|
|
Home | Switchboard | Unix Administration | Red Hat | TCP/IP Networks | Neoliberalism | Toxic Managers |
| (slightly skeptical) Educational society promoting "Back to basics" movement against IT overcomplexity and bastardization of classic Unix | |||||||
| Home | 2099 | 2020 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 |
For the list of top articles see Recommended Links section
|
|
Switchboard | ||||
| Latest | |||||
| Past week | |||||
| Past month | |||||
 |
 |
 |
www.zerohedge.com
While Hillary Clinton may have had some entertaining problems when using her Blackberry (or was that iPad) as US Secretary of State, one thing she excelled at was nepotism.
According to the latest set of emails released by the State Department, and first reported by the Daily Caller, Hillary intervened in a request forwarded by her son-in-law, Marc Mezvisnky, on behalf of a deep-sea mining firm, Neptune Minerals, to meet with her or other State Department officials.
One of the firm's investors, Harry Siklas who was Mezvinsky's coworker at Goldman (which donated between $1 and $5 million to the Clinton Foundation) had asked Mezvinsky, who married Chelsea Clinton in 2010 and who currently runs his own hedge fund (in which Goldman CEO Blankfein is also an investor) for help setting up such contacts, an email from May 25, 2012 shows.
Siklas told Mezvinsky that Neptune Minerals (a company founded by one of Siklas' close friends) was poised for great things. He also touted an investment that Goldman Sachs - had made in the company, which had underwater tenements in the South Pacific.
Siklas said that he and Adam hoped to meet with State Department officials, including Clinton, to discuss deep sea mining "and the current legal issues and regulations" surrounding it.
"I introduced them to GS and the bankers took them on as a client," Siklas wrote.
"There is a favor I need to ask, and hopefully it will not put you out, as I'm not one to ask for favors typically," Siklas wrote to Mezvinsky. "I need a contact in Hillary's office."
"Siklas said that he and Adam hoped to meet with State Department officials, including Clinton, to discuss deep sea mining "and the current legal issues and regulations" surrounding it.
As AP adds, the lobbying effort on behalf of Neptune Minerals came while Hillary Clinton - now the leading Democratic presidential candidate - was advocating for an Obama administration push for Senate approval of a sweeping Law of the Sea Treaty. The pact would have aided U.S. mining companies scouring for minerals in international waters, but the Republican-dominated Senate blocked it.
Clinton then ordered a senior State Department official, Thomas Nides and now a vice chairman at Morgan Stanley, to look into the request in August 2012.
"Could you have someone follow up on this request, which was forwarded to me?" Clinton asked Nides.
Nides replied: "I'll get on it."
The emails do not show whether Clinton or other State Department officials met with Harry Siklas or with executives from the Florida-based firm. Clinton's official calendars, recently obtained by The Associated Press, also do not show any meetings between Clinton and Neptune representatives.
Clinton's campaign declined through a spokesman to discuss the issue, despite AP asking detailed questions about the matter since Nov. 30. The AP attempted to reach Siklas and a Neptune executive, Josh Adam, by phone, email and in-person visits to their homes last week but received no replies.
As noted above, Siklas had said in his email that his then-employer, Goldman Sachs, was representing Neptune.
Unperturbed by the State Department's stonewalling, AP then dug deeper into its quest to see just how extensive the nepotism ran:
A spokesman for Eaglevale said Mezvinsky would not comment on his role. Emails to a spokeswoman for Chelsea Clinton went unreturned. Morgan Stanley officials did not respond to an AP request to interview Nides. The AP also left three phone messages with Neptune Minerals' office in St. Petersburg, Florida, and also left several phone and email messages with Hans Smit, the firm's current president, also with no reply.
Federal ethics guidelines warn government employees to "not give preferential treatment to any private organization or individual," but there are no specific provisions prohibiting officials from considering requests prompted by relatives.
As the AP then notes, "Clinton's willingness to intercede as a result of her son-in-law's involvement is the latest example of how the Clinton family's interests cut across intersecting spheres of influence in American politics, commerce and charity."
There's more:
A lawyer for an environmental group opposing deep-sea mining said Clinton's action was "cause for concern that the State Department might take any action that could encourage such activity." Emily Jeffers, an attorney for the Center for Biological Diversity, a group opposing deep-sea mining, filed suit against Commerce Secretary Penny Pritzker and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration last May, accusing the agencies of failing to conduct comprehensive environmental tests before licensing Lockheed Martin Corp. to mine for minerals in U.S. territorial waters in the Pacific Ocean.
Jeffers said her organization supports the Law of the Sea Treaty that Clinton championed during her tenure at the State Department. She said the proposal would give the U.S. and other countries roles in establishing standards to explore for oil, gas and minerals. Jeffers said her group worries that the U.S. and other commercial nations will encourage deep-sea mining once the treaty is adopted.
One provision of the treaty, backed by corporate interests, would allow nations, including the U.S., to sponsor mining companies seeking to scour deep seas for minerals. Clinton told senators in May 2012 that American mining firms would only be able to compete freely against foreign rivals under standards set by the treaty.
Seabed mining is "very expensive, and before any company will explore a mine site, it will naturally insist on having a secure title to the site and the minerals it will recover," she said.
Clinton's public push for a U.S. role in securing deep sea mining rights quickly hit home at Neptune Mining. Three days after her Senate appearance, Siklas, who described himself as a "passive investor" in Neptune, emailed Mezvinsky.
As Siklas explained to Clinton's son in law, Neptune was pursuing sea-floor massive sulfide (SMS) mining in the South Pacific and had just bought out two other mining firms. Siklas said that he and Adam needed "a contact in Hillary's office: someone my friend Josh (and I perhaps) can reach out via email or phone to discuss SMS mining and the current legal issues and regulations." Siklas, then registered as a stockbroker at Goldman Sachs in New York, had contributed $2,000 to Hillary Clinton's 2008 unsuccessful presidential bid.
Siklas said the State Department would be interested in the subject following Clinton's Senate testimony. He said he and Adam "would feel very fortunate to have someone's ear on this topical issue, with the hope that at some point we get in front of the secretary herself."
And since the emails do not show how Clinton became directly aware of Siklas' email to Mezvinsky or why it took three months for her to act after Mezvinsky became involved, it also raises questions how many emails in the chain had been illegally deleted, and what may be contained in them. As the Daily Caller observes:
... it is unclear why there is no record of Clinton being forwarded the email that Siklas sent to Mezvinsky. Clinton wrote in her email to Nides that she was forwarded the email from Siklas to her son-in-law. If Clinton had turned over all work-related emails that she has sent or received - as she has repeatedly claimed - it would be expected that she had an email sent directly to her inbox with Siklas's email attached.
The answer is simple: Clinton did not in fact produce all emails as had been demanded. But while the emails do not show a reply from Mezvinsky, Hillary Clinton eventually obtained a copy and sent it to Nides that August, ordering a follow-up.
Most importantly, as DC concludes, the email shows that people close to Clinton had the inside track in pushing her their pet projects - a pattern that has been on display with nearly every monthly release of Clinton emails.
For those who are shocked, feel free to read what little evidence Clinton did provide of just that, shown below.
|
|
|
finance.yahoo.com
This week, though, the media appeared curiously incurious about the latest tranche of e-mails from the Clinton server. In the largest release yet, State unveiled 7,800 pages of e-mails, of which 328 e-mails were redacted for containing classified information. ABC News dutifully reported on that addition to the refutation of Clinton's claims, and noted that the number of e-mails that contained classified information has reached 999 in total – with about a third of the communications left unpublished for now.
Oddly, though, the media outlet that broke the story didn't seem interested in pursuing that aspect of it. The New York Times report on the latest tranche didn't bother to mention that any e-mails had been classified. Its lead on the release instead noted that one e-mail which had been previously considered classified had been declassified for this release…which presumably kept Clinton from hitting 1,000 refutations to her claims.
The rest of the media didn't take much more of an interest in the implications of this development, either. Most of the focus fell on Philippe Reines' effort to get advice from the NFL for Clinton's "cracked head," as she self-effacingly described her concussion and its aftermath. Others found it amusing that Clinton was a fan of the TV series Homeland but didn't recall which channel to watch for it. Very few news outlets found it newsworthy that the number of classified messages had jumped nearly 50 percent with this release, and none pondered what that meant to Hillary Clinton's credibility.
This lack of interest seems to be of a piece with the narrative that emerged in late October, after the Democrats' first presidential debate and Clinton's testimony to the House Select Committee on Benghazi. They rushed to declare that time frame "the best ten days of the Clinton campaign," even though as Marco Rubio pointed out in a subsequent debate , the testimony actually demonstrated that Clinton lied about Benghazi.
In an e-mail uncovered in the scandal, she told her family within hours of the attack on the consulate that it was an organized terrorist operation, while insisting for the next two weeks that it was a spontaneous demonstration in response to an obscure YouTube video.
Still, ever since then the narrative has had Clinton recovering her bearings and moving past the e-mail scandal even as the FBI probe continues and more classified information is redacted. The collective yawn from the media after this week's release gives us an indication of the level of media interest we can expect, as Hillary Clinton gets closer to the nomination. They want to keep that narrative going rather than look at the thousand ways Clinton lied about her e-mail system and risked national security in order to thwart legitimate oversight into the State Department's performance.
|
|
|
Oct 13, 2015 | Daily Mail Online
Datto Inc has been revealed to have stored Hillary Clinton's emails - which contained national secrets - when it backed up her private server
- It claims it runs 'data fortresses' monitored by security 24 hours a day, where only a retinal or palm scan allows access to its facilities
- But its building in Bern Township, Pennsylvania, doesn't have a perimeter fence or security checkpoints and has two reception areas
- Dumpsters at the site were left open and unguarded, and loading bays have no security presence
- Clinton faces first Democratic debate tonight amid falling poll numbers and growing questions
The congressional committee is focusing on what happened to the server after she left office in a controversy that is dogging her presidential run and harming her trust with voters.
In the latest developments it emerged that hackers in China, South Korea and Germany tried to gain access to the server after she left office. It has also been reported that hackers tried to gain access to her personal email address by sending her emails disguised parking violations which were designed to gain access to her computer.
Daily Mail Online has previously revealed how a former senior executive at Datto was allegedly able to steal sensitive information from the company's systems after she was fired.
Hackers also managed to completely take over a Datto storage device, allowing them to steal whatever data they wanted.
Employees at the company, which is based in Norwalk, Connecticut, have a maverick attitude and see themselves as 'disrupters' of a staid industry.
On their Facebook page they have posed for pictures wearing ugly sweaters and in fancy dress including stereotypes of Mexicans.
Its founder, Austin McChord, has been called the 'Steve Jobs' of data storage and who likes to play in his offices with Nerf guns and crazy costumes.
Nobody from Datto was available for comment.
[Oct 13, 2015] Hillary Clintons private server was open to low-skilled-hackers
Notable quotes:
"... " That's total amateur hour. Real enterprise-class security, with teams dedicated to these things, would not do this" -- ..."
"... The government and security firms have published warnings about allowing this kind of remote access to Clinton's server. The same software was targeted by an infectious Internet worm, known as Morta, which exploited weak passwords to break into servers. The software also was known to be vulnerable to brute-force attacks that tried password combinations until hackers broke in, and in some cases it could be tricked into revealing sensitive details about a server to help hackers formulate attacks. ..."
"... Also in 2012, the State Department had outlawed use of remote-access software for its technology officials to maintain unclassified servers without a waiver. It had banned all instances of remotely connecting to classified servers or servers located overseas. ..."
"... The findings suggest Clinton's server 'violates the most basic network-perimeter security tenets: Don't expose insecure services to the Internet,' said Justin Harvey, the chief security officer for Fidelis Cybersecurity. ..."
"... The U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology, the federal government's guiding agency on computer technology, warned in 2008 that exposed server ports were security risks. It said remote-control programs should only be used in conjunction with encryption tunnels, such as secure VPN connections. ..."
Daily Mail Online
Investigation by the Associated Press reveals that the clintonemail.com server lacked basic protections
- Microsoft remote desktop service she used was not intended for use without additional safety features - but had none
- Government and computer industry had warned at the time that such set-ups could be hacked - but nothing was done to make server safer
- President this weekend denied national security had been put at risk by his secretary of state but FBI probe is still under way
... ... ...
Clinton's server, which handled her personal and State Department correspondence, appeared to allow users to connect openly over the Internet to control it remotely, according to detailed records compiled in 2012.
Experts said the Microsoft remote desktop service wasn't intended for such use without additional protective measures, and was the subject of U.S. government and industry warnings at the time over attacks from even low-skilled intruders.
.... ... ...
Records show that Clinton additionally operated two more devices on her home network in Chappaqua, New York, that also were directly accessible from the Internet.
" That's total amateur hour. Real enterprise-class security, with teams dedicated to these things, would not do this" -- Marc Maiffret, cyber security expert
- One contained similar remote-control software that also has suffered from security vulnerabilities, known as Virtual Network Computing, and the other appeared to be configured to run websites.
- The new details provide the first clues about how Clinton's computer, running Microsoft's server software, was set up and protected when she used it exclusively over four years as secretary of state for all work messages.
- Clinton's privately paid technology adviser, Bryan Pagliano, has declined to answer questions about his work from congressional investigators, citing the U.S. Constitution's Fifth Amendment protection against self-incrimination.
- Some emails on Clinton's server were later deemed top secret, and scores of others included confidential or sensitive information.
- Clinton has said that her server featured 'numerous safeguards,' but she has yet to explain how well her system was secured and whether, or how frequently, security updates were applied.
'That's total amateur hour,' said Marc Maiffret, who has founded two cyber security companies. He said permitting remote-access connections directly over the Internet would be the result of someone choosing convenience over security or failing to understand the risks. 'Real enterprise-class security, with teams dedicated to these things, would not do this,' he said.
The government and security firms have published warnings about allowing this kind of remote access to Clinton's server. The same software was targeted by an infectious Internet worm, known as Morta, which exploited weak passwords to break into servers. The software also was known to be vulnerable to brute-force attacks that tried password combinations until hackers broke in, and in some cases it could be tricked into revealing sensitive details about a server to help hackers formulate attacks.
'An attacker with a low skill level would be able to exploit this vulnerability,' said the Homeland Security Department's U.S. Computer Emergency Readiness Team in 2012, the same year Clinton's server was scanned.
Also in 2012, the State Department had outlawed use of remote-access software for its technology officials to maintain unclassified servers without a waiver. It had banned all instances of remotely connecting to classified servers or servers located overseas.
The findings suggest Clinton's server 'violates the most basic network-perimeter security tenets: Don't expose insecure services to the Internet,' said Justin Harvey, the chief security officer for Fidelis Cybersecurity.
Clinton's email server at one point also was operating software necessary to publish websites, although it was not believed to have been used for this purpose.
Traditional security practices dictate shutting off all a server's unnecessary functions to prevent hackers from exploiting design flaws in them.
In Clinton's case, Internet addresses the AP traced to her home in Chappaqua revealed open ports on three devices, including her email system.
Each numbered port is commonly, but not always uniquely, associated with specific features or functions. The AP in March was first to discover Clinton's use of a private email server and trace it to her home.
Mikko Hypponen, the chief research officer at F-Secure, a top global computer security firm, said it was unclear how Clinton's server was configured, but an out-of-the-box installation of remote desktop would have been vulnerable.
Those risks - such as giving hackers a chance to run malicious software on her machine - were 'clearly serious' and could have allowed snoops to deploy so-called 'back doors.'
The U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology, the federal government's guiding agency on computer technology, warned in 2008 that exposed server ports were security risks.
It said remote-control programs should only be used in conjunction with encryption tunnels, such as secure VPN connections.
[Sep 17, 2015] Hillary Clinton had right to delete personal emails, says US justice department
Guardian presstitutes are ready to defend even indefensible Hillary Clinton behaviour.
Notable quotes:
"... I think that the moment she mixed personal and work related or classified information, she loses the right to claim that any of the emails were personal. Hence, all emails become connected to her work as SOS, and none of the emails can be deleted. None of her emails can be treated as personal anymore, they have now become government property. She had no right to delete anything. ..."
"... In Hillary's case, I suspect "personal emails" is a euphemism for ANY correspondence she does not want exposed in official governmental records, including that which could be used against her politically in the future, i.e. backroom deals, dubious policies, nefarious schemes, etc. ..."
www.theguardian.com
makaio 8 9 This is disheartening and outrageous, with State and Justice skirting around the issues, and as one commenter said, covering for Hillary in a partisan way.The departments have been largely silent on rules and legalities, and now they've evolved to tiptoeing. Pathetic.
The comparison of government server deletions versus private server deletions and wipes is inapt. Government employees and service members -- the millions who aren't as special as Hillary with private off-site servers for their work -- surely can delete any emails they choose, work or personal. But backup records are controlled by government IT departments, who ideally are following records-keeping regulations.
Not so with the queen's server and email setup. She's deplorable, as is this State and Justice mockery.
If the President continues to stand for this, I have no interest in voting. I haven't pulled him into my disgust with this topic until now ... Justice is full of crap. Berkeley2013 7 8 Many things are intriguing about this scandal.
1. The media covers it but not in a comprehensive or responsible way. The NY Times barely touches it. Same with The Economist. The Post pushes it to those vacuous bloggers, DM and CC. The New Yorker is hiding under a rock.
2. You would expect all to write "Calls to Action" of some kind.
3. Some kind of legal clarifications is order--several, actually. All the Title 18 items need to be clarified for the public. Do they apply?
