• 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

I wonder if this will turn into a bigger or smaller deal than BENGHAZI. Will we still be talking about this in three years still? I hope so to top the last foolishness.
 
PhDeac said:
The Clintons have survived much worse.
Click to expand...

Here is the problem: no one "survives" a scandal to go on to become the President of the United States. Hillary Clinton is nowhere near Slick Willy's level. Does anyone seriously believe she could pull off something like this?

 
TIME: Hillary Clinton simply searched her emails for search terms under subpoena; decided all other emails not containing these terms were "private," then deleted them forever

All this once made sense to Clinton. As a candidate for President in 2008, she included “secret White House email accounts” as part of her critique of the Bush Administration’s “stunning record of secrecy and corruption.” Now, however, Clinton is leaning heavily on “Trust me.” For more than a year after she left office in 2013, she did not transfer work-related email from her private account to the State Department. She commissioned a review of the 62,320 messages in her account only after the department–spurred by the congressional investigation–asked her to do so. And this review did not involve opening and reading each email; instead, Clinton’s lawyers created a list of names and keywords related to her work and searched for those. Slightly more than half the total cache–31,830 emails–did not contain any of the search terms, according to Clinton’s staff, so they were deemed to be “private, personal records.”
Click to expand...

http://time.com/3741847/the-clinton-way/
 
Last edited:
lol sig. I haven't seen numbnuts used in ages.
 
DeaconSig said:
That is how you respond to a subpoena, numbnuts.
Click to expand...

It may be the best way to respond to a subpoena, but she was required to turn over all emails that were not personal. I suspect that there were official emails that did not have the searchwords in them. You can not simply delete them.

Again, everyone is focusing on the wrong thing. The big deal is the security breach. (see Vad's post).
 
Last edited:
vadimivich said:
This is a titanic beach of national security - the outage is well justified this time (and should be less partisan).

From a technical and security policy standpoint this is a HUGE deal.
Click to expand...

don't confuse the nonsense ninja
 
vadimivich said:
This is a titanic beach of national security - the outage is well justified this time (and should be less partisan).

From a technical and security policy standpoint this is a HUGE deal.
Click to expand...

agreed with vad.
 
What is the security breach? I haven't been keeping up with this beyond this thread and not saying it isn't a breach. What are we saying is a security breach, that she emailed SOS stuff from her own server?
 
DeaconSig said:
That is how you respond to a subpoena, numbnuts.
Click to expand...

"Well Your Honor, I chose my own search terms, didn't find anything that I felt was responsive, and then immediately destroyed the rest."
(pause for response)
"What's a spoliation instruction?
 
Have they released the security config of her server and her datacenter? IDGAF about Hillary, but I am just wondering if we know how vulnerable the data was or if we are just assuming that it was more vulnerable.

Or is the security breach the deletion of what is assumed to be SOS messages from the sender side?
 
WakeandBake said:
Have they released the security config of her server and her datacenter? IDGAF about Hillary, but I am just wondering if we know how vulnerable the data was or if we are just assuming that it was more vulnerable.
Click to expand...

1) As we've already established, it was more vulnerable than if it had been on a .GOV server setup to handle the types of information a Secretary of State is privy to. The fact that she handled SoS and personal comms out of the same inbox/contact list alone means that she likely caused a breach or two herself. It's not exactly hard to accidentally forward the wrong email, grab the wrong contact with a similar name, etc.

2) Hillary has said that the physical server was originally setup for Bill when he left office, so one would assume it wasn't setup to be any sort of hardened environment to handle state secrets, and it certainly wasn't new hardware by any stretch of the imagination.

The fact of the matter is, we have no idea whether the server was breached precisely because it sat in an uncontrolled environment. The smart bet would be that her email was compromised IMO.
 
Last edited:
vadimivich said:
This is a titanic beach of national security - the outage is well justified this time (and should be less partisan).

From a technical and security policy standpoint this is a HUGE deal.
Click to expand...

Vad, I know nothing about network security. Can you briefly explain how bad it is and how no one noticed it until now?

Racer, feel free to jump in also.
 
I know that there are some devoted Noonan readers amongst this Board's left, but even her few skeptics in these parts may be interested in these observations: http://www.wsj.com/articles/hillary-seems-tired-not-hungry-1426205650

Cliffs: A lack of sincerity of effort in the defense to the private email server bit may be HRC's subconscious telling her that her heart may not want to run for President after all.
 
UNCG Deac said:
***

Click to expand...


2hsc7z4.gif
 
ONW said:
Vad, I know nothing about network security. Can you briefly explain how bad it is and how no one noticed it until now?

Racer, feel free to jump in also.
Click to expand...

Impossible to know how "bad" it is without having read all of her emails. But, the operating assumption going forward has to be that whatever resided on that server has been seen by our enemies and allies. That could mean lots of things. It could mean that state secrets were revealed, that peoples' and soldiers' lives were endangered, that our negotiations with Iran were hindered, etc. Without her ever knowing it or there being a record of it on her server, her domain/address could have been spoofed to extract information from her contacts. One easy to open door opens others as well. By having access to the server, a hacker also would have access to the ID's of devices that accessed it (her phone and her unapproved iPad), making those devices potentially easier to compromise. Any files on those devices would be compromised and a hacker could likely even monitor her location in real-time. Those are all past events. What's done, is done, for better or worse. I'm not sure how you figure out who/what had access to the info given that the server/firewall/security don't seem to have been actively monitored.

Worst case for the future is that Hillary becomes POTUS and there was information on the server that other nations and terrorist groups can use as leverage against her.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top