Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Look it up yourself. If you don't understand that you need reeducation. If I do it for you you will not remember it. It is easy to find.
No, you provide the link that says what you have stated, I want to be sure that I am reading the exact same thing as you....Or I could just say I did look it up and you have lied...right?
As a person who has retired from the military in 2009, and since then working for the government, I think you have NO clue what you talking about.
But that seems to be the leftist way here lately, let me explain, I have asked you, and another leftist, here lately for a link and you and the other leftist have stated, no...look it up yourself.
Why is it so hard to provide a damn link lately? I know why you cannot provide a link, but I just want you and the other poster to show how much better you are than I....
I'm about 10 years younger than her and I don't know anything about wiping computers! Seriously! I can't do my own computer repairs either. I don't even understand what a router does.
Just because you know these things, don't assume everyone else does too.
Uh; most of us CAN'T do what you just talked about except for IT people. Hillary; OTOH, she SHOULD have IT people around her because the Internet's been a utility since about 2,000 like Ma Bell was 30 years ago.
You are still beating a dead horse. It is quite possible she does not understand the nuances of high end security. It is in fact likely. And it is still of no matter. She has stated that there was no classified information on her server or in her emails on that server.
This in no way suggest she was not privy to and carrying on highly secure communications. She simply was not doing those on her email or server.
Now we know that various IGs have said otherwise and there was in fact top secret information in her emails. But that is a contest of authority not fact. If she said they were not classified they were not classified. In practice it should not have happened but it is likely her staff who would have the knowledge of where the line was...not Clinton. And I would be sure she sent nothing which had classified markings or even had them removed.
So as I have said she should have proceeded differently and her staff should have protected Clinton and the TS information more carefully. But no she has made no great sin other than leaving herself wide open to criticism.
So your point is that the secretary of state is required to set up their own servers etc. and if it happens they aren't really good at it then "ooops!".
Sorry, I'm not buying that "she doesn't understand" as an excuse since they have government people in support of her position that would do all that for her.
Trying to pass it off as some old aunt that got confused and got viruses on her computer or broke the CD tray thinking it's a coffee mug holder is disingenuous.
She made a conscious decision to follow different protocols than what were historically in place for Secretary of State. So far her supporters newest excuse that she is just incompetent isn't helping her either.
So your point is that the secretary of state is required to set up their own servers etc. and if it happens they aren't really good at it then "ooops!".
Sorry, I'm not buying that "she doesn't understand" as an excuse since they have government people in support of her position that would do all that for her.
Trying to pass it off as some old aunt that got confused and got viruses on her computer or broke the CD tray thinking it's a coffee mug holder is disingenuous.
She made a conscious decision to follow different protocols than what were historically in place for Secretary of State. So far her supporters newest excuse that she is just incompetent isn't helping her either.
That is not correct. There was no established pattern for a SofS. Powell apparently did the same though he may have been using a email service...
“He was not aware of any restrictions nor does he recall being made aware of any over the four years he served at State,” an aide for Mr. Powell said in a statement, Politico reported.
Powell in fact encouraged the use of email.
And no I don't believe she is playing the dumb old aunt. She did not use it for classified matters and she had sufficient authoritry to determine what was classified.
Uh; most of us CAN'T do what you just talked about except for IT people. Hillary; OTOH, she SHOULD have IT people around her because the Internet's been a utility since about 2,000 like Ma Bell was 30 years ago.
There a programs you can install to do wiping. You don't have to be an IT specialist.
This is exactly what we should be concerned about this, because most left wing democrats are willing to turn a blind eye to it all in order to convince themselves that supporting her is more important than learning the truth.
To many on the left this was a "fake scandal" before they even knew what took place.
And still is, even now after they all know that it is not a "fake scandal".
But leftists insist that literally ALL scandals that relate to their leaders are phony, as we have seen time and time again with Barack Obama over the last seven years.
That is not correct. There was no established pattern for a SofS. Powell apparently did the same though he may have been using a email service...
