FBI won't jail future US president over private email server The FBI has said it will not recommend nor push for any charges against Hillary Clinton for her use of a private email server while secretary of state. At a press conference Tuesday morning, FBI director James Comey gave a lengthy description of the investigation his staff had carried out, focused on whether Clinton has …
Anyone who has even caught a whiff of classified information knows that it is a legal requirement to personally protect the information under the penalty of felony persecution - legal situation that has been around for decades. The fact that highly classified information was on her server is enough for any other peon to prosecuted and thrown into slammer for a very lengthy vacation courtesy of Club Fed.
Also, sharing internal information, not classified, is a great help to the various spookhauses. One bit of training I had (very old) noted the mundane items like phone directories could be extremely useful to a competent spookhaus.
The flag should be the bananas and stripes.
Even with his constant blather about hispanics not being suitable to serve as federal judges, banning muslim immigration, sexist faux pas about various women, banning well-known news organizations (Washington Post) from his campaign events, etc.
Hillary should be leading Trump by double digits, but she just keeps reinforcing the mantra that on any given day she spends more time lying than the average American spends working.
Hillary should be leading Trump by double digits
That would be if Hillary had anything to offer except more neocon bullshit and populist "liberal" rhetoric. (Hell, she's the chosen candiate for Project For A New American Century II, this should make anyone's hair stand on end)
Trump should be DESTROYING Hillary like a B-52 area bombardment with bunker busters and added napalm. Only Ameridumb mental zombification and the MSM's control of the Goodthink narrative served with fat amounts of Computer Graphics and Duckspeak keeps the Trump barbarian out of the entirely rotten, maggot-infested and pestiferous Rome of the establishment.
Hillary was a staffer during the Watergate hearings, when then president Nixon had his "tapes", that he could have destroyed and that would be the end. Then they were "discovered" and the downfall was inevitable given what was going on.
Fast forward to today: Hillary controlled the server. Hillary edited the contents of the server (selectively "burned the tapes") to sanitize the problem. No "smoking gun"/"Deep Throat" and an uninterested press and the "problem" disappears.
Now we need her to say "I am not a crook!".
Observation: Where is Wikileaks when you need them??
'Unless there was evidence that Clinton or her team had knowingly bypassed reasonable security procedures.....'
There is NO requirement for an offence to be committed 'knowingly' or with any intent, it is an absolute offence. Have a look at what happened to Bryan Nishimura for an infinitessimally smaller transgression of the law:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-05/peak-fbi-corruption-meet-bryan-nishimura-found-guilty-removal-and-retention-classifi
What do you think Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch were talking about at Phoenix airport - their grandchildren?!
It is only necessary to read the juicy parts of the State Department IG report to see that there was intent to bypass reasonable security procedures, and that is true even if the primary or secondary motive was to keep control of records that might be demanded under the FOIA or become permanent records of Secretary Clinton's tenure at the State Department.
At a press conference Tuesday morning, FBI director James Comey gave a lengthy description of the investigation his staff had carried out, focused on whether Clinton has mishandled classified information, and concluded that "no reasonable prosecutor" would bring a case based on the evidence.
And then you have Republicans....
This isn't well reported in the press, and likely none of our international readers are aware of this. He was appointed by Obama because he had promised to appoint a couple republicans to cabinet level positions hoping that would help bipartisanship (obviously he was wrong there!)
Previously he was appointed Deputy Attorney General by George Bush, and before that was a federal prosecutor. Those who think "the fix is in" will still think that, but it wasn't due to a lifelong democrat whitewashing things at the FBI.
http://theweek.com/articles/463795/james-comey-why-obama-wants-republican-fbi-chief
.... if Apple had just unlocked that iPhone. It is encrypted phones that cause risk to all, definitely not classified information being stored on unsecured servers. Definitely not opm databases going walkabouts to China. Nope. iPhone encryption is where it's at.
/at least I am guessing that's where Coomey surveys his threat model.
// Fast forward to next iPhone-gate-gate. So POTUS H, remember when we made that email server case disappear? There's another box of stuff we didn't bother reading inside a filling cabinet in a disused lavatory with a leopard warning. Be a real shame to have to clean that out. Sorry, got sidetracked. Where was I. Oh, that's right. Can we talk about banning mathematics, sorry, I mean encryption?
Well part of it too is that if you prosecuted Hillary, democrats would be calling for an investigation of former secretary of states Powell and Rice, neither of whom used official state department email but used their own for all their official business. It is unlikely they operated any differently than Hillary did, which is probably why career (i.e. not partisan appointees) state department officials never flagged Hillary's use of private email as a problem. They'd seen it all before, and to stick around a long time through administrations of both parties they know you can't be a boat rocker.
