Newsflash: Hillary Clinton sent some emails to colleagues wishing them well. ARREST HER! OO AH!!!!

[RBInMaine]

This email thing is becoming as ridiculous as it gets. This is the same old silly shit the right wing and the corporate media have been doing to the Clintons since the dawn of time. Bottom line, she did what others had done, it was allowed, no laws broken, and no, she didn't sell American secrets to the Russians via invisible ink email to be paid a million dollars for it through a secret Swiss bank account.

It is just so disgusting, so sickening, that even some "progressives" are feeding into this corporate media and right wing bullshit nonsense. Just disgusting.

Where was the media over the Iraq War lies? Where is the media on the evils of the Republican budget which cuts taxes for billionaires and throws children off nutrition programs? Where is the corporate media on kids getting priced right out of attending college? How about income inequality? THAT is what progressives should be mad about. Not silly nonsense about an email account.

It would be SHAMEFUL if any Bernie supporters are actually buying this corporate media SHIT. Look at what they do to Bernie. They barely cover him. When they do interview him, they totally blow off the important issues he raises and just ask him about "Hillary Hillary Hillary" in order to try to stoke drama and negative campaigning. Where are the questions on the critical issues of the day? On and on and on about this email nonsense. And nonsense is ALL it is. And people are truly getting sick and tired of hearing about this stupid email shit. It's getting real old real fast.

[Sunlei]

1. All those emails show me is how hard she worked, and long hours, "a workaholic"

would love to see 30,000 emails from any other 'politician', let us see how hard they 'worked' and what their focus was.

[riversedge]

27. That certainly was evident in these emails that were released

[treestar]

83. good point. And that's just emails. Imagine the phone calls

It must be going on day and night.

[Cheese Sandwich]

2. Why

Why do you think it should be OK for government officials to run separate email servers and then selectively choose which ones become part of the public record?

I'm just curious why you think that's OK.

[pnwmom]

4. They were doing it because the Hatch act prohibited them from using government property

to handle political emails.

So in an effort to not run afoul of the Hatch act, she used a non-governmental email server -- just as previous administrations had done before her.

There was nothing illegal about what she did.

[Cheese Sandwich]

5. If I did that I would be be fired

[Fumesucker]

8. It's the inverse authority/responsibility curve in American culture

The more authority you have the less responsibility you bear, peons are severely punished for even the most trivial infractions of arbitrary and capricious rules while the biggest wheels get away with anything and everything.

[Cheese Sandwich]

9. Oh absolutely.

It's like they're above the rules.

The cover up looks horrible too. They keep changing the reason.

She didn't want to carry two devices, but she did have multiple devices. She didn't give it much thought, but then it turned out they were paying a State Department employee on the side to run it.

Now I guess the story is something with the Hatch Act. The constantly changing story isn't helping.

[pnwmom]

11. I haven't heard them cite the Hatch Act. But I remember that was the issue years ago.

Google it, if you don't believe me.

[RBInMaine]

15. This was ALLOWED. It is corporate media BULLSHIT. Email? Really? Is that all you have?

This Clinton derangement syndrome is getting really ridiculous.

[Fumesucker]

19. Are you implying that any goverment employee can conduct govt business on private email server?

Furthermore they can do so with no fear of any sort of sanction?

[RBInMaine]

16. Oh bullshit.

[Fumesucker]

7. That's the third different rationale I've heard on the email thing

The first was Hillary didn't want to carry two phones, then it was that the State Dept email was so horrendously bad, now the Hatch act.

You'd think a real take charge leader coming into an organization with a miserable communications infrastructure would try to improve the infrastructure for the entire organization rather than working around the problem for their own convenience while leaving the rest of the organization to fend for themselves.

[RBInMaine]

12. Oh please, give it up. Emails? Is that all you've got?

[Fumesucker]

14. I didn't realize it was off topic to talk about Hillary's email in this thread

Sorry...

[frylock]

36. Please refrain from discussing Clinton's email in this thread about Clinton's email.

[Art_from_Ark]

77. Time to cue John Cleese

[louis-t]

67. Yep, Hillary's fault she's not an IT, and only

one reason allowed for doing what was perfectly legal and all those before her had done. Yep, that's it. She should have spent her time there rebuilding the entire computer network. Yep.....

[Old Crow]

10. Color me confused.

You seem to be saying that Hillary had a really, really good reason for using her own private server for sending government emails. I mean, the way you're describing this Hatch Act thing (I haven't looked it up yet, as you can probably tell), she pretty much had to use her own private server.

If that's the case... why on Earth isn't she stating this and making the whole story go away?

[pnwmom]

42. Probably because she criticized Bush for running all his emails

through the Republican National Committee account.

