Hellobee Boards

Login/Register

DNC Exposed As Undercutting Bernie's Campaign

  1. meredithNYC

    pomegranate / 3314 posts

    @Adira: @MrsSCB: Get out of here with your facts! Politics is about emotion and who we like/dislike, didn't you know?

  2. agold

    grapefruit / 4045 posts

    @Adira: Ha. Yes. I heard all of the FBI's decision. No "intentional" misconduct. So, there was misconduct. They are just saying it was "unintentional". I'm curious what the standard of liability is. Unintentional lends itself to a finding of recklessness. Maybe careless disregard for national security? Either way, General Petraeus fared MUCH worse for a much lesser act. And Bill's little tarmac chat with Lynch just before the FBI announced its decision was absurd and completely taints all of the findings.

  3. agold

    grapefruit / 4045 posts

    @MrsSCB: I heard Trump's comments. Someone probably already has those emails. They were on her PERSONAL SERVER. And the FBI said as much as there was no way to rule out that her personal server had been hacked. I..e., it's been hacked.

  4. Adira

    wonderful pomelo / 30692 posts

    @meredithNYC:

    @agold: Actually, that's not true about General Petraeus doing a lesser act.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/fbi-director-set-to-appear-before-congressional-committee-to-answer-questions-on-clinton-investigation/2016/07/07/eb43ec7e-43c1-11e6-88d0-6adee48be8bc_story.html

    During the Congressional Hearing with FBI Director Comey, they asked about the difference between General Petraeus and Secretary Clinton.

    "He said that Petraeus — unlike Clinton — lied to the FBI and that investigators found classified material in his desk.

    'Clearly intentional conduct,' Comey said of Petraeus. 'Knew what he was doing was a violation of the law.'"

  5. MrsSCB

    pomelo / 5257 posts

    @agold: the state department's email server has also been hacked by Russia, though...so at this point, in terms of vulnerability to hacking, doesn't seem like it makes a difference where the emails are hosted. And now here Trump is encouraging additional hacking by Russia...which is odd because one of the big reasons people were critical of Hillary's email setup was, as you point out, vulnerability to hacking. But now we have a presidential candidate asking for MORE hacking?
    http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/10/politics/state-department-hack-worst-ever/

  6. Adira

    wonderful pomelo / 30692 posts

    @agold: As for President Bill Clinton's conversation with Lynch, I definitely agree it shouldn't have happened, BUT Lynch wasn't involved in the FBI investigation at all, so any implication that his conversation with her affected the outcome of the FBI investigation is just false.

  7. Adira

    wonderful pomelo / 30692 posts

    Here's even more details about the difference between what General Petraeus did and Hillary: http://www.businessinsider.com/james-comey-hillary-clinton-david-petraeus-2016-7

    ETA:

    "The Petraeus case to my mind illustrates perfectly the kinds of cases the Department of Justice is willing to prosecute," Comey said. "Even there they prosecuted him for a misdemeanor."

    "[Petraeus] not only shared [classified information] with someone who was not allowed to have it, but we found it in a search warrant under the insulation in his attic, and then he lied to us about it in the investigation," Comey said.

    He said Petraeus obstructed justice and committed intentional misconduct and later admitted it was the wrong thing to do.

    "You have a perfect illustration of the kind of cases that get prosecuted," he said.

  8. agold

    grapefruit / 4045 posts

    @Adira: The FBI reports directly to the Attorney General. And normal judges and prosecutors are removed from normal cases for way lesser actions that even give off a scent of bias in a case.

  9. Adira

    wonderful pomelo / 30692 posts

    @agold: Exactly! The FBI reports TO the Attorney General - not the other way around. So the FBI made their suggestion to Lynch (not to press charges), not the other way around.

    And yes, judges and prosecutors are removed from cases, BUT this wasn't a case yet. The FBI was doing an investigate to determine IF charges should be made, which they concluded they shouldn't be.

  10. Truth Bombs

    grapefruit / 4321 posts

    @agold: Doesn't your response to Adira that an article and a 5 paragraph response from her are "too much to read" because you "don't like Hillary" prove the perception that most people voting for Trump are blindly supporting him with very little research or critical thinking?

  11. Mrs D

    grapefruit / 4545 posts

    @agold: I think the best part is that the attorney's that sorted through the CLASSIFIED emails did not have sufficient security clearance - so not matter what she knowingly shared classified materials with people without proper clearance. This woman is a joke...the email scandal alone proves she is one of two things the dumbest person on the planet (I didnt know I shouldnt use a personal server for STATE secrets) or ridiculously deceitful thinks she is above the law woman. I'm just not sure which would be worse and I dont understand how people can still vote for her after that whole episode...

  12. tlcbaby

    nectarine / 2750 posts

    @Mrs D: It was definitely the final nail in the coffin for me. And I am going with option B: deceitful.

