White House Coordinated on Clinton Email Issues, New Documents Show
- Thread starter bangbang i'm a timpani
- Start date
- Status
Care to explain how this is a scandal?
It's not. I'm saying that OP trying to make this seem like a scandal was dumb, doubly so since we tend to be pretty liberal and well-informed here.
Know a guy who works in the government on the tech side. I asked in general terms is the Clinton email/server unique. He said hell no. Many superiors, unmaliciously, use their own systems they are comfortable with to communicate. It is like the non-government world- leaders with the power to fire and end careers ignore their IT departments.
If Clinton is guilty, then a large portion of the Federal government needs fired and put in jail for not complying with tech security. If anything, bringing Clinton's misstep to light has strengthened security. It has gotten many to actually comply with computer security protocol.
No. Not even a little bit. Literally the entire reason this became a thing is that she complied with an FOIA request to turn over emails from her private server.
Oh, I apologize. I took it as "you try posting the truth on a liberal board? What did you expect?" Type of thing...
No, I mean why she used one in the first place. I would imagine somebody would say this is not a good idea(if she asked ..not sure?)
Democrats like Obama can shape shift, that's why you can't trust them
This is very nostalgic
Gordon Shumway
Banned
The news talked about it for about a week or so when it happened..moved right along quickly.
SliceSabre
Banned
The Butcher of Benghazi still up to her tricks I see.
The Jackdog
Member
can he teach me to cyber
Imperfected
Member
So you're telling me Hillary consults popular and successful members of her peer group for advice and assistance on matters that may cause problems well in advance?
Fuck this lady, I want a president who makes up a solution (and a problem) on the spot without bothering to solicit any expert opinions or showing consideration for the thoughts and feelings of his close allies.
Fuck this lady, I want a president who makes up a solution (and a problem) on the spot without bothering to solicit any expert opinions or showing consideration for the thoughts and feelings of his close allies.
a/s/l?
fart town usa
Banned
It's called ethics.
Blindly supporting everything a political party/candidate/administration does makes you sheep.
If only gaf cared as much about political institutions as they do about the ad campaign for NMS.
SMH.
Blindly supporting everything a political party/candidate/administration does makes you sheep.
If only gaf cared as much about political institutions as they do about the ad campaign for NMS.
SMH.
Be careful I think conservatives just got a little excited.
fart town usa
Banned
And democrats get equally excited when a large portion of their base doesn't push back on anything that should easily be considered, at the very least, questionable.
There's a reason a lot of democrats are less than enthusiastic about their party of choice.
What is unethical here?
I think those were people who read it.
By it do you mean the headline?
fart town usa
Banned
What?
Libertarianism is a utopian ideology and their theories are largely rooted from/in agrarian societies.
You're making the wrong connection with my comment(s).
The majority of political ideologies are utopian in nature, libertarianism just happens to be much more hard lined than others. Look up the intellectuals behind their theories and you'll likely come to the same conclusion.
Also, the ethical considerations concerning aspects of Hillary and the democratic party are valid through and through and the same applies to all politicians of any political party. It's not a hard concept to grasp. Ethics is a pretty common course in most under grad/grad programs.
fart town usa
Banned
It depends on what you consider ethical or not.
No, the content of the OP and the article. Much reaction beyond "so what?" implies a person didn't really read more than the headline.
So explain it.
I do not consider any of the material in this article unethical.
fart town usa
Banned
Fair enough. That's totally understandable.
fart town usa
Banned
Trying to dodge questions that the public may want their representatives to be asked.
If the act of trying to avoid questions you don't want to answer is unethical, no public person has ever been ethical.
Requesting a current gov official not answer questions because of you screwed up is a little shady.
It really isn't, but also the White House made that request.
They would be excited up to the point the rules apply to them too. Technology ignorance isn't a liberal or conservative thing.
The FBI investigation was pretty clear that she did it so that she'd be able to use a Blackberry.
Pfffffffff why am I not surprised?
Did you know you can send emails from a blackberry? Even work emails.
Good luck doing that with your apple iPod phone!
Oh boy if someone think this is the case they never even interacted with anyone outside of their cave.
Version 3.0
Member
Both sides are the same!
Democrats: well, they deleted it. I guess they got away with it. Bummer.
Republicans: Fuck running the country. Let's devote all of our energy and millions of dollars, for years, to try and make a scandal out of this, even though we know it's really nothing. NEVER GIVE UP!
Imperfected
Member
I'll admit I don't keep up with phones much, but don't Blackberries still technically have better data encryption than other mobile devices? (Ironically, given the way all of this has shaken out...)
It isn't.
listen - i agree, Libertarianism is real dumb but there really doesn't seem to be anything unethical about this
and i am saying this as a liberal person, not as a democrat
fart town usa
Banned
I think it's at least questionable. My only issue with these things is that on gaf, people who take issue with anything involving Clinton or the democratic party are usually trounced upon or labeled trump/GOP apologists.
I know my comments can come off as inflammatory but I feel like these threads need a jolt sometimes cause everyone is usually coming from the same mindset.
Can you point to anything specific besides shit about the stupid emails?
fart town usa
Banned
Are you kidding me?
This thread is about the emails.
Take that stuff elsewhere, seriously, so unnecessary.
Also, not once on this forum have I ever said anything about being concerned about the emails, I was questioning the attempt by public officials to dodge questions concerning the emails. Transparency is a good thing.
This is bizarre to me. The White House communications director asked the state department if they could avoid answering questions about the emails. What kind of weird, twisted reasoning can you possibly come up with to make that into an unethical exchange? Do you consider everyone who has ever been asked questions by the press to be unethical? Because you must realize there are questions they would want to avoid.
I don't understand your position. Frankly I think you decided there was something unethical before you actually understood what happened, and now this is what you're hanging on to to avoid revising your premature conclusion.
Yes, but you said ANYTHING involving Clinton can you point to another valid criticism that people were attacked for posting?
Not sure why you got so mad about me questioning your claim.
True it's not absolutely unique on the side of superiors, this is true once you go high enough up the chain and moreso on the side of politics than my end in engineering. It's also part of the reason why our cyber security is so frail. I'm pretty happy about the fact that a lot of leaders finally perked up their ears after this.
To explain further, our systems literally would alert everyone upon any instance of a non pre-verified hardware or server system connection that has ever been used for non-government purposes. Work progress would be shut down for upwards of 4 hrs. to resolve any such instance. Even the wrong person reading a file they are not cleared for could result in such investigations. Circumventing said systems would be an immediate removal from position and potential charges.
To have a ongoing setup like that is directly in violation of rules. It may have been her secured private network, but no private networks should have had any connection via email or otherwise.
- Status