Hillary Clinton Used Personal Email at State Dept., Possibly Breaking Rules

The state department take security seriously and have a lot of rules, otherwise known as laws regarding handling of sensitive information. General Petraeus was prosecuted for a lot less, and someone will need to explain if a prosecution does not take place why he was prosecuted and Hillary was not.

Next step i think will be a recommendation by the FBI to prosecute, I think this will happen. Then it’s up to the Attorney General if they want to proceed with an indictment and thats where it becomes political, even if she were convicted she could get a pardon from the President.

Notice how Hillarys policies have fallen in line perfectly with Obama, a cynical person might say she has to be his bitch while he can decide how this case goes forward. it’s not much of a stretch then to say any other country, Russia , China, actors in the middle east, anyone who hacked and had a full copy of her emails would have her over a barrel as well. She at best acted with abundant stupidity at worst deliberately compromised security and put peoples lives at risk as well as national security because she wanted to avoid oversight. So yes, IMO the way she acted proves she is unfit for the job of President of the USA.

Big difference between handling information that was for the most part not then classified than to allow a mistress or boyfriend to access one’s secret account and send threatening messages from it. Surely, even you can see that difference is yawning?

Big difference between handling information that was for the most part not then classified than to allow a mistress or boyfriend to access one’s secret account and send threatening messages from it. Surely, even you can see that difference is yawning?[/quote]

I didn’t realize Petraeus mistress was sending threatening messages, but I looked it up and sure enough. Seems that was how they figured out he had shared the classified information, interesting.

Look, non classified information is not the issue, even some classified messages may be run of the mill information, I get that. But theres well over a thousand messages marked classified, some at top secret and now at least several dozen SAP which apparently at least one discusses human assets. Thats the sort of thing if Iran, or N Korea are listening in and happens to be referring to someone in their country that gets people killed or imprisoned.

Patraeus exposed his intelligence to one person, Hillary exposed it to the entire world and by the way if they had access to Hillarys emails, they can modify them so that if they were sent on, they too can infect another system, phones and devices. Intelligence is extremely valuable and sought after, China wants to know how the US would react to an attack on Taiwan, Russia wants to know can it invade Crimea and what the US thinks, Iran wants to know what the bottom line in it’s dealings with the US are. You would think nothing that sensitive would ever end up on Clintons home brew server, that even she would know not to do that, but shes already shown incredible lack of judgement in setting up the system in the first place.

Maybe Hillary will escape from this, maybe not, but Im pretty sure people are going to be charged, if not her then her aides and you can be sure there’s more to come. Stay tuned.

edit/ Just going to add this, it was reported a couple of months back that the feds were able to recover her deleted emails. If it turns out these several dozen SAP’s related emails are from those deleted emails, shes toast.

[quote]I didn’t realize Petraeus mistress was sending threatening messages, but I looked it up and sure enough. Seems that was how they figured out he had shared the classified information, interesting.
[/quote]

Not interesting, but sad.

Yes, I seem to recall suggesting the very same when our “heroic” whistleblowers were sharing similar, far more damning information. I seem to recall for the most part a steady stream of European and Canadian invective about “freedom” sprinkled or rather dolloped with a huge smattering of nonsense about how the US was “anti-freedom,” etc. and, now, suddenly, these lives are of interest to you and others of your ilk? How precious! I do hope that all of our offended European “friends” will also revisit their remarks in light of the revelations of spying on the part of their host governments against the US and US officials as well? Any chance of that?

but in a way that was intentionally negligent.

And all of this is suddenly news to you? of concern to you? Recall that much much MUCH of this has been hacked and shared and reposted and delved over already.