Career State Department security and IT staff who raised questions about Ms. Clinton's server were instructed "never to speak of the Secretary’s personal email system again." The State Department Inspector General's report on the matter is interesting, maybe especially for those inclined to make light of it.
Quite so!
In any case, they certainly can be found in a data center in Utah. To be printed out and slipped elegantly across a waxed desk should the need ever arise, accompanied by a small cough and raised eyebrows, as is the Imperial City's custom.
(One should also prosecute the cleaning lady for not adequately dusting around the server, the gardener for not appropriately cutting the greens visible from the server room windows etc.)
"Call me a conspiracy theorist if you like, but I do not believe for one instant that several thousand emails no longer exist."
the Clintstones are well known to have shredded a bunch of documents at the Rose Law firm related to Whitewater... (according to actual testimony from a courier in 1994). "What evidence?" Exactly!
This is nothing new, in other words. Nor, is it unexpected from the Clintstones.
the Clintstones are well known to have shredded a bunch of documents at the Rose Law firm related to Whitewater... (according to actual testimony from a courier in 1994). "What evidence?" Exactly!
That's all very well, but it's a damn sight easier to shred paper documents and hope that there are no existing photocopies than it is to delete every copy of an email. This is where Phil Jones (CRU) and his pals came unstuck. FOIA (whoever he/she/it is) had taken the precaution of backing them up or copying an existing backup.
A genuine conspiracy theory here would be a man in the middle attack on what is described as "an insecure server" from the NSA for example. Never mind the Norks, Russians, al Qaeda, Uncle Tom Cobbley... Whoopsie! I wan't supposed to mention Uncle Tom. How embarrassing!
Call me a conspiracy theorist if you like, but I do not believe for one instant that several thousand emails no longer exist.
I'll pass on the epithet, but perhaps you should ask Colin Powell about emails that no longer exist. I understand he is quite the expert in that domain.
Any email Hillary sent or received that included someone with a state department address should still exist in the system somewhere as it would be covered under the state department email server's retention. If she emailed putin@kremlin.ru and didn't cc: anyone, it'll be lost (unless the NSA has broken into his email and has a copy)
"there was no "clear evidence" that Clinton or anyone on her team has "intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information."
So ignorance of the law is now a legitimate defence?
"Sorry your honour, I didn't know that driving at 100mph through a school zone was illegal"
"OK, that's alright then. Off you go."
No matter who becomes the next US president, the whole world will suffer the consequences. They will enrich themselves in the wars that will surely come. None are competent to lead, or have any empathy for others. Authoritarian, narcissistic, criminals lead the world's nations. Prepare yourselves, a storm is coming.
Can anyone explain to me why Hillary seems to be hated so much by half the US?
Yes, I've heard "she lies all the time", "she's corrupt" and so on, but from this side of the Atlantic she doesn't seem to be any better or worse than the average politician.
Is there some specific reason that she's so much worse than any other politician? Or is it just partisanship getting more heated than normal?
Genuinely curious.
I had written a wall-o'-text, but here's the short version: She's female, and this puts her in the spotlight, and the spotlight shows all the crap that successful politicians do, and make her slime all the more noticeable. She also has a core of support that shields her from any backlash from slimy moves that go wrong.
RE: "She's female"
And, she's a Clinton, and a Democrat. For many people just being a Clinton is enough, but as any fule no a democrat is a communist heathen atheist fascist dictator, to which sins we can now add Obama's being a Moslem atheist, and whose only aim is to hate all Americans and destroy them all as slowly as possible. They dream of the old USSR and have secret pictures of Stalin on their walls. I know what-about-ery is not cool but there are politicians who I consider much much worse, such as Dick Cheney, but apparently he's a patriot and can do no wrong. The extreme hatred of Hilary and her rather mild sins is utterly irrational and seems to be sweeping through folk of a certain persuasion like an outbreak of mass hysteria. To answer the OP there is no rational reason to hate her so much more than almost any other politician, or at least none that I can discern. She has become in the minds of too many people a cartoon villain MWAHHAHAHAing in the shadows, and her enemies and the media are taking full advantage of this fact.
See http://www.gocomics.com/pricklycity/2016/06/24, a mild example of the output of a right-wing cartoonist, and one who hates Donald Trump (another of this strips has him pointing out that the Founding Fathers would have been less concerned about the black Prez than the, ahem, orange one.