4. Damage analysis. What possible damage could have been done?
5. Role of the administration? How did this situation last for four years?
6. Are the deleted e-mails going to surface?
7. Cost. Why should public pay for the legal and administrative chaos of a rogue SoS? Berkeley2013 flatulenceodor67 4 5 All these issues lead to more questions. In this case, who authorized the use? Who knew? Who responded to the existence of this rogue communications network? Who maintained? Which if any clearances did they have? Did they share any of what they knew with others? And this is just the most basic of this whole tsunami of needless problems. Just this avenue leads to millions of dollars of investigative hours. Many millions... flatulenceodor67 ShinjiNoShinji 1 2 Well one federal Judge thinks so...
http://jonathanturley.org/2015/08/21/federal-judge-says-hillary-clinton-violated-government-policy-in-using-personal-server-while-secretary-of-state/ Berkeley2013 2 3 The Guardian is being quite irresponsible here. You need to quote/date your sources and supply links to the full documents. Which case? When? Who? It looks to me as though you are just grabbing an article by a disreputable Metro DC publication that I am not going to dignify by naming.Also, assuming that something like this story is accurate, why would DOJ do this?
Am not sure why you add a click-bait article to this complex topic--you should just stick with the tabloid, sports, Hollywood junk articles that fill your virtual space these days. tropic2 makaio
2 3 She simply used a classified government email system, or more likely, approved hardcopy classified draft messages for a member of her staff to send with her approval. No, she didn't use a government email system (classified or not). She used a private email system, completely outside the government.
And no, she didn't set up her own server for the purpose of having hard copies of message drafts. So far, she has suggested a range of different reasons:
- To have just one device for both her official and personal communications....which is a lie: she had two devices.
- She was "not thinking very much about it"... which is a lie: she had a private server installed in her house, a domain registered under a former aide's name, and key staffers conducting official government business on that server. And she paid $5000 to a former IT aide to set up the system. Report
ga gamba 1 2 Of course she had the right to delete to personal emails - keep in mind that had she used a gov't-provided account like almost all other State Department employees she would have had to follow the rules governing personal use of tax payer-provided equipment and services. makaio tropic2 0 1 This conversation is pretty muddled.
In short, she wrongly used a private server and personal email address for the majority of her official work, which of course is not permissible for classified information, and questionable at best for unclassified content. And she has wrongly lied to the American public in response to related questions.
But just because she used her private account does not mean she did not have a largely inactive .gov address. And she also likely had a government address on a classified government system, which she or her staff likely used when receiving or sending marked classified information.
Ms Clinton certainly did not have the right to process classified information on a personal computer system. That's illegal. You'd think the top executive would know such things. zbrowne 1 2 I think that the moment she mixed personal and work related or classified information, she loses the right to claim that any of the emails were personal. Hence, all emails become connected to her work as SOS, and none of the emails can be deleted. None of her emails can be treated as personal anymore, they have now become government property. She had no right to delete anything. Socraticus 1 2 In Hillary's case, I suspect "personal emails" is a euphemism for ANY correspondence she does not want exposed in official governmental records, including that which could be used against her politically in the future, i.e. backroom deals, dubious policies, nefarious schemes, etc. Thirdparty Socraticus 0 1 How very cynical of you! If ever there was an opening for a 'Mr. Clean' named Joe Biden, this is it. Hillary is plummeting in the polls. Biden is not in the race, yet he polls 20%. After his appearance on Colbert on Thursday evening, I think that if he were to declare, his support would double, at least. At 40%, he would be ahead of Hillary. In addition to being thoroughly unethical, Hillary is not liked even by those who work with her. ID9630461 7 8 For many, Hillary's very existence is a crime, so no amount of exoneration by the Justice Dept... or indeed anyone else.... will change anything. The relentless attacks will continue, and many of us will continue to see them as a clear indication of how vulnerable the Republicans feel about their own Presidential prospects, with a campaign that's in complete disarray, and a front runner who seems determined to systematically alienate every single one of the demographic groups that the GOP had hoped to court this time around. Frankly, I'd be worried too if I were a Republican! Report
3 4 The Justice Department run by a political democratic appointee says Hillary has "rights" I wonder.....Fast and Furious, NSA spying, Waco, refusal to disseminate information after numerous court orders as directed under freedom of information act etc etc.. So you say we we should stand behind whatever the justice department says....LOL. Seems they are even more guilt of lying and cover ups then she is. Tom Voloshen 3 4 For almost all of us when using the company's equipment our emails become the property of the company. All mail on a company server is backed up for a period of time and it is the responsibility of the user to insure critical Emails are saved or archived properly to prevent them from being deleted thru periodic routine house keeping by the IT department. Being that all emails become company property and subject to review at any time by the company it seems quite obvious this was unacceptable to the Clinton's and could lead to problems similar to the Nixon fiasco on which Hillary cut her teeth just out of school. She as arrogant as she is decided she could ignore the the rules and keep all her communications to herself. She thinks if she says she did no wrong long enough people will give up. They usually do. While that still won't make her right it certainly makes her someone not to be trusted. wavigaru 4 5 Here is the deal folks.... This person wants to be president and have the responsibilities that go along with the office. If she can't even be competent with the little data she was entrusted why should she be given more responsibility? Because she is a woman?Why are we rewarding incompetence? Obama was re-elected despite the incredibly low labor usage, declining wage growth, and skyrocketing health care costs. He made it his mission to provide "affordable" care with the ACA, yet my rates doubled up to $500/month (compare this with my ever decreasing car insurance rates… only $25/month from Insurance Panda now). Yet we voted him in for 8 years? And we want to elect Hillary?
I am sorry but when you do a poor job at any job they don't promote you unless they just want to go out of business. Also what this woman did was a crime. Nixon was impeached for less, Edward Snowden did the same thing and is in hiding in Russia and the Government won't let him come home, and General Petraeus was forced to resign from his position in the CIA yet this woman is not facing any charges so far and is running for the highest office in the land. What is wrong with this picture? chiefwiley andthensome 1 2 Read the entire section under 5 FAM 443.5. Nothing in the system is considered "personal" and there is no expectation of privacy expected or granted. Cherry picking or rephrasing a rule that anybody can read in two minutes is also no way to go about your day.
Every email has a sender and a receiver. Usually multiple servers are involved. Every email in the system is recorded at numerous points, even if deleted at the source or destination. A day or two with a talented engineer and a high speed search engine would recover just about all of it. No warrant would be required for anything with a government connection. -- only the will to do it or an order from the appropriate judge. DracoFerret 3 4 a corrupt woman with such poor judgment and a Tory attitude toward the working class should not be president. No wonder Sanders is rising in the polls.Let her go back to Arkansas makaio Thebirdsareback 1 2 To Clinton's supporters ... here's a nice summary of everything she's done wrong on this subject, most of it intentional with no respect for most anyone.
http://www.sltrib.com/opinion/2937114-155/lowry-how-hillary-can-really-come makaio nolashea 1 2 She has purposely circumvented maintaining public records, dragged her feet in providing records as required, and botched public attempts to claim her actions have been aboveboard ... because they haven't been.
However legal or illegal, unbelievable gullibility is needed to assert she's done nothing wrong.
She's trying to play us, people of all political beliefs. And despite notable executive and media support, she's largely failing, as both public responses and her reactions have demonstrated. Woodenarrow123 3 4 Another biased article that fails to include the context of the allegations (that Clinton had the right to delete emails) and consequently it provides a misleading impression.
This is NO vindication for Hillary Clinton - it is a defence filing in a case where the Judge Emmet Sullivan has already decided at an earlier hearing that Clinton has violated Government Policy with regard to the handling of emails.
As a result of his decision he ordered the State Department to tell the FBI to go through all the emails (that are recovered - assuming they can be recovered), both business and personal, on her home brew server to see if Hillary deleted any emails she should have handed over to him as part of the FOI case.
Now Clinton's people are up in arms - Why? Is it because she deleted embarrassing emails regarding Benghazi? Is it because the FBI (having been instructed by a Federal Judge) might end up reading emails relating to dodgy dealings at the Clinton Foundation?
In the deeply Politicised US Civil Service both the State Department and the Justice Department are objecting to the Judge's decision and are attempting to limit the inquiry.
For those that naively (or perhaps because they support Hillary) believe this is simply a political attack by GOP opponents - It is worth remembering the FBI investigation was launch by the Inspector General and decision to have ALL emails examined was made by a member of the Judiciary (appointed ironically by Bill Clinton).
Both parties cited above are independent of the GOP.
Also for the record Hillary did NOT delete the emails at the time - She deleted them some 18 months after leaving office (according to her lawyer some time after October last year) and AFTER several investigations had been launched.
If Hillary Clinton deleted info relating to matters under investigation after an investigation was launched (destroying evidence) then that is a felony offence.
Hillary understood the seriousness of the question when asked did she wipe the server - That is why she replied along these lines: With a cloth or something.
Again this is no vindication of Clinton - Instead it is a lame defence to a serious charge to a Federal Judge who has already decided in the matter. pattbaa 0 1 What do you Brits know about the "Fast and Furious" scandal in the Dept. of Justice ? ; to have a perspective of how outrageous this was , consider this hypothetical situation.
In Manhattan , a narcotics squad interdicts a gang of drug dealers , a "shoot-out" erupts, and one of the squad members is murdered. The firearm that was used to commit the murder is seized , and an investigation reveals the "Source" of the murder weapon was-- the Office of the District Attorney on New York County!! ( Manhattan)
The D- A's Office was supplying drug criminals with firearms?; would never happen you might say. But that's EXACTLY what happened in the "Fast and Furious" scandal when Eric Holder was Attorney-General; the ATF division of the U. S. Dept. of Justice was selling firearms to members of Mexican drug cartels , and a Border Agent was murdered by a weapon supplied by the ATF division of the Justice Dept.
So much for the Dept. of Justice under the current President. The present A-G , Loretta Lynch , is loyal to the President and the Democratic Party , but not loyal to "Justice". Report
2 3 What do you know about Fast and Furious? Here is a good read for anyone that cares about facts or details:http://fortune.com/2012/06/27/the-truth-about-the-fast-and-furious-scandal/ Ladislav Din 1 2 Hillary in her own words:
"I believe in an open, transparent government that is accountable to the people. Excessive government secrecy harms democratic governance and can weaken our system of checks and balances by shielding officials from oversight and inviting misconduct or error. ... To me, openness and accountability are not platitudes _ they are essential elements of our democracy."
-- Hillary Clinton, May 2008 in response to Sunshine Week survey of presidential candidates.
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/clinton-tells-sunshine-week-shes-committed-to-restoring-open-government-56932142.html John Bluebeard 0 1 When are these extreme right wing terrorists like NPR going to stop saying that Clinton IS NOT exactly telling the truth? http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/09/11/439456567/fact-check-hillary-clintons-email-defense-is-a-mixed-bag
Perhaps it is time to cut off all gov't funding of NPR. We all know the obvious truth-- Clinton has told the truth. Report
0 1 Well, it is refreshing to see someone with a sense of humor about this. Thanks, Mr Bluebeard A_Cappella 1 2 Hillary just needs to lie the U.S. into a very costly war in terms of American and indigenous deaths, trillions of dollars and significant more destabilization in the Mideast.That will mollify the Republicans. CitizenCarrier 0 1 The State Department guidelines for emails had prohibited use of a private server since 2005.
Yet she still keeps saying that what she did was allowed.
Hillary's State Department fired U.S. Ambassador Scott Gration (Kenya) in part for using private emails to evade agency rules.
Hillary said the emails she deleted included private ones between her and her husband. Her husband's spokesman, within days, announced surprise at that, since Bill Clinton has only sent two emails in his entire life...and not to Hillary.
She is a liar. And a felon in violation of the Espionage Act.
[Sep 10, 2015] Hillary Clinton admits private email server was a mistake
Notable quotes:
"... The woman is a hawk and a warmonger. In a sane world she would be ineligible on her voting record and likely foreign policy, not down to some technicality about her email address. ..."
"... The fact that she posted almost identical language on Facebook as she used in the Muir interview certainly suggests that the "apology" was carefully written and likely tested in focus groups. ..."
"... Read the dreadful facts (warning: lolcatz spoiler): http://www.bubblews.com/posts/hillary-email-the-horrid-facts ..."
"... An FBI investigation whilst running to be your party's presidential nominee, let alone running for president in the real thing next year, is never a good look. ..."
"... Agreed. I don't much care about this "classified or not" kerfuffle. I am much more concerned about the Nixonian scrubbing of the email server, when Clinton KNEW her work emails were subpoenaed by the House Benghazi committee. That says GUILTY in no uncertain terms. And I don't think we're ever going to receive an "apology" for those deletions. ..."
"... More than a mistake I'm afraid. At best it is a career ending error of judgment. At worst a deliberate and cynical attempt to maintain personal control of data so none of it could come back to damage her presidential campaign. Anyway, she should be finished. ..."
"... Her "We came, we saw, ..." laughter is inappropriate, especially in light of the turmoil resulting from a power vacuum which we are still witnessing today. But I don't know the context of why everyone in the room is in such a jovial mood. ..."
"... She has no ability, but for deception, no intelligence, unless someone "advises" her beforehand, but she DOES have much experience at deception, and commitment only to herself. Certainly not presidential material. She should just drop and let Bernie take the lead. Of course, her dear friend Wasserman-Shultz, would not allow that to happen. ..."
"... It becomes a matter of criminal conspiracy because Clinton did not just use a private email address. This was a conspiracy to avoid monitored email and a matter of legal public record, arranged as a conspiracy between Clinton's desire to maintain secret communications hidden from the rest of government and the person who did the work of setting up the server with knowledge of how it would be used and the network administrators who allowed it to exist in what should have been a secured network location, knowing how it would be used. So not the childish lie of "I did it but I didn't mean to", but the reality of a conspired plan to thwart record keeping, discussed and implemented with purposeful intent and with no question that it was to hide intended criminal activity. ..."
"... Obviously her "apology" was dragged out of her and is completely insincere. This is the track record of H Clinton - arrogant; power hungry; untrustworthy; unscrupulous; unprincipled; 100% insincere; can't we do any better than this? ..."
"... HRC is aiding her own demonization and I honestly think she's going to lose to whomever/whatever clown emerges from the Right Wing. ..."
"... It's not about leaving an opening for her adversaries, it's is about destroying the public record of the Secretary of State. In the US, government communications belongs to the government and to the people. ..."
"... Sanders is the better person but he will never get nominated. So it's either Hillary or some GOP nutbag. Easy vote. Not optimal, but still an easy choice. ..."
"... the private server was not an error --it was a coup of genius-- since it allowed "the candidate" to hand over only the harmless emails after erasing(?) the damning ones (e.g., those with the quid-pro-quo negotiation of UKR-neonazi donations to the clinton foundation before the 2014 UKR coup d'etat). ..."
"... Hillary has learnt a lot from the old Bill. Denial first step: Bill, I did not have sexual relation with that woman. And I need to go back to work for the American people. ..."
"... Admission second step: Bill admitted in taped grand jury testimony on August 17, 1998, that he had had an "improper physical relationship" with Lewinsky. ..."
"... Clinton consistently acts with arrogant denial when confronted with wrong-doing, and throughout her career there have been repeated situations, each marked by the same denial, arrogance. ..."
"... She believes she'll be anointed and begrudgingly goes on the stump, showing no joy in meeting regular folks and getting huffy when reporters dare ask her questions. ..."
"... The US hasn't been a democracy since day 1. Never meant to be. It was/is a carpetbagger's club. The only thing that's changed is the voters are dumber and the pizazz is crappier (to match the candidates). Why is this even discussed? ..."
"... Then again we are talking about an oligarch aiming to retake the presidential office for her wing of the national aristocracy. What else would one expect. ..."
"... I read where Carl Rove deleted 13,000 emails during the bush horror years. It pisses me off that she apologized for this non-issue because of political pressure. I'm voting for Bernie. ..."
"... Mrs. Clinton has the most unappetizing combination of qualities to be met in many days' march: she is a tyrant and a bully when she can dare to be, and an ingratiating populist when that will serve. She will sometimes appear in the guise of a 'strong woman' and sometimes in the softer garb of a winsome and vulnerable female. She is entirely un-self-critical and quite devoid of reflective capacity, and has never found that any of her numerous misfortunes or embarrassments are her own fault, because the fault invariably lies with others. And, speaking of where things lie, she can in a close contest keep up with her husband for mendacity. Like him, she is not just a liar but a lie; a phony construct of shreds and patches and hysterical, self-pitying, demagogic improvisations." (p. 123) ..."
"... Snowden on Clinton: If an ordinary worker at the State Department or the Central Intelligence Agency were sending details about the security of embassies, meetings with private government officials, foreign government officials and the statements were made over unclassified email systems, they would not only lose their jobs and lose their clearance, they would very likely face prosecution for it. (condensed quotation) ..."
Sep 08, 2015 | The Guardian
MasalBugduv -> MasalBugduv 9 Sep 2015 09:18
Killary? Ha ha. Well she is a bit of a warmonger, isn't she?
dawkinsbulldog 9 Sep 2015 08:50
The woman is a hawk and a warmonger. In a sane world she would be ineligible on her voting record and likely foreign policy, not down to some technicality about her email address.
It's like rejecting Pinochet as Chilean president because he once farted in mixed company.
TamLin -> Oldiebutgoodie 9 Sep 2015 07:43
Great post! For those who don't have time to watch the entire Jim & Hillary interview, the real fun begins just after the 24 minute mark, when Jim says of Iran, "...or they will be taken out", and Hillary responds by into an orgasm of laughter.