I am sure that she would be the first to agree with you… now…

[quote]Maybe Hillary will escape from this, maybe not, but Im pretty sure people are going to be charged, if not her then her aides and you can be sure there’s more to come. Stay tuned.
[/quote]

Oh, I am sure that there will be “more to come.” I watched the Democrats engage in similar tomfoolery with regard to all of their concern over “scandals” involving George W. Pardon me, however, for not engaging in schadenfreude or other sentiments of amusement now that the tables have turned. I, for one, think that these internecine campaigns of character assassination to nothing to help our country. I think that it was despicable when it happened to George W. and I am not going to find it any more palatable now that it is happening to the Democrats.

Perhaps, perhaps… but if she is toast then we have lost a very qualified, capable candidate for president. I imagine then that many people of her stature will likewise avoid running for president to avoid the intense spotlight and endless grilling. Why then, you will have ensured that not only one side, the Republicans nominate less-than-desirable candidates but that the Democrats will do the same. Congratulations on your fine sentiments for they are truly advancing the causes of justice and integrity! I applaud you!

Anyway, like I said, if there are charges, I don’t think Clinton will be the first. Emails related to special access programs or marked top secret don’t just magically jump from an air gaped secure system to an unsecured server like Hillarys. Someone physically copied or more likely wrote to a CD and then transmitted from an unsecured location, whoever did that will be first in line to be charged.

Sure there is something to this story. To me, not much to get excited about, but it’s not nothing either so granted. However the one thing I find striking in all of this is your ability to determine that Hillary is clearly not qualified to be President, but you fail to give the same scrutiny to the opposite. If you can identify markers that disqualify a person for Presidency, surely you can identify markers that qualify?

I have been asking and asking, but no answers yet. What on earth makes someone like Donald Trump qualified to be President? One single thing on his resume that is leader of the free world caliber. As far as a businessman goes, at least 9 out of 10 businessmen are more successful so that’s a non issue. His business sense gets him absolutely nowhere. His knowledge of the issues is shockingly poor, to the point where he can’t even begin to articulate how he would proceed with his own plans let alone anything else of any importance. He has zero experience in anything remotely related to the Presidency, which makes you wonder how he will even navigate his first day in office with opposition let alone a successful term. He’s the furthest thing from diplomatic which is a major part of the job. He’s not well spoken at all. Honestly he sounds like he has a learning disability when he talks. He has zero tact, he rubs almost everybody the wrong way. He has zero patience for understanding other cultures and how to co-exist on this planet with them.

Honestly I can’t for the life of me find one single Presidential quality. Nothing that would make me say, hey that guy would actually make a good President. There’s plenty of businessmen we would say that about, America has a lot of talented businessmen. Trump? That’s the last thing I think about when I see him.

Yet Hillary, who is absolutely overflowing with qualifications and Presidential qualities and experience is somehow disqualified from the position because she fucked up with some email shit that almost certainly didn’t affect anything or anybody anywhere?

This is the Hillary Clinton email thread, not Donald trump one, but I did try to start a conversation with you and really it felt like to me I was taking to someone with their fingers in their ears singing “lalalalala I can’t hear you”. I don’t intend that to come across as mean, it’s really how I felt and saw little point in a continued exchange if someone has an inability to see things from another persons perspective. This is not the same as agreeing with what is said, and on these discussion forums, typically I expect at a minimum for people to disagree on various topics but possess an ability to leave aside rock solid black and white, right and wrong, binary thinking and engage in possibilities.

 As far as Hillary is concerned, its more than just her emails (or we could call it what it was, her top secret and beyond top secret data that was stored for years on an unsecured sever in her home). By the way how can you even say it didnt effect anything? There are 50 to 100 fbi agents working this because of her, the state department has to rework 30k emails sent to them by her for FOIA which would have been a hell of a lot easier if they had the electronic copies. EVERYTHING that was on her server must be now deemed compromised. How much of a headache that causes I don't know but it aint a small one. All because she thought her right to keep control over communications was more important than the security and established setup the State department had for securing communications.