  13. agold

    grapefruit / 4045 posts

    @Truth Bombs: Ha! So sorry my comment on this mommy blog about not wanting to read an article and lengthy quotes that someone named Adira posted here makes you think that I am a blind Trump supporter who has done very little research or critical thinking on who I am supporting in this election. My feelings are so very hurt. I'll just get back to my normally scheduled morning activity which didn't and shouldn't have included engaging in political talk with mommy bloggers this morning.

  14. agold

    grapefruit / 4045 posts

    @Mrs D: Well put. I'd go with either option. I have a work issued computer and I know that I can't do my own work on my personal computer and I have more or less a pretty silly job.

  15. Mrs D

    grapefruit / 4545 posts

    @agold: Seriously...thats my favorite question to ask people...I love when someone says it was "blown out of proportion"...ok...would you open sensitive material on a home computer? Would you access it not using your VPN? No...because you have common sense...if we cant expect her to exercise common sense how can we expect her to run our country?

    I feel bad for the FBI director...its obvious he is just trying to to be killed in a suspicious try to make it look like suicide way...House of Cards stuff here people...

  16. Adira

    wonderful pomelo / 30692 posts

    @Mrs D: @agold: Actually, no, she didn't "knowingly" share classified information because she didn't know there was classified information in those e-mails.

    ETA: The FBI Director also pointed out how none of the e-mails had proper classification markings on them, so he could see how she didn't realize certain things were classified.

  17. sunny

    coconut / 8430 posts

    @Adira: I read that some of those emails were classified afterwards too. And as Secretary of State she has the authority to declassify certain things.

  18. Truth Bombs

    grapefruit / 4321 posts

    @agold: You've been engaging on this topic, on this board, for two days. But now you're suddenly above the conversation. Got it.

  19. agold

    grapefruit / 4045 posts

    @Truth Bombs: You got it? Good. Thanks for monitoring my activity.

  20. Adira

    wonderful pomelo / 30692 posts

    @sunny: Yes! While there were some classified e-mails in there, the vast majority of them that are NOW classified, weren't at the time. He's the quote from FBI Director Comey:

    "From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were “up-classified” to make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the e-mails were sent."

    ...

    "With respect to the thousands of e-mails we found that were not among those produced to State, agencies have concluded that three of those were classified at the time they were sent or received, one at the Secret level and two at the Confidential level. There were no additional Top Secret e-mails found. Finally, none of those we found have since been “up-classified.”"

  21. Mrs D

    grapefruit / 4545 posts

    @Adira: "Comey testified to the House Oversight committee that “more than two, less than 10” people without security clearance had access to Clinton’s server. Based on Platte River employing approximately 30 people and Datto, Inc. employing approximately 15 employees (based on the video linked above), there would appear to be far more than ten people who might have gained access to the records. That doesn’t include the secretaries, attorneys and photocopy room staff who may have had access to the documents at the law firm Williams & Connelly after Clinton handed over 60,000 emails on a tiny thumb drive to her lawyers there. Comey testified under oath at the House Oversight hearing that these lawyers did not have the proper security clearances to view the documents."

    60,000 emails in a capacity of Secretary of State and a reasonable person would not assume ONE would have classified information in it? Come on...

  22. Mrs D

    grapefruit / 4545 posts

    And lets not wonder why more didnt include classified information...thats a whole different discussion...makes me wonder what the F she was doing as SOS...since certain other actions (or lack there of) make it clear she was not protecting us...

  23. MrsSCB

    pomelo / 5257 posts

    @Mrs D: so you're concerned about who Hillary may or may not have allowed to see possibly classified information. How do you feel about Trump requesting Russian hackers access that same possibly classified information?

  24. Truth Bombs

    grapefruit / 4321 posts

    @Adira: I'm voting for Hillary because she is way less terrifying than Trump, but there's just no use fighting this fight. She should have known better, as Secretary of State, than to use personal email. Any reasonable person would have. She made a bad call. Even if we think someone is the better candidate, that doesn't mean we shouldn't be able to recognize their faults.

  25. Adira

    wonderful pomelo / 30692 posts

    @Mrs D: Why WOULD you assume classified information were in those e-mails? It was an unclassified e-mail server and classified e-mails shouldn't have been included. If I had thought I had done my job well and was following protocol (which I have to assume most reasonable people WOULD assume), then it's logical to conclude that there wouldn't be any classified information contained in the e-mails.

  26. Adira

    wonderful pomelo / 30692 posts

    @Truth Bombs: Oh, I agree with that sentiment a thousand percent! It was a bad move on her part and she shouldn't have done it. AGREED! But, in my mind, it doesn't make her a criminal and it wasn't done maliciously and it doesn't disqualify her from becoming our next president.

  27. Mrs D

    grapefruit / 4545 posts

    @MrsSCB: First, I dont understand how when discussing the actions of one we always have to attack the other. Sometimes it can just be "she was wrong"...doesnt have to immediately be "but Trump did this....." It doesnt validate one persons poor actions by pointing out another persons poor actions...

    But to answer your question...I have not watched the video so I cannot comment on how he said it...but to say something comically as "well if no one else can find them maybe the Russians can"...its a joke...I dont freak out over that.

