cyber-guccifer-idUSKCN0W61TX
this is for a temporary 18-month extradition. interesting

One interesting thing related to the Gucifer hack is that there are still emails from Clinton to Blumenthal (that we know exist because of the Gucifer hack) that have not been released. This means that they are either too classified to release even heavily redacted (bad for Clinton) or both Blumenthal and Clinton deleted the email (potentially bad for Clinton, but not necessarily)


Also, Loretta Lynch wouldn't answer if a grand jury has been convened when she was interviewed last week, so maybe this has already started.

3/9/2016 8:08:52 AM

The threat should be re-labeled "Clinton Classified Leak Scandal."

Anyone who has ever signed an NDA for the federal government knows she is lying (and that's a lot of people), because the signer of the NDA acknowledges it is their responsibility to ensure classified information is not "leaked" even if it is not labeled with a classification.

She keeps making the argument that it is up to the DoS to decide what is classified.

She was the head of that organization.

She purposefully prevented her emails from being analyzed by the DoS at the time she sent them.

There are emails she sent to direct her staff to strip the classification markings (not the information that was classified) and send them via a non-secure server.

That's a blatant violation of the law for which Bradley Manning is spending time in a federal prison (near me, by the way).

Her family has had a disturbing trend of releasing classified information to foreign countries (Clinton Admin and China, as well as Clinton server and China/Russia).

3/12/2016 11:40:46 AM

It's nice to know ^ didn't intend to be taken seriously.

3/12/2016 12:23:47 PM

Quote :

"That's a blatant violation of the law for which Bradley Manning is spending time in a federal prison (near me, by the way). "

that's what's outrageous about the whole thing.

3/12/2016 12:54:14 PM

Quote :

"that's what's [most] outrageous about the whole thing."

3/12/2016 1:59:41 PM

my grammar and typing skills have diminished significantly post graduation/working in the real world. it's a tragedy

3/12/2016 3:35:42 PM

No I wasn't being grammer nazi, just pointing out that wasn't the only outrageous part of that post.

3/12/2016 8:01:57 PM

They found more emails, including emails that show clinton was warned about security risks using their own device.

also the whole setup with their server tech was sketchy as shit.

3/25/2016 7:01:54 PM

I did see where she requested the DoD to allow her staff to use blackberries inside a SCIF. It made me laugh

3/25/2016 7:39:06 PM

haha, wtf

3/25/2016 11:09:35 PM

http://wpo.st/vG1Q1

She really is a piece of shit. It's horrible how the alternatives to her are an asshole like Trump or a loon like Sanders.

3/28/2016 9:06:14 PM

I would vote for Joe Biden in a heartbeat if he was running.

3/28/2016 9:37:40 PM

You cant just disagree with him. You have to go as far as calling him a loon. Then the same people wonder why trump supporters are so turnt up

[Edited on March 28, 2016 at 11:39 PM. Reason : Turnt]

3/28/2016 11:37:38 PM

Bernie's ideas are just as crazy as Trump's. Deport millions of immigrants or give free college to everyone. Either idea would bring along untenable costs. Tariffs on imports or single-payer healthcare. Either one would be disastrous for the economy.

3/28/2016 11:51:10 PM

I know this will go in circles but it must be reiterated that one of those things is already done around the world and is NOT disastrous.

3/29/2016 12:24:45 AM

It wouldn't be free college to everyone,it would be free tuition for some colleges for students who worked hard enough to get into a college. This very reasonable, affordable, and would most likely pay for itself.

3/29/2016 12:31:50 AM

3/29/2016 12:50:26 AM

Cool false equivalence rjrumfel

3/29/2016 1:03:23 AM

I get "free college" tickles peoples "ermergherrdd socialism!!" nerve we were all given if you went to school through the 90s, but when Bernie says "socialism" he's pretty much just making up a definition for this word that means "political and economic policies that benefit society instead of corporations/capital-owners". He doesn't mean doing away with free markets or market economies (both of which aren't capitalism themselves-- capitalism is market economies + government regulations to protect capital) or private ownership. It kinda sucks he chose this banner to fly, but he needs to do a better job explaining it.

3/29/2016 1:04:45 AM

Quote :

" You cant just disagree with him. You have to go as far as calling him a loon. Then the same people wonder why trump supporters are so turnt up"

I called her a piece of shit and Trump an asshole. Bernie Babies are never satisfied.

3/29/2016 1:22:49 AM

Since when does socialism mean doing away with free markets or market economies?

3/29/2016 1:15:41 PM

Quote :

"but when Bernie says "socialism" he's pretty much just making up a definition for this word that means "political and economic policies that benefit society instead of corporations/capital-owners". He doesn't mean doing away with free markets or market economies (both of which aren't capitalism themselves-- capitalism is market economies + government regulations to protect capital) or private ownership. It kinda sucks he chose this banner to fly, but he needs to do a better job explaining it."

sanders didn't make up this definition
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_democracy

but i'm not sure what this has to do with the fact that there are 147 FBI agents investigating Clinton's email server

3/29/2016 1:33:07 PM

I love it when people compare a country whose population is almost half that of North Carolina to the US.

3/29/2016 1:42:49 PM

If the US really wanted to move towards a more socialist model, I would actually be fine with it. But to suggest it could happen overnight in a two party system that's as broken as it right now is delusional. It took all of those small countries decades to move towards the model they have now and they're all incredibly homogenous.

3/29/2016 1:46:54 PM

incremental change requires someone wanting to move things in that direction, if you negotiate from a center starting point you can't even hope for incremental change

but again this has nothing to do with Clinton making her server admin an appointed position

3/29/2016 1:50:43 PM

That article is pretty damning to me, because in the media she's played dumb regarding her email infrastructure. She knew exactly what the hell she was doing.

3/29/2016 2:51:59 PM

Quote :

"I would actually be fine with it. But to suggest it could happen overnight in a two party system that's as broken as it right now is delusional."

Its delusional because of this mentality. People who are fine with it but don't think it could happen therefore they vote against it are the main barrier. Most people who understand it would be fine with it.

Its really mind-blowing that the idea that Americans will vote for people who align with their principles is the delusional part but I do agree.

Quote :

"I love it when people compare a country whose population is almost half that of North Carolina to the US. "

Brazil is a very large country with tuition free college but its not as good of a comparison because money is the most important factor, not scale. Denmark Scale actually has advantages that probably outweigh the disadvantages. We can give states autonomy or use states as pilot programs restrict or open state lines and gain a lot of flexibility overall.

Quote :

"and they're all incredibly homogenous. "

They are homogeneous more as a result of socialism than the other way around. Socialism merges classes and education level for people all around the country. It turns out, when people share more of the same experiences, they actually unite and integrate more.

Quote :

"but again this has nothing to do with Clinton making her server admin an appointed position"

yes it does because none of this would matter if people would just vote for bernie.

[Edited on March 29, 2016 at 3:08 PM. Reason : h]

3/29/2016 3:05:46 PM

bruh, Brazil is your example right now?

3/29/2016 3:07:28 PM