Why evidence of hacking Hillary's server is an irrelevant diversion

[leftwinger]

Worst of all. She had paid underlings go into Secure system then cut/paste/send super-duper top secret to her at [email protected]

 

[Skylar]

Oh, obviously. That's why they lost their shit when Powell did the exact same thing.

Since he did it, that means it's ok for Clinton to do it?

It certainly establishes how serious you think the issue is. Namely, none. As when Powell did it, your ilk didn't say a word nor uttered the slightest complaint. Demonstrating that your mock 'outrage' at Clinton doing the *exact same thing* is merely politics.

Oh, and you never did answer my question:

Exposed the 2000 emails....to who?

Watch, I'll use your example and show you how its done.

Q: Patraeus exposed top secret information to who?

A: Patreaus showed his mistress, walking out 8 binders full of top secret information which he showed her.

Now you try. Hillary exposed 2000 emails....to who? If its 'common knowledge' as you claim, this should be remarkably easy for you to answer.

Try again.

Clinton illegally mishandled classified mataerial. Its as simple as that.

You said she exposed classified material, the same as Patraeus.

Exposed the 2000 emails....to who?

Its such a simple question. And yet you've run from it 3 times, unable to answer.

What are the security clearances of her staff that saw these emails?

None of them have security clearances higher that congressional committe members. Some of those emails are classified above congress' clearance.

Then your 'common knowledge' 2000 emails have been reduced to 'some of those emails'.

That was easy.

Now get specific. Which emails, which security levels, and which staffers.

 

[WildBillKelsoe]

Since he did it, that means it's ok for Clinton to do it?

It certainly establishes how serious you think the issue is. Namely, none. As when Powell did it, your ilk didn't say a word nor uttered the slightest complaint. Demonstrating that your mock 'outrage' at Clinton doing the *exact same thing* is merely politics.

Oh, and you never did answer my question:

Exposed the 2000 emails....to who?

Watch, I'll use your example and show you how its done.

Q: Patraeus exposed top secret information to who?

A: Patreaus showed his mistress, walking out 8 binders full of top secret information which he showed her.

Now you try. Hillary exposed 2000 emails....to who? If its 'common knowledge' as you claim, this should be remarkably easy for you to answer.

Try again.

Clinton illegally mishandled classified mataerial. Its as simple as that.

You said she exposed classified material, the same as Patraeus.

Exposed the 2000 emails....to who?

Its such a simple question. And yet you've run from it 3 times, unable to answer.

What are the security clearances of her staff that saw these emails?

None of them have security clearances higher that congressional committe members. Some of those emails are classified above congress' clearance.

Then your 'common knowledge' 2000 emails have been reduced to 'some of those emails'.

That was easy.

Now get specific. Which emails, which security levels, and which staffers.

It doesn't matter. If it was ONE email, it's still a crime.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

we never made hacking her server an issue in the first place, you did...or rather your right wing propaganda rag liars did and kept it in their circle jerk of faux news, for months...

Damn, you got Foxitis too? I thought only the nut jobs got that affliction

 

[Care4all]

Oh, obviously. That's why they lost their shit when Powell did the exact same thing.

Since he did it, that means it's ok for Clinton to do it?

It certainly establishes how serious you think the issue is. Namely, none. As when Powell did it, your ilk didn't say a word nor uttered the slightest complaint. Demonstrating that your mock 'outrage' at Clinton doing the *exact same thing* is merely politics.

Oh, and you never did answer my question:

Exposed the 2000 emails....to who?

Watch, I'll use your example and show you how its done.

Q: Patraeus exposed top secret information to who?

A: Patreaus showed his mistress, walking out 8 binders full of top secret information which he showed her.

Now you try. Hillary exposed 2000 emails....to who? If its 'common knowledge' as you claim, this should be remarkably easy for you to answer.

Try again.

Clinton illegally mishandled classified mataerial. Its as simple as that.

You said she exposed classified material, the same as Patraeus.

Exposed the 2000 emails....to who?

Its such a simple question. And yet you've run from it 3 times, unable to answer.

