• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Clinton Email Problem

WFFaithful said:
The funny thing is Congress has exempted themselves from the standards they're frying Hillary over.
Click to expand...

"But if the rules at federal agencies are unclear, at least there are rules. On Capitol Hill, there are almost none. That means that the same House Republicans who are subpoenaing Clinton's emails as part of their inquiry into the Benghazi, Libya, attacks are not required to retain emails of their own for future inspection by anyone."

"Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., who is spearheading the hunt for Clinton's emails as head of the Benghazi inquiry committee, did not respond to several messages seeking comment on whether the rules on lawmakers' emails — including his own — should change."

http://xfinity.comcast.net/articles/news-general/20150313/US-Congress_-Email-Rules/

Hypocrites. All of them.
 
Email scandal indirectly highlights why politics is so disgusting and why Americans are checking out of involvement in droves.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/03/a-peek-at-washington-dcs-comfort-with-small-corruptions/387694/

Indeed, the Post article is really a critique of Hillary Clinton for not doing enough to supply fellow Democrats with thoughts not their own to parrot on national TV. She's shirking some of the basics of public deception! Is she really ready to run? Had Team Clinton acted to supply political allies with typical talking points, the article wouldn't have been written. No one would've thought it newsworthy.
Click to expand...
 
ugh:

Lots of Democrats were willing to defend Clinton even when they didn't know the facts or what the defense would be—they were waiting to be told what they should go on national TV and purport to believe. And some of these people still went on TV to defend Clinton even though they were "flying blind," which is to say, put in the unusual position of having to rely on their own opinions and analysis in appearances where they purport to offer their expert opinions and analysis...

...Indeed, the Post article is really a critique of Hillary Clinton for not doing enough to supply fellow Democrats with thoughts not their own to parrot on national TV. She's shirking some of the basics of public deception! Is she really ready to run? Had Team Clinton acted to supply political allies with typical talking points, the article wouldn't have been written. No one would've thought it newsworthy
Click to expand...
 
These are Hillary's e-mails. Why do the taxpayers want to see them?
 
FuckmouthedRube said:
Not a fan of Jarrett either, but I don't thinking moving left is a winning 2016 strategy. Christie isn't going to be a factor and the GOP pretends Jeb is way more moderate than he actually is. Jeb's position on Teri Schiavo was hardly moderate. No GOP nominee is going to be anywhere near the center. Dems may need another candidate, but 2016 is hardly a slam dunk for any Dem candidate and moving left when the center is wide open isn't wise.
Click to expand...

Jim Webb anyone?
 
deacvision7 said:
He isn't at the top of my list, but I would happily support him if he was the nominee. The Democrats could do a lot worse.
Click to expand...

This is where I am based on what little I know about Webb.
 
Walker didn't run or govern from the middle, do he'd have a tough time moving left in a general election. Tea Party is doing Jeb a huge favor by calling him moderate when he's at least more conservative than his dad. If he doesn't pull a Romney and move right to win the nomination, he could move toward the center easily than other wannabes.

Dem base wants Warren, but she cedes too much middle ground relative to HRC. Base wouldn't like it, but former Governors like Manchin, Warner, Bayh paired with Warren or Castro might be their best play if HRC doesn't run or craps out early.
 
Warren wouldn't want to be VP. She'd effectively be neutralized in that role. Could argue she would be somewhat neutralized as President.
 
FuckmouthedRube said:
Walker didn't run or govern from the middle, do he'd have a tough time moving left in a general election. Tea Party is doing Jeb a huge favor by calling him moderate when he's at least more conservative than his dad. If he doesn't pull a Romney and move right to win the nomination, he could move toward the center easily than other wannabes.

Dem base wants Warren, but she cedes too much middle ground relative to HRC. Base wouldn't like it, but former Governors like Manchin, Warner, Bayh paired with Warren or Castro might be their best play if HRC doesn't run or craps out early.
Click to expand...

No chance Warren would accept a VP nomination, I don't think.

I wouldn't mind Warner. Manchin is a "meh" to me. I think Bayh has something in his closet that he doesn't want found, otherwise I believe he would have made a run by now. No proof of that, just a sneaky suspicion of mine.
 
http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...ense-laughable-foia-116116.html#ixzz3UlD1FDy3

Well, as the saying goes, “reality is not her friend.”