“He was not aware of any restrictions nor does he recall being made aware of any over the four years he served at State,” an aide for Mr. Powell said in a statement, Politico reported.
Powell in fact encouraged the use of email.
And no I don't believe she is playing the dumb old aunt. She did not use it for classified matters and she had sufficient authoritry to determine what was classified.
private email <> private server
You realize you aren't helping your cause at this point, you just seem to be trying to wordsmith the truth into something else.....and you probably can't figure out why she has a huge trust issue in the polls too.
You realize you aren't helping your cause at this point, you just seem to be trying to wordsmith the truth into something else.....and you probably can't figure out why she has a huge trust issue in the polls too.
private email may well be worse than a private server. Depends on how structured. Certainly common email systems can and have been penetrated and are automatic and standard targets for government and private hackers.
The principle however is the same. The emails are removed from the control of the government.
I am not a Hillary fan.. Not likely to be. Could end up voting for her but, if so, it is likely on a lesser of the evils basis.
I am not trying to wordsmith anything. I am however refuting the argument that she in fact violated any security regulation or protocol. And the reason is simply because she had the authority to determine what is classified and what is not.
There is a broad and obvious gulf between security people and people actually running the government.. Pretty healthy thing in some ways. But in the end those who actually run the government determine what is or is not secret. And that is the way it has to be for the government to work. The crucial thing is that the doers understand the security implications of what they do and release information only when it is the right thing to do. But that is not a place where the security guys should get a vote. They get to explain and argue but the line makes the end decision.
private email may well be worse than a private server. Depends on how structured. Certainly common email systems can and have been penetrated and are automatic and standard targets for government and private hackers.
The principle however is the same. The emails are removed from the control of the government.
I am not a Hillary fan.. Not likely to be. Could end up voting for her but, if so, it is likely on a lesser of the evils basis.
I am not trying to wordsmith anything. I am however refuting the argument that she in fact violated any security regulation or protocol. And the reason is simply because she had the authority to determine what is classified and what is not.
There is a broad and obvious gulf between security people and people actually running the government.. Pretty healthy thing in some ways. But in the end those who actually run the government determine what is or is not secret. And that is the way it has to be for the government to work. The crucial thing is that the doers understand the security implications of what they do and release information only when it is the right thing to do. But that is not a place where the security guys should get a vote. They get to explain and argue but the line makes the end decision.
That's the dumbest lie I heard since she wiped her server with a rag...
She does not have the ability to make or choose what is or what is not classified...I don't care who she is or what her job name is.
However, the fact of who she is would mean most of everything she handles would be considered "classified." Again, I would not have a job, just "Because" just as everyone else...
Sorry, but your failure to even understand what OPSEC is, is very obvious...So, please stop trying to tell us how good you are...
BTW, still waiting on that link where she has the authority of the president....
private email may well be worse than a private server. Depends on how structured. Certainly common email systems can and have been penetrated and are automatic and standard targets for government and private hackers.
The principle however is the same. The emails are removed from the control of the government.
I am not a Hillary fan.. Not likely to be. Could end up voting for her but, if so, it is likely on a lesser of the evils basis.
I am not trying to wordsmith anything. I am however refuting the argument that she in fact violated any security regulation or protocol. And the reason is simply because she had the authority to determine what is classified and what is not.
There is a broad and obvious gulf between security people and people actually running the government.. Pretty healthy thing in some ways. But in the end those who actually run the government determine what is or is not secret. And that is the way it has to be for the government to work. The crucial thing is that the doers understand the security implications of what they do and release information only when it is the right thing to do. But that is not a place where the security guys should get a vote. They get to explain and argue but the line makes the end decision.
The issue is not private email on a private unsecured server though. The government doesn't restrict hilldog@yahoo or Cpowell@gmail from sending around cookie recipes or forwarding videos of cats falling over.
It's how she operated her secretary of state emails that is the crux of the situation.
Let's come clean, do you know WHY she did that?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