What are the security clearances of her staff that saw these emails?

None of them have security clearances higher that congressional committe members. Some of those emails are classified above congress' clearance.

the staffers had security clearance and were the ones that forwarded these emails to Hillary, and the one email that is supposedly of top secret level was forwarded among staffers between 2009 and 2011 on the state dept's unclassified state.gov. system, before they even sent it to her....

so, I say....really? to the intelligence dept that classified it? It's considered top secret to you? WHY now?

 

[rdean]

The latest tactic to emerge in the Hillary email server saga is to somehow use "no evidence of hacking" as a means of exoneration. Totally irrelevant. First of all when you are talking about State level cyber-hacking, the Chinese are as good as anyone at disguising their hack attempts. So by saying "we found no evidence of hacking" just means you weren't smart enough to detect the hack attempt. Secondly, National security laws do not say "it's ok to put Secret and Top Secret stuff on an unsecured server as long as no bad guys get it". That is utter nonsense. If you hold the highest Security clearance given as Hillary does, and you do what Hillary did the law is clear. You immediately lose your clearance and you are going to do time in jail.

Like Powell and Patreaus did time in jail?

As an example, in 2011 there was a Marine that ran into financial trouble and he approached the Chinese with a proposition. He took photographs of the Chinese consulate including location of security cameras etc. He was caught, the photographs were classified at the Secret level. He was stripped of his clearance and got 9 years in prison. I'm going off the top of my head here sorry no link but it happened. Compare what the Marine did to what Hillary did. What should be her sentence?

And who did Hillary approach with top secret information?

Patreaus was convicted and given probation.

Are you recommending that Clinton should get probation, vice jail time?

He passed on classified info. She didn't. So in the twisted mind of the GOP, she's worse. Go figure.

She mishandled classified information by transmitting it through an unsecured network. That, by itself, is a crime.

First it wasn't classified when she had it.
Second, that didn't become a crime until two years AFTER she left office.

 

[Skylar]

It certainly establishes how serious you think the issue is. Namely, none. As when Powell did it, your ilk didn't say a word nor uttered the slightest complaint. Demonstrating that your mock 'outrage' at Clinton doing the *exact same thing* is merely politics.

Oh, and you never did answer my question:

Exposed the 2000 emails....to who?

Watch, I'll use your example and show you how its done.

Q: Patraeus exposed top secret information to who?

A: Patreaus showed his mistress, walking out 8 binders full of top secret information which he showed her.

Now you try. Hillary exposed 2000 emails....to who? If its 'common knowledge' as you claim, this should be remarkably easy for you to answer.

Try again.

Clinton illegally mishandled classified mataerial. Its as simple as that.

You said she exposed classified material, the same as Patraeus.

Exposed the 2000 emails....to who?

Its such a simple question. And yet you've run from it 3 times, unable to answer.

What are the security clearances of her staff that saw these emails?

None of them have security clearances higher that congressional committe members. Some of those emails are classified above congress' clearance.

Then your 'common knowledge' 2000 emails have been reduced to 'some of those emails'.

That was easy.

Now get specific. Which emails, which security levels, and which staffers.

It doesn't matter. If it was ONE email, it's still a crime.

So now your 2000 emails which were 'common knowledge'.....have been widdled down to 1.

Which you can't cite, can't tell us which staffer saw, nor what the security level of the email was, nor what the security level of the staffer was.

Perhaps 'common knowledge' doesn't mean what you think it means.

 

[flacaltenn]

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Logic 101

Nor is it evidence of existence either. Logic 101.

So what would be your evidence of a hack into those email servers be? The answer is obvious: jack shit.

That's irrelevant. She still broke the law and should be in prison for the rest of her life.

Like Powell and Patreaus were put in prison for the rest of their lives?

Petraeus had classified information in an unsecure setting with ONE PERSON viewing it. Much different than a commercial server shared with other PERSONAL stuff as an open target. And some aides FORWARDING this information were not even indoctrinated in RECOGNIZING the classified nature of the communications. Huge diff.

