timschochet
Footballguy
Not a great idea IMO
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Official Hillary Clinton 2016 thread (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter timschochet
- Start date
- Status
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
I think I will never understand how or why you will accept commentary from a fanboy like Joe Conason.
http://www.nytimes.com/1996/01/05/us/memo-places-hillary-clinton-at-core-of-travel-office-case.html
timschochet
Footballguy
Yeah it's disappointing.
We're not going to keep companies here by punishing them IMO. Trump doesn't seem to get that either. We need to create positive incentives for them to stay- and more importantly create the conditions for new companies to emerge.
The Commish
Footballguy
Edit....nevermind 
Last edited by a moderator:
G
Guest
Guest
Immaterial. First of all, sophisticated hacking would not show up on logs. Secondly, the outcome isn't the point. If this gets ultimately spun into the relative security advantages of private versus government servers, we've gone completely through the Looking Glass. Why even have laws?
The Commish
Footballguy
Quint
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
In the case of Willie Brown, absolutely the ends justified the means. But Willie never murdered anyone or committed any terrible crimes. He was a machine politician in the old style. That's fine. He was very effective.
LBJ a little different. He was far more corrupt. Even so he did some good things. I could never support LBJ but after the fact in evaluating him I could credit him for the good things he did. I could support Willie Brown though.
As I wrote it depends on the situation. I don't, however, put Hillary in these categories.
Last edited by a moderator:
G
Guest
Guest
Hillary is the one candidate paying herself out of the campaign. Salary: 250k.
freebeacon.com/politics/hillary-paid-herself-250000-from-campaign-funds/
freebeacon.com/politics/hillary-paid-herself-250000-from-campaign-funds/
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
So when Hillary was representing a bank in front of a regulatory board entirely consisting of people that her husband had appointed, and she was getting paid for that, what would you call that? Especially considering that the loans authorized by that board helped that bank go bankrupt, harming its depositors, the state and the fed which backed it?
What would you call that?
Last edited by a moderator:
IC FBGCav
Footballguy
Quint
Footballguy
like taking $1M from a CEO to make domestic violence charges "go away" under the auspices of Ethical Behavior?
#Chahal
Last edited by a moderator:
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
The Commish
Footballguy
Hang 10
Footballguy
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article37968711.html
- This isn't a claim of anything nefarious, it's just funny to see this entity show up again. This company is Hillary.
Last edited by a moderator:
Henry Ford
Footballguy
1. "He sure made a new career out of what happened to him" sounds an awful lot like what's been going on in the Erin Andrews thread;
2. My understanding is that Mr. Dale sued Harry Thomason, not the Clintons;
3. Last I heard, he was working as a prison guard.
spreagle
Footballguy
Now that OJ is back in the news, I was wondering if Hillary skates on her email problems are minorities going to explode in cheerful celebration because Hillary "beat the system" or are they going to get steamed because Hillary will clearly be seen as one of the protected class that never goes to jail even if she does something wrong that would send a normal person to jail for years?
I think it is the latter. Trump will remind minorities every day that Hillary is special and they are not when it comes to legal matters.
I think it is the latter. Trump will remind minorities every day that Hillary is special and they are not when it comes to legal matters.
squistion
Footballguy
I assume this is shtick. If not, then comparing Hillary to O.J. is probably the worst false equivalency in the history of this forum.
G
Guest
Guest
I think when we all heard the news about the knife this morning, we naturally assumed that it would sway the course of American politics.I assume this is shtick. If not, then comparing Hillary to O.J. is probably the worst false equivalency in the history of this forum.
Gopher State
Footballguy
timschochet
Footballguy
So Hillary's private server was never breached, yet the official State Departmebt server was breached? Is that correct?
Not a true statement. The security log did not record a breach. But that log does not catch most breaches, just certain types of breaches. You have a knack of grossly overstating things.
ETA: And it was not the classified network which was breached.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Commish
Footballguy
I don't know if it was or not. I'm confident the "corporate" servers in our gov't are breached often. That's why there is a completely closed system shut off to everything outside the intranet. Not sure why any of this is a question though or has to do with Hillary's decision making other than to possibly go the "see, other systems are breached too". The irony is, that line of thinking is exactly why I question Hillary's decision making of having the server. She either didn't have a clue or didn't care or both.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Love it when Tim decides to pay attention to an issue.
Tim do you know what signals intelligence is?
Hacking implies forced or tricked entry into a server. If her password was compromised that's not a "hack" arguably. And right now the FBI is investigating the compromise if Hillary's password, and possibly more than one. Depends on the Clintonian definition of "breached".
And no State's secure network was not breached. Foreign intel services best option for that kind of info was Hillary's email.