She lied to the grieving families as the coffins of their loved ones were unloaded in front of their eyes about the cause being an internet video, then when several different families went on tv to repeat what she said, she essentially called them liars. This is the person you think is fit for president? No one else pulled that shit, only Hillary, I saw recently one of the sisters of the dead relatives talking about this and said Biden was nothing but warm and kind, had he been running she would have voted for him.

The women who accuse Bill of assault and rape also accuse Hillary of going after them, intimidating them, using private investigators to threaten them. these women call Hillary the war on women. She is smart I give you that, quick, sharp, but my impression is she is absolutely lacking a moral compass. Scandals surround her like flies over a piece of shit, apparently she told a security detail to “fuck off” because he had the audacity to say “good morning” to her, adding “It’s enough that I have to see you shit-kickers every day, I’m not going to talk to you too!! Just do your G*damn job and keep your mouth shut”. On the other hand I see trump walking out from his towers and some guy cleaning out rubbish calls over “hey it’s the man himself”, and trump goes over shakes his hand and says hi, and carries on. Guarantee you Hillary would have had him roped off, such people are beneath her.

Clinton is incessant liar, it’s pathological, no need for examples, they would just go on and on. The list of reasons not to want Hillary in the Whitehouse just seems endless, I’ve got to stop or this post will be too long for anyone to bother reading any of it. Shes part of the establishment, paid for by the Banks, I’ve said before I would rather see a Bernie sanders or or Donald Trump who are not in the pockets of donors who spent 10’s or 100’s of millions of dollars. Both Bernie and Trump are against the TPPA, what Hillary says is irrelevant to me, I dont believe a word she says. I may go back and revisit the Trump thread and provide a more solid reasoning for you, but if after every post your reply is “dont see it” “nope no points being made” “no convinced of anything” it’s kind of boring. Im not trying to change your mind or “win” an argument, there’s nothing in it for me to explain why I look at something from a particular perspective and if i get the impression for one second the person I am talking to is putting his fingers in their ears and singing “lalala I can’t hear you” I am not going to waste my time.

[quote=“Mick”]This is the Hillary Clinton email thread, not Donald trump one, but I did try to start a conversation with you and really it felt like to me I was taking to someone with their fingers in their ears singing “lalalalala I can’t hear you”. I don’t intend that to come across as mean, it’s really how I felt and saw little point in a continued exchange if someone has an inability to see things from another persons perspective. This is not the same as agreeing with what is said, and on these discussion forums, typically I expect at a minimum for people to disagree on various topics but possess an ability to leave aside rock solid black and white, right and wrong, binary thinking and engage in possibilities.

 As far as Hillary is concerned, its more than just her emails (or we could call it what it was, her top secret and beyond top secret data that was stored for years on an unsecured sever in her home). By the way how can you even say it didnt effect anything? There are 50 to 100 fbi agents working this because of her, the state department has to rework 30k emails sent to them by her for FOIA which would have been a hell of a lot easier if they had the electronic copies. EVERYTHING that was on her server must be now deemed compromised. How much of a headache that causes I don't know but it aint a small one. All because she thought her right to keep control over communications was more important than the security and established setup the State department had for securing communications.

She lied to the grieving families as the coffins of their loved ones were unloaded in front of their eyes about the cause being an internet video, then when several different families went on tv to repeat what she said, she essentially called them liars. This is the person you think is fit for president? No one else pulled that shit, only Hillary, I saw recently one of the sisters of the dead relatives talking about this and said Biden was nothing but warm and kind, had he been running she would have voted for him.

The women who accuse Bill of assault and rape also accuse Hillary of going after them, intimidating them, using private investigators to threaten them. these women call Hillary the war on women. She is smart I give you that, quick, sharp, but my impression is she is absolutely lacking a moral compass. Scandals surround her like flies over a piece of shit,
apparently
she told a security detail to “fuck off” because he had the audacity to say “good morning” to her, adding “It’s enough that I have to see you shit-kickers every day, I’m not going to talk to you too!! Just do your G*damn job and keep your mouth shut”. On the other hand I see trump walking out from his towers and some guy cleaning out rubbish calls over “hey it’s the man himself”, and trump goes over shakes his hand and says hi, and carries on. Guarantee you Hillary would have had him roped off, such people are beneath her.