When Powell held that job -- the State Dept electronic systems were in the Stone Age. HE was the Sec. that implemented secured networks and field communications. So most of HIS classified work was done on INTERNAL older systems. And it's quite possible that ANY OUTSIDE e-mail he used was relegated to unclassified convos. Just like you can't pick up ANY phone and have a classified session -- same with email..

Hilliary OTH -- used the Private server EXCLUSIVELY --- even tho the State Dept by that time had external secure nets that COULD have been used, but would have been "recorded" and logged.

You folks need to appreciate the magnitude of the issue here. There are MILLIONS of Americans who know what a crime this was. And at the LEAST -- Hilliary ought NEVER hold high Security again.. NEVER EVER....

Which would make it REALLY REALLY hard to act as Prez -- wouldn't it?? That kind of arrogance and irresponsibility and bad judgement would disqualify ANYONE else from obtaining those clearances. Most folks don't know the demands made of people security cleared at that level. It's absurdly strict... It affects your Real life.. It affects the way you travel or maybe even party or socialize.. And it's a kick in the face to the others who have to guard national secrets to see this poo-flinging back and forth..

 

[Skylar]

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Logic 101

Nor is it evidence of existence either. Logic 101.

So what would be your evidence of a hack into those email servers be? The answer is obvious: jack shit.

That's irrelevant. She still broke the law and should be in prison for the rest of her life.

Like Powell and Patreaus were put in prison for the rest of their lives?

Petraeus had classified information in an unsecure setting with ONE PERSON viewing it. Much different than a commercial server shared with other PERSONAL stuff as an open target. And some aides FORWARDING this information were not even indoctrinated in RECOGNIZING the classified nature of the communications. Huge diff.

Petraius TOOK classified material out of the CIA and SHOWED it to a woman he was fucking. 8 full binders worth.

Who did Hillary show any classified information to?

 

[Care4all]

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Logic 101

Nor is it evidence of existence either. Logic 101.

So what would be your evidence of a hack into those email servers be? The answer is obvious: jack shit.

That's irrelevant. She still broke the law and should be in prison for the rest of her life.

Like Powell and Patreaus were put in prison for the rest of their lives?

Petraeus had classified information in an unsecure setting with ONE PERSON viewing it. Much different than a commercial server shared with other PERSONAL stuff as an open target. And some aides FORWARDING this information were not even indoctrinated in RECOGNIZING the classified nature of the communications. Huge diff.

When Powell held that job -- the State Dept electronic systems were in the Stone Age. HE was the Sec. that implemented secured networks and field communications. So most of HIS classified work was done on INTERNAL older systems. And it's quite possible that ANY OUTSIDE e-mail he used was relegated to unclassified convos. Just like you can't pick up ANY phone and have a classified session -- same with email..

Hilliary OTH -- used the Private server EXCLUSIVELY --- even tho the State Dept by that time had external secure nets that COULD have been used, but would have been "recorded" and logged.

You folks need to appreciate the magnitude of the issue here. There are MILLIONS of Americans who know what a crime this was. And at the LEAST -- Hilliary ought NEVER hold high Security again.. NEVER EVER....

Which would make it REALLY REALLY hard to act as Prez -- wouldn't it?? That kind of arrogance and irresponsibility and bad judgement would disqualify ANYONE else from obtaining those clearances. Most folks don't know the demands made of people security cleared at that level. It's absurdly strict... It affects your Real life.. It affects the way you travel or maybe even party or socialize.. And it's a kick in the face to the others who have to guard national secrets to see this poo-flinging back and forth..

that's simply not true.... the staffers that sent her this stuff were ALL Indoctrinated in handling of and identifying top secret/classified material.... thus they are requesting the release of this material, they don't believe it is top secret....

 

[paperview]

Petraeus had classified information in an unsecure setting with ONE PERSON viewing it...

Let's hear from the person who persecuted Patreus.

The key element that distinguishes Secretary Clinton’s email retention practices from Petraeus’ sharing of classified information is that Petraeus knowingly engaged in unlawful conduct, and that was the basis of his criminal liability.