NottaBot steveji 9 Sep 2015 07:23
The fact that she posted almost identical language on Facebook as she used in the Muir interview certainly suggests that the "apology" was carefully written and likely tested in focus groups.
ProgRock 9 Sep 2015 07:22
Read the dreadful facts (warning: lolcatz spoiler): http://www.bubblews.com/posts/hillary-email-the-horrid-facts
callaspodeaspode 9 Sep 2015 07:16
An FBI investigation whilst running to be your party's presidential nominee, let alone running for president in the real thing next year, is never a good look.
Added to this is that if anything is calculated to motivate the movement conservative base to its highest ever turnout, it's Hillary Rodham Clinton running for president.
I'm mildly (only mildly) surprised there aren't more senior Democrats out there who can see what a liability she is.
Although I'll say this, if Bernie Sanders gets the nomination, the Republican candidate is going to end up with double the money from billionaires and corporate lobbyists, the cash normally being shared between the two candidates from the Republicrat Party.
Mind you, that will just prove Senator Sanders' point.
NottaBot -> ninjamia 9 Sep 2015 07:09
Agreed. I don't much care about this "classified or not" kerfuffle. I am much more concerned about the Nixonian scrubbing of the email server, when Clinton KNEW her work emails were subpoenaed by the House Benghazi committee. That says GUILTY in no uncertain terms. And I don't think we're ever going to receive an "apology" for those deletions.
thesweeneytodd -> Mark Forrester 9 Sep 2015 06:44
Some perspective please. Dubya caused total mayhem and catastrophe with his ill judged and utterly illegal war in Iraq. His lack of intervention in Katrina resulted in misery and death for many in New Orleans. The most unpopular US president perhaps of all time.
Hilary ran a private email server that was perhaps ill judged.
Like I say, some perspective please.
Mark Forrester 9 Sep 2015 06:38
More than a mistake I'm afraid. At best it is a career ending error of judgment. At worst a deliberate and cynical attempt to maintain personal control of data so none of it could come back to damage her presidential campaign. Anyway, she should be finished.
Oldiebutgoodie -> Oldiebutgoodie 9 Sep 2015 03:54
The interview about Diplomacy with Charlie Rose took place June 2012 - prior to the Benghazi fiasco.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpJWsryvVrcBoth James Baker and Hillary basically admit to forcing Assad out and causing 'regime change' in Syria.
Oldiebutgoodie -> makaio 9 Sep 2015 03:24
Nov. 2009
Hillary on Channel l3, NY's Charlie Rose show - Text of interview.
Subject: Iran, Afghanistan
http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/texttrans/2009/11/20091110130524xjsnommis0.1892206.html#axzz3lDt0HNg2Hillary & Jim Baker interviewed must see laughing about provoking war with Iran
October 2012
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpJWsryvVrcmakaio -> TamLin 9 Sep 2015 01:38
Thanks for the previously unknown to me information.
Her "admission" is sarcasm, which is preceded by a quick note that she was not involved and her visit was unrelated.
Her "We came, we saw, ..." laughter is inappropriate, especially in light of the turmoil resulting from a power vacuum which we are still witnessing today. But I don't know the context of why everyone in the room is in such a jovial mood.
It's hard to get facts on the unfortunate and disastrous consequences of Gaddafi's assassination. I don't directly blame the U.S., but my sense in that our government wrongly gave it a go-ahead.
Timothy Everton -> Hin Leng 9 Sep 2015 01:32
She has no ability, but for deception, no intelligence, unless someone "advises" her beforehand, but she DOES have much experience at deception, and commitment only to herself. Certainly not presidential material. She should just drop and let Bernie take the lead. Of course, her dear friend Wasserman-Shultz, would not allow that to happen.
Rob Jenkins 9 Sep 2015 01:02
American politics is depressing again for me. All realistic candidates seem to be a retrograde step.
Clinton appears to be a moderate Republican from the 90s and has no feasible opponents whilst the GOP primary is a clown car filled with buffoons, crooks and religious zealots.
Where do you go now America?
Hin Leng 9 Sep 2015 00:58
Clearly America has caught a new cultural-political disease called "The Tall Poppy Syndrome". Cut down anyone with ability, intelligence, experience , commitment and vision. Find any excuse for doing it - email server, age, gender, hairstyles, anything whatsoever. Meanwhile give some blatantly nonsensical candidates for its presidency plenty of oxygen and headline space. Is this how an empire expire ? How a hegemon self-destruct ? It is worrying to the extreme.
vr13vr 9 Sep 2015 00:47"I'm sorry about that. I take responsibility."
How is that taking responsibility after half a year of denial and fighting the allegations? Outside of the lingo of politicians, this doesn't even look like taking responsibility. A phrase, "I finally decided to admit the wrong doing," is much more appropriate at this point.
rtb1961 -> Asok Smith 9 Sep 2015 00:43
It becomes a matter of criminal conspiracy because Clinton did not just use a private email address. This was a conspiracy to avoid monitored email and a matter of legal public record, arranged as a conspiracy between Clinton's desire to maintain secret communications hidden from the rest of government and the person who did the work of setting up the server with knowledge of how it would be used and the network administrators who allowed it to exist in what should have been a secured network location, knowing how it would be used.
So not the childish lie of "I did it but I didn't mean to", but the reality of a conspired plan to thwart record keeping, discussed and implemented with purposeful intent and with no question that it was to hide intended criminal activity.
Merveil Meok 8 Sep 2015 23:36Obama and Hillary Clinton were bitter rivals until the end of the primaries in 2008. When Obama suggested that Mrs. Clinton be his Secretary of State, I thought it was a trap and a dangerous proposition for Hillary's future bids to the presidency, because foreign policy was a mess after George W. Bush and anything going wrong in the world would be blamed on her. It looks like the GOP didn't need to work that hard.
p4451d 8 Sep 2015 23:08
Obviously her "apology" was dragged out of her and is completely insincere. This is the track record of H Clinton - arrogant; power hungry; untrustworthy; unscrupulous; unprincipled; 100% insincere; can't we do any better than this?
whereistheend 8 Sep 2015 23:00
I'd never vote for a Republican, but if she didn't have Bill Clinton's last name, she'd be out of the picture, and maybe Elizabeth Warren, or Bill Bradley, or Howard Dean (or Bernie) would have the nomination- any of those names could beat any Republican, but HRC is aiding her own demonization and I honestly think she's going to lose to whomever/whatever clown emerges from the Right Wing. Yes, I think she's going to lose to a clown, and that's depressing, and it's because she has no charm to handle her mistakes, and no judgment to avoid some of them (the 'wiping' comment was sickeningly stupid), and she's sucking up all the coverage so no one else is getting the air they need; most of the discussion is over this BS instead of actual issues and that's not all on Fox News.
Elias Vlanton -> seehowtheyrun 8 Sep 2015 22:47
It's not about leaving an opening for her adversaries, it's is about destroying the public record of the Secretary of State. In the US, government communications belongs to the government and to the people. This is not about what is illegal or not, it is about whether officials can be held accountable for their actions. By destroying the public record, Hillary Clinton wanted to avoid that accountability. That's the real travesty.
Kevin Reuter -> LostLake 8 Sep 2015 22:39
The corporate-run media would like us all to believe that Bernie doesn't stand a chance. Since he has such strong policy suggestions and is demanding such attention, the only possible way to stop him is to flood people's minds with rhetoric such as "he can't win!"
Hillary herself has now been championing policy ideas that Bernie started, such as repealing Citizens United, and $15 minimum wage!
LostLake 8 Sep 2015 21:55
Sanders is the better person but he will never get nominated. So it's either Hillary or some GOP nutbag. Easy vote. Not optimal, but still an easy choice.
sashasmirnoff -> erpiu 8 Sep 2015 21:09
As the "Guardian view" is unfailingly wrong on anything it opines on (proven track record), and it's fully endorsing this scum's candidacy, I can only conclude that she merits life in prison at the least, as opposed to high office. That no media organ is questioning her claim of the deleted emails as being purely "personal" speaks volumes as to the sorry state of journalism in this era, as you point out.
Great post!
erpiu 8 Sep 2015 20:28the private server was not an error --it was a coup of genius-- since it allowed "the candidate" to hand over only the harmless emails after erasing(?) the damning ones (e.g., those with the quid-pro-quo negotiation of UKR-neonazi donations to the clinton foundation before the 2014 UKR coup d'etat).
yes, those erased emails that, let's see... the guardian never mentions, preferring to direct the suckers' attention to the leftover emails selected by billary for regular release. Great diversion job, guardian!
the NSA has hillary's erased emails! When is the MSM going to request that the NSA gives its copies of the erased h.clinton emails to the feds for official archiving and future declassification?
Confucion 8 Sep 2015 20:06In an interview with ABC News's David Muir which aired on Tuesday, the former secretary of state said: "That was a mistake. I'm sorry about that. I take responsibility."
Hillary has learnt a lot from the old Bill. Denial first step: Bill, I did not have sexual relation with that woman. And I need to go back to work for the American people.
Admission second step: Bill admitted in taped grand jury testimony on August 17, 1998, that he had had an "improper physical relationship" with Lewinsky.
Hilary is the best Bill's disciple in his trickery, lies and contempt of people from whom they are seeking employment and benefit.
FugitiveColors kenalexruss 8 Sep 2015 19:56That's wishful thinking. The Judge ordered a release of more emails every 30 days until they are all released. It won't be over in 3 months much less 3 weeks. They say til February. There are 55,000 emails and those are just ones she didn't delete. She deleted 35,000 emails that will dog her forever.
When she finally gives up the ghost, I hope you will consider voting for the honest, scandal free candidate.
Bernie Sanders.EarthyByNature -> Davinci Woohoo 8 Sep 2015 19:54
It's about trust, stupid.
Not being able to trust the potential President of the United States is a huge issue, for everyone on the planet.1) Clinton consistently acts with arrogant denial when confronted with wrong-doing, and throughout her career there have been repeated situations, each marked by the same denial, arrogance.
2) Everyone's entitled to make mistakes in life and to beg forgiveness. When it happens repeatedly trust evaporates. I am no longer able to trust Hillary Clinton, no more no less that any other behaving the same way, Dem or Republican.
allymaxy -> danceoutlook 8 Sep 2015 19:47
Re: the Secretary of State position: Hillary didn't have to campaign for the job, she was appointed. Her problem is she's making the same mistakes running for CinC that she made in 2008.
She believes she'll be anointed and begrudgingly goes on the stump, showing no joy in meeting regular folks and getting huffy when reporters dare ask her questions.
Remember the recent rope line where she corralled the press in a noose of ropes to keep them away from her?
She is a poor candidate - always was and she hasn't learned anything from losing. She repeats the same mistakes and only changes her policies when focus groups chime in.
If Elizabeth Warren declared tomorrow, Hillary would be long forgotten and not missed.
Joe Stanil -> JoeBursudge 8 Sep 2015 19:47The US hasn't been a democracy since day 1. Never meant to be. It was/is a carpetbagger's club. The only thing that's changed is the voters are dumber and the pizazz is crappier (to match the candidates). Why is this even discussed?
Ziontrain 8 Sep 2015 19:24
"Full responsibility" would actually mean admitting that she lacks the integrity to be president and withdrawing her candidacy.
But we live in an era where there is no shame, so "full responsibility" is not more like "yeah, I did it. So what? Nothing changes".
Then again we are talking about an oligarch aiming to retake the presidential office for her wing of the national aristocracy. What else would one expect.
JoeBursudge -> NeverLie 8 Sep 2015 19:22
A carpetbagger in a dress. Tony Blair and the Clintons - just goes to show it isn't country specific.
Though he didn't know them, these are the people Kim Beazley Snr was talking about when he said [the Left] went from being represented by the cream of the working-class to being led by the dregs of the middle-class.
Let's face it: the mere fact that Trump and Clinton are being discussed as a possible President is all the proof you need that America's democracy is stuck with a broken model. It's doubtful that the average Yank is up to fixing it.
Not that we can talk, of course, our system is looking sicker by the day. That a fool like Abbott can commit our troops to war without Parliamentary discussion is a pretty clear signal that our 19th century democratic architecture, too, is in need of renovation, if not a complete re-build.
jozzero -> gwpriester 8 Sep 2015 19:20
I read where Carl Rove deleted 13,000 emails during the bush horror years. It pisses me off that she apologized for this non-issue because of political pressure. I'm voting for Bernie.
OneTop 8 Sep 2015 18:42
Christoper Hitchens summed up HRC as well as anyone.
Mrs. Clinton has the most unappetizing combination of qualities to be met in many days' march: she is a tyrant and a bully when she can dare to be, and an ingratiating populist when that will serve. She will sometimes appear in the guise of a 'strong woman' and sometimes in the softer garb of a winsome and vulnerable female. She is entirely un-self-critical and quite devoid of reflective capacity, and has never found that any of her numerous misfortunes or embarrassments are her own fault, because the fault invariably lies with others. And, speaking of where things lie, she can in a close contest keep up with her husband for mendacity. Like him, she is not just a liar but a lie; a phony construct of shreds and patches and hysterical, self-pitying, demagogic improvisations." (p. 123)
Berkeley2013 williamdonovan 8 Sep 2015 18:35Thank you; there are many more but this is a good start.
As the story unravels, many of there earlier HC rationalizations will require scrutiny--things that seemed innocuous to the average person will require intense scrutiny.
"I deleted e-mails that were personal."
This sounds anodyne enough on first read. Who wants to read billet doux between B and H?
Once people realize that she had no right to mix personal and professional and it certainly wasn't up to any one person what to delete, then even bigger troubles will start for the former SOS.
Sooner or later some of the deleted e-mails will begin to circulate.
At that point...
David Egan 8 Sep 2015 18:15What gets me about this whole issue is the fact that she is still maintaining that "she did what was allowed" which is a bold faced lie!!! All she is doing right now is continuing to "circle her wagons" around this issue.... I'll bet right now she is trying to figure out how to bribe Pagliano to take the fall for her, stating that she knew nothing about what he did to maintain her ILLEGAL email account. They both knew it was ILLEGAL!!! Clinton and Pagliano should be brought up on charges, the sooner the better!!
Her utter contempt for the investigation makes me laugh, she really thinks she did nothing wrong, and to say something as totally ignorant like "It was allowed by the State Dept. and the State Department CONFIRMED that" is beyond belief and borderlines the definition of psychosis. The State Department is actively investigating Shrillary and her accomplice Bryan Pagliano. I'll bet Pagliano goes to prison.....Any takers?
CNNEvadingTheTopic 8 Sep 2015 18:11Stand With Bernie, compare, follow, spread the word, donate, help in campaign.
https://berniesanders.com/ (Meet Bernie, Learn Issues/Events, Volunteer, Donate…)
https://www.facebook.com/berniesanders
https://twitter.com/berniesanders (#FeelTheBern)
https://www.reddit.com/r/SandersForPresident (Become Part Of A Bernie Community)
https://www.reddit.com/r/CodersForSanders (Help Create Bernie Websites & Apps)
http://voteforbernie.org/ (How To Vote In Primaries For Bernie By State, Learn Deadlines)
http://feelthebern.org/ (Bernie On The Issues)
Bernie2016tv = https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_yPTb_MIzNt725QKVW_y9A
http://www.bernie2016.tv / (Discuss Bernie & View Campaing Rallies)Bernie 2016, Feel The Bern!
zyxzyxzyx 8 Sep 2015 18:05
Snowden on Clinton:
If an ordinary worker at the State Department or the Central Intelligence Agency were sending details about the security of embassies, meetings with private government officials, foreign government officials and the statements were made over unclassified email systems, they would not only lose their jobs and lose their clearance, they would very likely face prosecution for it. (condensed quotation)
Clinton on Snowden:
I think turning over a lot of that material-intentionally or unintentionally, because of the way it can be drained-gave all kinds of information, not only to big countries, but to networks and terrorist groups and the like.
macktan894 8 Sep 2015 17:54
Poor Hillary. If she had just said this in the beginning instead of all the bs about how what she did wasn't a prosecutable offense and then tried to defend her behavior by comparing herself to the Republicans, she might have nipped much of this in the bud. Instead, she stonewalls for months, re-enacts her husband's insistence that "he didn't have sex with that woman, Ms Lewinsky," and arrogantly believes that voters will accept that all this is a vast right wing conspiracy that no one gives a hoot about.
Now she admits sorrow over her choice after practically being beat down about it. The main point is that people don't want to re-elect the same o same o. I for one am not looking forward to ranting on a forum about what happened to this promise, to that one. Oh, right. The Republicans. I don't want to hear another Dem try to persuade me that cutting measly social security and Medicare benefits are the way to save the system while at the same time the budget for defense, foreign aid, and mass govt surveillance go up so much that much of it is redacted.
I've heard too much of this before and have no interest in hearing it again. Vote for Bernie Sanders who believes open and transparent govt is worth a little inconvenience.
williamdonovan 8 Sep 2015 17:41
Great now tell it to the Judge. Because as I have stated from the very start these acts were and are Illegal. And Hillary Clinton new it at time she the secret server set up or should have known it.
Title 18, U.S. Code Section 641 - Public Money, Property or Records
793 - Gathering, Transmitting or Losing Defense Information
794 - Gathering of Delivering Defense Information to Aid Foreign Govt.
