Support NeoGAF

[MIMIC]

Lol you have no idea how clueless most old lawyers are about technology.

People are assuming that Hillary went into this thing blind and left to her own devices.

"I'm old and nobody told me what to do, so I'll just set up a private server and use my regular email like I always do."

That would be fine, if it weren't for the fact that she was warned against this very practice (on multiple occasions). Considering the fact that technology was becoming a lot more beneficial and utilized a lot more often (in life in general), the State Department revised their own rules and procedures regarding the use of technology in the work place.

-Do this. Don't do this.

So blaming it on "old age" just doesn't fly, especially if you were already warned to stop doing something (and especially if the warning was sent under your name).

 

[4Tran]

Older person failing at technology can be charming if it's your grandparent, but not so when it's a presidential candidate.

Hope someone tech savvy will guide her if she becomes president.

It's probably less of a deal than you think. Obama was the first president to even have a computer in his office, and Powell was the first Secretary of State to even use e-mail. The IT competence of the president should be a non-issue as long as they have proper people supporting them. The bigger problem is whether the federal government's IT security is sufficient against attack, but that doesn't have anything to do with the president's own knowledge.

 

[SlimySnake]

This is so absurd. She has got a team of IT professionals who know how to use computers. Her lawyers arent dumb. They are the best of the best who also employ highly skilled IT professionals. They knew what they were doing when they deleted 30K emails. I can promise you that the three hundred people int his thread havent sent out 30k personal emails COMBINED in the last 8 years. That is a load of crap.

I am a Hillary supporter. I supported her through out the primaries. But deleting 30k emails is shady as fuck. I dont think she is inherently evil. But i dont think she is 100% clean either.

I am a realist and i know politicians have skeletons in their closet. But at the same time, i hate how some gaffers just defend her no matter what. It's ok to admit that your candidate might be a just a tiny bit shady.

 

[Des0lar]

Deleted, since it apparently pisses people off

 

[AlphaDump]

How accurate is this: (from reddit)

So you paste shit from reddit and are asking us to vet it?

Christ

 

[minor effort]

How accurate is this: (from reddit)

And what's the source? And no, reddit itself is not a source.

 

[Melkezadek]

This is so absurd. She has got a team of IT professionals who know how to use computers. Her lawyers arent dumb. They are the best of the best who also employ highly skilled IT professionals. They knew what they were doing when they deleted 30K emails. I can promise you that the three hundred people int his thread havent sent out 30k personal emails COMBINED in the last 8 years. That is a load of crap.

I am a Hillary supporter. I supported her through out the primaries. But deleting 30k emails is shady as fuck. I dont think she is inherently evil. But i dont think she is 100% clean either.

I am a realist and i know politicians have skeletons in their closet. But at the same time, i hate how some gaffers just defend her no matter what. It's ok to admit that your candidate might be a just a tiny bit shady.

Did you actually read the report?

 

[Des0lar]

So you paste shit from reddit and are asking us to vet it?

Christ

Well I was looking for a summary of the most important points.

I was reading it up meanwhile, and can confirm at least some of them. Didn't find the drone strike paragraph and the "not paying attention" to classification markers

And what's the source? And no, reddit itself is not a source.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...lary-clintons-private-email-server/?tid=sm_fb

for some of those points. Currently reading further

 

[TestOfTide]

Alright so she's old and can't figure out emails... and we want this person running the entire country? Are you people out of your god damn minds?

It's cute if grandma can't figure it out.

It's potentially disastrous if the leader of the free world can't.

Inb4 "So then Trump...." I hate Trump too, I just don't buy this excuse.

There's a lot more to being President than whether or not you are good with tech.

 

[MIMIC]

How accurate is this: (from reddit)

It's true. Everything except the SIM cards thing (maybe I overlooked it), I remember reading a little while ago.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Well I was looking for a summary of the most important points.

I was reading it up meanwhile, and can confirm at least some of them. Didn't find the drone strike paragraph and the "not paying attention" to classification markers



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...lary-clintons-private-email-server/?tid=sm_fb

for some of those points. Currently reading further

Why the hell are you following buzzfeed-eque list articles on something this complicated?

It's true. Everything except the SIM cards thing (maybe I overlooked it), I remember reading a little while ago.

Saying that she couldn't recall ANY of her classification training is false. Also, trouble remembering things SoS is false. They specifically mentioned it was related to the period of time when she had a concussion, not all 4 years.

 

[AlphaDump]

Well I was looking for a summary of the most important points.

