Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Search Hillary Clinton’s Emails

graphics.wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 156 posts

Re: Search Hillary Clinton’s Emails

#71

Post by caseysoftware »

SeanLuke wrote: post #29
caseysoftware wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When Hillary Clinton served as Secretary of State, she used a private email server that was stored at her home and later in hosting facility not cleared for classified information (supposedly in a bathroom). Initially, she claimed there was no classified information on the server at any time. Further, when she was required to turn over records to comply with archival rules, she had her staff delete the personal messa…

> In the current investigation, they've discovered classified emails - some classified after the fact, some not "some not"? If you are implying that Clinton's server held messages marked as classified when sent, could you provide some evidence to this effect? The Clinton campaign is quite adamant that this is not true.

I did not imply anything, I said it quite clearly: some of the emails contained information that was classified at the time she sent/received them.

According to CNN:

> Two government agencies flagged emails on Clinton's server as containing classified information, the inspector general said, including some on "special access programs," which are a subset of the highest "Top Secret" level of classification, but are under subject to more stringent control rules than even other Top Secret information."

Ref: http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/19/politics/hillary-clinton-email...

Re: Search Hillary Clinton’s Emails

#73

Post by dandelany »

glitch003 wrote: post #70

I'm not sure how well the search actually works. I searched for "fart" in the "Search email text" field, and it returns 2 emails as results, but they don't contain the word "fart" as far as I can tell. Can anyone else confirm this? And does anyone have any idea why this would happen? Some kind of partial text match? One of the 2 results definitely doesn't contain the substring "fart" anywhere: "will be available in 1…

Search works fine for me. Do a select all/copy on the document text and paste into a text editor - you'll see that in both cases the OCR has misinterpreted other words as "fart" due to overlapping with redaction boxes.

Re: Search Hillary Clinton’s Emails

#74

Post by caseysoftware »

caf wrote: post #43
caseysoftware wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When Hillary Clinton served as Secretary of State, she used a private email server that was stored at her home and later in hosting facility not cleared for classified information (supposedly in a bathroom). Initially, she claimed there was no classified information on the server at any time. Further, when she was required to turn over records to comply with archival rules, she had her staff delete the personal messa…

So, as another outside observer looking in, the use of the private email doesn't seem to be relevant to the document release itself, right? That's just the result of a FOI request, because public official's emails are subject to FOI, regardless of where they're stored. So what I wonder is, do we see this with every candidate? Is there a similar archive of Jeb Bush's emails from his time as Governor of Florida? Or do…

To the best of my knowledge, governors would rarely have access to classified information other than law enforcement or potentially terrorism matters, so the laws and rules would be different than a Cabinet Secretary.

I can't speak about Florida or any State specifically, my background is purely at the Federal level.

Re: Search Hillary Clinton’s Emails

#75

Post by bhz »

glitch003 wrote: post #70

I'm not sure how well the search actually works. I searched for "fart" in the "Search email text" field, and it returns 2 emails as results, but they don't contain the word "fart" as far as I can tell. Can anyone else confirm this? And does anyone have any idea why this would happen? Some kind of partial text match? One of the 2 results definitely doesn't contain the substring "fart" anywhere: "will be available in 1…

The OCR is flaky. The first email has "Release in Part" and the 'Part' is coming up as 'Fart' after OCR. And in the second email the word "fact" is coming up as "fart".

If you download the PDFs you can search by text and it matches on your search term.

I have to say that I am sad no one actually said "fart".

Re: Search Hillary Clinton’s Emails

#76

Post by throwaway_exer »

All politicians have personal email servers before they're elected and after they are un-elected. It's human nature that there is a transition time between pre-election and post-election in which personal email will continue to be used. Rarely do analysis pieces mention this fact. If our government really cared about that, they would have dedicated IT staff to onboarding new officials with systems that actually work.

Re: Search Hillary Clinton’s Emails

#77

Post by hackuser »

caf wrote: post #43
caseysoftware wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When Hillary Clinton served as Secretary of State, she used a private email server that was stored at her home and later in hosting facility not cleared for classified information (supposedly in a bathroom). Initially, she claimed there was no classified information on the server at any time. Further, when she was required to turn over records to comply with archival rules, she had her staff delete the personal messa…

So, as another outside observer looking in, the use of the private email doesn't seem to be relevant to the document release itself, right? That's just the result of a FOI request, because public official's emails are subject to FOI, regardless of where they're stored. So what I wonder is, do we see this with every candidate? Is there a similar archive of Jeb Bush's emails from his time as Governor of Florida? Or do…

> the use of the private email doesn't seem to be relevant to the document release itself, right? That's just the result of a FOI request, because public official's emails are subject to FOI, regardless of where they're stored.

I think probably someone would have tried to obtain her emails, whether the server issue came up or not. But as it happened, IIRC the sequence of events leading to the release began when the server issue came up.

Also relevant is that because Clinton controlled the server, she originally controlled which emails were deleted as 'personal' and which were released to the public.

> do the States not tend to have the same kind of FOI transparency as the Federal Government?

Some states, at least, have open records laws. Also, I've seen many governmental organizations adopt the policy of deleting all email after, e.g., 30 days, to reduce 'liability' (transparency).

> Is there a similar archive of Jeb Bush's emails from his time as Governor of Florida?

https://duckduckgo.com/?q=jeb+bush+emails+site%3Anytimes.com

Re: Search Hillary Clinton’s Emails

#79

Post by gameshot911 »

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #68
gameshot911 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'Undue' as defined how?

Unwarranted or unjustifiable.

By that I meant not "what is the definition of undue", but rather, why is the "offspring of powerful people having [extra] influence" undue? By what metric do you define the level of influence that is appropriate to any one person? And separately, how are we to determine whether the child of a powerful person doesn't have just the right amount of influence per that metric, and it's just a coincidence that their parent is powerful in their own right?

Re: Search Hillary Clinton’s Emails

#80

Post by kaitai »

dpweb wrote: post #10

What striking to me, however certainly expected, is all the sycophantic drivel heaped onto a powerful person. "You looked fabulous", "we were discussing how incredible you are". Perhaps aides think somehow they are being supportive, but if I were that powerful person, I believe I would rather just a few people I trust to tell me when I'm effing up - than everyone telling me how fantastic I am.

I work with some colleagues who use this kind of conversation. Full disclosure: I am a female, they are also female. They wouldn't talk to you like that -- it's a female-female communication style with a lot of subtext, common in parts of corporate America as well.

The majority (by far!) of my colleagues are male, and part of the subtext and context of this type of conversation is (1) to comment on things guys "can't" comment on, like "did I wear the appropriate jewelry or footwear for this event to project the social and intellectual persona that I'm trying to project", and (2) to combat the everyday little degradations you encounter, like someone at the registration table not registering you because they figured you're a girlfriend not a real participant. Women who are trying to maintain and accumulate power know that they can support each other in maintaining a stance of confidence rather than acceptance. Being primarily socialized into a stance of acceptance due to my historically all-male and socially inept professional circles, I was way confused when I got a female boss who started saying nice things about/to me. It is true that I do good things at work, although I don't manage to find the right shoes to project being corporate -- but I've never had anyone say anything about either of those things! Ever!

It's a reasonable management tool in some ways. My male bosses asked me (forced me?) to do my job and also take care of "women things" (recruitment and retention of women and minorities) without ever saying anything nice or giving me any credit, so I quit doing most of that. Altruism has limits that are often reached at the bank account. But now I have a boss who views outreach as a positive and actually says nice things ("you're incredible! I'm amazed at how much you do!" etc) so yep, I'm more likely to do it. And it is good for my organization.

Post reply on HN