The facts of Petraeus’ case are a matter of public record. During his tenure as the commander of the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, Petraeus recorded handwritten notes in personal journals, including information he knew was classified at the very highest levels.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2015/08/21/clinton-email-state-server-column/32042775/
These journals contained top secret and even more sensitive “code word” national defense information, including the identities of covert officers, war strategy, intelligence capabilities, diplomatic discussions, and quotes and deliberative discussions from National Security Council meetings, including discussions with the president of the United States.

Both the law and his oath required Petraeus to mark these books as “top secret” and to store them in a Secured Compartmented Information Facility. He did neither.

Rather, Petraeus allowed his biographer to take possession of the journals in order to use them as source material for his biography.

Importantly, Petraeus was well aware of the classified contents in his journals, saying to his biographer, Paula Broadwell on tape, “I mean, they are highly classified, some of them. They don’t have it on it, but I mean there’s code word stuff in there.”

When questioned by the FBI, Petraeus lied to agents in responding that he had neither improperly stored nor improperly provided classified information to his biographer. As Mukasey also highlighted, the key element is that Petraeus’ conduct was done “knowingly.” That is, when he stored his journals containing “highly classified” information at his home, he did so knowingly. Petraeus knew at that time that there was classified information in the journals, and he knew they were stored improperly.

In sharp contrast, Clinton is not being investigated for knowingly sending or receiving classified materials improperly."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opini...versy-no-comparison-petraeus-column/71421242/

 

[bripat9643]

The latest tactic to emerge in the Hillary email server saga is to somehow use "no evidence of hacking" as a means of exoneration. Totally irrelevant. First of all when you are talking about State level cyber-hacking, the Chinese are as good as anyone at disguising their hack attempts. So by saying "we found no evidence of hacking" just means you weren't smart enough to detect the hack attempt. Secondly, National security laws do not say "it's ok to put Secret and Top Secret stuff on an unsecured server as long as no bad guys get it". That is utter nonsense. If you hold the highest Security clearance given as Hillary does, and you do what Hillary did the law is clear. You immediately lose your clearance and you are going to do time in jail.

Like Powell and Patreaus did time in jail?

As an example, in 2011 there was a Marine that ran into financial trouble and he approached the Chinese with a proposition. He took photographs of the Chinese consulate including location of security cameras etc. He was caught, the photographs were classified at the Secret level. He was stripped of his clearance and got 9 years in prison. I'm going off the top of my head here sorry no link but it happened. Compare what the Marine did to what Hillary did. What should be her sentence?

And who did Hillary approach with top secret information?

Patreaus was convicted and given probation.

Are you recommending that Clinton should get probation, vice jail time?

I'm suggesting that if Patreaus wasn't given jail time for walking out 8 binders of top secret information from the CIA to impress the woman he was fucking.....its remarkably unlikely Hillary will for using a private email server.

Patreaus was convicted of a felony. If that's what happens to Hillary, she's finished.

 

[Skylar]

The latest tactic to emerge in the Hillary email server saga is to somehow use "no evidence of hacking" as a means of exoneration. Totally irrelevant. First of all when you are talking about State level cyber-hacking, the Chinese are as good as anyone at disguising their hack attempts. So by saying "we found no evidence of hacking" just means you weren't smart enough to detect the hack attempt. Secondly, National security laws do not say "it's ok to put Secret and Top Secret stuff on an unsecured server as long as no bad guys get it". That is utter nonsense. If you hold the highest Security clearance given as Hillary does, and you do what Hillary did the law is clear. You immediately lose your clearance and you are going to do time in jail.

Like Powell and Patreaus did time in jail?

As an example, in 2011 there was a Marine that ran into financial trouble and he approached the Chinese with a proposition. He took photographs of the Chinese consulate including location of security cameras etc. He was caught, the photographs were classified at the Secret level. He was stripped of his clearance and got 9 years in prison. I'm going off the top of my head here sorry no link but it happened. Compare what the Marine did to what Hillary did. What should be her sentence?

