• 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!

hillary is a pathological liar

ChrisL68 said:
MATT CARTWRIGHT: You were asked about markings on a few documents, I have the manual here, marking national classified security information. And I don’t think you were given a full chance to talk about those three documents with the little c’s on them. Were they properly documented? Were they properly marked according to the manual?

JAMES COMEY: No.

MATT CARTWRIGHT: According to the manual, and I ask unanimous consent to enter this into the record Mr. Chairman

CHAIRMAN: Without objection so ordered.

MATT CARTWRIGHT: According to the manual, if you’re going to classify something, there has to be a header on the document? Right?

JAMES COMEY: Correct.

MATT CARTWRIGHT: Was there a header on the three documents that we’ve discussed today that had the little c in the text someplace?

JAMES COMEY: No. There were three e-mails, the c was in the body, in the text, but there was no header on the email or in the text.

MATT CARTWRIGHT: So if Secretary Clinton really were an expert about what’s classified and what’s not classified and we’re following the manual, the absence of a header would tell her immediately that those three documents were not classified. Am I correct in that?

JAMES COMEY: That would be a reasonable inference.​
Click to expand...


He forgot to ask the final question -
MATT CARTWRIGHT: How did (C) classified information could get into an email that did not have a Classified marking in the header?

JAMES COMEY: Because the text was copied or scanned from the classified email system by one of Clinton's aides and manually added to an email sent to Hillary on her unsecure, personal server.


Admittedly, I haven't kept up with all of this closely, but I thought it was clear part of the information in Hillary's email came from the classified systems. And the classified systems don't allow people to forward info to an outside email, which means people had to be manually extract or copy the information and re-entered or scan it into an email for it to be in Hillary's email. I never thought they were going to get Hillary, but I expected the aides who were doing that were going to get prosecuted.
 
"And the classified systems don't allow people to forward info to an outside email"

Definitely not true at the DoS at the time.
 
DCDeac said:
"And the classified systems don't allow people to forward info to an outside email"

Definitely not true at the DoS at the time.
Click to expand...

DC - You seem a lot more up to speed on this than me and most others who post here.

Are there separate systems for classified and unclassified?

Also, several people mentioned that DOS systems have been hacked therefore it doesn't really matter that Hillary used a private server. Do you know if the secure system has been hacked? It seems to me they would want everybody on the same systems just to know precisely what was compromised if and when there is some sort of intrusion.

Thanks.
 
aocs3281 said:
DC - You seem a lot more up to speed on this than me and most others who post here.

Are there separate systems for classified and unclassified?

Also, several people mentioned that DOS systems have been hacked therefore it doesn't really matter that Hillary used a private server. Do you know if the secure system has been hacked? It seems to me they would want everybody on the same systems just to know precisely what was compromised if and when there is some sort of intrusion.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

The State Department was hacked multiple times that they knew about:

2006:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/state-department-computers-hacked/

Their email hacked in 2014

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-cybersecurity-statedept-idUSKCN0J11BR20141117

2015

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/25/w...onage-state-department-social-media.html?_r=0

There are other stories about other years.

However, if it wasn't Hillary would you want to have all of our data as sitting ducks just to know what was taken? That doesn't make sense.
 
what!?!? Hillary is a liar!?!?! and she is going up against a pampered lying brat for the POTUS?!?!?
**BREAKING NEWS**
 
RJKarl said:
The State Department was hacked multiple times that they knew about:

2006:

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/state-department-computers-hacked/

Their email hacked in 2014

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-cybersecurity-statedept-idUSKCN0J11BR20141117

2015

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/25/w...onage-state-department-social-media.html?_r=0

There are other stories about other years.

However, if it wasn't Hillary would you want to have all of our data as sitting ducks just to know what was taken? That doesn't make sense.
Click to expand...

Your links are all about the Unclassified System being hacked. I'm interested in learning more about the Classified System. My TS/SCI security clearance expired some years ago, long before the internet age, but my appreciation of the time, effort and expense of protecting state secrets lingers on.
 