798 - Disclosure of Classified Information
952 - Diplomatic Codes and Correspondence
1905 - Disclosure of Confidential Information
2071 - Concealment, Removal, or Mutilation of RecordsTitle 50, U.S. Code
Section 783 (b) - Communication of Classified Information by Government Officer or Employee 783(d) - Penalties for ViolationTitle 42, U.S. Code
Section 2272 -Violation of Specific Sections
2273 - Violation of General Sections
2274 - Communication of Restricted Data 2275 - Receipt of Restricted Data
2276 - Tampering With Restricted Data 2277 - Disclosure of Restricted Data
[Aug 18, 2015] Mom and pop shop Clintons private emails housed on server in a bathroom closet - report
It is not true that server was ever was located in "Bathroom closet". But the nickname stick...
Notable quotes:
"... At the time I worked for them they wouldn't have been equipped to work for Hilary Clinton because I don't think they had the resources, they were based out of a loft, so [it was] not very high security, we didn't even have an alarm," ..."
"... "I don't know how they run their operation now, but we literally had our server racks in the bathroom. I mean knowing how small Platte River Networks... I don't see how that would be secure [enough for Clinton]." ..."
"... Last week, Intelligence Community Inspector General Charles McCullough III told Congress that at least five emails from Clinton's private server contained classified information. ..."
"... "top secret," ..."
"... "I'm not sure how that all happened, all I know he was saying he had the opportunity to make quite a bit of money doing it," ..."
"... "Our internal network was extremely secure. At the time Inca St was a relatively obscure location, second floor office. The technology we had in place was pretty good. The security we had in place at the office was really good to protect our well-being." ..."
"... "what changed after I left the company I have no idea, I really could not comment on that. I don't know." ..."
"... "subject to a criminal investigation for the potential release of classified material." ..."
Aug 18, 2015 | RT America
A small IT management firm employed by presidential candidate Hillary Clinton kept its servers containing her private emails in a bathroom closet of its loft-apartment office, according to a new report, in another absurd twist to the Democrat's 2016 run.
TagsElection, Hillary Clinton, Politics
Platte River Networks, based in Denver, Colorado, was hired in mid-2013 by then-US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to maintain her old email server, according to the company's lawyer.
Until this summer, Platte River Networks' office was a loft apartment in downtown Denver, and the servers were stored in a bathroom closet, former employees told the Daily Mail.
The company recently told ABC News it is "highly likely" a full backup copy of the server was made, meaning emails deleted by Clinton could still exist.
Clinton handed the servers to federal investigators last week. Experts believe more than 60,000 emails deleted by Clinton could be recoverable.
Clinton, presumed the frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2016, tasked Platte River Networks with protecting her personal email account long before any scrutiny surfaced over Clinton's handling of classified information on private servers.
One former employee described Platte River Networks as a "mom and pop shop" that seemed unlikely to be a go-to cybersecurity firm for a top government official to house state secrets. Few employees knew that Clinton was a client, the Daily Mail reported.
"At the time I worked for them they wouldn't have been equipped to work for Hilary Clinton because I don't think they had the resources, they were based out of a loft, so [it was] not very high security, we didn't even have an alarm," said Tera Dadiotis, a customer relations consultant between 2007 and 2010.
"I don't know how they run their operation now, but we literally had our server racks in the bathroom. I mean knowing how small Platte River Networks... I don't see how that would be secure [enough for Clinton]."
Platte River Networks moved into a larger workspace earlier this year.
Last week, Intelligence Community Inspector General Charles McCullough III told Congress that at least five emails from Clinton's private server contained classified information. The messages, dating from 2006 and 2008, contained signal intercepts and surveillance photos from Keyhole satellites operated by the CIA and the Pentagon. Two of the emails were labeled "top secret," according to Senate Judiciary Committee chair Chuck Grassley.
Clinton has said nothing in the content of the emails was classified at the time that she received them. According to court documents more than 300 emails have been flagged for "further inspection."
How did Platte River Networks, a small but reputable IT management company in Denver, receive such a prized contract? Ex-employees said David DeCamillis, the company's vice-president of sales and marketing, was active in Democratic Party circles and may have pursued her business.
Platte River co-founder Tom Welch said DeCamillis hoped to rent his home to vice president candidate Joe Biden during the 2008 Democratic Convention in Denver, according to Daily Mail. But Biden didn't take the deal, said Welch, who sold his third of the company in 2010.
"I'm not sure how that all happened, all I know he was saying he had the opportunity to make quite a bit of money doing it," Welch said.
Since Clinton's server did not encrypt emails, critics have also raised concerns over the possibility that hackers may have obtained classified information from her official correspondence. The Clinton campaign maintains there had been no breaches in security.
Welch said the company's servers were secure when he was involved.
"Our internal network was extremely secure. At the time Inca St was a relatively obscure location, second floor office. The technology we had in place was pretty good. The security we had in place at the office was really good to protect our well-being."
He added that "what changed after I left the company I have no idea, I really could not comment on that. I don't know."
New polls coming out of New Hampshire and other early primary states suggest Clinton would lose not just to her primary rival for the party nomination, Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders, but also to some Republican contenders. Her favorability and trustworthiness ratings continue to be low.
A poll by Monmouth University, released before the server handover, showed that 52 percent of respondents thought the emails should be "subject to a criminal investigation for the potential release of classified material."
READ MORE: Headache for Hillary as classified emails draw FBI probe
[Aug 16, 2015] Liar, Liar, Pantsuit On Fire
Notable quotes:
"... And we are expected to believe that there were no data backups? So if in the (Not too uncommon) event that she had a hard drive fail, the US Secretary of State would have been totally unable to function? ..."
"... The fact that she chose not to do so strongly suggests that she made the choice knowing in advance that she was always going to delate anything she wanted. ..."
"... Civil Forfeiture is the thing the Clintons fear the most. Hillary could do a Martha Stewart on her head just as long as she knew ther'd be a couple hundred mil waiting for her when she got out. Bill is a trinket. ..."
"... The archivist for state makes that decision. A half a dozen statutes she ignored and trust me she knew better. Using private email she was supposed to either forward it to her govt account (she didn't have) or print out a hard copy and present to archivist within 20 days. The other gem when she put out the memo not to use personal emails to everyone in state, while she was using personal emails....a goodie. ..."
"... You obviously didn't live through Bills Presidency.... Clintons THRIVE on scandal... they overload the publics senses with so much scandal people start to believe none of it is true. ..."
"... I wonder if she doesn't actually escape this. The intelligence community takes security very seriously, and her crimes are both serious and numerous. Her breaches were so reckless and incompetent (both the deliberate and unintentional ones) that the odds that all of her emails have been compromised by at least Russia and China (and who knows who else) are just under 100%. The IC knows this already. So while laws are normally for the little people I have a hard time believing the IC will look the other way when, were she to win the office, it's a near certainty she's going to get blackmailed, and blackmailed effectively. ..."
Zero Hedge
TeamDepends
... won't care because truth is subordinate to the cause.
philipat
And we are expected to believe that there were no data backups? So if in the (Not too uncommon) event that she had a hard drive fail, the US Secretary of State would have been totally unable to function?
Yeah, sure....And also, having decided to operate as she did, then ALL of the data on that server belongs to the Government and it is for the Government, not Hilary, to decide what is personal and can be returned to her.
Many of us in business use two email accounts, one for business and one (Generally in the cloud) for personal mails so not backed-up with Company data.
The fact that she chose not to do so strongly suggests that she made the choice knowing in advance that she was always going to delate anything she wanted.
I also wonder which data is potentially the most embarassing for Hills, is it the details of the CIA operation in Benghazi or her correspondence with Huma?
TruxtonSpangler
Believe me yet that shes throwing the election, giving her superpac money to Fauxcahontas in exchange for not being investigated when Warren is Pres?
philipat
Now that WOULD be ironic because most of that money came from Wall St and the same Banks that Pocahontas would (Hopefully) go after......
TheReplacement
You don't know that Fauxbaby made her money representing those Wall Streeters in court? All this drama is just entertainment for the masses. It means nothing. No matter who wins, the bankers will still be in control.
Wake up. Ain't nobody gonna go after anybody unless it is us.
TruxtonSpangler
Fauxcahontas wont go after wallstreet, that's all populist rhetoric. Same shit, different politician. This time is different!
macholatte
Civil Forfeiture is the thing the Clintons fear the most. Hillary could do a Martha Stewart on her head just as long as she knew ther'd be a couple hundred mil waiting for her when she got out. Bill is a trinket.
Is that the smell of another Presidential Pardon?
Obama and the Clintons: Top Dems mingle on Martha's Vineyard
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_DEM_2016_CLINTON_OBAMA?SITE=AP...
PlayMoney
with a couple of decades with the feds you are correct she cannot determine what to delete.
The archivist for state makes that decision. A half a dozen statutes she ignored and trust me she knew better. Using private email she was supposed to either forward it to her govt account (she didn't have) or print out a hard copy and present to archivist within 20 days. The other gem when she put out the memo not to use personal emails to everyone in state, while she was using personal emails....a goodie.
JustObserving
The NSA has something on everyone on this planet. Bernie is doomed for his position on Snowden:
Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders said Edward Snowden was defending Americans' freedoms when he leaked classified information about the National Security Agency's intelligence gathering.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/01/06/snowden-clemency-sa...
FireBrander
You obviously didn't live through Bills Presidency.... Clintons THRIVE on scandal... they overload the publics senses with so much scandal people start to believe none of it is true.
Funny.... twice I typed "Clintons" and then 'sc' and the autocomplete suggested 'scandal' :)
ebworthen
"I did not have sex with that Woman."
you enjoy myself
I wonder if she doesn't actually escape this. The intelligence community takes security very seriously, and her crimes are both serious and numerous. Her breaches were so reckless and incompetent (both the deliberate and unintentional ones) that the odds that all of her emails have been compromised by at least Russia and China (and who knows who else) are just under 100%. The IC knows this already. So while laws are normally for the little people I have a hard time believing the IC will look the other way when, were she to win the office, it's a near certainty she's going to get blackmailed, and blackmailed effectively.
Plus, how is the IC going to maintain info security discipline when everyone sees that someone basically crapped all over every law/policy related to classified material, but got off because of who she is. That's not going to go over well even someone as revered as Gen Petraeus gets prosecuted for a fraction of what Hillary did.
[Aug 09, 2015] Hillary Clinton State Department Emails, Mexico Energy Reform, and the Revolving Door
Notable quotes:
"... By Steve Horn, a Madison, WI-based Research Fellow for DeSmogBlog and a freelance investigative journalist. He previously was a reporter and researcher at the Center for Media and Democracy. Originally published at DeSmogBlog . ..."
"... Originally stored on a private server , with Clinton and her closest advisors using the server and private accounts, the emails confirm Clinton's State Department helped to break state-owned company Pemex 's (Petroleos Mexicanos) oil and gas industry monopoly in Mexico, opening up the country to international oil and gas companies. And two of the Coordinators helping to make it happen, both of whom worked for Clinton, now work in the private sector and stand to gain financially from the energy reforms they helped create. ..."
"... The appearance of the emails also offers a chance to tell the deeper story of the role the Clinton-led State Department and other powerful actors played in opening up Mexico for international business in the oil and gas sphere. That story begins with a trio. ..."
"... David Goldwyn , who was the first International Energy Coordinator named by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in 2009, sits at the center of the story. As revealed by DeSmog, the State Department redacted the entire job description document for the Coordinator role. ..."
"... The emails show that, on at least one instance, Goldwyn also used his private " [email protected] " (Goldwyn Global Strategies) email address for State Department business. ..."
"... It remains unclear if he used his private or State Department email address on other instances, as only his name appears on the other emails. But Cheryl Mills, a top aide to Secretary Clinton at the time, initiated the email that he responded to on his private account. ..."
naked capitalism
By Steve Horn, a Madison, WI-based Research Fellow for DeSmogBlog and a freelance investigative journalist. He previously was a reporter and researcher at the Center for Media and Democracy. Originally published at DeSmogBlog.Emails released on July 31 by the U.S. State Department reveal more about the origins of energy reform efforts in Mexico. The State Department released them as part of the once-a-month rolling release schedule for emails generated by former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, now a Democratic presidential candidate.
Originally stored on a private server, with Clinton and her closest advisors using the server and private accounts, the emails confirm Clinton's State Department helped to break state-owned company Pemex's (Petroleos Mexicanos) oil and gas industry monopoly in Mexico, opening up the country to international oil and gas companies. And two of the Coordinators helping to make it happen, both of whom worked for Clinton, now work in the private sector and stand to gain financially from the energy reforms they helped create.
The appearance of the emails also offers a chance to tell the deeper story of the role the Clinton-led State Department and other powerful actors played in opening up Mexico for international business in the oil and gas sphere. That story begins with a trio.
The Trio
David Goldwyn, who was the first International Energy Coordinator named by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in 2009, sits at the center of the story. As revealed by DeSmog, the State Department redacted the entire job description document for the Coordinator role.
Goldwyn now runs an oil and gas industry consulting firm called Goldwyn Global Strategies, works of counsel as an industry attorney at the law firm Sutherland Asbill & Brennan, and works as a fellow at the industry–funded think tanks Atlantic Council and Brookings Institution.
The emails show that, on at least one instance, Goldwyn also used his private "[email protected] " (Goldwyn Global Strategies) email address for State Department business.
It remains unclear if he used his private or State Department email address on other instances, as only his name appears on the other emails. But Cheryl Mills, a top aide to Secretary Clinton at the time, initiated the email that he responded to on his private account.
[Jul 27, 2015] Clinton Favorability Plunges, Sanders Surges Amid Classified Emails Scandal
www.zerohedge.com
Despite all her proclamations of new fairness doctrines, false promises of her truthfulness, and exclamations of 'everyday Americanism' Hillary Rodham Clinton is seeing her favorability ratings collapse. As populist as she dares to be, in the face of her donating captors, it appears the everyday American just isn't buying it as Gallup reports just 43% Americans view her favorably (down from 66% just a few years ago) while none other than Bernie Sanders is bounding up the popularity ladder, rising from 12% to 24% favorability in recent weeks.
Via Gallup,Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders' favorable rating among Americans has doubled since Gallup's initial reading in March, rising to 24% from 12% as he has become better known. Hillary Clinton's rating has slipped to 43% from 48% in April. At the same time, Clinton's unfavorable rating increased to 46%, tilting her image negative and producing her worst net favorable score since December 2007.
JustObserving
just 43% Americans view her favorably
Isn't that 44% too many?
Obama is always the most admired man in this world in Gallup polls
We will never run out of idiots in the land of the free.
Psychopath Hillary sees great humor in Gaddafi's gruesome death: We came, we saw, he died
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fgcd1ghag5Yebworthen
Time for another "dark horse" (pun intended) DEM candidate to steal Hillary's thunder.
Younger, female, and with hints of pan-sexuality...Susan Rice?
Ralph Spoilsport
This guy at the NY Post thinks she's toast. He thinks Valerie Jarret was the leak about the emails and that the White House let her do it.
http://nypost.com/2015/07/26/hillary-has-a-dangerous-enemy-in-the-obama-...
Berspankme
I am sure the leaks come from the white house too. They own the MSM and nothing gets printed without white house okay. They don't want hilary and they are determined to deep six the bitch
LetThemEatRand
"Sanders is still an unknown to a majority of Americans, with just 44% able to rate him compared with Clinton's 89%."
I wonder why. Even ZH barely covers him. I've seen probably 10 Trump stories in the last week here, several Clinton stories, and zero (hedge) Sanders stories until now.
theTribster
Yep, exactly what I've been thinking. Would be nice to see a little love in Bernie's drection, a man with integrity (and lots of it) and some good ideas - but mostly a guy that listens to and works for us.
LetThemEatRand
My interest in Bernie is the same as Trump. They are both spoilers, and they say some truth in the process (Trump very obviously ignores the Fed and is a NeoCon, and Bernie has the problem of thinking taxation is the answer to everything). I'd like to see the MSM and certainly alternative media like ZH give both good coverage so people can hear what they are saying. Maybe someone worth electing would emerge if the vote for the banker candidates were truly split among both Teams.
CHC
I would absolutely LOVE to see Hillary just totally crash and burn! I'd be delighted if she's actually charged with violating a federal law - that would be so damn awesome. That would definitely do something to restore a little faith in our judicial system, but I'm definitely not holding my breath on that. CRASH AND BURN YOU TELETUBBY!
LetThemEatRand
Assume for a moment that Trump is the Ross Perot of the Red Team candidate this election (think George Bush against Bill Clinton). Sanders could play the same role for Hillary or other Blue Team candidate, splitting the Blues. MSM including Fox and other supposedly conservative media can't get enough of Trump (same for ZH for that matter). Not so much for Bernie. What does that tell you about who "they" want to win.
Baby Eating Dingo22
Funny how Sanders gest bashed here
He represents everything that most here clamor for
1.He is not a sell-out to party or lobbyists
2.He has been honest and consistent about his position his entire career
3.He will out the Fed
4.He will out the banksters
5.He will FINALLY aim the printers where they should have ben aimed 10 years ago. Directly at Americans and not to Wall StreetThe ones that don't support him seem to think that someone should come in and stop the printing and we'll be on way to recovery. That's wrong. We're broke 20 times over. The debt's NEVER being paid back.
