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.
And the proper place of custody was NOT on a server in her home, backed up to the cloud, sent through unsecure means.
She most certainly had knowledge that they had been illegally removed from their proper place of custody - SHE had the server set up in her home.
Ignorance is no excuse for breaking the law. "Thinking" her server was the proper place of custody doesn't change the fact that it was NOT. And it was not a mistake - it was a blatant disregard for the law.
I seriously wonder about the sanity of people that also truly believe that it was an "honest mistake". They delight in the fact that she's brilliant and crafty, yet believe she's so stupid she has no idea what she's doing on a day to day basis. How convenient.
A. A nonsensical and incomplete (and unintelligible) statement.
B. Not proof
Still waiting on the PROOF of who, where and when she spoke with multiple SOS's regarding a remote server.
Dinner party. At previous Secretary of State Madeleine Albright's home. Attended by other previous Secretaries of State. Where the topic came up. As reported by an independent journalist named Conason.
As any lawyer can tell you, the law is not black and white. I'm sorry that it puzzles you that some people see Hillary's actions in a different light than you. But then we don't all march in lock-step together, do we? And that's a good thing.
I defend Hillary because her actions resulted in no harm. She didn't intend for confidential information to fall into the hands of anyone unauthorized to have that confidential information. And the FBI, after a thorough investigation, didn't find that any confidential information was actually compromised.
The people demanding jail aren't demanding it because Hillary has done anything illegal. They are demanding it because they hate Hillary. And they really don't hate Hillary at all, because they don't know her. All they know is a bunch of propaganda spewed about her.
You know the rest of Comey's statement, but choose to ignore it:
'But, given the nature of the system and of the actors potentially involved, we assess that we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence. We do assess that:
1. hostile actors gained access to the private commercial e-mail accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account;
2. that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal e-mail extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries;
3. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account.'
Besides that, the law doesn't require that the classified information be obtained by foreign actors for the law to be broken.
Your quibble over 'hating' Clinton is a vapid defense of her. Plenty of people 'hate' Bush, Cheney. Putin, Trump, or others they don't know personally. Anecdotally, I know people who now 'hate' The Bern, some because he dared to challenge Clinton, others because he quit.
You use the word 'hate' to whitewash her playing fast and loose with national security and the other 'mistakes' she's already admitted to or hasn't yet acknowledged.
You know the rest of Comey's statement, but choose to ignore it:
'But, given the nature of the system and of the actors potentially involved, we assess that we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence. We do assess that:
1. hostile actors gained access to the private commercial e-mail accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account;
2. that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal e-mail extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries;
3. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account.'
Besides that, the law doesn't require that the classified information be obtained by foreign actors for the law to be broken.
Your quibble over 'hating' Clinton is a vapid defense of her. Plenty of people 'hate' Bush, Cheney. Putin, Trump, or others they don't know personally. Anecdotally, I know people who now 'hate' The Bern, some because he dared to challenge Clinton, others because he quit.
You use the word 'hate' to whitewash her playing fast and loose with national security and the other 'mistakes' she's already admitted to or hasn't yet acknowledged.
As often as I've read Comey's statement, I pretty much know it by heart.
Those three points are the foundation for his remarks about extreme carelessness.
They still didn't find that the classified information had fallen into the hands of anyone not authorized to receive it.
I don't think that the hatred for Clinton actually compares to the hatred for Trump. There are people who viscerally hate Clinton, who have physical reactions to anything related to Clinton. I think Trump is a poor candidate for President, but I don't wish him any harm. On a daily basis on this forum I see people wishing all sorts of terrible things on Hillary Clinton. Including, quite often, death.
No change of topic. Hillary had classified info routed through her private email server, which was stored on a public cloud, and therefore compromised.
Quote:
I take your response as your admission that the Public Cloud is not necessarily less secure then unsecured Federal Systems.
You would have to not understand how VPNs, etc., work to come to your ridiculous conclusion.
No change of topic. Hillary had classified info routed through her private email server, which was stored on a public cloud, and therefore compromised.
You would have to not understand how VPNs, etc., work to come to your ridiculous conclusion.
Where was your reference to classified information in your original statement? I don't see it.
I have a pretty good understanding of computer and network security having worked in the area for nearly 40 years.
Do you think the public cloud providers like Amazon are not taking precautions on the access to the data of their customers in their public cloud?
How many private servers operated by various companies have been comprised? A lot.
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.