And who did Hillary approach with top secret information?

Patreaus was convicted and given probation.

Are you recommending that Clinton should get probation, vice jail time?

I'm suggesting that if Patreaus wasn't given jail time for walking out 8 binders of top secret information from the CIA to impress the woman he was fucking.....its remarkably unlikely Hillary will for using a private email server.

Patreaus was convicted of a felony. If that's what happens to Hillary, she's finished.

Unless she isn't. And she isn't.

 

[bripat9643]

The latest tactic to emerge in the Hillary email server saga is to somehow use "no evidence of hacking" as a means of exoneration. Totally irrelevant. First of all when you are talking about State level cyber-hacking, the Chinese are as good as anyone at disguising their hack attempts. So by saying "we found no evidence of hacking" just means you weren't smart enough to detect the hack attempt. Secondly, National security laws do not say "it's ok to put Secret and Top Secret stuff on an unsecured server as long as no bad guys get it". That is utter nonsense. If you hold the highest Security clearance given as Hillary does, and you do what Hillary did the law is clear. You immediately lose your clearance and you are going to do time in jail.

Like Powell and Patreaus did time in jail?

As an example, in 2011 there was a Marine that ran into financial trouble and he approached the Chinese with a proposition. He took photographs of the Chinese consulate including location of security cameras etc. He was caught, the photographs were classified at the Secret level. He was stripped of his clearance and got 9 years in prison. I'm going off the top of my head here sorry no link but it happened. Compare what the Marine did to what Hillary did. What should be her sentence?

And who did Hillary approach with top secret information?

Patreaus was convicted and given probation.

Are you recommending that Clinton should get probation, vice jail time?

I'm suggesting that if Patreaus wasn't given jail time for walking out 8 binders of top secret information from the CIA to impress the woman he was fucking.....its remarkably unlikely Hillary will for using a private email server.

Patreaus was convicted of a felony. If that's what happens to Hillary, she's finished.

Unless she isn't. And she isn't.

Obama has absolutely no scruples, so you could be right.

 

[MarathonMike]

OK if we're comparing Patreus to Clinton here is a decent article on the subject. The most relevant point is made concerning the magnitude of what Hillary did in terms of national security vs what Patreus did. There are also other crimes such as deleting 30,000 emails the SHE determined were personal in nature. That is evidence tampering. Anyhow here is the link to Patreus v Clinton:
How Gen. David Petraeus Gets It, And Hillary Clinton Still Doesn't

 

[paperview]

Patreaus was convicted of a felony. If that's what happens to Hillary, she's finished.

No, he wasn't. Idiot.

 

[paperview]

OK if we're comparing Patreus to Clinton here is a decent article on the subject. The most relevant point is made concerning the magnitude of what Hillary did in terms of national security vs what Patreus did. There are also other crimes such as deleting 30,000 emails the SHE determined were personal in nature. That is evidence tampering. Anyhow here is the link to Patreus v Clinton:
How Gen. David Petraeus Gets It, And Hillary Clinton Still Doesn't

Why evidence of hacking Hillary's server is an irrelevant diversion

 

[flacaltenn]

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Logic 101

Nor is it evidence of existence either. Logic 101.

So what would be your evidence of a hack into those email servers be? The answer is obvious: jack shit.

That's irrelevant. She still broke the law and should be in prison for the rest of her life.

Like Powell and Patreaus were put in prison for the rest of their lives?

Petraeus had classified information in an unsecure setting with ONE PERSON viewing it. Much different than a commercial server shared with other PERSONAL stuff as an open target. And some aides FORWARDING this information were not even indoctrinated in RECOGNIZING the classified nature of the communications. Huge diff.

Petraius TOOK classified material out of the CIA and SHOWED it to a woman he was fucking. 8 full binders worth.

Who did Hillary show any classified information to?

Pretty much risked showing it to the world. All a foreign intel org would have to know is that she does all work from her commercial portable device. They'd be smart enough to CHECK if her links were secure.. So anywhere she traveled -- she put the nations' secrets at risk..