I was reading it up meanwhile, and can confirm at least some of them. Didn't find the drone strike paragraph and the "not paying attention" to classification markers



https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...lary-clintons-private-email-server/?tid=sm_fb

for some of those points. Currently reading further

So you tell us.

 

[Des0lar]

Why the hell are you following buzzfeed-eque list articles on something this complicated?

Because I honestly don't have time to read a couple hundred of FBI material. And I would assume most of GAF won't as well. That's why I am glad that there are other people doing this job.

What is up with the aggressive tone in here anyway?
The stuff in the article is there, sourced with pages from the document. I am not claiming anything beyond what's written there.

Can we rationally discuss those statements?

So you tell us.

Tell you what? I told you all I know right now and I will update my post once I find out more. If other posters want to chime in, they can feel free to do so.

 

[Davidion]

"She's a lawyer she must know how emails work"

"She was warned and received training!"

"Anyone who don't know how to use email have no business leading"

ITT: sheltered ass people who don't know shit about how technology is used or works in the real world.

 

[MIMIC]

Saying that she couldn't recall ANY of her classification training is false. Also, trouble remembering things SoS is false. They specifically mentioned it was related to the period of time when she had a concussion, not all 4 years.

Well I'm glad that that very important bit is all cleared up.

 

[Goodstyle]

This is so absurd. She has got a team of IT professionals who know how to use computers. Her lawyers arent dumb. They are the best of the best who also employ highly skilled IT professionals. They knew what they were doing when they deleted 30K emails. I can promise you that the three hundred people int his thread havent sent out 30k personal emails COMBINED in the last 8 years. That is a load of crap.

I am a Hillary supporter. I supported her through out the primaries. But deleting 30k emails is shady as fuck. I dont think she is inherently evil. But i dont think she is 100% clean either.

I am a realist and i know politicians have skeletons in their closet. But at the same time, i hate how some gaffers just defend her no matter what. It's ok to admit that your candidate might be a just a tiny bit shady.

I honestly mainly think Hillary is just paranoid about how people would interpret the things she says and does, hence the deletions. We already know the media has zero ethics when it comes to reporting on her, so I don't blame her.

 

[atr0cious]

Why is smashing her electronics a big deal? Has no one seen Mission Impossible?

 

[Nafai1123]

Well I'm glad that that very important bit is all cleared up.

Considering how misleading and confusing many statements have been regarding this whole email issue, yes those are important distinctions.

 

[Des0lar]

About the drone strike thing:

Clinton stated she did not remember the email specifically, CLINTON stated deliberation over a future drone strike did not give her cause for concern regarding classification. CLINTON understood this type of conversation as part of the routine deliberation process.

So the apparent "she sent drone strike information via her private email" is kind of false, and was concerning possible future drone strikes. Am I understanding this correctly?

 

[whyamihere]

About the drone strike thing:



So the apparent "she sent drone strike information via her private email" is kind of false, and was concerning possible future drone strikes. Am I understanding this correctly?

This has been discussed in January.

http://www.salon.com/2016/06/10/fbi...ssassinations_with_her_cellphone_report_says/

In 2011, some Pakistani officials pushed back against the U.S. drone assassination program, leading the U.S. State Department to ask the CIA to be more “judicious” about the timing of drone attacks. Clinton’s State Department did not oppose the CIA’s specific choice of targets, just their timing.

This led to a compromise in which the CIA gave the State Department some voice in the drone assassination process. Beginning in 2011, CIA officers began notifying diplomats in the U.S. embassy in Islamabad of planned attacks. The diplomats then conveyed the information to senior State Department officials.

This agreement gave then-Secretary of State Clinton and her aides personal say in U.S. drone killings.

The Wall Street Journal report provides more insight into the State Department’s coordination with the CIA on the secretive drone program.

State Department officials were given notice before a planned attack, sometimes with a narrow timeframe of as few as 30 minutes. Officials told the FBI that they used a less-secure system of communication when they had to make a decision quickly before a drone killing and were not at the office.

Roughly half a dozen times, State Department officials sent emails on their smartphones in order to approve a drone assassination when they were away from secure communications systems.

The U.S. is very secretive about its covert CIA drone campaign. Strict U.S. classification rules bar officials from discussing drone killings publicly and outside of secure communications systems.

Given this secrecy, law-enforcement and intelligence officials told the Journal that State Department discussion of the covert CIA drone program should have been conducted via a more secure communications system.

 

[MetatronM]

Alright so she's old and can't figure out emails... and we want this person running the entire country? Are you people out of your god damn minds?

It's cute if grandma can't figure it out.