Clinton is incessant liar, it’s pathological, no need for examples, they would just go on and on. The list of reasons not to want Hillary in the Whitehouse just seems endless, I’ve got to stop or this post will be too long for anyone to bother reading any of it. Shes part of the establishment, paid for by the Banks, I’ve said before I would rather see a Bernie sanders or or Donald Trump who are not in the pockets of donors who spent 10’s or 100’s of millions of dollars. Both Bernie and Trump are against the TPPA, what Hillary says is irrelevant to me, I don’t believe a word she says. I may go back and revisit the Trump thread and provide a more solid reasoning for you, but if after every post your reply is “dont see it” “nope no points being made” “no convinced of anything” it’s kind of boring. Im not trying to change your mind or “win” an argument, there’s nothing in it for me to explain why I look at something from a particular perspective and if I get the impression for one second the person I am talking to is putting his fingers in their ears and singing “lalala I can’t hear you” I am not going to waste my time.[/quote]

Pretty much sums up everything you’ve ever said about Hillary. Not quite, but nearly as non existent as qualifications you’ve listed for Trump to be President. Still, none given.

[quote=“BrentGolf”]
Pretty much sums up everything you’ve ever said about Hillary. Not quite, but nearly as non existent as qualifications you’ve listed for Trump to be President. Still, none given.[/quote]

Quite the rebuttal. Ok, i’m going to work of the premise you dont understand the technical details, which might read as plain English to me, but I admit there might be some additional knowledge that needs to be known to understand the Hillary thing.

Forget for a moment what Hillary is accused of doing. Top secret or Special access program information doesn’t exist on computers as you are familiar with them. They are on what is known as closed systems, or air gapped. They have no internet connection, USB drives are strictly prohibited. The only way to get information off one of these systems is to photograph the screen, copy it by hand, or burn it to a CD then transfer it to an unsecured internet based computer, known as sneakernetting and is highly illegal . Then if you were to strip the confidential headers and send the data through a unsecured medium, you have just broken some very serious federal laws and are going to go to jail, not withstanding political intervention by the Attorney General unwilling to prosecute or a Presidential pardon.

Hillary is playing the ignorant card, nothing that was sent or received was marked as classified. That’s harder to prove than what I described above. It’s not necessarily a defense either, but it’s all shes got. If as it seems apparent that dozens of SAP data existed on Clintons computer, whoever transferred that to an unsecured system will almost certainly go to jail.

I’m just not a person swayed by hearsay and apparently’s, which is all I’ve heard on the subject. And not just you, I wasn’t just saying it’s you who’s making a poor case, it’s everybody. I don’t understand why regular people think that they know something, when literally everything you know came from news sources. Anything truly important to a case against her is obviously not going to be released to the public. You know as much as I do about what Hillary did or didn’t do.

I will be patiently waiting for some actual evidence to surface. If and when it does, I’ll judge her based on real evidence. Until then, I don’t really care what news outlets say she did with emails, or her husbands infidelity, or any of it. It’s not like she’s my hero or something, she’s my second choice in a field of bad choices.

[quote=“BrentGolf”]I’m just not a person swayed by hearsay and apparently’s, which is all I’ve heard on the subject. And not just you, I wasn’t just saying it’s you who’s making a poor case, it’s everybody. I don’t understand why regular people think that they know something, when literally everything you know came from news sources. Anything truly important to a case against her is obviously not going to be released to the public. You know as much as I do about what Hillary did or didn’t do.

