Have Hillary's chickens come home to roost?

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by spence

2 emails that should have been top secret out of over 6,000 doesn't a "systematic effort" make.

Additionally, isn't the outrage over these stats pretty moot without a baseline to compare them against? How common is this?

Two emails out of 6K is not the sample pool being discussed. TWO emails out of FORTY in the sample reviewed by the Intelligence Community Inspector General had top secret / compartmentalized information.

http://www.grassley.senate.gov/sites...n%20server.pdf

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Its not "If".....they do.....anywhere from "Top Secret" to "Unclassified" , Every network as to be certified to a certain level.....this is what type of information that is certified to be present on that network



She can use private e-mail....there is no Rule against it....but there are plenty of rules a responsible government official must adhere to when transmitting government docs....and putting any classified/unclassified sensitive information on them is a no-no



Again, there are hard rules on what types of documents can be on an unclassed network...if state.gov mail server is on an unclassed network, then she can't have them on that server either



We'll find out when they are done with the investigation, won't we?



Of course she wasn't doing it to hide anything...that's obvious....it was all hanging out there for every hacker in the world to look at...the problem is she should have taken the safeguards to HIDE EVERYTHING....that's the problem

Yes - she was at best, sacrificing security for convenience, at worst she was blatantly and willfully defying the rules and logic on handling government information to prevent future investigations against her. Meanwhile, she made it easier for other governments to read the email of the Secretary of State.

[spence]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Two emails out of 6K is not the sample pool being discussed. TWO emails out of FORTY in the sample reviewed by the Intelligence Community Inspector General had top secret / compartmentalized information.

The State Department has already released over 6000 emails and another 6000 today I believe which a few hundred of are being referred to other agencies for further review.

The Inspector General decided to take no further action on the two they felt should be top secret and many have even argued the information in them is pretty benign.

Yes - she was at best, sacrificing security for convenience, at worst she was blatantly and willfully defying the rules and logic on handling government information to prevent future investigations against her. Meanwhile, she made it easier for other governments to read the email of the Secretary of State.

Considering we know that state.gov has already been hacked I'm not sure it really means all that much. It's a wake up call to harden everything...

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by spence

The State Department has already released over 6000 emails and another 6000 today I believe which a few hundred of are being referred to other agencies for further review.pretty benign. [/UOTE]

Yes, I believe there were around 150 classified out of the ones released today.


Considering we know that state.gov has already been hacked I'm not sure it
really means all that much. It's a wake up call to harden everything...

Your right Spence, what better way to wake up to the Dangers then to make an example of a High Profile person like Hillary. Put her in the clink and throw away the key.

[spence]

Originally Posted by justplugit

Your right Spence, what better way to wake up to the Dangers then to make an example of a High Profile person like Hillary. Put her in the clink and throw away the key.

There's no evidence yet she did anything illegal. Why would you throw her in the clink?

If there are bigger issues our government needs to address then that's a systems problem.

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by spence

There's no evidence yet she did anything illegal. Why would you throw her in the clink?

- Yet- ,that is the key word.


If there are bigger issues our government needs to address then that's a systems problem.

Your right, but the others are not as much fun to follow as Hillary drops in the
the trust and integrity polls.

[scottw]

that's classic isn't it? it really a "systems problem" not the creeps manipulating and undermining the system.....it becomes a "bigger issue" when no one is held accountable....dumb


We must reject the idea that every time a law is broken, society(or the system) is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his/her actions.(particularly if that individual is vying for the public trust)

Ronald Reagan