Federal investigators want Justice Department probe of Hillary Clinton emails

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by aaronvan, Jul 26, 2015.

  1. aaronvan Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #1
    Well, this is getting very interesting. The DoJ is weighing whether to launch its own investigation after the Inspector General notified the agency that classified information that went through the account appeared to have been mishandled.

    No doubt this leak came from the very top and has nothing to do with the Republicans. The Inspector General recommending an investigation and the DoJ are part of the Obama administration. Someone at the White House--probably Valerie Jarret--doesn't like Hillary and these Machiavellian machinations are clearing the way for someone else--probably Joe Biden--to run. Furthermore, a Biden run would be terrible news for the GOP, too, as he would easily crush any of the GOP top-tier. It will be interesting to see how this all falls out.
     
  2. lowendlinux Contributor

    lowendlinux

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Location:
    North Country (way upstate NY)
    #2
    If she's silly enough to have classified data on her server then she needs fried she's just not that special.
     
  3. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
    #3
    Blasphemer!

    I'm sure that this will be quickly portrayed as a Republican witch hunt even though, like @aaronvan said, the Department of Justice is run by the Democrats.
     
  4. sodapop1 Suspended

    sodapop1

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2014
    #4
    No, calling it a Republican witch hunt would actually be dignifying something that is more accurately an act of sheer desperation. Retroactive criminality is a novel concept though.
     
  5. lowendlinux Contributor

    lowendlinux

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Location:
    North Country (way upstate NY)
    #5
    If you were a federal employee you'd probably understand spillage is spillage no matter the timeframe and this would be intentional.
     
  6. sodapop1 Suspended

    sodapop1

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2014
    #6
    I do not need to be a federal employee to understand dysfunction between to governmental agencies who apparently can't agree on a consistent definition of what qualifies as classified information nor can they agree on a standardized mechanism to identify classified information.
     
  7. lowendlinux Contributor

    lowendlinux

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Location:
    North Country (way upstate NY)
    #7
    There is a standardized definition of classified information at all levels of classification.
     
  8. sodapop1 Suspended

    sodapop1

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2014
    #8
    According to who? You? Have you been listening to any of the testimonies on the subject? That is the whole point of this inquiry, not Hillary.
     
  9. lowendlinux Contributor

    lowendlinux

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Location:
    North Country (way upstate NY)
    #9
    Not according to me and no I've not listened to testimony
     
  10. aaronvan thread starter Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #10
    Incorrect. All federal government classification guidance is established my Executive Order. So yea, Hillary was operating under classification guidance signed by her boss, President Obama.

    I can't think of a Cabinet-level Secretary that should know more about, or be more concerned with, classified information than the Secretary of State. Not even the SecDef.

    Hillary either willfully ignored the rules and regulations out of a sense of entitlement or she is colossally incompetent.
     
  11. sodapop1 Suspended

    sodapop1

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2014
    #11
    More like wishful thinking from all of the Hillary haters.

    Regardless of the outcome of the investigation(s) as it relates to Hillary, all Americans should be outraged at how pathetic our government is at securing classified information and equally important our personal information. It makes absolutely no sense that our government would even be using something as primitive and error prone as an email system to share highly sensitive classified material. You would think that our government would have a much more sophisticated system designed to control not only who can access the classified information but also who a person can share that info with.
     
  12. aaronvan thread starter Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #12
    What is "primitive" and "error-prone" about encrypted email? I sent and received TS/SCI information all the time on a NSA email server. What do you suggest they use? FTP? Telnet? Gopher?

    The U.S. government has access controls and handling procedures. Hillary circumvented and ignored them. Now there will be an investigation and it will likely kill her presidential ambitions.
     
  13. ucfgrad93 macrumors P6

    ucfgrad93

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2007
    Location:
    Colorado
    #13
    Doubtful, as there plenty of people like @sodapop1 who will ignore anything she does and blame it on the Republicans.
     
  14. aaronvan thread starter Suspended

    aaronvan

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2011
    Location:
    República Cascadia
    #14
    Hillarybots will always mindlessly champion their dishonest and corrupt heroine. However, it's obvious that someone high in the Obama administration wants to stick a knife in her back. Probably Obama himself.
     
  15. sodapop1, Jul 26, 2015
    Last edited: Jul 26, 2015

    sodapop1 Suspended

    sodapop1

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2014
    #15
    Brilliant, neither transport level or message level security is going to prevent someone from sending an email to the wrong recipient. It isn't about communication protocols either but rather designing a system the reduces the possibility of human error.