Let Bernie print until the reset. At least the banksters and Fed will be cut down to size and the 99% can prosper in the meantime
theTribster
Agrred. There is a lot more to this country's problems then our financial system, military - healthcare - good jobs - judicial - corruption everywhere, etc. There is no reason he can't win - it isn't all about money, he needs enough to communicate nationally which he has and more is coming. An amazing fact, there is a national Bernie meeting on the 29th, I looked at how many places around my zip (outside Philly within 50 miles) where the meeting was being held - 192! That's incredible. I then looked at our other locations (Wildwood Crest, Key Colony Beach) and both had 96 and 52 respectively. That is amazing, there is a lot more to Bernie then we know - the polls are corrupt (no surprise) as is the media - Lies and omissions...
Berspankme
Bernie and Trump tapping into pissed off americans
Nutflush60
George Will once called George Wallace's 68 campaign a warnings signal for Deomcrats. Both parties are now warnedt there are lot of angry people out there.
She has the money and organization, but I think the phoniness of Hillary will be so evident to her borderline supporters as time goes on,
Would love to see Kasich pick up mometum for the Repubs.
Bazza McKenzie
Jarrett is busy doing that. The Obama crime family is in the process of obliterating the older Clinton crime family. Then they'll pop up Joe as the Obama family's candidate.
Clinton can either sulk off with her corrupt millions or get charged. That's the path they're taking her down. And that's why the MSM is running stories critical of Clinton. They would be too afraid to do so if they thought there was any chance of her getting the nomination and being elected.
holdbuysell
To dog pile on the rabbit:
Hillary Clinton Exposed:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1mYW5nmS9ps&feature=youtu.be
PlayMoney
This is why we need her http://sweetness-light.com/archive/barbara-olson-on-hillarys-cattle-futures
[Jul 24, 2015] Justice Dept. Is Asked to Investigate Clinton Email by MICHAEL S. SCHMIDT and MATT APUZZO
Jul 24, 2015 | nytimes.com
Two inspectors general asked the Justice Department to investigate whether Hillary Clinton mishandled sensitive information on a private account, senior officials said.
[Jul 24, 2015] Hillary Legal Troubles
Notable quotes:
"... "It is not clear if any of the information in the emails was marked as classified by the State Department when Mrs. Clinton sent or received them." But since Clinton privatized her server, it's a fair point that the potential is there. ..."
www.nytimes.com
"Criminal Inquiry Is Sought in Clinton Email Account" [New York Times].
National security stuff, of course, not privatization or corruption.
"It is not clear if any of the information in the emails was marked as classified by the State Department when Mrs. Clinton sent or received them." But since Clinton privatized her server, it's a fair point that the potential is there.
[Jul 10, 2015] Hillary Clinton emails reveal Cherie Blair acted as go-between for leading Qatari and the-then US Secretary of State
Notable quotes:
"... When Mrs Clinton finally agreed to meet with Middle East royal, who Mrs Blair referred to as "My friend from Q", she replied to the green light, stating: "Great… when I see what a difference you are making it reminds me why politics is too important to be left to bad people ..."
Jul 10, 2015 | independent.co.uk
The wife of the former British prime minister, Tony Blair, lobbied Mrs Clinton, then US Secretary of State, for a "woman-to-woman" meeting in the American capital with Sheikha Mozah bint Nasser al-Missned.
Sheikha Mozah's son is the current ruling emir of Qatar, Sheikh Tamin bin Hamad al-Thani.
Using the close relationship that her husband and Bill Clinton built up during their respective years in Downing Street and the White House, Mrs Blair exchanged a series of 19 emails in 2009 asking Mrs Clinton to help Sheikha Moser improve Qatar's relationship with the US.
Although the meeting was aimed primarily on the Qatari royal's charitable interests, Mrs Blair admitted to the US Secretary of State that "I am sure the conversation would not be confined to these interests [disability charities] but would be about the US/Qatar relationship generally."
When Mrs Clinton finally agreed to meet with Middle East royal, who Mrs Blair referred to as "My friend from Q", she replied to the green light, stating: "Great… when I see what a difference you are making it reminds me why politics is too important to be left to bad people."
[May 20, 2015] Looks Like Hillary May Be Facing Two Perjury Charges
Notable quotes:
"... Clinton served as secretary of state from Jan. 2009 to Feb. 2013. The emails she sent with the "[email protected]" were sent in 2011 and 2012, according to the documents released by the Times. ..."
May 20, 2015 | beforeitsnews.com
Emails published by the New York Times Monday indicate that Hillary Clinton used more than one private email address during her time as secretary of state, contradicting previous claims from the Democratic presidential contender's office.
Multiple emails show Clinton used account "[email protected]" while serving in the Obama administration as secretary of state.
... ... ...
Clinton served as secretary of state from Jan. 2009 to Feb. 2013. The emails she sent with the "[email protected]" were sent in 2011 and 2012, according to the documents released by the Times.
... ... ...
Republican National Chairman Reince Priebus tweeted Monday evening that the news proved Clinton "misled public about the use of only one secret email address."
Earlier this year, it was reported Clinton may have violated federal rules by exclusively using a personal email address to conduct all official government business while serving as secretary of state.
[May 09, 2015] Caught On Tape Stunned Reporter Grills State Department Why Hillary's Breaches Won't Be Investigated
Looks like Hillary is too big to jail.
May 08, 2015 | Zero Hedge
In the past several weeks, not a day has passed without a new scandal surfacing revealing Clinton's lack of judgment whether it involves her abuse of email protocol, or some previously undisclosed financial relation between either Hillary Clinton or the Clinton foundation and an outside donor. The most egregious revelation took place a few days ago when it emerged that the Democratic presidential candidate had breached her agreement with the White House to name all foundation donors during her tenure as secretary of state.
Specifically, as Reuters reported, Clinton had promised the federal government that the Clinton Foundation and its associated charities would name all donors annually while she was the nation's top diplomat. "She also promised that the charities would let the State Department's ethics office review beforehand any proposed new foreign governments donations."
In March, the charities confirmed to Reuters for the first time that they had not complied with those pledges for most of Clinton's four years at the State Department.
The implication is that foreigners banned from donating to U.S. political campaigns could and likely did curry favor with her by giving to the charity that bears her name. The charities accepted new donations from at least six foreign governments while Clinton was secretary of state: Switzerland, Papua New Guinea, Swaziland, Rwanda, Sweden and Algeria. And, of course, Ukraine.
The charities never told the State Department about the new and increased donations. In two instances, the charities said this was the result of "oversights"; for the other six, they said those donations were exceptions to the agreement for various reasons.
The charities also stopped publishing full donor lists from 2010 onwards; the annually updated list omitted donors to the foundation's flagship health initiative.
But the most shocking development took place yesterday when the US State Department, via spokesman Jeff Rathke, told reporters that while it "regrets" that it did not get to review the new foreign government funding, it does not plan to look into the matter further, spokesman Jeff Rathke said on Thursday.
"The State Department has not and does not intend to initiate a formal review or to make a retroactive judgment about items that were not submitted during Secretary Clinton's tenure," Rathke told reporters.
And while the objective, unbiased media would have been up in arms had this gross abuse of government privileges and clear pandering to foreign interests occurred under a Republican candidate, there has been barely a peep from said media as far as Hillary's involvement is concerned.
One person, however, did speak up: that was AP's Matt Lee who asked why the State Department wouldn't investigate further to determine if the tens of millions of dollars in donations had influenced her, and thus the US State Department's, decisions in the 2011-2013 period.
Rathke's response: there is no evidence that these donations to the Clinton charities had any effect on Clinton's decisions.
"We're not going to make a retroactive review on these cases and we will not make a retroactive judgment," he said.
Of course, the circular logic involved is so twisted even hardened, conflicted government apparatchiks would not fail to recognize that there is no way to make a determination if said previously undisclosed donations had influenced her decisions without a further inquiry, an inquiry the State Department refuses to make because it assumes that it would find nothing.
Lee quickly noted this told Rathke that "the reason you are not aware of anything is because the building is refusing to go back and look at it to see if there is anything that might raise a flag."
What followed was 6 minutes of squirming that would make even the most hard-core Clinton supporter blush red with embarrassment at the farce and the corruption evident at every single level of government, especially when certain pre-approved (by Wall Street) candidates are involved.
The full exchange below.
Comte de Saint Germain
With the outcome already decided in favor of Mrs. Clinton in the next presidential elections, this type of nonsense is just focused on keeping entertained the brute and ignorant masses in America. Presidents in the US are selected, NOT elected.
Anusocracy
A read for the political season. This, along with the Moral Intuitions Theory, helps explain why libs and cons are libs and cons.
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2006-01/euhs-esl012406.php
When it comes to forming opinions and making judgments on hot political issues, partisans of both parties don't let facts get in the way of their decision-making, according to a new Emory University study. The research sheds light on why staunch Democrats and Republicans can hear the same information, but walk away with opposite conclusions.
The investigators used functional neuroimaging (fMRI) to study a sample of committed Democrats and Republicans during the three months prior to the U.S. Presidential election of 2004. The Democrats and Republicans were given a reasoning task in which they had to evaluate threatening information about their own candidate. During the task, the subjects underwent fMRI to see what parts of their brain were active. What the researchers found was striking.
"We did not see any increased activation of the parts of the brain normally engaged during reasoning," says Drew Westen, director of clinical psychology at Emory who led the study. "What we saw instead was a network of emotion circuits lighting up, including circuits hypothesized to be involved in regulating emotion, and circuits known to be involved in resolving conflicts." Westen and his colleagues will present their findings at the Annual Conference of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology Jan. 28.
Once partisans had come to completely biased conclusions -- essentially finding ways to ignore information that could not be rationally discounted -- not only did circuits that mediate negative emotions like sadness and disgust turn off, but subjects got a blast of activation in circuits involved in reward -- similar to what addicts receive when they get their fix, Westen explains.
"None of the circuits involved in conscious reasoning were particularly engaged," says Westen. "Essentially, it appears as if partisans twirl the cognitive kaleidoscope until they get the conclusions they want, and then they get massively reinforced for it, with the elimination of negative emotional states and activation of positive ones."
Dame Ednas Possum
What's this 'retroactive' bullshit word w.r.t. judgements?
ALL judgements are on past 'retro' events.
Investigations could hardly assess and pass judgement on future events...
For example it's not like the military of a country e.g. The Department of Attack could legitimately invade foreign countries pre-emptively on the basis of what they judge MIGHT happen... oh wait...
'Retroactive: (especially of legislation) taking effect from a date in the past.'
Is this muppet suggesting that the laws have changed in the U.S. w.r.t. 'democratically' elected holders of public office using their tax-advantaged registered charity to covertly take payments from private interest groups. I
s he suggesting that the morals and ethics of any such conflict of interest have been only recently established?
Absolutely stunning. The audacity of these people is simply breath-taking.
Real Estate Geek
No. More than once I've seen that reporter 'call Bullshit.' I think he enjoys the sport of fucking with flacks who're lying right to his face.
Dame Ednas Possum
Agreed.
I think he does extremely well to maintain his composure and repeat his questions diplomatically. The .gov sock puppet shill was like a deer in headlights; too stunned by legitimate questioning to maintain control of the situation. The worthless fool.
Full credits to the journo.
cnmcdee
This is not about Hillary this is about your very lives.
That flesh bag of feces was knee deep in the killing of Ambassador Stevens who was going to bring down the entire arms shipments to jihadi snack bars.
Maybe we laudibly find this entertaining but if we let the entire whitehouse make edicts above the law there will be nothing left but the slaughters to come upon the American people by nazis in minority mask
New Kid
The AP reporter is controlled opposition. Or he would not have got his foot in the door, Or they would not have let him ask all those questions. AP itself is a red shield organization
nmewn
Hear, hear!
"Bipartisanship" is the Deep States way of compromising BOTH SIDES liberties away. The latest example of this political ruse is the word "gridlock", used by the Deep State (MSM pundits, regulators & pols) to convey some ill-defined crisis building due to governmental inaction.
I submit the absolute opposite is true, it is they who have created every "crisis" by their own actions, bipartisan or otherwise.
The debt & deficit is the result of their actions, domestic spying is the result of their actions, the devaluing of the dollar is the result of their actions...one can go right down the list.
[Apr 10, 2015] Hillary Clinton What to know about her recent controversies, scandals
"... Clinton has said that she deleted 30,000 of about 60,000 emails exchanged during her four years as secretary of state because they were "personal in nature," but that she turned all of her work-related emails over to the State Department. ..."
"... "We do get money from other countries, and some of them are in the Middle East," former President Bill Clinton said last month. "The United Arab Emirates gave us money, do we agree with everything they do? No, but they're helping us fight ISIS and they helped build a university with NYU. . . . My theory about all this is, disclose everything, and let people make their judgments." ..."
"... Lincoln Chafee -- a former Republican senator, independent governor of Rhode Island and potential Democratic presidential nominee -- said this week that Clinton's vote on Iraq should disqualify her from receiving the Democratic nomination in 2016. "I don't think the next president of the United States should have voted in favor of that mistake," Chafee said in an interview with AP. "And I don't think the Democratic party nominee, in particular, should have voted for that mistake." ..."
RT USA
Hillary Clinton, a former US secretary of state (and senator, and First Lady), will reportedly announce her 2016 presidential run Sunday via social media. Expect these recent Clinton scandals to surface again (and again) for the duration of her candidacy.State Department emails
The latest Clinton controversy stems from her use of a private email account and server -- which was found to be insecure for at least three months -- to conduct official business as US secretary of state. Clinton has said she used her private email account -- just as past secretaries of state have done -- as a matter of convenience.
Then just over a week ago, it was revealed that Clinton used both her Blackberry and an iPad to email State Department employees from her private account and server.
US Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), who heads the House Select Committee on Benghazi, issued a subpoena for the private server that hosted Clinton's emails as the congressional panel investigates the 2012 attacks on the US consulate in Benghazi, Libya that killed four Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens. Late last month, he announced that Clinton had failed to respond to the subpoena and had wiped her server clean. In response, the Benghazi committee has formally asked Clinton to answer questions about the server during an in-person, transcribed interview before May 1.
Clinton has said that she deleted 30,000 of about 60,000 emails exchanged during her four years as secretary of state because they were "personal in nature," but that she turned all of her work-related emails over to the State Department.
Benghazi attacksOn September 11, 2012, following the disposition and death of Libyan strongman Muammar Gaddafi, a US diplomatic outpost in Benghazi was attacked, leading to the deaths of US Ambassador to Libya Christopher Stevens, a colleague, and two security contractors -- the latter two at an "annex" used by the CIA. Many top officials of the Obama administration, including the president himself, have been scrutinized ad nauseam by congressional Republicans and the media for actions -- or lack thereof -- taken before the attack. The administration has also been criticized for its behavior during the incident's aftermath, for allegedly attempting to pass blame for any mistakes made that led to the deaths.
Clinton, in her final days as secretary of state at the time, has been a particular focus of investigations, not only due to her role as top US diplomat, but also because of her position as the Democratic Party's likely standard bearer following President Obama's second and final term in the White House. Republicans have claimed that Clinton refused to offer increased security upon request of diplomats stationed in Libya prior to the Benghazi attack. Clinton has denied she ever received word of such requests. The aforementioned private email scandal has provided new fodder for congressional investigators interested in cornering Clinton over the incident. The Obama administration, meanwhile, has been blamed for indirectly providing arms to Al-Qaeda-linked extremists in Libya.
Diplomatic cables published by WikileaksIn late 2010, Wikileaks published 250,000 classified documents sent by State Dept. diplomats from December 1966 to February 2010. The leaked cables -- provided by whistleblower Chelsea Manning, a US Army soldier stationed in Iraq at the time -- displayed the unfiltered face of America's diplomatic machinations, in which embassies were used as a vital tool for American espionage. For instance, secret cables sent under Clinton's name instructed US diplomats to gather "biometric data," such as "fingerprints, facial images, DNA, and iris scans," of African officials.
Other cables targeted the most personal information, including credit card numbers, of United Nations diplomats. Top UN officials -- including Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and security-council representatives from China, Russia, France and the UK -- were also targeted. The leaked cables include myriad other revelations about American diplomatic maneuvers.
Despite the damning contents splayed out for all to see, Clinton asserted that the leaks were not an indictment of Washington's malevolence.
"Let's be clear. This disclosure is not just an attack on America - it's an attack on the international community," Clinton said.
"There is nothing laudable about endangering innocent people, and there is nothing brave about sabotaging the peaceful relations between nations," she added.
The Clinton Foundation donorsLast month, it was reported by the Wall Street Journal that the Clinton Foundation, a charitable organization run by the Clinton family, had accepted as much as $68 million from elite donors with close ties to foreign governments and state-run companies while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state. The conflict-of-interest allegations were denied by the Clintons, who said the donations were part and parcel of building coalitions to tackle the world's most pressing issues.
"We do get money from other countries, and some of them are in the Middle East," former President Bill Clinton said last month. "The United Arab Emirates gave us money, do we agree with everything they do? No, but they're helping us fight ISIS and they helped build a university with NYU. . . . My theory about all this is, disclose everything, and let people make their judgments."
This week, McClatchy News Service reported that, since 2001, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates -- governments that have been maligned for their dismal human rights records and for ties to terror funding throughout the Middle East -- gave as much as $40 million to the Clinton Foundation.
As RT has reported, from 2009 up to 2013, the year the Ukrainian crisis erupted, the Clinton Foundation received at least $8.6 million from the Victor Pinchuk Foundation, which is headquartered in the Ukrainian capital of Kiev, calling into question whether the donations were an attempt to curry favor from the US State Dept. Several alumni of oligarch Pinchuk's program have already graduated into the ranks of Ukraine's parliament, while a former Clinton pollster went to work as a lobbyist for Pinchuk at the same time Clinton was working in government.