Last edited by a moderator:
timschochet
Footballguy
Look, that's what was reported on this news:
I don't know if it was or not. I'm confident the "corporate" servers in our gov't are breached often. That's why there is a completely closed system shut off to everything outside the intranet. Not sure why any of this is a question though or has to do with Hillary's decision making other than to possibly go the "see, other systems are breached too". The irony is, that line of thinking is exactly why I question Hillary's decision making of having the server. She either didn't have a clue or didn't care or both.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/04/us/politics/security-logs-of-hillary-clintons-email-server-are-said-to-show-no-evidence-of-hacking.html?_r=0
But if it's true, then I do find it ironic that so many people here want to prosecute her for using a private server, when the official server was hacked in what has been called the "worst hack ever", which had nothing to do with Hillary Clinton:
http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/10/politics/state-department-hack-worst-ever/
It's like you're angry with your daughter for losing her $50 in her purse on the same day that you lost $1,000 in your wallet.
timschochet
Footballguy
I'm just going by what I read. It sure sounds like you and jon and everyone are the ones who are trying to redefine this stuff. It's like arguing that the good news about jobs this morning is actually bad news. OK I guess.
And the breech is just not her server which is a concern. It is the dozens of other computers which are on unsecured networks passing thousands of classified information around. There is no possible way anyone could know if the information was hacked or not. It is just way to out in the open.
timschochet
Footballguy
Why wouldn't this be true no matter what email account the Secretary of State is using?
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
I posted on this much further up its good news for Hillary. She has at least three fig leaves now if or when DOJ closes the book on her - no hack, nothing marked, and other SOS's with class email. You will repeat all three like an imam throwing three pebbles at the Rock in Mecca when the news comes down I'm sure. Tune in to Brian Fallon he'll tell ya.
Last edited by a moderator:
Because secure networks which they are suppose to use for classified data only talk to other computers on secured networks. It is impossible to send an email from a secure SIPrnet computer to a non-secured email address. Those networks do not get hacked. It is far far far more secured than the standard government work email.
timschochet
Footballguy
Sure, but it's my understanding, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, that Hillary DID use a secure network for classified material. What happened was that a small number of the emails that went into her non-classified email account were later made classified. If Hillary had used an official state department account, the same thing would have happened.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
There were some 2000 emails on her private non-classifed email server which contained classifed information. That is a very large number by any measure. The classification of the information and how and when it was officially considered classified is what the investigation should show. Obviously Hillary was way too loose with the type of information she discussed on non-classified networks. She should have known what kind of information is considered classified or not and the marking is not all that relevant.
Last edited by a moderator:
And it would still be a crime to knowingly use these networks for classifed data. The fact she used a private server amplified the level of policy she was violating.
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
Bottomfeeder Sports
Footballguy
Tim was correct The tag team correcting him was not.SaintsInDome2006 said:
And the password stuff was particularly painful. I think I pulled a muscle laughing at that. And before you go to find the article(s) to prove to me that such an investigation is going on realize that I have already read them and more importantly understood them.
G
Guest
Guest
Just watched Episode 1, Season 4 of House of Cards and suspect that Claire has been modeled to embody the worst of Hillary. Hope they stick the landing.
Last edited:
Nothing was pointed out in which I was wrong. Tim on the other hand was factually wrong as I specifically pointed out
MaxThreshold
Footballguy
Negative!Bottomfeeder Sports said:
The Commish
Footballguy
It won't matter to you but I asked for a specific reason. One could likely get into your computer and leave no trace that they were there because you don't have the appropriate security measures in place. Yes, security measures are put in place to make it more difficult to let people in, but they are also there to tell you that someone indeed got in. These articles don't say no one got in. They say no evidence was left behind (best they can tell).timschochet said:
This SHOULD outline why it's important to keep this sort of information on a more secured network than Time Warner cable provides to you and me. There's a full stop there, period. It SHOULD become even clearer why it's important to keep classified (and up) information on the closed network that wasn't hacked. The hackers could get to the day to day network, but not the classified. There's a reason why they go the extra lengths to protect that network.
To use your analogy. The money's gone from being held in a safe deposit box (secured internal intranet), to put in the girls purse (less secured internet), to being left laying on a park bench (Hillary's server). It makes little to no difference to me if someone walked up and took the money or not. That she thought it was acceptable to leave it sitting there is what bothers me. I don't care how many other kids do it.
I would hope we all realize by now that the media understands even less about IT security than most of the people posting here.timschochet said:
In this case, The Commish is correct. What they've actually found is that if Hillary's server was hacked, the hackers didn't leave any markings behind. It's kind of like saying that if your house was broken into, the robbers were smart enough to wear gloves and not leave fingerprints. To use the same analogy, it's also kind of like saying there was no sign of forced entry (e.g. broken doors/windows), but then, that could be because the front door was left unlocked in the first place.
Further, the server didn't need to be compromised at all in order for the information to be compromised. The information could have been stolen in-transit, at the network level. Again, to use an analogy, that's like saying that the bank itself wasn't robbed, but ignores that instead of using a Brinks truck to transport it to a different bank, we used a bicycle messenger with a fanny pack.
- Status
Similar threads