- Dan Metcalfe spent more than thirty years working at the U.S. Department of Justice, at which he served from 1981 to 2007 as director of the Office of Information and Privacy, where he was responsible for overseeing the implementation of the FOIA throughout the entire executive branch. He now teaches secrecy law at American University’s Washington College of Law. [and self-identified likely hilldog voter].
 
And again from Bloomberg why this matters (It is not political (no matter how much the right or left want to make it, it is security!) Some of you tech guru's will have to explain some of this...


Hillary Clinton's E-Mail Was Vulnerable to 'Spoofing'

Hillary Clinton didn't take a basic precaution with her personal e-mail system to prevent hackers from impersonating or "spoofing" her identity in messages to close associates, according to former U.S. officials familiar with her e-mail system and other cyber-security experts.

This vulnerability put anyone who was in communication with her clintonemail.com account while she was secretary of state at risk of being hacked. Clinton said at the United Nations last week that there were no security breaches of her personal e-mail server, which she used to send and receive more than 60,000 professional and personal e-mails. But former cyber-security officials and experts told us that there were gaps in the system.

According to publicly available information, whoever administrated the system didn't enable what’s called a Sender Policy Framework, or SPF, a simple setting that would prevent hackers sending e-mails that appear to be from clintonemail.com. SPF is a basic and highly recommended security precaution for people who set up their own servers. Here is a security evaluation of Clinton's server by SenderScore:


http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-18/hillary-clinton-s-e-mail-was-vulnerable-to-spoofing-
 
jhmd2000 said:
http://www.politico.com/magazine/st...ense-laughable-foia-116116.html#ixzz3UlD1FDy3

Well, as the saying goes, “reality is not her friend.”

- Dan Metcalfe spent more than thirty years working at the U.S. Department of Justice, at which he served from 1981 to 2007 as director of the Office of Information and Privacy, where he was responsible for overseeing the implementation of the FOIA throughout the entire executive branch. He now teaches secrecy law at American University’s Washington College of Law. [and self-identified likely hilldog voter].
Click to expand...

I guess he wasn't very good at his job then.
 
Hillary became SOS when Obama was inaugurated. In 2009.

Sick burn.
 
Wrangor said:
Hillary became SOS when Obama was inaugurated. In 2009.

Sick burn.
Click to expand...

So when Powell and Rice did the same thing that wasn't before 2007....and implementing something implies it works in the future. Sick burn though.
 
ONW said:
So when Powell and Rice did the same thing that wasn't before 2007....and implementing something implies it works in the future. Sick burn though.
Click to expand...

If you read the article you will see the author claims that what Clinton was doing is completely different. The difference in sending an email on a private server occasionally due to time and situation restraints (which is entirely understandable) and organizing your entire line of communication out of sight of the American public, which is direct violation of the rules we have in place.

Did you read the article ONW? The issue he took with Clinton wasn't having a private email. It was using it exclusively as her communication source for official government business out of reach of anyone that could provide accountability.
 
Wrangor said:
If you read the article you will see the author claims that what Clinton was doing is completely different. The difference in sending an email on a private server occasionally due to time and situation restraints (which is entirely understandable) and organizing your entire line of communication out of sight of the American public, which is direct violation of the rules we have in place.

Did you read the article ONW? The issue he took with Clinton wasn't having a private email. It was using it exclusively as her communication source for official government business out of reach of anyone that could provide accountability.
Click to expand...

Yes I did. If we're questioning the security and accountability aspect, why would exclusively vs. occasionally matter?

Additionally, those rules weren't in place when she left office.


"The New York Times Reverses Course On Clinton's Emails After Public Editor Admits Fault In Reporting"

http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/03/13/the-new-york-times-reverses-course-on-clintons/202894


Regardless, I totally agree that it was a shady and technologically negligent way of doing business.


Next up will be the "separation" form she didn't sign, but Powell and Rice didn't sign one either reinforcing my belief in not trusting anyone ever.
 
Last edited:
HC supporters going with the Tarheel defense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top