wayneflorida 0 #1 September 9, 2015 http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/hillary-clinton-private-email-mistake-im/story?id=33608970 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBkGdbci-wM I'm Sorry Song by Brenda Lee I'm sorry, so sorry That I was such a fool I didn't know E-mail could be so cruel Oh, oh, oh, oh Oh, oh Oh, yes You tell me mistakes Are part of being SOS But that don't right The wrong that's been done I'm sorry (So sorry) So sorry Please accept my apology But E-mail is blind And I was too blind to see Oh, oh, oh, oh Oh, oh Oh, yes You tell me mistakes Are part of being SOS But that don't right The wrong that's been done Oh, oh, oh, oh Oh, oh Oh, yes I'm sorry, so sorry Please accept my apology But E-mail was blind And I was too blind to see (Sorry) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #2 September 9, 2015 I'm more interested in what "I take responsibility for it" means in terms of actions and corrections. Admitting it and taking responsibility for it are two different things. I don't even know what taking responsibility for security breaches even means really - how do you put the rabbit back in the hat? in any case, admitting it and apologizing is always the best political option she has ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,517 #3 September 9, 2015 As a former IT professional, I'd have to say that her personal server, with no oversight, was a pants-on-the-head stupid decision, and trying to justify it as ok for so long, almost as stupid. 10 years earlier that might not have been the case; standards weren't as well established. But at least some formal oversight, criminy! I'd hate to have to choose between her and the Donald, or Cruz. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Anvilbrother 0 #4 September 9, 2015 Is there some sort of government information protection procedure that her aids, lawyers, IT guy, anyone who had physical access to the hardware had to follow? It seems like there were a alot of hands all over this information. Would they not also have to have a government clearance, or do they? Postes r made from an iPad or iPhone. Spelling and gramhair mistakes guaranteed move along, Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #5 September 9, 2015 wmw999 As a former IT professional, I'd have to say that her personal server, with no oversight, was a pants-on-the-head stupid decision, and trying to justify it as ok for so long, almost as stupid. 10 years earlier that might not have been the case; standards weren't as well established. But at least some formal oversight, criminy! I'd hate to have to choose between her and the Donald, or Cruz. Wendy P. Bottom line is she is NOT an IT professional... and the fact her email address was very well known by thousands.. and still no one in a position of IT Security pointed it out IF it was supposedly such a breach of security. Delegation in large organizations means executives do not have to deal with menial tasks..... But the menial minds outside of that reality can't seem to grasp that sort of reality. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rickendiver 6 #6 September 9, 2015 I've been working at several national laboratories and other government entities for nearly 40 years, and worked with classified material for much of it. If I may share a few insights: Government servers are not slow. Claiming incompetence/ignorance is not a plausible defense. Anyone handling classified matter has tons of REQUIRED training and signs NDA's. By operating outside of the system, she bypassed all safeguards, protections, protocols, oversights and auditing. Blatant, numerous violations of 18 US Code 793 & several Presidential Orders. Possibly some International Agreements & Atomic Energy Act of 1954- depending on category, classification & Sigma of documents involved. Anyone (authorized) that received emails containing classified information from her would know this was illegal and would be required to report it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wolfriverjoe 1,523 #7 September 9, 2015 For the standard "Worker Bee", absolutely. There is virtually no way that classified material could "accidentally" be mishandled. But HRC is "special." First Lady, Senator, SecState. NONE of those are "ordinary" positions. And most people who hole those positions feel that the "normal rules" don't apply to them. And in many (most?) cases, they don't. I would like to know what "Take full responsibility" means. Does that mean she is going to give up any and all security clearances? Or attend remedial classes on how to handle classified material? Or is it just something convenient to say that means about the same as what any politician usually says... Nothing."There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy "~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rickendiver 6 #8 September 9, 2015 As a "worker bee", I would expect to be: 1. Stripped of all clearances/accesses 2. Fired 3. Barred from any future government employment 4. Arrested and charged with the aforementioned violations, and very likely espionage as well. If convicted, $250k fine, up to 10yrs jail for each offense under 18 USC 793. 5. Wishing I were in politics, instead of research Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rickendiver 6 #9 September 9, 2015 There are serious reasons for the harsh punishments for violations, and in addition to the statutory issues I would pose the following questions: What actual harm was done to the national security? What other nations will no longer share classified information with us because of this? Who else knew about this when it was happening, and didn't blow the whistle THEN? Have any people died as direct result of the data breach? Because of the attempted cover up efforts, DOJ may never know the full extent of the security breach. Would it therefore be prudent to assume that ALL classified information that HRC was privy to during her tenure as SoS has been compromised? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Anvilbrother 0 #10 September 9, 2015 As someone who is in the industry how likely is the chance that someone like Russia, China, North Korea etc monitored and saved the data going in and out of her server. Postes r made from an iPad or iPhone. Spelling and gramhair mistakes guaranteed move along, Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rickendiver 6 #11 September 9, 2015 Based on what I've been told of the level of effort exerted by what we call "Sensitive Nations", (as well as our friends, BTW) to gain access to our secrets, I'd call it a certainty. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #12 September 10, 2015 RickendiverAs a "worker bee", I would expect to be: 1. Stripped of all clearances/accesses 2. Fired 3. Barred from any future government employment 4. Arrested and charged with the aforementioned violations, and very likely espionage as well. If convicted, $250k fine, up to 10yrs jail for each offense under 18 USC 793. 