According to the International Business Times, the Clinton Foundation accepted million of dollars from a Colombian oil company before then-Secretary of State Clinton changed her previous position and supported a US-Colombia trade deal, controversial for its links to human rights violations. In addition, after the deal was finalized, Clinton's State Department "never criticized or took action against the Colombian government for alleged violations of labor rights at Pacific Rubiales," the oil company "at the center of Colombia's labor strife," IBT reported.
Support for Iraq war, Patriot Act, bank bailoutsDespite a long career in and around government, Clinton has only held one elected position: US senator from the state of New York during the duration of the George W. Bush administration, from 2001 to 2009. Bush's two terms were full of divisive issues, especially following the attacks of September 11, 2001. Two of the top issues that galvanized Democratic opposition to the Bush White House included the American invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the USA Patriot Act, a broad-based national security law passed in late 2001 that was a basis for vast spying programs employed by the likes of the National Security Agency to this day.
Clinton gave the Bush administration political cover from the left on both issues, as she backed the initial invasion of Iraq and twice voted for the Patriot Act. Her Iraq vote became a major issue in her race against Barack Obama for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination, which she would eventually lose.
Lincoln Chafee -- a former Republican senator, independent governor of Rhode Island and potential Democratic presidential nominee -- said this week that Clinton's vote on Iraq should disqualify her from receiving the Democratic nomination in 2016. "I don't think the next president of the United States should have voted in favor of that mistake," Chafee said in an interview with AP. "And I don't think the Democratic party nominee, in particular, should have voted for that mistake."
Chafee, now a Democrat, was the only Republican in the Senate to vote against the Iraq invasion.
Clinton also supported the hugely unpopular bank bailouts amid the financial crisis of 2007-2008.
[Mar 30, 2015] IRS Scandal Deja Vu Hillary Clintons Email Server Wiped Clean
Notable quotes:
"... This appears to have taken place after the first production request had come in, which means that Clinton may well be guilty of destruction of evidence. ..."
"... it appears she made the decision after October 28, 2014, when the Department of State for the first time asked the Secretary to return her public record to the Department." ..."
"... It is time for the Committee to stop this political charade and instead make these documents public and schedule Secretary Clinton's public testimony now. ..."
www.zerohedge.com
Mar 28, 2015 | Zero HedgeIf, as one claims, one is innocent of i) using a personal email account to send out confidential information and/or to take advantage of one's political position to abuse opponents and ii) deleting said confidential emails against government regulations, what would one do when faced with a government subpoena demand? If one is the IRS' Lois Lerner, one would claim, against subsequently revealed facts, that a hardware error led to a permanent loss of all demanded emails, even though by email protocol definition, said emails are always stored on at least one off-site server. Or, if one is Hillary Clinton, one would just format the entire server.
This, according to the Hill, is precisely what Hillary Clinton has done as the recent clintonemail.com scandal continues to grow bigger and impair ever more the already frail credibility and decision-making skills of the former first lady and democratic presidential hopeful. According to the head of the House Select Committee on Benghazi says former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has erased all information from the personal email server she used while serving as the nation's top diplomat.
"We learned today, from her attorney, Secretary Clinton unilaterally decided to wipe her server clean and permanently delete all emails from her personal server," Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) said in a statement Friday.
What difference does it make if she deleted all her emails?
Apparently a lot.
The key question is when said server formatting took place. This appears to have taken place after the first production request had come in, which means that Clinton may well be guilty of destruction of evidence. He said while it's "not clear precisely when Secretary Clinton decided to permanently delete all emails from her server, it appears she made the decision after October 28, 2014, when the Department of State for the first time asked the Secretary to return her public record to the Department."
What's worse, the evidence destroyed officially is US government property, since it was all created when Clinton was an employee of Uncle Sam.
Last week, Gowdy sent a letter to Clinton's attorney asking that the email server be turned over to a third party in the hopes that an investigation could recover about 30,000 emails that her team deleted before turning the rest over to the State Department.
Gowdy said "it is clear Congress will need to speak with the former Secretary about her email arrangement and the decision to permanently delete those emails."
"Not only was the Secretary the sole arbiter of what was a public record, she also summarily decided to delete all emails from her server, ensuring no one could check behind her analysis in the public interest," Gowdy said.
Those intent on defending the former Secretary of State, such as the panel's top Democrat, Elijah Cummings may have their work cut out for them but that doesn't stop them from trying: Cummings said the letter the select committee received from Clinton's attorney detailing what happened the server proves she has nothing to hide.
"This confirms what we all knew - that Secretary Clinton already produced her official records to the State Department, that she did not keep her personal emails, and that the Select Committee has already obtained her emails relating to the attacks in Benghazi," he said in a statement.
"It is time for the Committee to stop this political charade and instead make these documents public and schedule Secretary Clinton's public testimony now."
Clinton has maintained that the messages were personal in nature, but Gowdy and other Republicans have raised questions over whether she might have deleted messages that could damage her expected White House run in the process.
"I have absolute confidence that everything that could be in any way connected to work is now in the possession of the State Department," Clinton said during a press conference in New York earlier this month.
Sadly, there is nothing but her word to go by at this moment: a word whose credibility has now been fatally compromised by her recent actions.
She said she had culled through more than 60,000 emails from her time at State and determined that roughly 30,000 of them were public records that should have been maintained.
Gowdy said given Clinton's "unprecedented email arrangement with herself and her decision nearly two years after she left office to permanently delete" information, his panel would work with House leadership as it "considers next steps."
Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), Gowdy and other members of the Benghazi panel in the past have hinted that the full House could issues a subpoena for Clinton's server.
The Hill concludes by treating the population to the next upcoming kangaroo court: House Oversight Committee Chairman Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) has suggested his panel could hold hearings over Clinton's use of private email, emphasizing his panel's jurisdiction over violations of the Federal Records Act.
Will anything change as a result? Of course not, because the real decision-maker has already hedged its bets. Recall Blankfein has already indicated that despite his strong preference for a democrat president, one which would perpetuate the Fed's policies, "he would be fine with either a Bush or Clinton presidency." Which in a country controlled and dominated by lobby interests, and which happens to be the "best democracy that money can buy" is all that matters.
Au Member
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LihB7ZoGf4c
All you need to know about this toxic duo right there.
[Mar 14, 2015] Clinton defence of personal email server fails to placate critics
Mar 14, 2015 | The Register
Phil Barnett, a VP at mobile device management vendor Good Technology, questioned Clinton's data management practices.
"Personal and highly sensitive corporate data are very different and should be treated as such," Barnett said. "But that's not to say you can't have them on the same device. The user experience must be high quality to keep data secure -- if your corporate security model is too heavy, people will find a way around it.
"Separating and containerising sensitive data allows one device to do both jobs while balancing usability and security. And the more sensitive the data, the more critical this approach becomes," he added.
The affair has created issues around using personal vs. government issued e-mail addresses, as well as the preservation requirements that apply to each case. The incident has also thrown up regulatory, compliance and storage/e-discovery issues.
Mark Noel, a former litigator for Latham & Watkins who went on to co-found an electronic discovery software firm before moving onto Catalyst Repository System, is more sympathetic to Clinton's DIY email set-up, arguing that there's a good chance that historically significant data will be recovered one way or another.
"The use of a personal email account doesn't necessarily mean there's any intent to hide things," Noel said. "It's very common for busy professionals to try to funnel everything into one email account or one device, because multiple devices or accounts are too much of a pain to deal with and take up way too much time. When the government or corporate system isn't set up to allow that kind of efficiency, people often craft their own solutions purely for the sake of getting their jobs done."
Emails sent or received by Clinton might still be accessible even if here or her staff either deleted or lost them for any reason. There are always copies at the other end, the managing director of professional services at Catalyst Repository System pointed out.
"Analysts who are complaining that 'there's no way we can know if there's anything missing' aren't quite right," Noel said. "We do this all the time in civil litigation and government investigations. Emails tend to leave copies on every server they touch, so even if a sender doesn't keep a copy of it, the receiver's email system probably did. If Ms. Clinton emailed other government issued accounts, those emails are very likely preserved -- just in a different location."
Gaps in the record might also be revealed via practices common in commercial litigation, according to Noel.
"Additionally, there are other types of analysis, such as 'gap analysis' that can reveal whether email is likely missing, based on the usual pattern and quantities of email and whether there appear to be 'holes' in the emails that are preserved. These types of analyses are also quite common in civil litigation and government investigations where it is suspected that someone is intentionally hiding or deleting evidence," he concluded. ®
[Mar 14, 2015] http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/mar/14/hillary-clinton-arkansas-friends
From comments:: She's not a computer tech and hasn't got a clue as to whether security was breached. If the hackers can invade gov't websites (wikileaks) and major corporations, it's not only possible but very likely that her security was breached.
Mar 14, 2015 | The Guardian
flatulenceodor67 -> J.K. Stevens 14 Mar 2015 12:33
"She was on a secured server and has already confirmed that security was not breached."
What an ASININE statement believing a compulsive/corrupt KNOWN LIAR! I guess it takes one to know one.
Spanawaygal -> J.K. Stevens 14 Mar 2015 12:12
She's not a computer tech and hasn't got a clue as to whether security was breached. If the hackers can invade gov't websites (wikileaks) and major corporations, it's not only possible but very likely that her security was breached.
[Mar 12, 2015] Hillary Clinton is now the face of shadow IT
Notable quotes:
"... Usually, employees who decide to engage in shadow IT don't have bad intentions. They do so because what they're getting from corporate IT isn't good enough: Corporate-issued devices and apps are clunky, enterprise security measures ruin the user experience, IT is too slow to respond to requests. ..."
"... Battling on another front, CIOs should reach out to shadow IT vendors with an olive branch. While it's reactionary to slam vendors for bypassing IT, this won't stop them from selling directly to employees. Instead, CIOs should focus on building a relationship with vendors so that their services can spread throughout the organization on a long-term basis rather than sold to individuals and business units on an ad hoc basis, Riley says. ..."
"... Even if the political furor over Clinton's private email system subsides and continued debate shows shadow IT as a common practice -- "Colin Powell, Rick Perry and Jeb Bush used private email" for government business, Riley says -- this doesn't mean there aren't severe consequences. ..."
"... CIOs hope these fears have lasting effects, at least in the workplace. Clinton proved that she wasn't able to get away with her personal email system, and the fallout to her career can be great. Her situation should sound a warning to employees about the dangers of shadow IT. ..."
"... "The message is, if you try to circumvent us, then you're going to cause pain for yourself," Riley says. "But if you work with us, we're more than willing to give you whatever you need." ..."
Mar 12, 2015 | www.cio.com
"Heavy-handed approaches are not going to eliminate shadow IT, it'll just go farther underground," says Deputy CTO Steve Riley at Riverbed, an enterprise software vendor. "There's no positive outcome for being a disciplinarian about something like this. You might end up with services that are even more dangerous, where people now actively seek to circumvent policies."Usually, employees who decide to engage in shadow IT don't have bad intentions. They do so because what they're getting from corporate IT isn't good enough: Corporate-issued devices and apps are clunky, enterprise security measures ruin the user experience, IT is too slow to respond to requests.
CIOs need to change this perception but not in an antagonistic way. Riley advises CIOs to work with employees in areas where shadow IT tends to start and spread, such as file sharing and instant messaging. It's easier to rein in data from five services than 30, Riley says.
Battling on another front, CIOs should reach out to shadow IT vendors with an olive branch. While it's reactionary to slam vendors for bypassing IT, this won't stop them from selling directly to employees. Instead, CIOs should focus on building a relationship with vendors so that their services can spread throughout the organization on a long-term basis rather than sold to individuals and business units on an ad hoc basis, Riley says.
CIOs can use Clinton case as a teachable moment
Ironically, the Clinton case might help CIOs fight against shadow IT by spurring employees to police themselves. Even if the political furor over Clinton's private email system subsides and continued debate shows shadow IT as a common practice -- "Colin Powell, Rick Perry and Jeb Bush used private email" for government business, Riley says -- this doesn't mean there aren't severe consequences.
There will likely be inquiries about whether or not Clinton broke the law. Her reputation as someone to be trusted has been tarnished. Her peers might think twice about lending their support if she put her political party at risk. If a smoking-gun email surfaces or a national security breach comes to light, Clinton will be under fire.
CIOs hope these fears have lasting effects, at least in the workplace. Clinton proved that she wasn't able to get away with her personal email system, and the fallout to her career can be great. Her situation should sound a warning to employees about the dangers of shadow IT.
"The message is, if you try to circumvent us, then you're going to cause pain for yourself," Riley says. "But if you work with us, we're more than willing to give you whatever you need."
[Mar 10, 2015] Killary Clinton faces new questions over personal emails she 'chose not to keep' by Jon Swaine
This case convincingly demonstrates to the world not only that Hillary is an a very weak politician, but also that she is uncapable to attract decent experts.
10 March 2015 | The Guardian
The former secretary of state said she had preserved official communications but her office said she 'chose not to keep her private, personal emails'
Hillary Clinton failed to quell mounting criticism over her controversial private email account on Tuesday evening after her office suggested she had erased more than half of her emails before turning them over for release to the American public.
In a statement released after a press conference intended to end a week-long controversy, Clinton's office said that she did not preserve 31,830 of the 62,320 emails she sent and received while serving as Barack Obama's secretary of state from 2009 to 2013.
"After her work-related emails were identified and preserved, Secretary Clinton chose not to keep her private, personal emails that were not federal records," her office said, in a defiant nine-page explanation for the unusual arrangement that has put her under political fire.
Republicans accused Clinton of blocking transparency. It could not be confirmed whether the deleted archives included messages sent and received by Clinton relating to her family's philanthropic foundation. Donations to the foundation by foreign governments and corporations are the subject of a separate ongoing controversy.
The continuing saga threatened to complicate the plans for her expected second campaign for the US presidency, which were thought to be in their final stages in advance of an announcement in April.
Criticism has grown since it was revealed last week that Clinton did not use an official government email address during her four years at the State Department. She instead conducted all official business using a private address under the ClintonEmail.com domain.Clinton conceded at a press conference in New York on Tuesday afternoon that she had erred and "it would have been better" to have used separate email accounts for work and personal matters. However, she insisted she had used a single account on one mobile phone for "convenience", adding: "I thought using one device would be simpler, and obviously, it hasn't worked out that way."
The former secretary's office said she had turned over all 30,490 of her sent and received emails that related to her work to the State Department. They manually searched her archive, the statement said, first by finding all emails involving people with government email addresses, then searching for some people by name and for topics such as Libya.
All these are expected to be published. "You will see everything from the work of government, to emails with State and other administration colleagues, to LinkedIn invites, to talk about the weather -- essentially what anyone would see in their own email account," her office said.
In further defiant remarks on the emails that Clinton will not turn over, her office insisted that none contained material relevant to her work in four years leading Foggy Bottom.
"These were private, personal messages, including emails about her daughter's wedding plans, her mother's funeral services, and condolence notes, as well as emails on family vacations, yoga routines, and other items one would typically find in their own email account, such as offers from retailers, spam, etc," it said.
But the Republican party, which accused Clinton of "putting our national security at risk for 'convenience'" by operating the private email server, said there could be no independent verification that Clinton had preserved all messages related to her work."Because only Hillary Clinton controls her personal email account and admitted she deleted many of her emails, no one but Hillary Clinton knows if she handed over every relevant email," Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee, said in a statement.
Clinton rejected suggestions that an independent monitor could review her email server to examine emails not turned over. "I believe that I have met all of my responsibilities and the server will remain private," she said at the press conference.
Despite separately indicating all personal messages were erased, she said the server "contains personal communications from my husband and me". Clinton's spokesman did not respond to an email seeking clarification on what precisely had been erased.
Other critics pointed to remarks made by Clinton at an onstage interview last month, in which she said she used both an iPhone and a Blackberry. Discussing devices later in the conversation, Clinton said, "I don't throw anything away, I'm like two steps short of a hoarder." It was not clear when Clinton began using two devices.
The statement from Clinton's office addressed other questions raised by the news of her email server -- several relating to security and her interaction with foreign governments. The statement said her team's review of Clinton's email archive "revealed only one email with a foreign (UK) official". It clarified that "during her time at State, she communicated with foreign officials in person, through correspondence, and by telephone".
Clinton said during her press conference that she had never used the email account to send classified material. She insisted that the server had been secure by being placed on property protected by the secret service and claimed to know that the system had never been breached.
[Mar 08, 2015] Clinton email domain shows effort for security and obscurity, say experts
Notable quotes:
"... Doesn't the FBI, NSA, or some part of Homeland Security vet what government agencies are doing with their computer security? ..."
"... And how could Obama not know about this, unless he never exchanged e-mail with Hillary, which seems unlikely. ..."
"... I also wonder why Kerry would not question the absence of Clinton's correspondence when he took office? Doesn't he, as the successor, have to establish a historical record? Wouldn't her communications be part of that process? ..."
"... The main focus of the controversy comes because she could have deleted any emails she wanted to. ..."
"... Funny, we're back to paper as the only secure way to communicate anything (as in Roman Polanski's The Ghost). ..."
"... Despite the fact that digital record keeping continues to advance, the record keeping requirements go back to the early 50's and there is simply no reason that she should now be in possession of these records instead of either the State Department or the National Archives. ..."
"... The fact that she has criminally violated at least a dozen US Federal laws has nothing to do with the fact that she is lower than pond scum. God help us if she gets elected to POTUS! ..."