Agree on the super careless part, but what's more troubling is that this seems to be a broader institutional problem and not a Hillary specific problem. Like why are there not State Dept controls for this sort of stuff?

Example: When Obama took office, they gave him a super secure mostly disabled bberry and told him he cant drive anymore. Those are just the rules, not his decisions. Seems like the controls should be in place no matter who holds these top offices. Hillary should have never had the discretion to make the choice for private servers. Are we just lagging behind to update policies?
 
TheTwinAndreBen said:
Agree on the super careless part, but what's more troubling is that this seems to be a broader institutional problem and not a Hillary specific problem. Like why are there not State Dept controls for this sort of stuff?

Example: When Obama took office, they gave him a super secure mostly disabled bberry and told him he cant drive anymore. Those are just the rules, not his decisions. Seems like the controls should be in place no matter who holds these top offices. Hillary should have never had the discretion to make the choice for private servers. Are we just lagging behind to update policies?
Click to expand...

Exactly, a CEO of a company can't override IT controls. You would think that high levels of government would have the same control structure.
 
TheTwinAndreBen said:
Agree on the super careless part, but what's more troubling is that this seems to be a broader institutional problem and not a Hillary specific problem. Like why are there not State Dept controls for this sort of stuff?

Example: When Obama took office, they gave him a super secure mostly disabled bberry and told him he cant drive anymore. Those are just the rules, not his decisions. Seems like the controls should be in place no matter who holds these top offices. Hillary should have never had the discretion to make the choice for private servers. Are we just lagging behind to update policies?
Click to expand...

Perhaps the State Dept. should get an oversight committee...wait a second...
 
Fast forward to around 1:20 for the lying under oath to begin.
 
Last edited:
The State Department Inspector General said in his report Hillary never would have been given permission to use a private server. She didn't ask for permission, she just did it.
 
AF4X.png
 
Can somebody explain the purpose of the Clinton Foundation to me? There appear to be a lot of coincidences between US government actions in certain countries and sectors when the Clintons are in or running for office and donations to the foundation from these countries and sectors. How does this work? I'm trying to get a grasp of the situation beyond conspiracy theories.

ETA: More specifically, what does it actually do? How are some of these coincidences not considered more significant issues?
 
Last edited:
Strickland33 said:
Can somebody explain the purpose of the Clinton Foundation to me? There appear to be a lot of coincidences between US government actions in certain countries and sectors when the Clintons are in or running for office and donations to the foundation from these countries and sectors. How does this work? I'm trying to get a grasp of the situation beyond conspiracy theories.

ETA: More specifically, what does it actually do? How are some of these coincidences not considered more significant issues?
Click to expand...

Ok so the clintons have a lot of ne'er-do-well sycophantic groupies, and they all need bread. The Clinton Foundation provides the groupies with a hustle
 
Strickland33 said:
Can somebody explain the purpose of the Clinton Foundation to me? There appear to be a lot of coincidences between US government actions in certain countries and sectors when the Clintons are in or running for office and donations to the foundation from these countries and sectors. How does this work? I'm trying to get a grasp of the situation beyond conspiracy theories.

ETA: More specifically, what does it actually do? How are some of these coincidences not considered more significant issues?
Click to expand...

Here's a fews:

46664
AIDS LIFE
Aid Still Required
ALAS
Alliance for a Healthier Generation
American Foundation for AIDS Research
American India Foundation
Apne Aap
Artists for a New South Africa
Artists for Peace and Justice
Avoided Deforestation Partners
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Bottletop
Bush Clinton Coastal Recovery Fund
CAMFED
CHOC South Africa
Chris Tucker Foundation
Clinton Bush Haiti Fund
Clinton Foundation
Clinton Global Initiative
Conservation International
Cotlands
Elton John AIDS Foundation
FC Harlem
Food Bank For New York City
Global Fund
Heifer International
HELP USA
i.am.angel foundation
Ithemba Trust
Jewish National Fund
J/P Haitian Relief Organization
K.I.D.S.
Kiva
Make-A-Wish Foundation
MASSIVEGOOD
MusiCares
Music Rising
Natural Resources Defense Council
Oceana
PeacePlayers International
Reach For A Dream Foundation
Red Cross
Robin Hood
ROTA
Rush Philanthropic Arts Foundation
Save the Children
Save The Music Foundation
STILLERSTRONG
St. Mary's Hospital
The Lunchbox Fund
The Rainforest Foundation
TJ Martell Foundation
Treatment Action Campaign
US Doctors for Africa
Usher's New Look Foundation
Walkabout Foundation
Walter Sisulu Paediatric Cardiac Centre for Africa
World Vision
Yum-o!

They took in about $225M according to Factcheck and spent over $195M on donations.
 
RJKarl said:
Here's a fews:

46664
AIDS LIFE
Aid Still Required
ALAS
Alliance for a Healthier Generation
American Foundation for AIDS Research
American India Foundation
Apne Aap
Artists for a New South Africa
Artists for Peace and Justice
Avoided Deforestation Partners
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Bottletop
Bush Clinton Coastal Recovery Fund
CAMFED
CHOC South Africa
Chris Tucker Foundation
Clinton Bush Haiti Fund
Clinton Foundation
Clinton Global Initiative
Conservation International
Cotlands
Elton John AIDS Foundation
FC Harlem
Food Bank For New York City
Global Fund
Heifer International
HELP USA
i.am.angel foundation
Ithemba Trust
Jewish National Fund
J/P Haitian Relief Organization
K.I.D.S.
Kiva
Make-A-Wish Foundation
MASSIVEGOOD
MusiCares
Music Rising
Natural Resources Defense Council
Oceana
PeacePlayers International
Reach For A Dream Foundation
Red Cross
Robin Hood
ROTA
Rush Philanthropic Arts Foundation
Save the Children
Save The Music Foundation
STILLERSTRONG
St. Mary's Hospital
The Lunchbox Fund
The Rainforest Foundation
TJ Martell Foundation
Treatment Action Campaign
US Doctors for Africa
Usher's New Look Foundation
Walkabout Foundation
Walter Sisulu Paediatric Cardiac Centre for Africa
World Vision
Yum-o!

They took in about $225M according to Factcheck and spent over $195M on donations.
Click to expand...

That last one would be a great opportunity to use Monica Lewinsky as its spokesperson; maybe with a take-off on the "Got Milk?" theme.
 
aocs3281 said:
DC - You seem a lot more up to speed on this than me and most others who post here.

Are there separate systems for classified and unclassified?

Also, several people mentioned that DOS systems have been hacked therefore it doesn't really matter that Hillary used a private server. Do you know if the secure system has been hacked? It seems to me they would want everybody on the same systems just to know precisely what was compromised if and when there is some sort of intrusion.

Thanks.
Click to expand...

The DoD was far more regimented than DoS or DHS at the time - they've had a high-side and low-side split with physical and technical barriers between networks for pretty much everything computer related. I don't know the exact dates and technical details of the DoS email system implementations - I do know when DHS made the switch - but for a long time you simply couldn't communicate through high side only and do your job if you had to interact with the outside world. The truth is tons of diplomats used GMail and a bunch of them were hacked. I can't find it at the moment, but there's a listing of 100+ people in just a year that sent confidential or secret info across gmail. Daily schedules were a good example - stuff that people reasonably sent. Or replies to copied emails where the systems don't typically display inline replies. To my knowledge only the low side servers were ever successfully hacked at DoS (state.gov addresses). But the bottom line is people had to use low side email. At some level many, many people had to send borderline info over those systems to do their job. Low side servers in the department? Hacked. Gmail? Hacked. Personal servers? Probably hacked. Mobile devices? Hacked.