No action was ever taken against him, but it would have seemed hypocritical to then do something similar. Except she probably thought it was better to send it through a personal account than the DNC.

http://www.dod.mil/dodgc/defense_ethics/resource_library/deskbook/hatch_act_ppt.pdf

[6chars]

60. so now she shouldn't have criticized bush????

[winter is coming]

38. So, every single email she sent as Secretary of State was political?

There isn't a single thing she did as SOS that couldn't be considered campaigning? Do you really want to go with that?

[RBInMaine]

17. Thanks for repeating FOX NEWS talking points. She released tens of thousands of emails VETTED by

her attorneys. THEY screened the emails and determined what was work related and what was personal. They were told NOT to send them personal emails. My goodness, enough of this STUPID SHIT. Can we please do what Bernie wants to do and talk about the REAL issue? This is NONSENSE and it is very, very STALE.

[Cheese Sandwich]

18. Sorry I don't trust her attorneys to decide what is work related and what is personal. Why do you?

[randome]

21. Because that's how the regulations work. That's how they've ALWAYS worked.

No one gets to read all her personal email and then decide if it's relevant or not. It's up to the official to turn over relevant materials.

You want to change that? Go right ahead and get the rules changed.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[Cheese Sandwich]

23. Not buying it. She made a mistake.

I guess you think it's ok for government employees to do government business on personal email servers and then have their paid lawyers go thru and selectively delete some items by calling them personal.

Maybe it wasn't illegal but it's still a bad practice.

[pnwmom]

43. Why can government employees be trusted BEFORE they send an email

to decide whether it belongs on a personal account or a .gov account, and to route it accordingly?

But these same employees can't be trusted, after they send an email, to make the same designation?

[Cheese Sandwich]

68. Why aren't government employees allowed to do government business from private email servers?

Because it takes government business and hides it beyond the reach of government oversight.

[pnwmom]

69. What assurance is there that government employees don't do this every day

when they choose to use their personal emails for anything?

[Cheese Sandwich]

70. Hey if you think what she did was OK, that's your choice.

Most government employees would be fired if they paid a subordinate on to run an email server on the side and then used it to conduct public business outside of the oversight structure.

Also by combining her two roles together like that raises serious ethical concerns.

Did she send any fundraising letters for the Clinton Foundation from the same email address that she used for government business?

It could be very intimidating to receive a charity fundraising request from a high ranking government official.

There's just a lot of potential for conflict of interest and corruption.

We'll never know what was deleted.

[Fred Sanders]

55. RW talking points attacking Clinton are all the rage at DU, did you not get the memo?

Hoping someone outside the Democratic Party will rise by hoping another within falls is de rigeur for non-Democratic Party members.

[Bill USA]

63. I'm curious, why do you think getting a Republican plutocrat President would not be a disaster?

[Cheese Sandwich]

64. Uh... because I don't think that and you're just making shit up

[oasis]

3. Democrats who help perpetuate the bullshit should hang their

heads in shame.

[RBInMaine]

13. Yup, and Bernie would be disgusted with it. Same old corporate media whore bullshit.

[cherokeeprogressive]

24. Yes. Bernie Sanders should contact the DOJ and tell them to call off the FBI.

[oasis]

45. You're not Bernie or an FBI agent. (1)Do you think this witch hunt

should end? (2) Is perpetuating any GOP/Fox News propaganda by Democrats in the best interest of Democrats?

[cherokeeprogressive]

46. Moot point. I don't think it's a "witch hunt".

And I'm shocked that you would call Hillary Clinton that.

[840high]

79. I don't think it's

a witch hunt.

[Fred Sanders]

57. Bernie has told his "fans" to stop carrying RW water, but the bucket brigade seems not to care.

See post 53 for a link to a detailed example of how the lazy mass media literally salivates at the prospect of distoriting everything Clinton says to keep on the Get Clinton bandwagon.

Wiesel must be ashamed he is one of few journalists left in A,Erica worthy of the name.

And very brave to take on his own failed industry.

[frylock]

37. As opposed to using past actions of Republicans to excuse current actions by Democrats?

What about those of us who aren't Democrats? Or what about those of us who aren't Democrats and have real-world experience as sysadmins, Exchange admins, or IT security engineers that understand and comply with the concept of best practice? Do we need to hang our heads in shame as well?

[oasis]

44. E-mail obsessed DUers need to explain why they believe Hillary's

actions were so egregious they need to thumb their noses at the Democratic establishment and get into bed with The GOP witch hunters.

Btw, presenting an argument about Hillary's overall trust factor won't cut it.

I would like to know why anyone at DU would think the e-mail thing, by itself alone, is such a big fucking deal.