"... Her dishonesty and corruption already have been well documented for many decades, and she has proven that despite all her "image makeovers", she is the same untrustworthy person we always knew she was. ..."
"... It is not her decision to create her own web accounts to avoid public scrutiny. This is exactly what is wrong with Washington. No accountability or transparency. ..."
"... Bottom line if official State Department business was being routed through a personal email system she needs to go down for it. I work a mundane middle class job as a data analyst and my employer would be furious and fire me instantly if I routed work related emails and attachments through my personal email so why should Hillary get off the hook? ..."
"... The fact that the email traffic isn't encrypted makes this strictly amateur hour. ..."
"... The fact that the email isn't immediately controlled and discoverable by the govt is appalling enough. The fact it's apparently secured using small business standards just makes it worse. ..."
"... Was there any footnotes or exceptions noted concerning use of a private email server ? If not, then we should get our money back from auditing contractor. If they didn't discover and report it as an exception, then they should be barred from federal contracting for gross incompetence or complicity in this deception. ..."
"... "Dick Cheney in a pantsuit" is gonna live forever, or at least as long as she remains in the public arena ..."
"... Not having encryption (google smtps), which is easily determined if the mail server is still running, is a very bad sign. ..."
"... If Clinton is using Internap right now, that should be the subject of ridicule, not praise. ..."
"... People lost their jobs when Hillary was in charge over there for doing the EXACT SAME THING. ..."
"... The ruling elite plays by their own rules. ..."
"... Actually, the rules were there before. ..."
"... It is the Department's general policy that normal day-to-day operations be conducted on an authorized AIS, which has the proper level of security control to provide nonrepudiation, authentication and encryption, to ensure confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the resident information. ..."
Mar 08, 2015 | The Guardian
captainjohnsmith 2015-03-07 18:06:55
Questions, questions. Doesn't the FBI, NSA, or some part of Homeland Security vet what government agencies are doing with their computer security? Wouldn't that have turned up Hillary's private scheme? And how could Obama not know about this, unless he never exchanged e-mail with Hillary, which seems unlikely.
kgb999again -> BeckyP
Hillary Clinton was not serving as a politician. She was serving as a high official in a non-elected office of the U.S. Government. She is required by law to maintain accessible records within the government of every meeting and communication she conducted - for both accountability and historic legacy reasons.
If she wanted to behave as a politician, she shouldn't have accepted the role of Secretary of State.
macktan894
The basic question is still: why would she do such a thing? Why would she insist that all her email and that of her principal staff be handled by this private server?
And I guess I would also wonder how this could go undetected and unscrutinized for so long? Why would not anyone receiving email from the Clinton people wonder why they were getting email from an account that was non government in its address?
I also wonder why Kerry would not question the absence of Clinton's correspondence when he took office? Doesn't he, as the successor, have to establish a historical record? Wouldn't her communications be part of that process?
I recall when Obama won the nomination in 2008, he had a meeting with Clinton re her appt to sec of state. He was surprised when she turned up with a "contract" that listed items she needed him to agree to if she were to join his administration. Was this server business in that contract?
Why do I have these questions but reporters do not?
thegradycole -> macktan894
Why does anybody do it? Jeb Bush used a personal server while he was governor of Florida and then handed over 275,000 emails, of course just like Clinton he didn't release those that he determined were of a personal nature. Kerry is the first SOS to use the official .gov server.
The main focus of the controversy comes because she could have deleted any emails she wanted to. But I always thought that nothing could really be deleted. If they have the server don't they have everything?
This whole thing better be more than the usual it-looks-bad-but-we-can't-find-anything. It gets to the point where the appearance of impropriety becomes a conspiracy, they add "gate" to it and it has a life of its own. If there's something there let's see it. Scott Walker and Chris Christie have similar problems as their emails are part of criminal investigations.
Funny, we're back to paper as the only secure way to communicate anything (as in Roman Polanski's The Ghost).
BradBenson -> chiefwiley 8 Mar 2015 06:48
Well yes, in theory. In actual practice Freedom of Information Requests were always treated with disdain by the agencies. Since I left Government in 1999, it has gotten much worse.
You are absolutely correct that she should not be mixing official and private business or the servers, which carry them. All of her official correspondence should have been retained in a Government Server.
Despite the fact that digital record keeping continues to advance, the record keeping requirements go back to the early 50's and there is simply no reason that she should now be in possession of these records instead of either the State Department or the National Archives.
FloodZilla 8 Mar 2015 06:43
The fact that she has criminally violated at least a dozen US Federal laws has nothing to do with the fact that she is lower than pond scum. God help us if she gets elected to POTUS!
Anne Vincent 8 Mar 2015 03:19
If she was too insecure to utilize the US Government's own computer system, then she is too insecure to reside in the White House or to work as a US Government official. She needs to "move on".
Her dishonesty and corruption already have been well documented for many decades, and she has proven that despite all her "image makeovers", she is the same untrustworthy person we always knew she was.
David Egan 7 Mar 2015 22:34
Mayer added that speculation that Clinton had created a "homebrew" internet system was "plainly inaccurate", at least when talking about the current configuration of the service.
Newsflash!!! Hillary had no business, legal or otherwise, to create her own network!!
This way she has total control over the e-mails that she wants to make public.... GET IT.....??
David Egan -> anthonylaino 7 Mar 2015 22:28
I agree!!! The elitist one percent have made billions and knowingly sent tens of thousands of people to their deaths, just for a buck (ok, well, lots of bucks) and to further their jack boot on the throat of the average citizen from any country...
Financial Bondage For Everyone!!!!
Zooni_Bubba 7 Mar 2015 20:58
Maybe Clinton had security and maybe she didn't. It is not her decision to create her own web accounts to avoid public scrutiny. This is exactly what is wrong with Washington. No accountability or transparency. When someone under investigation gets to decide what to supply, they not the authorities control the evidence.
Stephen_Sean 7 Mar 2015 20:25
Bottom line if official State Department business was being routed through a personal email system she needs to go down for it. I work a mundane middle class job as a data analyst and my employer would be furious and fire me instantly if I routed work related emails and attachments through my personal email so why should Hillary get off the hook?
Dems better start looking for an alternative. Hillary isn't the one you want answering the phone at 3am.
Trixr -> Miles Long 7 Mar 2015 19:54
From a technical point of view, saying it's a 'high security' system is cobblers. Anti malware is the LEAST you can do for email security in a corporate system. Having a domain registered in one location and traffic coming from another means absolutely nothing in these days of shared hosting and dynamically-provisioned server farms. No-one puts their personal details on a WHOIS these days. I don't, and I just have a dinky little personal domain.
The fact that the email traffic isn't encrypted makes this strictly amateur hour.
The fact that the email isn't immediately controlled and discoverable by the govt is appalling enough. The fact it's apparently secured using small business standards just makes it worse.
And this 'expert' is an idiot, or not giving the full story.
John Hemphill -> imipak 7 Mar 2015 19:12
Just curious if know by chance, how did the State Department do in their last couple ot FISMA audits ?
Was there any footnotes or exceptions noted concerning use of a private email server ? If not, then we should get our money back from auditing contractor. If they didn't discover and report it as an exception, then they should be barred from federal contracting for gross incompetence or complicity in this deception.
ElmerFuddJr -> MakeBeerNotWar 7 Mar 2015 18:37
"Dick Cheney in a pantsuit" is gonna live forever, or at least as long as she remains in the public arena.!.
MakeBeerNotWar -> ElmerFuddJr 7 Mar 2015 18:48
- yes but one risks the label of misogynist by her many followers. Cheney is a true psychopath tho and Clinton could reach being one thus why the Dems who really care about our country need to find an alternate candidate so HRC will not be given the chance to start another idiotic fraud war that benefits Wall $t, I$rael and the MIC.
GuardianIsBiased127
What a bunch of liberal spin by ABC. I've run mail servers for 20 years. Scanning for viruses etc is trivial and every email provider does it. Not having encryption (google smtps), which is easily determined if the mail server is still running, is a very bad sign.
macktan894 -> GuardianIsBiased127
Agree. Saying that her system scanned for viruses and was therefore "secure" is a laugh. My computer scans for viruses, too, as do most computers. We all know that does not equate with topnotch security. I also use an Apple. Still, the NSA or any other cyberterrorist can easily hijack my computer if that's the goal.
ludaludaluda
"internap" is not a good company by any measure -- my company has been a client for years.
If Clinton is using Internap right now, that should be the subject of ridicule, not praise.
bbuckley
Look, let's be clear. People lost their jobs when Hillary was in charge over there for doing the EXACT SAME THING.
Where's the email that has Hillary wanting these poor people being brought back to work. Hillary has in the past spoken of the danger of using a private domain.
This is once again the rules don't apply to Clintons. And I'm going to tell Ya all something: the investigators will be going to gmail, or yahoo, or whoever, and making 100% sure they get it all. I truly do not care for this woman. I find her to be a shifty giant egoed elitist. However, I'm not ready to yell guilty. Decency and fair play require that I see the pudding before I declare the truth. But, she damn well knew the rules, so why hide the emails? It won't be a mystery lover, that's for sure. She didn't want them seen, there's gotta be a reason for that.
Danish5666
The ruling elite plays by their own rules.
Kelly Kearns -> Miles Long
Actually, the rules were there before.
12 FAM 544.2 Automated Information System (AIS)
Processing and Transmission
(CT:DS-117; 11-04-2005)November 4, 2005 above.
Kelly Kearns -> imipak
"12 FAM 544.3 Electronic Transmission Via the Internet
(CT:DS-117; 11-04-2005)
a. It is the Department's general policy that normal day-to-day operations be conducted on an authorized AIS, which has the proper level of security control to provide nonrepudiation, authentication and encryption, to ensure confidentiality, integrity, and availability of the resident information. The Department's authorized telework solution(s) are designed in a manner that meet these requirements and are not considered end points outside of the Department's management control. "
[Mar 07, 2015] Email scandal Hillary Clintons impulse to secrecy by Ruth Marcus
Quotes: ...Indeed, Clinton herself was once worked up about this very issue. "We know about the secret wiretaps, the secret military tribunals, the secret White House email accounts," she said back then. ...So far, the explanation from Clintonworld about the failure to comply with this basic rule of modern archiving has been inadequate and unpersuasive. ...This has the distinct odor of hogwash. First, the basic rule that government business is to be transacted from government accounts doesn't have a well-we'll-capture-it-anyway exception.
Notable quotes:
"... "We know about the secret wiretaps, the secret military tribunals, the secret White House email accounts," she said back then. ..."
"... the email domain clintonemail.com that she appears to have been using was created on Jan. 13, 2009, the very day Clinton's confirmation hearings began. ..."
"... So far, the explanation from Clintonworld about the failure to comply with this basic rule of modern archiving has been inadequate and unpersuasive. ..."
"... First, the basic rule that government business is to be transacted from government accounts doesn't have a well-we'll-capture-it-anyway exception. ..."
"... What is the legitimate reason for conducting official business on a personal back-channel? Why, if not for purposes of secrecy, would Clinton choose to operate that way? ..."
March 3, 2015 | delawareonline.com
Hillary Clinton may not have a serious opponent for the Democratic nomination – except herself.
The Clintons' unfortunate tendency to be their own worst enemy is on display, again, with reports that, as secretary of state, Hillary Clinton conducted official business solely from a personal email account.
This is a problem – and not only because it presents a particularly unflattering contrast with the move by former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush to release a flood of official emails. It illustrates Clinton's reflexive impulse to secrecy over transparency, a tendency no doubt bolstered by the bruising experience of her White House years, yet one that she would be well advised to resist rather than indulge.
Indeed, Clinton herself was once worked up about this very issue. "We know about the secret wiretaps, the secret military tribunals, the secret White House email accounts," she said back then.
So what to make of the revelation that Clinton avoided official email entirely while at State? This had to be a deliberate decision. After all, the issue of the Bush emails was still in the news.
And, as The Washington Post's Philip Bump reports, the email domain clintonemail.com that she appears to have been using was created on Jan. 13, 2009, the very day Clinton's confirmation hearings began.
To back up: The Federal Records Act requires agencies to maintain records of official business, including emails. The National Archives, which oversees such collection, had this to say in 2013 about the use of personal email accounts:
"While agency employees should not generally use personal email accounts to conduct official agency business, there may be times when agencies authorize the use of personal email accounts, such as in emergency situations when federal accounts are not accessible or when an employee is initially contacted through a personal account. In these situations, agency employees must ensure that all federal records sent or received on personal email systems are captured and managed in accordance with agency recordkeeping practices."
Italics mine.
So far, the explanation from Clintonworld about the failure to comply with this basic rule of modern archiving has been inadequate and unpersuasive.
Clinton spokesman Nick Merrill "declined to detail why she had chosen to conduct State Department business from her personal account," reported The New York Times, which broke the story.
This has the distinct odor of hogwash. First, the basic rule that government business is to be transacted from government accounts doesn't have a well-we'll-capture-it-anyway exception.
Second, the government records to be retained aren't only intra-agency communications. If Clinton is emailing with world leaders or others about official business, the entire point of the Federal Records Act is to ensure that those communications are captured for history.
This should have been clear. Certainly, the intersection of email and federal records law has been evolving. Former Secretary of State Colin Powell writes about his effort to use "the then-newfangled email system" to communicate with counterparts overseas. His successor, Condoleezza Rice, rarely used email to transact business but employed her government address when she did.
What is the legitimate reason for conducting official business on a personal back-channel? Why, if not for purposes of secrecy, would Clinton choose to operate that way?
That Clinton has recently turned over 55,000 pages of email records in response to an overdue burst of documentary housekeeping by State does not excuse her lack of compliance while in office.
That her proto-campaign describes her activities as complying with "both the letter and spirit" of the rules would be jaw-dropping, if it weren't so sadly familiar.
Ruth Marcus' email address is [email protected].
We may need a new metaphor to describe the situation Clinton faces now.
Is Hillary Clinton's challenge that she's been set up for failure, or for success?See also
- Hillary Clinton, too cautious for her own good Her secretive ways with official e-mail repeats the same mistake she has made for nearly a quarter-century. Dana Milbank | Opinions | Mar 6, 2015
- What Democrats are missing about Hillary Clinton The Hillary Clinton e-mail scandal is not just about rule-breaking. Jennifer Rubin | Opinions | Mar 6, 2015
- The 'Texts from Hillary' meme isn't so funny anymore. An image that evoked Clinton as a boss has taken on new meaning following her e-mail controversy. Hunter Schwarz | Politics | Mar 6, 2015
- House committee subpoenas Clinton emails in Benghazi probe. A House committee investigating the Benghazi, Libya, attacks issued subpoenas Wednesday for the emails of Hillary Rodham Clinton, who used a private account exclusively for official business when she was secretary of state - and also used a computer email server now traced back to her family's New York home. Associated Press | Technology | Mar 5, 2015
- House committee subpoenas Clinton emails in Benghazi probe. A House committee investigating the Benghazi, Libya, attacks issued subpoenas Wednesday for the emails of Hillary Rodham Clinton, who used a private account exclusively for official business when she was secretary of state - and also used a computer email server now traced back to her family's New York home. Associated Press | Technology | Mar 4, 2015
- White House says Clinton did not heed e-mail policy. Hillary Clinton's official e-mail habits once again draw attention to her penchant for secrecy - a trait that has created political problems since her years as first lady.
Mar 07, 2015] Hillary Clinton email controversy leaves some anxious Democrats looking for 'plan B'
Mar 07, 2015 | telegraph.co.uk
Controversy over Hillary Clinton's use of a private email account while serving as secretary of state has sent fresh waves of alarm through the Democratic Party, with activists saying they need a "plan B" if Mrs Clinton's candidacy runs aground.
... ... ...
Mrs Clinton is under attack after it emerged she may have broken the law by using a personal email account, run out of a private server in an office near her New York home, during her entire tenure as secretary of state.
Under pressure from Republicans who accuse her of "a scheme to conceal" her communications, Mrs Clinton has agreed to release four years' worth of emails.
For a woman who fought through the dark days of her husband's impeachment and her own loss to Barack Obama in 2008, the current political storm is one more round of choppy weather.
But the email controversy has alarmed some Democrats, who say the party cannot afford to head into the election with no alternatives to Mrs Clinton.
"We should have a plan B," said Martin Peterson, a party chairman in the crucial early voting state of Iowa. "We will pretty much lose the general election if we don't have a competition for the nomination."
... ... ...
A Quinnipiac poll found that Mrs Clinton commanded the support of 56 per cent of Democrat voters.
Elizabeth Warren, a Left-wing senator from Massachusetts, was on 14 per cent, despite saying she was not going to run.
... ... ...
Mrs Clinton has not yet formally announced her candidacy but may do so as early as next month.
patrickz
Thanks for a well-balanced, thoughtful assessment of Frau Clinton's position within the Democratic Party's "American Idol" tryouts. America's media couldn't sum up the situation with such honesty and dispassion -- nor would they ever want to. With barely a little over a year and a half until the 2016 November elections, now is not the time for our media to hold back on the hysteria, name calling, Mean Girl remarks, malicious misquoting, rumor spreading and journalistic tire slashing. If only Barack Obama had a younger, equally articulate brother, then yet another Clan Kennedy political dynasty would be born -- but alas, Trayvon Martin, Obama's almost son, cannot run.
DavEd -> CamerBand
''Hillary Rodham Clinton's 2011 campaign to drive Moammar Gadhafi from power did significant damage to U.S. intelligence, according to a top Libyan aide and U.S. intelligence officials.