It's potentially disastrous if the leader of the free world can't.

Inb4 "So then Trump...." I hate Trump too, I just don't buy this excuse.

Your options in this election are an old lady who doesn't know how to use email and an old man who doesn't know how to use email. Which is an absurd state to be in, yes, but that's the way it is.

 

[Vagabundo]

I work in IT for a university. I have no problem believing any of this. Old people* can be incredibly smart but terrible with IT.

*Surprisingly quite a lot of young people too.

 

[SolarMystic]

People need to stop drinking the Fox News koolaid. This shit shouldn't even be a thing anymore.

 

[Des0lar]

This has been discussed in January.

http://www.salon.com/2016/06/10/fbi...ssassinations_with_her_cellphone_report_says/

Isn't this different though? You post is talking about imminent drone strikes, while my quote is talking about possible drone strike targets.

Not that it changes anything in the end

 

[NikonShots]

"She's a lawyer she must know how emails work"

"She was warned and received training!"

"Anyone who don't know how to use email have no business leading"

ITT: sheltered ass people who don't know shit about how technology is used or works in the real world.

That's very dismissive
She was the secretary of state,she shouldn't have held that posistion if she can't follow a simple rule like "you can't use your own email at home, you must use this instead"

I mean shit, how complicated is it to just do what the pro's and guidelines tell you to do?

This is our next president, the cause for concern is legit, calling people sheltered when technology has nothing to do with common sense decision making is rather hostile

 

[Blader]

This is so absurd. She has got a team of IT professionals who know how to use computers. Her lawyers arent dumb. They are the best of the best who also employ highly skilled IT professionals. They knew what they were doing when they deleted 30K emails. I can promise you that the three hundred people int his thread havent sent out 30k personal emails COMBINED in the last 8 years. That is a load of crap.

The FBI was pretty explicit that the lawyers simply searched for subject lines that included relevant terms and deleted whatever fell outside of that scope; they didn't actually pore through every single email.

What is so unbelievable about accumulating 30k emails in 8 years? Especially for that job.

 

[dramatis]

That's very dismissive
She was the secretary of state,she shouldn't have held that posistion if she can't follow a simple rule like "you can't use your own email at home, you must use this instead"

I mean shit, how complicated is it to just do what the pro's and guidelines tell you to do?

This is our next president, the cause for concern is legit, calling people sheltered when technology has nothing to do with common sense decision making is rather hostile

Proper guidelines for the State Department didn't happen until she was out of the department and Kerry was in.

 

[whyamihere]

Isn't this different though? You post is talking about imminent drone strikes, while my quote is talking about possible drone strike targets.

Not that it changes anything in the end

I don't think so.

deliberation over a future drone

is exactly what was referred to in WSJ/Salon etc reporting. There's nothing "possible" in the quote of what you posted? Seemed to be a procedure at State, if my memory is correct as this has come out, when they're away from their work, so this would jive with that.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

This is our next president, the cause for concern is legit, calling people sheltered when technology has nothing to do with common sense decision making is rather hostile

And if she doesn't win?

 

[platocplx]

Why is smashing her electronics a big deal? Has no one seen Mission Impossible?

Or Tom Brady. He does it every year

 

[NikonShots]

Proper guidelines for the State Department didn't happen until she was out of the department and Kerry was in.

Well that's fucking frightening.
Most companies of significantly less importance have guide lines set up, but our Goverment just wings it.

 

[stonesak]

And if she doesn't win?

Report to your local MAGA camp on January 20, 2017.

 

[User 463088]

That's very dismissive
She was the secretary of state,she shouldn't have held that posistion if she can't follow a simple rule like "you can't use your own email at home, you must use this instead"

I mean shit, how complicated is it to just do what the pro's and guidelines tell you to do?

This is our next president, the cause for concern is legit, calling people sheltered when technology has nothing to do with common sense decision making is rather hostile

There was no rule that she couldn't use private email. Like, there just wasn't. Powell did it. Condi Rice did it. Hillary did it. Hell, Kerry did it too as recently as last year.

 

[MIMIC]

Proper guidelines for the State Department didn't happen until she was out of the department and Kerry was in.

Now I know with almost certainty that this isn't true.

EDIT: From the Inspector General's report:

Full report (PDF)

By Secretary Clinton’s tenure, the Department’s guidance was considerably more detailed and more sophisticated. Beginning in late 2005 and continuing through 2011, the Department revised the FAM and issued various memoranda specifically discussing the obligation to use Department systems in most circumstances and identifying the risks of not doing so. Secretary Clinton’s cybersecurity practices accordingly must be evaluated in light of these more comprehensive directives.