[frylock]

47. The email thing is such a big fucking deal because it's yet another example..

of Hillary's poor judgment. And fuck the Democratic establishment. I owe the Democratic establishment exactly jack fucking shit. And pointing out Hillary's penchant for killing herself with more self-inflicted bullshit isn't getting into bed with GOP witch hunters. I don't give a fuck about Benghazi. What I do give a fuck about is a self-absorbed candidate for President who can't seem to make the right decisions.

[oasis]

49. Do you think Bernie should slam Hillary with this in the debates?

I can't see him letting his supporters down by not going for the jugular. He needs to play the e-mail card if he truly wants to win.

[frylock]

50. Sanders is going to win by sticking to the issues.

What do you know about winning?

[oasis]

71. What's that got to do with Bernie's hitting Hill hard

with improper use of e-mails in the debates? He should hold her to account since so many of his supporters believe it would show she's incompetent.

[frylock]

72. Hillary's consistent inability to exercise good judgment shows her to be incompetent.

There's no need for Sen Sanders to pile on. Not his style anyway.

[oasis]

73. I like Bernie's class, too bad many of his supporters

refuse to follow his lead.

[frylock]

74. we should all aspire to mirror the class and dignity on display at hillaryclintonsupporters.com

[oasis]

75. Each individual must account for himself. I have never

trashed Bernie at DU or at any other site. I would never use right wing talking points against any Democrat.

When so-called Bernie supporters misbehave, I question their motives. DU, as you know, is a very nice place to be, but it's up to caring members to make sure the quality doesn't take a nosedive.

I'll be retiring for the night. Take care.

[frylock]

82. Hillary's inability to exercise sound judgment is reality, not a RW talking point.

Supporters of Hillary Clinton really should stay in their own lane.

[oasis]

84. Hill supporters should "stay in their own lane"?

Whatever the hell that means.

[frylock]

85. People in glass houses and sich.

[oasis]

86. Riiiiight.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.......>>> ......

[betsuni]

6. K&R

[randome]

20. Did she use the GOP-approved 'Well-Wishing' protocols?

If not, throw her in the clink!
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[99Forever]

22. Hillary Clinton's email scandal...

...was self-inflicted.

An unforced error caused by extremely poor judgment. It will not ever go away. EVER.

Period.

[840high]

80. I can hardly wait for the debates.

[99Forever]

81. I couldn't agree more.

With the real differences becoming clearer every day, Hillary is in for a tough reckoning, she can dance around the issues, but Senator Sanders straight forward, honesty instead of Clinton's politispeak spin will be a delight to watch.

[edgineered]

25. This is both ironic and boring.

The OP brings up the emails again. Then again Clinton supporters in the thread say stop with the right wing talking points to those replying.

Give it up already!

[AtomicKitten]

26. Unrec. Your browbeatings are tiresome.

Hillary's poor judgment and reckless behavior at State vis a vis use of an unsecured private server is a valid consideration in this election regardless of your continued efforts to make it go away.

[TM99]

29. Well said.

Thanks for saying it so clearly. I agree.

[AtomicKitten]

31. thanks

[RiverLover]

32. Thank you!

Couldn't have said it better.

[AtomicKitten]

34. cheers

[cpwm17]

39. Of course you're correct.

She did all of her E-mail business on a private server. Unless she wasn't doing anything important, that was a major security breach. Plus her government business is our business. She had no right to keep it to herself.

[AtomicKitten]

62. I agree.

Government business is our business.

Cheers.

[Fawke Em]

40. Thank you.

I don't care who she emailed, I only care whether our national secrets were protected, which they seemingly weren't.

1) Communications with her server were not encrypted for the first 3 months.
https://www.venafi.com/blog/post/what-venafi-trustnet-tells-us-about-the-clinton-email-server/

2) They left the default VPN keys installed on her server
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-04/clinton-s-e-mail-system-built-for-privacy-though-not-security
Using those addresses, McGeorge discovered that the certificate appearing on the site Tuesday appeared to be the factory default for the security appliance, made by Fortinet Inc., running the service.

3) They were using, and continue to use, self-signed SSL certificates
http://gawker.com/how-unsafe-was-hillary-clintons-secret-staff-email-syst-1689393042

4) They set up a .com domain, enabling the typosquater who has registered clintonmail.com (no "e" before "mail&quot . Whoever registered that domain is in a perfect position to steal login information or perform spear phishing attacks.

5) Her ISP was repeatedly hacked by China
http://krebsonsecurity.com/2011/10/who-else-was-hit-by-the-rsa-attackers/

Hat Tip: Jeff47

[AtomicKitten]

48. Thanks for posting this.

And to Jeff47.

This was like using "password" for your password, pretty much laying it there for hackers.

This issue is not nothing. Her use of an unsecured private server as SOS has some pretty serious implications.