I will be patiently waiting for some actual evidence to surface. If and when it does, I’ll judge her based on real evidence. Until then, I don’t really care what news outlets say she did with emails, or her husbands infidelity, or any of it. It’s not like she’s my hero or something, she’s my second choice in a field of bad choices.[/quote]

:laughing: One does not need to rely on the news, in many cases of her lying theres a video of the lie, like claiming to arrive under sniper fire and ducking for cover, and there's an actual video of her arriving and calmly receiving flowers. There's no allegedly about most of the claims. 

You can see multiple first hand accounts from family members saying Clinton told them they would get the person who made the video, youtube.com/watch?v=jkpZzlZBI3M theres another one where she basically calls them all liars.

There’s video’s of all the women claiming Hillary intimidated them and there are videos of people claiming to have witnessed the behavior, youtube.com/watch?v=Rlfbi24kN44 skip to 4.35. Do a search on youtube for Juanita Broaddrick, listen to her first hand account and tell me you think she’s lying.

You don't need to rely on the news to know Hillary had above top secret information on her server, the Inspector General wrote a letter that is now public, and he was an Obama appointee. [url=http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/01/19/us/politics/document-letter-by-the-intelligence-agencies-inspector-general.html]Letter by the Intelligence Agencies Inspector General[/url]

Hillary supporters can pretend all they like this is some right wing conspiracy, but I would suggest they have lost the moral high ground to lecture the Republicans on any of their candidates virtues as long as they support Hillary.

Well hell, clearly if she embellished a story like that, OF COURSE she’s also guilty of treason. And it’s obvious that lying about coming under fire also means her husband is a rapist and she defended his actions.

As I said my friend, I will wait for something called evidence to come forward. :slight_smile:

I’ve never seen any real evidence that Bill and Hillary Clinton even exist, just a bunch of videos and news reports purporting that they do, but I remain skeptical. In the end it really comes down to what the meaning of is is.

Bubba seems like a sitcom character. Bubbette appears to be an android of some sort.

Thinking the increasingly thinkable…

reformclub.blogspot.ie/2016/01/t … stent.html

Various scenarios wherein Bubbette’s legal problems could make a hash of the electoral process.

Too big to jail? Well. she is looking a bit plump lately.

Maybe… or maybe if there really were something to jail her with, they would have done it two years ago…

Anyway, looks like she might win Iowa. How do you feel about that?

Maybe… or maybe if there really were something to jail her with, they would have done it two years ago…

Anyway, looks like she might win Iowa. How do you feel about that?[/quote]

I guarantee you that if any lesser mortal was found to have used an unsecured private email account to transmit top secret government intelligence he or she would, at the very least, have their security clearance revoked. How do you feel about a president who’s either had her security clearance revoked or is above the law?

Hillary Clinton lying for 13 minutes straight. I truly feel this woman is a sociopath.

[quote=“fred smith”]
Anyway, looks like she might win Iowa. How do you feel about that?[/quote]

Right now it’s 49.8 Clinton, 49.6 Sanders, Clintons just got a 0.2% lead and it seems to keep narrowing with 10% left uncounted, how do you feel about that?

Whether Hillary wins or loses, this is why I feel she is a disaster…

Hillary Clinton Made US$2.9 Million for 12 Speeches to Big Banks

And husband Bill has raked in over $100 million from such speeches. And now almost all of Hillary’s campaign contributions come from Wall Street banks. The Clinton’s are in Wall Street’s pocket. Outside the USA, these “speaking fees” and “campaign contributions” are known as “bribes.” The acceptance of such massive bribes by a president or a senator would be called “corruption.”

What does Wall Street get in exchange for these bribes? They get de-regulation. They get non-prosecution for their financial crimes. They get literally trillions of dollars in bailouts.

Of course the Republicans are going to make an issue out of Hillary’s email account, just like they did about Bill’s sex life. What they aren’t going to make an issue out of the Clintons accepting bribes from Wall Street, because the Republicans are just as guilty, if not more so.

Maybe we should just get it over with and pass a constitutional amendment authorizing Goldman-Sachs to appoint the next president, rather than wasting money on an election.