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.
Again our poor little IT guy appears to have been reasonable competent.
If you are going to secure a public facing server you either eliminate or firewall off services/ports not required by the public. This is the most basic server security. Emphasis on basic.
It's got nothing to do with her phone. Any communication that produces records made by a US government employee about government business is the property of the US government regardless of how it's communicated. The only exception to this is most of the communications by elected officials. Hillary and her staff were using this server almost exclusively for all government email communications. She was not required to turn over her personal communications.
While on the topic of phones Hillary was also using her personal phone including overseas trips after repeated warnings not to use it.
Next time she travels on a 737 Max, she should probably wear nose plugs.
Planes are definitely hackable.
Boeing was warned.
Last edited by Hyperthetic; 03-14-2019 at 07:51 PM..
Former FBI lawyer Lisa Page testified last year that officials in the bureau, including then-FBI Director James Comey, discussed Espionage Act charges against Hillary Clinton, citing “gross negligence," but the Justice Department shut them down.
Newly released transcripts from Page’s private testimony in front of a joint task force of the House Judiciary and Oversight committees in July 2018 sheds new light on the internal discussions about an investigation into Clinton's emails. This goes back to the FBI’s "Midyear Exam" investigation, which looked into whether Clinton committed crimes when she sent and received classified information on her unauthorized private email server while serving as secretary of state.
So, if there was knowingly & acknowledged to be “zero” crime when the Special Counsel was appointed, and if the appointment was made based on the Fake Dossier (paid for by Crooked Hillary) and now disgraced Andrew McCabe (he & all stated no crime), then the Special Counsel should never have been appointed and there should be no Mueller Report. This was an illegal & conflicted investigation in search of a crime. Russian Collusion was nothing more than an excuse by the Democrats for losing an Election that they thought they were going to win THIS SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN TO A PRESIDENT AGAIN!
Former FBI lawyer Lisa Page testified last year that officials in the bureau, including then-FBI Director James Comey, discussed Espionage Act charges against Hillary Clinton, citing “gross negligence," but the Justice Department shut them down.
Newly released transcripts from Page’s private testimony in front of a joint task force of the House Judiciary and Oversight committees in July 2018 sheds new light on the internal discussions about an investigation into Clinton's emails. This goes back to the FBI’s "Midyear Exam" investigation, which looked into whether Clinton committed crimes when she sent and received classified information on her unauthorized private email server while serving as secretary of state.
Hillary isn't going to prison.
Hillary isn't going to be convicted of anything.
Hillary isn't going to be charged with anything.
The only people who are going to be locked up are some people connected with Trump.
Unless you can analyze the facts in the Clinton case and show me how me how they fit or don't fit specific provisions of the federal criminal code than your opinion on this subject is pretty worthless. The problem is that those who have done this analysis don't believe the facts support charges or a conviction.
I realize some rightwingers have a wet dream about putting Hillary in prison. In fact, its probably infuriating to them that its not going to happen.
Time to grow up and face the realities of the day. Your man Trump is president and his reelection prospects look dismal. He has somewhere between a 41% and 42% approval rating. This is not the stuff reelection is made of. The democrats can only lose by picking a weak candidate. Maybe next time you'll pick a better candidate than Trump.
The Obama administration completely corrupted the DOJ on their watch. It is not too late to re-open this matter and to get this right.
Lisa Page: DOJ blocked 'gross negligence' charges for Hillary
Former FBI lawyer Lisa Page testified last year that officials in the bureau, including then-FBI Director James Comey, discussed Espionage Act charges against Hillary Clinton, citing “gross negligence," but the Justice Department shut them down.
Newly released transcripts from Page’s private testimony in front of a joint task force of the House Judiciary and Oversight committees in July 2018 sheds new light on the internal discussions about an investigation into Clinton's emails. This goes back to the FBI’s "Midyear Exam" investigation, which looked into whether Clinton committed crimes when she sent and received classified information on her unauthorized private email server while serving as secretary of state.
So you're saying, as we already knew, that some people thought Hillary and/or her people may have been guilty of negligence, but not of any deliberate wrong-doing or criminal corruption. Isn't that basically the same thing that Comey said long ago?