Seeing that cartoon reminds me of Scott Adams, the creator of Dilbert. Apparently Adams is a trained hypnotist and skilled in the art of persuasion. Adams says it would be a mistake to underestimate Trump. Trumps is apparently using all the tools of persuasion and using them well and managing to convince a lot of people to vote for him. Even those who hate Trump are being manipulated and are behaving in a very predictable manner. Trump looks at who he is talking to and says what those people will react to in the way Trump wants them to react. In California he promises water. In Arizona and New Mexico he promises a big wall. He is more formidable than he has led his haters to believe.
God help you.
I'm glad I don't have to make the choice between Clinton or Trump. Or watch a Republican Senate and Congress try and subvert the democratic process, should Trump lose.
You have to admire a process that takes a year to choose a candidate, a few months before an election, in this day and age, there must be a better way, now that geography is somewhat less important.
Many forget that Secretary Clinton relied on advice from her predecessor, Colin Powell - previously Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff - for advice on email and messaging at State as she took over. He entered a world where a technophobic state department did not quite know how to spell "email" let alone have processes in place for managing it properly. After setting up her own services as done by Powell it is hard to remember the need to manage the underlying administrivia when you are in a Sec State role running over a million miles a year and corresponding all over the world. Your key criteria - did my messages get through and did just the people who were supposed to get them get them.
Many fail to recall a huge scandal that occurred on the Secretary's watch - Wiki Leaks, where the State Department's internal emails were breeched and sent out for global publication. At the time I bet Ms Clinton was glad she had her own private server instead of government services and security. The same security that saw every known malevolent state actor hack White House Emails, Pentagon (F35 plans to China), OPM - where all the top secret HR files for Presidents, Generals, and spies were hacked. The list of successful government hacks is rather too long to enumerate here. Where is the FBI/CIA/NSA in safeguarding these systems? Oh right - they have Edward Snowden's to worry about.
Lest we point fingers to all the massive government incompetence - we should look carefully at our own practices. Has your password changed since 1990? 2000? 2010? Do you change your password every 30 days and is it a complex alpha-numeric with more than 12 characters? Despite being in the technical dark ages in 2008 with respect to cyber-security - even in 2016 we would at best have just recently discovered the steam engine. We have a long way to go.
When Clinton took the State Department Office in 2008, the world was a very different place geo-politically and technologically. The planet was in the midst of its greatest recession in 70 years. A new President assumed office and was embroiled in domestic economic collapse and global conflicts while a new model of diplomacy was being embraced. Into that environment the prime objective for Ms Clinton was getting messages on a timely basis. Her predecessors advice was to not rely on internal staff based on their lack of technological familiarity. The world has changed radically since 2008.
Clinton left office in 2012 and with each 4 year interval the level of technical expertise and security awareness has changed geometrically - and yet, Sony, Home Depot, Panama Papers, Your Favorite Hospital. The list of major hacks and infiltrations using phishing attacks and social media to subvert mail and sophisticated security standards seems to grow each month.
My question is whether the right yardstick was used to judge Clinton - and I think it was. However, I take the words of James Comey - the FBI director - as a reminder to Clinton that things have radically changed and she needs to focus on cyber-security in any future new roles. It is ironic that despite shaming Ms Clinton for her security expertise, Comey, just a few months earlier, begged the courts - since "Congress" and "act" are oxymoron's, to force Apple to make their phone systems less secure so the FBI can crack them.
Oh Trump will continue to whine like a baby about this just like he did years after it was proven that Obama was born in the US.
Trump will continuing his whining even after he loses badly in November.
Hey. The FBI director is a Republican and even he couldn't agree that what she did was so bad.
Even those who sent mail should of noticed that she wasn't using a government approved server [no .gov is a hint].
The hope by some that Clinton's use of a private email server would somehow provide a silver bullet to kill her candidacy has however died.
GOP TO INVESTIGATE FBI DECISION ON CLINTON EMAILS
WASHINGTON (AP) - Angry House Republicans are announcing plans to investigate FBI Director James Comey's decision against pressing criminal charges for Hillary Clinton over her handling of classified emails. House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., said Comey's decision defies explanation and leaves many questions unanswered. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee called Comey to testify on Thursday, and the Judiciary panel announced that Attorney General Loretta Lynch would appear next week.
The GOP has to keep this in the news so Trump can use it against Clinton. Fox News [sic] will trumpet it and the Trumpettes will eat it up. GOP Congress-critters can't see what's coming. If you believe what he says, a Trump presidency will render both houses of Congress redundant, because Trump "has a very good brain" and he will make his own decisions. He don't need no stinking advice and consent.
That said, Clinton was reckless and that's not a good prerequisite for a president either.
Oh, you do them injustice. Research is so much more than going on chat shows. It also means reading World Net Daily and The Drudge Report, neither of which tasks is easy and takes up time when they could be doing more useful things such as prayin', shoot'n, and going to public "Rest" rooms.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