If I was carrying classified docs in a locked briefcase -- I have to be PHYSICALLY IN CONTACT with that briefcase. Don't need to SHOW it to anyone. Just leaving it for 15 minutes at a Starbucks is a breach of security. .

 

[flacaltenn]

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Logic 101

Nor is it evidence of existence either. Logic 101.

So what would be your evidence of a hack into those email servers be? The answer is obvious: jack shit.

That's irrelevant. She still broke the law and should be in prison for the rest of her life.

Like Powell and Patreaus were put in prison for the rest of their lives?

Petraeus had classified information in an unsecure setting with ONE PERSON viewing it. Much different than a commercial server shared with other PERSONAL stuff as an open target. And some aides FORWARDING this information were not even indoctrinated in RECOGNIZING the classified nature of the communications. Huge diff.

When Powell held that job -- the State Dept electronic systems were in the Stone Age. HE was the Sec. that implemented secured networks and field communications. So most of HIS classified work was done on INTERNAL older systems. And it's quite possible that ANY OUTSIDE e-mail he used was relegated to unclassified convos. Just like you can't pick up ANY phone and have a classified session -- same with email..

Hilliary OTH -- used the Private server EXCLUSIVELY --- even tho the State Dept by that time had external secure nets that COULD have been used, but would have been "recorded" and logged.

You folks need to appreciate the magnitude of the issue here. There are MILLIONS of Americans who know what a crime this was. And at the LEAST -- Hilliary ought NEVER hold high Security again.. NEVER EVER....

Which would make it REALLY REALLY hard to act as Prez -- wouldn't it?? That kind of arrogance and irresponsibility and bad judgement would disqualify ANYONE else from obtaining those clearances. Most folks don't know the demands made of people security cleared at that level. It's absurdly strict... It affects your Real life.. It affects the way you travel or maybe even party or socialize.. And it's a kick in the face to the others who have to guard national secrets to see this poo-flinging back and forth..

that's simply not true.... the staffers that sent her this stuff were ALL Indoctrinated in handling of and identifying top secret/classified material.... thus they are requesting the release of this material, they don't believe it is top secret....

There's a lot we DON'T KNOW and shouldn't know. But just the folks who INSTALLED and HOSTED that server had access to ALL those communications --- if they wanted them. What about the aide that ARRANGED for the server??? The one given immunity just yesterday ??

Just knowing the physical location or the IP address of that server should have been Top Secret to match the communications that went over it.. There IS NO WAY --- to make what she did --- excusable..

 

[rdean]

The latest tactic to emerge in the Hillary email server saga is to somehow use "no evidence of hacking" as a means of exoneration. Totally irrelevant. First of all when you are talking about State level cyber-hacking, the Chinese are as good as anyone at disguising their hack attempts. So by saying "we found no evidence of hacking" just means you weren't smart enough to detect the hack attempt. Secondly, National security laws do not say "it's ok to put Secret and Top Secret stuff on an unsecured server as long as no bad guys get it". That is utter nonsense. If you hold the highest Security clearance given as Hillary does, and you do what Hillary did the law is clear. You immediately lose your clearance and you are going to do time in jail.

Like Powell and Patreaus did time in jail?

As an example, in 2011 there was a Marine that ran into financial trouble and he approached the Chinese with a proposition. He took photographs of the Chinese consulate including location of security cameras etc. He was caught, the photographs were classified at the Secret level. He was stripped of his clearance and got 9 years in prison. I'm going off the top of my head here sorry no link but it happened. Compare what the Marine did to what Hillary did. What should be her sentence?

And who did Hillary approach with top secret information?

Patreaus was convicted and given probation.

Are you recommending that Clinton should get probation, vice jail time?

I'm suggesting that if Patreaus wasn't given jail time for walking out 8 binders of top secret information from the CIA to impress the woman he was fucking.....its remarkably unlikely Hillary will for using a private email server.

Patreaus was convicted of a felony. If that's what happens to Hillary, she's finished.

misdemeanor
you sit in front of the fucking Internet nitwit
what the fuck is wrong with your kind?