New York Times: Hillary Clinton illegally used private email for all State Dept. business

Because it was a run of the mill private server, likely ran by MS Exchange? Are you implying she ran advanced server capability that is found on government computers? Seriously? "new", "forward" and "reply" were likely the basics of whatever system she used.

 

she should have used clutchfans messaging

 

I didn't take it as snarky, but I didn't find that post very helpful, informative, or responsive to my question. But it looks like from this and other posts, you (a) claim to know the details of her server set-up. Link? and (b) answer my question about "which is it" for her as #1: she is just completely stupid.

I just find it hard to believe that she's completely stupid, given the rest of her career and history. Devious and scheming? sure. Stupid? Um, no. I'm still struggling the believe the narrative of smart woman who wants to be president but is then incredibly sloppy with state secrets and puts them on a Best Buy server. Oh whoops, my bad, LOL.

 

And as from your other posts, you do not understand server security in the first place. Even if someone could provided a detailed server setup, you would not know what it even means to determine if it was suffice for basic government communication. Since there is no law or regulation that would prevent a government official from having their own server, the security is irrelevant.

However classified is very different. To start out in the first place, you can not have a setup to store classified in the first place, regardless if its the most secure place in the universe. Secure networks are less about if you're running the latest Mcafee or Malware bytes (that is sarcasm) and more about physical controlled access to server rooms, personal who would have access, physical cable emi emissions, ect... ect...

To be fair, little is known about the classified information and how it got on there. It was gross negligence to run a private email server used for government business. This is what is hurting her. No, there is no law that states that she can't, but if **** hits the fan, like it is now, it will come cascading down upon her. If she had classified information on government email server, she would just get her hand slapped for basic negligence.

It becomes willful negligence if she circumvented security protocols (printing, faxing, and/or copy'n'pasting) to get this information onto her private email server. If this is the case, then she should face some serious consequences (im not implying jail time). None of this is cut and dry, so how she did it is more important than why she did it.

 

I don't think it was her being "stupid" so much as it was her thinking that the rules don't apply to her and her thinking that she could get away with it.

IMO what matters is IF she did it, not how or why she did it. Anyone who has ever held a security clearance knows better than to put any classified information on ANY private device. That's pretty much the first thing you are taught and you can't tell me that she didn't know better, she just didn't care. It was more important to her to have control over her emails (so she could ignore FOIA requests for example) than it was for her to follow the laws of the US and for her to protect classified information.

 

We have no idea what information was in the emails. Perhaps it really wasnt classified at the time of inception...although I am highly skeptical. How and why will determine if there will be an indictment. Mishandling of classified information doesn't automatically equal jail time. Stick to the facts and lets not turn this into a Benghazi.

 

We don't know the specific information in the emails, but we do know the level of classification of the information in the emails and that's really all that matters. If the information was classified prior to being emailed, it's a felony. Now, I don't think she'll see jail time either but a conviction and probation IMO is likely if they don't just ignore the case due to party loyalty. Also, it's only due to who she is that she is likely to avoid jail time, pretty much anyone else would be looking at a token jail term in the very least for this many offenses.

The facts are what is damning about this. We know she had classified information on a private server which is illegal. We know she instructed someone to send her classified information over an unclassified fax with the classification removed which is illegal. We know that she attempted to wipe the server or have someone wipe the server storing classified information and information related to FOIA requests that she was aware of, which is illegal.

The facts are what is so damning.

 

(a) Correct, and I never claimed otherwise. God knows.
(b) I'm pretty quick on the uptake and more tech savvy than I let on, so with decent documentation, I dispute that.
(c) Irrelevant to the indictment possibility, yes, probably right. But on a practical level, it seems important, and the media keeps reporting it as "unsecured," et cetera. That's what I was commenting on.

But thanks for the reply. I get where you're coming from.

 

Yeah, I'm sure she had some security set up, but as far as the government is concerned there is no such thing as a private "secured" server. The "unsecured" label is accurate.

 

Those sound like desperate assumptions. There is nothing to suggest Mrs. Clinton did not comply with State Department rules, laws, and other procedures.

 

LOL are you serious? She had classified information on a private server....that's a felony. I get why people who want her to win the nomination for president would want to turn a blind eye, but c'mon man.

 

So I kept hearing people say " the only way Bernie wins over Clinton is if she gets into a scandel "

Is the resurgence of this old scandel enough?

 

This "old scandal" if prosecuted could easily make her ineligible to hold public office....so yeah, it really could be "enough" unless the Obama administration decides to ignore it due to party loyalty.

 

It's a shame that the person she hired to set this email server up has decided to take advantage of his 5th amendment rights and refuses to answer any questions regarding the server. I'd like to know exactly what she told him to do. I think he could provide some insight into how computer literate Hillary really is. Did he know what she was asking him to do was a really bad idea? Did he advise her what she was doing was not a good idea?

 

Or complements the explicit letter with an understanding of the spirit and meaning of the law, or considers the precedence of past cabinet level officials separating or compartmentalizing communication records. Or other living former Presidents of both parties advise him to preclude the conviction or prosecution to keep potential cabinet appointees from worrying about managerial autonomy.

 

It sounds like the FBI may have already offered him a plea deal, or an immunity arrangement or something of that sort in exchange for his testimony. Of course it would be strange if they didn't, given the circumstances.

In fact, they may have completed this deal already and the FBI may have taken his testimony as well, for all we know. It certainly would not be normal for the FBI to broadcast the details of that to the public before even recommending charges, so it really is no surprise we have not heard anything specific on that yet.

 

There is an easy fix for that. Grant the guy immunity, no more 5th amendment rights.

 

I think I am missing something. Don't you use immunity as bargaining chip to somehow drop or reduce charges? Is the guy being charged with something?

 

You're not missing anything. The firm that setup the server did nothing wrong. They are simply pleading the fifth, which anyone should do. You dont need to be a criminal or be accused to plead the fifth.

 

I see BTG is digging in fiercely on this, which should bring comfort to Hillary supporters.