The Libyan dictator provided regular reports to the CIA that helped capture or kill key al Qaeda figures and thwart terrorist attacks against American targets overseas, those sources said.
The Libyan regime, for instance, helped U.S. forces kill a key al Qaeda operative of a suicide attack on a U.S. air field in Afghanistan in 2007 when Vice President Dick Cheney was visiting.''
Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com...
Ted Crilly
The worlds most famous cuckold continues to display a lot of the unfortunate symptoms. ( as revealed by her undisguised joy at the death of Gaddafi)
As such, she is the very last person on earth to have a finger near any buttons
(no pun intended)
DavEd CamerBand Ted Crilly" Hillary Clinton on Gaddafi: "We came, we saw, he died" followed by much laughter.
Robert Rudolph
Oh, Hillary will press on. She thinks she's indispensable, and anyway what else would she do with those vats of campaign money? Further, it's unlikely that any credible Democratic candidate will enter the field against her. The cry of "party unity" will weigh against the challenger; so will the vats of campaign money mentioned above.
midnighteye
I hope she still is wins the candidacy. Although she would be my second worst nightmare as president (after Obama) only just over 40% of the American people think she is honest and with her big idiotic mouth and her obvious disdain for the intelligence of the electorate she could only go downhill from here.
daysofglorypassed
Nothing that she has ever done or said that was questionable (or worse) and nothing that she will say or do, no matter how offensive to 50% of the country between now and Nov. 1, 2016, will make a bit of difference to the biased, liberal U.S. media. She is preordained. Her gender oppression card was trumped by his race oppression card in 2008, but now her time has come. It doesn't matter that she isn't deserving, qualified or trustworthy, she is a liberal female and the media can hardly contain themselves. Martin O' Malley is mostly unknown to most Americans, except for the couple million of us who had the pleasure of having our pockets picked by him and our businesses banished to neighboring states for the last 8 years. He does not offer a solution to anything and is probably a more accomplished self-aggrandizer than Bill Clinton himself...his hero and mentor.
The Republicans better wake up and realize that they must move to the center of the country and fast. Let the fundamentalist Christians and take-no-prisoners neocons leave and form their own party. Their only hope to defeat Queen Hillary is a tough minded, fighting centrist....they need Chris Christie.
George
Goodness, if her emails reveal any activities similar to those previously displayed by her despicable "husband" for the sake of my digestive system I would not want them revealed - EVER -- She must be one of the few women in the world who actually makes Frau Merkel and "La Kretena" of Argentina appear attractive !
Continued
Recommended Links
Google matched content
Softpanorama Recommended
Top articles
Oldies But Goodies
[Jul 12, 2016] DNI Clapper Denies Paul Ryan Request to Block Clinton From Classified Intel Briefings
[Jul 11, 2016] 5 Reasons The Comey Hearing Was The Worst Education In Criminal Justice The American Public Has Ever Had by Seth Abramson
[Jul 06, 2016] FBI Rewrites Federal Law to Let Hillary Off the Hook by Andrew C. McCarthy
[Dec 27, 2017] Mueller investigation can be viewed as an attempt to avoid going after Clinton and hide the fact that a corrupted intelligence service worked to derail Sanders
[Dec 12, 2017] Thoughts on Neoconservatism and Neoliberalism by Hugh
[Sep 11, 2017] Around 1970 corporate managers and professionals realized that they shared the same education, background and interests with capital owners and realigned themselves, abandoning working class and a large part of lower middle class (small business owners)
[Sep 11, 2017] Around 1970 corporate managers and professionals realized that they shared the same education, background and interests with capital owners and realigned themselves, abandoning working class and a large part of lower middle class (small business owners)
[Jul 13, 2017] Progressive Democrats Resist and Submit, Retreat and Surrender by James Petras
[May 23, 2017] Trumped-up claims against Trump by Ray McGovern
[May 23, 2017] Are they really out to get Trump by Philip Girald
[Feb 19, 2017] The deep state is running scared!
[Dec 10, 2018] One thing that has puzzled me about Trump methods is his constant tweeting of witch hunt with respect to Mueller but his unwillingness to actually disclose what Brennan, Clapper, Comey, et al actually did
[Nov 27, 2018] The political fraud of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's "Green New Deal"
[Nov 23, 2018] Sitting on corruption hill
[Nov 03, 2018] Kunstler The Midterm Endgame Democrats' Perpetual Hysteria
[Oct 04, 2018] Brett Kavanaugh's 'revenge' theory spotlights past with Clintons by Lisa Mascaro
[Oct 02, 2018] I m puzzled why CIA is so against Kavanaugh?
[Sep 16, 2018] Looks like the key players in Steele dossier were CIA assets
[Sep 02, 2018] Open letter to President Trump concerning the consequences of 11 September 2001 by Thierry Meyssan
[Aug 14, 2018] I think one of Mueller s deeply embedded character flaw is that once he decides on burying someone he becomes possessed
[Aug 14, 2018] US Intelligence Community is Tearing the Country Apart from the Inside by Dmitry Orlov
[Jul 17, 2018] I think there is much more to the comment made by Putin regarding Bill Browder and his money flows into the DNC and Clinton campaign. That would explain why the DNC didn t hand the servers over to the FBI after being hacked.
[Jul 16, 2018] Putin Claims U.S. Intelligence Agents Funneled $400K To Clinton Campaign Zero Hedge
[Jul 15, 2018] What Mueller won t find by Bob In Portland
[Jul 15, 2018] Sic Semper Tyrannis HILLARY CLINTON S COMPROMISED EMAILS WERE GOING TO A FOREIGN ENTITY – NOT RUSSIA! FBI Agent Ignored Evide
[Jul 15, 2018] Peter Strzok Ignored Evidence Of Clinton Server Breach
[May 03, 2018] Alert The Clintonian empire is still here and tries to steal the popular vote throug
[Apr 21, 2018] On the Criminal Referral of Comey, Clinton et al by Ray McGovern
[Apr 01, 2018] Big American Money, Not Russia, Put Trump in the White House: Reflections on a Recent Report by Paul Street
[Mar 13, 2018] The CIA takeover of the Democratic Party by Patrick Martin
[Mar 10, 2018] Visceral Russo-phobia became a feature in Obama policy and HRC campaign long before any Steele s Dossier. This was a program ofunleashing cold War II
[Mar 02, 2018] Contradictions In Seth Rich Murder Continue To Challenge Hacking Narrative
[Jan 27, 2018] As of January 2018 Trump's firing of FBI Director James Comey, is starting to look like something Trump should have done sooner.
[Jan 26, 2018] Warns The Russiagate Stakes Are Extreme by Paul Craig Roberts
[Jan 24, 2018] Whistleblower Confirms Secret Society Meetings Between FBI And DOJ To Undermine Trump
[Jan 22, 2018] The Associated Press is reporting that the Department of Justice has given congressional investigators additional text messages between FBI investigator Peter Strzok and his girlfriend Lisa Page. The FBI also told investigators that five months worth of text messages, between December 2016 and May 2017, are unavailable because of a technical glitch
[Jan 20, 2018] What Is The Democratic Party ? by Lambert Strether
[Jan 19, 2018] #ReleaseTheMemo Extensive FISA abuse memo could destroy the entire Mueller Russia investigation by Alex Christoforou
[Jan 13, 2018] The FBI Hand Behind Russia-gate by Ray McGovern
[Jan 02, 2018] What We Don t Talk about When We Talk about Russian Hacking by Jackson Lears
[Dec 20, 2019] Did John Brennan's CIA Create Guccifer 2.0 and DCLeaks by Larry C Johnson
[Dec 04, 2019] The central question of Ukrainegate is whether CrowdStrike actions on DNC leak were a false flag operation designed to open Russiagate and what was the level of participation of Poroshenko government and Ukrainian Security services in this false flag operation by Factotum
[Dec 04, 2019] Common Funding Themes Link 'Whistleblower' Complaint and CrowdStrike Firm Certifying DNC Russia 'Hack' by Aaron Klein
[Dec 04, 2019] DNC Russian Hackers Found! You Won't Believe Who They Really Work For by the Anonymous Patriots
[Dec 04, 2019] June 4th, 2017 Crowdstrike Was at the DNC Six Weeks by George Webb
[Dec 04, 2019] Cyberanalyst George Eliason Claims that the "Fancy Bear" Who Hacked the DNC Server is Ukrainian Intelligence – In League with the Atlantic Council and Crowdstrike
[Dec 04, 2019] Fancy Bear - Conservapedia
[Dec 04, 2019] June 2nd, 2018 Alperovich's DNC Cover Stories Soon To Match With His Hacking Teams by George Webb
[Nov 30, 2019] CrowdStrike: a Conspiracy Wrapped in a Conspiracy Inside a Conspiracy by Oleg Atbashian
[Nov 28, 2019] WSJ story reopens the claim Comey had a report there was an email exchange between Loretta Lynch and Clinton claiming Lynch promised her the DOJ would go easy on Clinton.
[Sep 10, 2019] Being called a narcissist by Jim Comey is akin to being accused of having sex with underage girls by the late Jeffrey Epstein by Larry C Johnsons
[Aug 23, 2019] Spygate The Inside Story Behind the Alleged Plot to Take Down Trump by Jeff Carlson
[Aug 17, 2019] The Unraveling of the Failed Trump Coup by Larry C Johnson
[Jul 29, 2019] Looks like Epstein turned informant for Mueller s FBI in 2008. Likely earlier
[Jul 27, 2019] Understanding the Roots of the Obama Coup Against Trump by Larry C Johnson
[Jun 30, 2019] USG's Bizarre Change of Position in the Roger Stone Case by Larry C Johnson
[Jun 19, 2019] Investigation Nation Mueller, Russiagate, and Fake Politics by Jim Kavanagh
[Jun 16, 2019] Rule of law in Murrika is kaput
[Jun 05, 2019] Do Spies Run the World by Israel Shamir
[May 30, 2019] Whatever you may think of Trump, the people who set out to 'get him' are the scum of the Earth
[May 15, 2019] Barr s Investigator John Durham Once Probed Mueller In A Shocking Case
[May 11, 2019] Doug Ross @ Journal A TIMELINE OF TREASON How the DNC and FBI Leadership Tried to Fix a Presidential Election [Updated]
[May 10, 2019] Mueller Report - Expensive Estimations And Elusive Evidence by Adam Carter
[May 03, 2019] Former high-ranking FBI officials on Andrew McCabe's alarming admissions
[May 03, 2019] Andrew McCabe played the key role in the appointment of the special prosecutor
[Apr 17, 2019] Deep State and the FBI Federal Blackmail Investigation
[Apr 15, 2019] War is the force that gives America its meaning.
[Apr 10, 2019] Habakkuk on cockroaches and the New York Times
[Apr 07, 2019] Nunes The Russian Collusion Hoax Meets An Unbelievbable End
[Mar 25, 2019] Russiagate was never about substance, it was about who gets to image-manage the decline of a turbo-charged, self-harming neoliberal capitalism by Jonathan Cook
[Mar 25, 2019] Spygate The True Story of Collusion (plus Infographic) by Jeff Carlson
[Mar 24, 2019] The accountability that must follow Mueller's report
[Mar 24, 2019] "Russia Gate" investigation was a color revolution agaist Trump. But a strnge side effect was that Clintons have managed to raise a vicious, loud mouthed thug to the status of some kind of martyr.
[Mar 24, 2019] With RussiaGate Over Where's Hillary
[Mar 17, 2019] As Hemingway replied to Scott Fitzgerald assertion The rich are different than you and me : yes, they have more money.
[Mar 11, 2019] Bruce Ohr, Liar or Moron by Larry C Johnson
[Feb 15, 2019] FOIA Docs Reveal Obama FBI Covered Up Chart Of Potential Hillary Clinton Crimes
[Jan 15, 2019] Apparently, the FBI, and not the CIA, are the real government.
Sites
Etc
Society
Groupthink : Two Party System as Polyarchy : Corruption of Regulators : Bureaucracies : Understanding Micromanagers and Control Freaks : Toxic Managers : Harvard Mafia : Diplomatic Communication : Surviving a Bad Performance Review : Insufficient Retirement Funds as Immanent Problem of Neoliberal Regime : PseudoScience : Who Rules America : Neoliberalism : The Iron Law of Oligarchy : Libertarian Philosophy
Quotes
War and Peace : Skeptical Finance : John Kenneth Galbraith :Talleyrand : Oscar Wilde : Otto Von Bismarck : Keynes : George Carlin : Skeptics : Propaganda : SE quotes : Language Design and Programming Quotes : Random IT-related quotes : Somerset Maugham : Marcus Aurelius : Kurt Vonnegut : Eric Hoffer : Winston Churchill : Napoleon Bonaparte : Ambrose Bierce : Bernard Shaw : Mark Twain Quotes
Bulletin:
Vol 25, No.12 (December, 2013) Rational Fools vs. Efficient Crooks The efficient markets hypothesis : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2013 : Unemployment Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 23, No.10 (October, 2011) An observation about corporate security departments : Slightly Skeptical Euromaydan Chronicles, June 2014 : Greenspan legacy bulletin, 2008 : Vol 25, No.10 (October, 2013) Cryptolocker Trojan (Win32/Crilock.A) : Vol 25, No.08 (August, 2013) Cloud providers as intelligence collection hubs : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : Inequality Bulletin, 2009 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Copyleft Problems Bulletin, 2004 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Energy Bulletin, 2010 : Malware Protection Bulletin, 2010 : Vol 26, No.1 (January, 2013) Object-Oriented Cult : Political Skeptic Bulletin, 2011 : Vol 23, No.11 (November, 2011) Softpanorama classification of sysadmin horror stories : Vol 25, No.05 (May, 2013) Corporate bullshit as a communication method : Vol 25, No.06 (June, 2013) A Note on the Relationship of Brooks Law and Conway Law
History:
Fifty glorious years (1950-2000): the triumph of the US computer engineering : Donald Knuth : TAoCP and its Influence of Computer Science : Richard Stallman : Linus Torvalds : Larry Wall : John K. Ousterhout : CTSS : Multix OS Unix History : Unix shell history : VI editor : History of pipes concept : Solaris : MS DOS : Programming Languages History : PL/1 : Simula 67 : C : History of GCC development : Scripting Languages : Perl history : OS History : Mail : DNS : SSH : CPU Instruction Sets : SPARC systems 1987-2006 : Norton Commander : Norton Utilities : Norton Ghost : Frontpage history : Malware Defense History : GNU Screen : OSS early history
Classic books:
The Peter Principle : Parkinson Law : 1984 : The Mythical Man-Month : How to Solve It by George Polya : The Art of Computer Programming : The Elements of Programming Style : The Unix Hater’s Handbook : The Jargon file : The True Believer : Programming Pearls : The Good Soldier Svejk : The Power Elite
Most popular humor pages:
Manifest of the Softpanorama IT Slacker Society : Ten Commandments of the IT Slackers Society : Computer Humor Collection : BSD Logo Story : The Cuckoo's Egg : IT Slang : C++ Humor : ARE YOU A BBS ADDICT? : The Perl Purity Test : Object oriented programmers of all nations : Financial Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2008 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2010 : The Most Comprehensive Collection of Editor-related Humor : Programming Language Humor : Goldman Sachs related humor : Greenspan humor : C Humor : Scripting Humor : Real Programmers Humor : Web Humor : GPL-related Humor : OFM Humor : Politically Incorrect Humor : IDS Humor : "Linux Sucks" Humor : Russian Musical Humor : Best Russian Programmer Humor : Microsoft plans to buy Catholic Church : Richard Stallman Related Humor : Admin Humor : Perl-related Humor : Linus Torvalds Related humor : PseudoScience Related Humor : Networking Humor : Shell Humor : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2011 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2012 : Financial Humor Bulletin, 2013 : Java Humor : Software Engineering Humor : Sun Solaris Related Humor : Education Humor : IBM Humor : Assembler-related Humor : VIM Humor : Computer Viruses Humor : Bright tomorrow is rescheduled to a day after tomorrow : Classic Computer Humor
The Last but not Least Technology is dominated by two types of people: those who understand what they do not manage and those who manage what they do not understand ~Archibald Putt. Ph.D
Copyright © 1996-2021 by Softpanorama Society. www.softpanorama.org was initially created as a service to the (now defunct) UN Sustainable Development Networking Programme (SDNP) without any remuneration. This document is an industrial compilation designed and created exclusively for educational use and is distributed under the Softpanorama Content License. Original materials copyright belong to respective owners. Quotes are made for educational purposes only in compliance with the fair use doctrine.
FAIR USE NOTICE This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to advance understanding of computer science, IT technology, economic, scientific, and social issues. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided by section 107 of the US Copyright Law according to which such material can be distributed without profit exclusively for research and educational purposes.
This is a Spartan WHYFF (We Help You For Free) site written by people for whom English is not a native language. Grammar and spelling errors should be expected. The site contain some broken links as it develops like a living tree...
You can use PayPal to to buy a cup of coffee for authors of this site Disclaimer:
The statements, views and opinions presented on this web page are those of the author (or referenced source) and are not endorsed by, nor do they necessarily reflect, the opinions of the Softpanorama society. We do not warrant the correctness of the information provided or its fitness for any purpose. The site uses AdSense so you need to be aware of Google privacy policy. You you do not want to be tracked by Google please disable Javascript for this site. This site is perfectly usable without Javascript.
Last modified: March, 01, 2020
