121–130 of 259 posts
Any time in the last 10 years I setup an independent email server it had horrible deliverability rates. I wonder how they worked around that. Getting your server whitelisted with all the major providers is a major hassle.
The US government should give Guccifer the Medal of Honour. This is a farce.
Among the more disappointing things in all of this is that there is a rational, important conversation to be had about everyday awareness of security and government inflexibility. But there won't be, because she is Hillary Clinton and it is 2016. Supposedly she got the server set up because the NSA refused to give a politician who travels frequently a secure smartphone. She (I personally believe) was likely ignorant…
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/mar/...
Politifact rates this idea mostly false.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do we need to preface every discussion with a list of others' bad behavior? I imagine that would distract for the topic under discussion... and you wouldn't want to do that would you?
Well, we could be superficial and only talk about Hillary. OR, and this is crazy but stay with me, we could talk about how this issue happened way back in the early 2000's and no one at the NSA/House addressed the issue then. A lot of people failed on this issue long before Hillary.
Among the more disappointing things in all of this is that there is a rational, important conversation to be had about everyday awareness of security and government inflexibility. But there won't be, because she is Hillary Clinton and it is 2016. Supposedly she got the server set up because the NSA refused to give a politician who travels frequently a secure smartphone. She (I personally believe) was likely ignorant…
Among the more disappointing things in all of this is that there is a rational, important conversation to be had about everyday awareness of security and government inflexibility. But there won't be, because she is Hillary Clinton and it is 2016. Supposedly she got the server set up because the NSA refused to give a politician who travels frequently a secure smartphone. She (I personally believe) was likely ignorant…
Baloney. She was the second most powerful person in the US government. If she couldn't get them to provide modern secure communications, she had the ear of the one who could.
If it was as you say, and truly that systemic a problem, then indeed heads should politically roll - starting from the top, which means her.
Handling national secrets on a cheap generic PC in one's bathroom because a subordinate huge-budget agency won't cooperate is a sign of gross incompetence on many levels. If jail time is what it's going to take to motivate people to get this systemic problem solved, them so be it. The standards are obvious, and ominously violated to a dangerous degree.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What's the rationale for not giving everyone secure smartphones? And I mean high-ranking officials, SoS certainly ranks considering how much she/he is in foreign countries with foreign leaders. Can someone in the know explain why the NSA would deny such requests?
Difficult to know for sure. Obama had one, Rice previously used one, but: The NSA refused to give Clinton a device similar to the one used by Obama: a modified BlackBerry 8830 World Edition with additional cryptography installed. And while Clinton's predecessor Condaleeza Rice had obtained waivers for herself and her staff to use BlackBerry devices, Clinton's staff was told that "use [of the BlackBerry] expanded to a…
The emails themselves sent from Clinton's server were unencrypted for several months, so unencrypted printing is just more of the same. There's no reasonable question anymore that laws on handling classified data were broken, the only question is will charges actually be brought?
Assuming the data was classified (HRC has stated that it was not), what laws were broken?
For answers to most of your questions about the Clinton email scandal, http://www.thompsontimeline.com/ breaks all the factors in play here down in excruciating detail.
Among the more disappointing things in all of this is that there is a rational, important conversation to be had about everyday awareness of security and government inflexibility. But there won't be, because she is Hillary Clinton and it is 2016. Supposedly she got the server set up because the NSA refused to give a politician who travels frequently a secure smartphone. She (I personally believe) was likely ignorant…
Supposedly she got the server set up because the NSA refused to give a politician who travels frequently a secure smartphone. Baloney. She was the second most powerful person in the US government. If she couldn't get them to provide modern secure communications, she had the ear of the one who could. If it was as you say, and truly that systemic a problem, then indeed heads should politically roll - starting from the…