[Fred Sanders]

53. Here is something that proves that some folks are determined to Get Clinton, context be damned.

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/09/28/washington-posts-weigel-criticizes-media-for-mi/205823

[Fawke Em]

54. I didn't say she was dismissive.

I said I was concerned about the security on her private servers and these are the links to my reasoning behind my concern.

I didn't even watch her interview. I've seen enough of her throughout my life.

Hell, I don't even have time to watch everything Bernie is on and I support him.

[Fred Sanders]

56. The point made by Wiegel and MM is how every interview of Clinton is distorted. And here is proof.

Any observation on that?

[Fawke Em]

65. But that has nothing to do with what I was talking about.

In fact, what concerns me about the server hasn't really been discussed in the media because so few of them understand the implications. The media tends to pluck the low-hanging fruit, which, quite frankly, amounts to a hill of beans in this case, as far as I know. The issue regarding the security of the server, though, is probably something the FBI and the NSA are looking into on the sly.

I only became concerned recently when jeff47 and I were discussing her lack of security on the server. I work in IT security (not as an analyst, but I am in PR, so I have to know quite a bit about what my analysts do to promote it) and hadn't realize the server wasn't any better protected than most home computers. That's a huge issue for me.

Granted, Hillary probably isn't an IT security expert, but you'd think the former president and SoS would hire a competent IT security firm that would either hire their own experts or at least outsource their IT security to properly log, monitor, assess and protect their server.

[Fred Sanders]

66. On the contrary, I would say the media distortions and how they are created is exactly what

we should be talking about, not every day, every half-true editorialized news report parsing the details of every out of context headline and speculation disguised as conclusion, all lacking in fact due to laziness and in context due to bias.

Do you see how the full context puts the lie to the anti-Clinton headlines and the editorials of the media?

This is as good an example from Wiegel as it gets.

If you do not, you do not.

[uponit7771]

59. No its not, its wingerish news ...like most of her critque... and to be ignored and made fun of at

... best.

No one cares about the email server but the few who are scoring political points on their side of the isle.

None of the dem candidates can throw a stone on judgement either...

NOT ONE, even Bernie

regards

[AtomicKitten]

61. You are wrong and your denial damages the party.

The Democratic Party, not the Clinton Party to which some here pledge their allegiance. She was reckless at State for reasons already stated. She alone is responsible for any and all repercussions that befall her bid for the presidency, and that's precisely why the Democratic Party elite have Joe Biden warming up in the wings.

[sibelian]

28. I agree.

I think the e-mail story is a piece of nonsense. I don't want to go anywhere near it.

[liberal N proud]

30. How many times did they bring up Benghazi?

And how many times have they tried to repeal Obamacare?

Republicans don't know when to stop, they just keep beating a dead horse until...

Well, they just keep beating it.

[mcar]

33. K&R

Well said RB.

[jeff47]

35. How Team Clinton screwed up the security on her email server

What we know so far:

1) Communications with her server were not encrypted for the first 3 months.
https://www.venafi.com/blog/post/what-venafi-trustnet-tells-us-about-the-clinton-email-server/

2) They left the default VPN keys installed on her server
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-03-04/clinton-s-e-mail-system-built-for-privacy-though-not-security

Using those addresses, McGeorge discovered that the certificate appearing on the site Tuesday appeared to be the factory default for the security appliance, made by Fortinet Inc., running the service.

3) They were using, and continue to use, self-signed SSL certificates
http://gawker.com/how-unsafe-was-hillary-clintons-secret-staff-email-syst-1689393042

4) They set up a .com domain, enabling the typosquater who has registered clintonmail.com (no "e" before "mail&quot . Whoever registered that domain is in a perfect position to steal login information or perform spear phishing attacks.

5) Her ISP was repeatedly hacked by China
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=615632

And to cover your likely response, yes no one has announced they hacked her server. How many successful operations does the NSA announce? Zero. Why do you think the NSA-equivalent in other countries would announce successful operations?

[Fawke Em]

41. Correct.

The point of this type of successful attack is to lay low to gather all the info you want and to put the info in your back pocket to use as a bargaining chip later down the road.

I don't think these types of hackers give a shit if John Doe, federal worker, makes more than Mary Roe.

[Gothmog]

51. This e-mail non-scandal is getting silly

[Logical]

52. The desperation is strong in this one! nt

[aidbo]

58. Asked & answered. It's time to move on.

[Scootaloo]

76. Show me a Bernie supporter demanding Clinton's arrest for well-wishing, please.

I'll wait, but I won't hold my breath.

[jkbRN]

78. News is news. Get over it.

I see more posts about HRC fans complaining about it than actual news/posts criticizing her for it.

[anamnua]

87. General comment

The Clinton e mail saga is to quote one of the jurors in the OJ trial (responding to some Byzantine 'expert' testimony) 'a whole load of nothing'.