    And secondly, it is just a bad practice in general to be sending out classified information on a collaboration platform.
     
  16. Technarchy macrumors 603

    Technarchy

    Joined:
    May 21, 2012
    #16
    Indeed. And in the shadow of this OPM nightmare security and handling of federal electronic classified information will be a big deal that all candidates better be ready to debate.

    As a .gov contractor with a clearance I know better, and Hillary absolutely should know better.
     
  17. lowendlinux Contributor

    lowendlinux

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Location:
    North Country (way upstate NY)
    #17
    Classified information lives on it's own network and the people with access have a separate email address the only way to get classified information off it's network onto the unclassified network is sneaker net. i.e. you can't send me an email to my unclass account from your classified account the networks don't touch. There are protocols and policies in place to prevent this exact thing from happening.
     
  18. sodapop1 Suspended

    sodapop1

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2014
    #18
    Well that makes more sense but is that at an agency level or across all governmental agencies? I'm still trying to understand how classified information, could be sent to an unclassified email address, i.e. Hillary Clinton, in the first place. In the scenario you described, the sender of the email containing the classified info would need to circumvent the system in order for the email to get onto Hillary's email server.

    I know everyone wants this to be about Hillary. I personally think it was a stupid idea for her to setup a private email server and she should deal with the political repercussions of that decision. The more important question is how was classified information, if proven to be the case, allowed to end up on her private email server. Whether she knowingly or unknowingly forwarded classified information is a separate but legitimate concern. But to me this speaks more to government incompetence as a whole and a lack of the proper controls in place.
     
  19. lowendlinux Contributor

    lowendlinux

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Location:
    North Country (way upstate NY)
    #19
    It's across all agencies

    Sneaker net...take the classified data off the classified network on a CD/DVD/paper and introduce to the non classified network. aka spillage

    It's about Hillary because classified data may have been on her personal server the are processes and precedures to clean spillage but you can't do it when it's on someone elses server and that server has been wiped. There are only a couple ways that it could have ended up there neither speak positively about her or her management style. If there is classified data on that server people need to know and it needs dealt with as quickly as possible.

    There are proper controls in place but you have to actually follow them. I work around enough flag officers to know that powerful people need care and feeding but at the end of the day it's her fault no matter the buck stops at her desk.

    We (fed gov) have policies in place that seem silly at first blush like having a separate electronic device for the position you sit in but what that does is make sure things stay contained and lets you separate yourself from your job. Laziness like I just wanted to use one device leads to stuff like this because your just motoring along and don't make the mental change from Hillary Clinton and Secretary of State.
     
  20. sodapop1 Suspended

    sodapop1

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2014
    #20
    Well, apparently it is impossible to have a rational discussion about security procedures within the government with someone obsessed with bashing Hillary Clinton.

    What you describe as having the proper controls in place and your 1980's data theft techniques "aka spillage" really illustrates just how incompetent our government is with data security.
     
  21. lowendlinux Contributor

    lowendlinux

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Location:
    North Country (way upstate NY)
    #21
    It's incompetent because it keeps classified data on a separate network from unclassified data....OK :rolleyes:
     
  22. You are the One macrumors 6502a

    You are the One

    Joined:
    Dec 25, 2014
    Location:
    In the present
    #22
    She broke the law, not much doubt about that. Doens't matter if mails contained classified information or not.

    If she handled the majority or all of her mail via that mail account there is bound to be classified information there.


    Didn't she also brake the law when not complying with congress to hand them over and instead delete them?

    Where the mails encrypted in transition? And on the server? Any info on that? Not that it makes any difference for the point of law. But if it was not encrypted basically anyone could access the contents. From any foreign governemnt to Joe Down the Street.

    "I never had sex with THAT server" history repeats.
     
  23. 556fmjoe macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2014
    #23
    Bashing Clinton? If all we heard was that a government employee had set up a private email address and used it for classified information, nobody would be defending that employee, nobody would call this a political "witch hunt", and nobody would have the slightest problem with that person being fired and prosecuted.

    Calling it Clinton bashing when she clearly is in the wrong is political tribalism at its best.
     
  24. sodapop1 Suspended

    sodapop1

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2014
    #24
    No, it is incompetent because it allowed classified data to be sent to a personal email address account. And when asked to explain how this could have happened, your explanation is that Hillary manually copied the data to a CD.
     
  25. lowendlinux Contributor

    lowendlinux

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2014
    Location:
    North Country (way upstate NY)
    #25
    That's literally the only way.
     

Share This Page