As a tech guy, I simply have a very hard time putting criminal blame on a user - any of the hundred improper users or Colin Powell or whoever - for a failing in policy. The NSA, DoD, the banking industry, and other commercial entities that really cared about security would never have allowed - either explicitly or tacitly - anyone doing what any of those users did. It was out in the open and incredibly obvious - with Hillary going the extra mile as likely the worst of the bunch with the personal server stuff - but my bet would be you could find far worse information breaches than hers. I believe there was a gmail troop levels incident for example.

At least all this attention and multiple recent hacks into DHS have improved security tremendously in the past 2 years. Spend $20 million on those improvements, not politically motivated investigations.
 
RJKarl said:
Here's a fews:

46664
AIDS LIFE
Aid Still Required
ALAS
Alliance for a Healthier Generation
American Foundation for AIDS Research
American India Foundation
Apne Aap
Artists for a New South Africa
Artists for Peace and Justice
Avoided Deforestation Partners
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Bottletop
Bush Clinton Coastal Recovery Fund
CAMFED
CHOC South Africa
Chris Tucker Foundation
Clinton Bush Haiti Fund
Clinton Foundation
Clinton Global Initiative
Conservation International
Cotlands
Elton John AIDS Foundation
FC Harlem
Food Bank For New York City
Global Fund
Heifer International
HELP USA
i.am.angel foundation
Ithemba Trust
Jewish National Fund
J/P Haitian Relief Organization
K.I.D.S.
Kiva
Make-A-Wish Foundation
MASSIVEGOOD
MusiCares
Music Rising
Natural Resources Defense Council
Oceana
PeacePlayers International
Reach For A Dream Foundation
Red Cross
Robin Hood
ROTA
Rush Philanthropic Arts Foundation
Save the Children
Save The Music Foundation
STILLERSTRONG
St. Mary's Hospital
The Lunchbox Fund
The Rainforest Foundation
TJ Martell Foundation
Treatment Action Campaign
US Doctors for Africa
Usher's New Look Foundation
Walkabout Foundation
Walter Sisulu Paediatric Cardiac Centre for Africa
World Vision
Yum-o!

They took in about $225M according to Factcheck and spent over $195M on donations.
Click to expand...

because certainly no one can contribute to the Red Cross, etc directly. They need a middle man.
 
DCDeac said:
The DoD was far more regimented than DoS or DHS at the time - they've had a high-side and low-side split with physical and technical barriers between networks for pretty much everything computer related. I don't know the exact dates and technical details of the DoS email system implementations - I do know when DHS made the switch - but for a long time you simply couldn't communicate through high side only and do your job if you had to interact with the outside world. The truth is tons of diplomats used GMail and a bunch of them were hacked. I can't find it at the moment, but there's a listing of 100+ people in just a year that sent confidential or secret info across gmail. Daily schedules were a good example - stuff that people reasonably sent. Or replies to copied emails where the systems don't typically display inline replies. To my knowledge only the low side servers were ever successfully hacked at DoS (state.gov addresses). But the bottom line is people had to use low side email. At some level many, many people had to send borderline info over those systems to do their job. Low side servers in the department? Hacked. Gmail? Hacked. Personal servers? Probably hacked. Mobile devices? Hacked.

As a tech guy, I simply have a very hard time putting criminal blame on a user - any of the hundred improper users or Colin Powell or whoever - for a failing in policy. The NSA, DoD, the banking industry, and other commercial entities that really cared about security would never have allowed - either explicitly or tacitly - anyone doing what any of those users did. It was out in the open and incredibly obvious - with Hillary going the extra mile as likely the worst of the bunch with the personal server stuff - but my bet would be you could find far worse information breaches than hers. I believe there was a gmail troop levels incident for example.

At least all this attention and multiple recent hacks into DHS have improved security tremendously in the past 2 years. Spend $20 million on those improvements, not politically motivated investigations.
Click to expand...

QFT
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top