The only people who are going to be locked up are some people connected with Trump.
Unless you can analyze the facts in the Clinton case and show me how me how they fit or don't fit specific provisions of the federal criminal code than your opinion on this subject is pretty worthless. The problem is that those who have done this analysis don't believe the facts support charges or a conviction.
I realize some rightwingers have a wet dream about putting Hillary in prison. In fact, its probably infuriating to them that its not going to happen.
Time to grow up and face the realities of the day. Your man Trump is president and his reelection prospects look dismal. He has somewhere between a 41% and 42% approval rating. This is not the stuff reelection is made of. The democrats can only lose by picking a weak candidate. Maybe next time you'll pick a better candidate than Trump.
Yeah.. Justice is supposed to be blind but she's not. Hillary won't go to jail but you know what's worse?
She was rejected for her rightful throne 2 times by the American people. For her, that's worse than Prison.
And talk about picking a better candidate. Yours sucked in 2016 and as of now I don't see a real strong contender that really has a following. So far all D's have are weak candidates.
Without Obama and Hillary, we wouldn't have Trump today. Thank you.
Yeah.. Justice is supposed to be blind but she's not. Hillary won't go to jail but you know what's worse?
She was rejected for her rightful throne 2 times by the American people. For her, that's worse than Prison.
And talk about picking a better candidate. Yours sucked in 2016 and as of now I don't see a real strong contender that really has a following. So far all D's have are weak candidates.
Without Obama and Hillary, we wouldn't have Trump today. Thank you.
Either Biden or O'Rourke will do fine.
The GOP better understand a storm is coming and its going to be worse than anything they have seen yet.
2020 is a long ways away, but Trump hasn't reached a 50% approval rating at any point in the over two years he's been President. I think many of his supporters don't quite understand what a poor moral tone he sets. Even if you don't see it, most of the country does.
You can rant and rave about socialism til the cows come home. Most people don't care.
Unless you can analyze the facts in the Clinton case and show me how me how they fit or don't fit specific provisions of the federal criminal code than your opinion on this subject is pretty worthless. The problem is that those who have done this analysis don't believe the facts support charges or a conviction.
Right, she won't be going to prison.
Wrong about no facts supporting an indictment. With Lynch and other political officials in the DOJ/FBI supporting Hillary at every turn, an indictment was impossible. Neutral officials and investigators could easily have determined Hillary was 'grossly negligent,' which would justify an indictment. Instead, DOJ/FBI sliced and diced the verbiage and came up with 'extremely careless.'
Don't tell me that politics can't influence those kinds of decisions, prosecutors don't exercise discretion in when they will and won't indict. I won't believe you.
Judge Huber in Utah and his team of US Attorneys will come up with the evidence needed to indict. They seem to be focusing on espionage cases, judging by the latest case of an Obama era DIA contractor who spied for the Chinese. They have all the Clinton Foundation documents I believe.
Wrong about no facts supporting an indictment. With Lynch and other political officials in the DOJ/FBI supporting Hillary at every turn, an indictment was impossible. Neutral officials and investigators could easily have determined Hillary was 'grossly negligent,' which would justify an indictment. Instead, DOJ/FBI sliced and diced the verbiage and came up with 'extremely careless.'
Don't tell me that politics can't influence those kinds of decisions, prosecutors don't exercise discretion in when they will and won't indict. I won't believe you.
All fun and games but no meat. Read the language of the statute carefully. All indications are that the emails in question were created directly on the involved email system. So they were never moved. They were also encrypted upon creation. So there is no movement of the items.
Further Clinton is a security source. All classified items in the State Dept are classified (or declassified) based on the authority of the Secretary of State. So how does an item get classified in the State Dept get classified if the SofS does not agree?
All this is dodged in the Comey accusations by claiming other agencies claim it was classified. But in fact they do not have the authority to classify anything in the State Dept. Only the SofS or delegatee does.
What sit does is actually point out a well known problem. There is no uniform classification system in the Federal government. Each agency does its own thing. They generally respect each others classifications but do not accept directives on classification from other departments.
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.