  28. Mrs D

    grapefruit / 4545 posts

    @Adira: I would assume that because I have read several articles indicating there have been nurmerous reports that she only actively used the one server. That is the basis for my statement.

  29. MrsSCB

    pomelo / 5257 posts

    @Mrs D: Ok, but that's not what is happening here. This whole discussion is about the hacked DNC emails. The emails that the FBI strongly suspect were hacked by Russian hackers. In response to that information, Donald Trump requested Russian hackers also get access to Hillary's emails. It's directly connected, and in fact, if anything is irrelevant to the overarching conversation about the DNC emails being hacked, by Russian hackers, it's the contents of Hillary's emails sent while she was secretary of state.

  30. Adira

    wonderful pomelo / 30692 posts

    @Mrs D: Is it possible that you would assume that because you already have a bias against her, though?

  31. Maysprout

    grapefruit / 4800 posts

    Trump sucks and is an ass but everyone, even his supporters already know that, I wish Clinton would be more strategic. She basically handed to him to bring up her sketchiness

    1. Bill Clinton has received half million at least in speaking fees from Russian banks and other donations to the Clinton Foundation
    2. Her campaign managers big fundraising group also receives significant donations from Russian and Saudi banks
    3. Her own email scandal while she wasn't found criminal, there was nothing praiseworthy in their findings of how she handled classified material, they called her careless, the security culture lacking, and potential violations that they didn't have enough evidence for.
    I'm still going to vote for her but she's sketch and i just don't get how she campaigns, it's like she's constantly shooting herself in her foot even with a very weak candidate. Just don't give someone an honrary position who's been not doing their job and don't try to say Russia is in Trumps pocket when you don't want to bring up your own history.

  32. Adira

    wonderful pomelo / 30692 posts

    @MrsSCB: haha, true! We definitely went off tangent here!

  33. sunny

    coconut / 8430 posts

    @Mrs D: there is a separate system setup by the state department to handle classified materials. So a document that was classified and could only by viewed by the separate computer system couldn't simply be forwarded to steve@apple.com.

    I thought this was a good article about it:
    http://www.rawstory.com/2016/07/how-did-classified-information-get-into-those-hillary-clinton-emails/

    A few months ago I also read about the security required to gain access to that separate system. Can't find the article now but IIRC, the "other computer" was locked away in a separate room.

  34. Adira

    wonderful pomelo / 30692 posts

    @Maysprout: Yeah, I totally agree with you. I mean, the e-mail scandal mostly happened before she started her campaign, but she definitely doesn't make things easy on herself!

  35. MrsSCB

    pomelo / 5257 posts

    @Adira: which, to be clear, I don't have a problem with! I don't mind tangents. I just think it's absurd to suggest that Donald Trump's response to the news about Russian hackers accessing DNC emails isn't relevant to a thread specifically about the DNC hacking. ETA: not to mention, the news about Donald's Russia remarks came up in this thread before any talk of Hillary's state department email scandal contents. So if anything is deflection of blame, it's that.

  36. sunny

    coconut / 8430 posts

    @Adira: I am annoyed that she is giving the opposition so much material to work with.

  37. Mama Bird

    pomegranate / 3127 posts

    Since we're back to the email fight (hahaha), I agree it's poor judgment to have used a personal server, but I feel I must point out that hackers have recently gotten into highly sensitive and supposedly well protected info on the servers of the federal personnel office, IRS, and a few major hospitals. So was it really so much more secure to use the federal server? Maaaybe, but it's not some magic fortress of hacker proofness.

    Also many people in my company sometimes work from home and forward work documents and email to home computers. So do many others outside of my company. So I have a hard time seeing that as an awful thing, it's very commonly done if you're not always in the office, work from remote locations, or work odd times after hours.

  38. Adira

    wonderful pomelo / 30692 posts

    @sunny: Yes, I agree.

    @MrsSCB: I concur.

    @Mama Bird: Yep, good point about the security of federal servers. Also, it's my understanding that using a personal server was allowed - it's not like it was a secret and people didn't realize they were sending e-mails to "hillary@clinton.com" or whatever!

  39. Maysprout

    grapefruit / 4800 posts

    @Adira: all of those happened before she was running. But they still are things people judge her character and sketchiness on. I obv find her to be super sketch and it's honestly going to be hard to get myself to actively vote for her - she's like a more articulate but more awkward GWB to me. But there's no hope with Trump. So for me the only way I can be comfortable is for people to be honest about her missteps so she's watched closely as president.
    @Mama Bird: it's not just about hacking though, it's about not allowing security info to be taken out of the system even by US citizens where they can either be manipulated into passing it along to an 'innocent' source or willingly pass it along to inappropriate people without it being able to be traced.

  40. Adira

    wonderful pomelo / 30692 posts

    @Maysprout: I mean, I obviously don't find her as super sketchy as some people, but she's definitely made missteps and done things that give credence to the notion she's untrustworthy. For me, personally, those things just aren't nearly as bad or as condemning as the things Trump says or does.

Reply »

You must login / Register to post

© copyright 2011-2014 Hellobee