5. Wishing I were in politics, instead of research I'm good with that. I also do not want to have to pick between Hillary or the Donald. Me and 300M other citizens ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,063 #13 September 10, 2015 >I also do not want to have to pick between Hillary or the Donald. Me and >300M other citizens The ammunition that Hillary has handed to the GOP is trumped only by what the other guy has given to the democrats. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #14 September 10, 2015 billvon>I also do not want to have to pick between Hillary or the Donald. Me and >300M other citizens The ammunition that Hillary has handed to the GOP is trumped only by what the other guy has given to the democrats. you used the word 'trumped' I think this particular 2 person arms race is pretty much even - idiotically so fortunately, the dems have a couple other old white and crazy alternate options - and the Reps have a couple options that think the clerk in Kentucky is right comedians and cartoon writers the nation over will have good job security for the next couple years Speaker's Corner is safe for awhile too in terms of a supply of politicians to bash and/or unreasonably support just so we can randomly irritate each other. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #15 September 10, 2015 rehmwa***>I also do not want to have to pick between Hillary or the Donald. Me and >300M other citizens The ammunition that Hillary has handed to the GOP is trumped only by what the other guy has given to the democrats. you used the word 'trumped' I think this particular 2 person arms race is pretty much even - idiotically so fortunately, the dems have a couple other old white and crazy alternate options - and the Reps have a couple options that think the clerk in Kentucky is right comedians and cartoon writers the nation over will have good job security for the next couple years Speaker's Corner is safe for awhile too in terms of a supply of politicians to bash and/or unreasonably support just so we can randomly irritate each other. At no other time have the participants in speakers corner agreed with one another more than they do with regards to HRC and DT.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kawisixer01 0 #16 September 10, 2015 C'mon folks we're all just supposed to believe that she just didn't want to have to handle multiple devices to handle multiple email accounts. Because ya know, I've only had FIVE email accounts on my single cell phone for at least the last 7 years including a fairly secure work account. What I am curious about is how was it possible for anyone to NOT question why they were sending classified information to any domain that wasn't a known agency domain. That in itself would indicate to you that you were sending to a non-govt server. What I think is the worst is that she is laying down just pure bullshit for excuses in hopes that the general non-technically knowledgeable public will believe her. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Anvilbrother 0 #17 September 10, 2015 kawisixer01C'mon folks we're all just supposed to believe that she just didn't want to have to handle multiple devices to handle multiple email accounts. Because ya know, I've only had FIVE email accounts on my single cell phone for at least the last 7 years including a fairly secure work account. What I am curious about is how was it possible for anyone to NOT question why they were sending classified information to any domain that wasn't a known agency domain. That in itself would indicate to you that you were sending to a non-govt server. What I think is the worst is that she is laying down just pure bullshit for excuses in hopes that the general non-technically knowledgeable public will believe her. She also stated it was so she would only have to carry around one device, but that was proven false also as she had multiples around her most of the time. Postes r made from an iPad or iPhone. Spelling and gramhair mistakes guaranteed move along, Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 226 #18 September 10, 2015 Just sayin . . .I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #19 September 11, 2015 I'm not defending her, but I haven't seen anything to indicate that she sent or received anything marked classified. If she did, then she should be in hella trouble, but not if her e-mails were classified later. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Anvilbrother 0 #20 September 11, 2015 Then you have a lot to learn about what's going on. Postes r made from an iPad or iPhone. Spelling and gramhair mistakes guaranteed move along, Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #21 September 11, 2015 Teach me, oh great one. Do you have a reputable source that she handled classified material on her private server? Not speculation and maybes, but actual evidence? I haven't seen any. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Anvilbrother 0 #22 September 11, 2015 Open your paper, turn on a news station, fucking Google?. They have uncovered MANY emails that were of a classified nature, and before you spout that retarded line about being MARKED or not some of it at the time was and is still so sensitive it can't even be discussed. It doesn't need to have a mark to be classified FYI. She sent and received classified material via her private server. Deal with that fact. Postes r made from an iPad or iPhone. Spelling and gramhair mistakes guaranteed move along, Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #23 September 11, 2015 kawisixer01 What I am curious about is how was it possible for anyone to NOT question why they were sending classified information to any domain that wasn't a known agency domain. That in itself would indicate to you that you were sending to a non-govt server. What I think is the worst is that she is laying down just pure bullshit for excuses in hopes that the general non-technically knowledgeable public will believe her. Were they sending to her private mail address or did she have email forwarding turned on for her government account? If her government account was forwarding those communicating with her might not have noticed. Of course if the Government IT department configured the mail forward... Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #24 September 11, 2015 If that's the case, she should be charged with multiple felonies. Do you have a security clearance? I have maintained one for over 20 years. I know the rules quite well. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Anvilbrother 0 #25 September 11, 2015 Then you should know what she did was wrong/against rules/illegal. Quit wasting everyone's time here. Postes r made from an iPad or iPhone. Spelling and gramhair mistakes guaranteed move along, Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