Secretary Clinton used mobile devices to conduct official business using the personal email account on her private server extensively, as illustrated by the 55,000 pages of material making up the approximately 30,000 emails she provided to the Department in December 2014. Throughout Secretary Clinton’s tenure, the FAM stated that normal day-to-day operations should be conducted on an authorized AIS,147 yet OIG found no evidence that the Secretary requested or obtained guidance or approval to conduct official business via a personal email account on her private server. According to the current CIO and Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security, Secretary Clinton had an obligation to discuss using her personal email account to conduct official business with their offices, who in turn would have attempted to provide her with approved and secured means that met her business needs. However, according to these officials, DS and IRM did not—and would not—approve her exclusive reliance on a personal email account to conduct Department business, because of the restrictions in the FAM and the security risks in doing so.

 

[platocplx]

I work in IT for a university. I have no problem believing any of this. Old people* can be incredibly smart but terrible with IT.

*Surprisingly quite a lot of young people too.

Exactly lol young and old, also people thinking IT people dont miss shit all the time. All these people are fallible as hell nothing sinister as conspiracy nuts want to make it to be.

 

[platocplx]

That's very dismissive
She was the secretary of state,she shouldn't have held that posistion if she can't follow a simple rule like "you can't use your own email at home, you must use this instead"

I mean shit, how complicated is it to just do what the pro's and guidelines tell you to do?

This is our next president, the cause for concern is legit, calling people sheltered when technology has nothing to do with common sense decision making is rather hostile

There were no rules against it.

 

[Blader]

Lol you have no idea how clueless most old lawyers are about technology.

It's especially funny given this year, since the whole Panama Papers leak was a result of poor email security at a law firm!

Well that's fucking frightening.
Most companies of significantly less importance have guide lines set up, but our Goverment just wings it.

Most companies have extremely shitty, if not totally absent, email or IT security guidelines. The government's cyber practices are pretty robust by comparison.

 

[antipode]

That's very dismissive
She was the secretary of state,she shouldn't have held that posistion if she can't follow a simple rule like "you can't use your own email at home, you must use this instead"

That's literally the exact opposite of the rule.

You can use personal email as a government employee - on Gmail, Aol, Yahoo, your own server, wherever you like. You are encouraged to do so.

You can also send unclassified work emails on your personal email. It's just not recommended, and you just have to send those over in response to an FOIA request (which she did.)

This was the only way she could send or receive emails outside of a secure room in 2009. The State Department literally told her they didn't have details on President Obama's Blackberry (the first of its kind) and could not obtain one for her. Think about how different that is from how everyone else checks email. If you asked someone to send you an email, it might go unread for days until you get back to a secure room to check if it had been sent or not. You can't just log in to a web browser or your laptop to read it.

You are not supposed to send classified documents over unclassifed channels. All the evidence is that she made no intentional attempts to break this law.

 

[platocplx]

Most companies have extremely shitty, if not totally absent, email or IT security guidelines. The government's cyber practices are pretty robust by comparison.

Right. Like you see people like cops etc have crazy ass email exchanges come out and many companies are very shitty with IT security, very few even have rsa keys all thia extra stuff cuz its expensive as shit. IT depts are way underfunded or outsourced. Lol

 

[NikonShots]

And if she doesn't win?

That has absolutely nothing to do with what I said, but I'll answer that hypothetical


If she doesn't win, we vote with our brains next time, not because she is the chosen one. We as people don't vote for candidates with a bad history. We could have placed anyone in there against Trump and won. (I don't mean Bernie, definitely not Bernie).

 

[Doominated]

I've been trying to explain this to people since literally the day the "email scandal" became a thing. The hilarious part is that it's always middle aged people that I know have absolutely no clue what they're doing with computers/technology even though they use them every single day for everything they do at work that are so adamant that Hillary is some kind of technical mastermind that deliberately did awful things "with her email".

She's just a clueless old person. Like every other 70 year old in the country.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

If she doesn't win, we vote with our brains next time, not because she is the chosen one. We as people don't vote for candidates with a bad history. We could have placed anyone in there against Trump and won. (I don't mean Bernie, definitely not Bernie).

People thought no one would make the same mistakes that were made in 2000 with Gore/Nader/Bush and yet here we are about to make a decision much worse than that.

 

[Blackpanther25]

I believe it. Heck, a qauter of my time at work is teaching my old GS (government) employees how to perform basic functions on outlook.

 

[Davidion]

That's very dismissive
She was the secretary of state,she shouldn't have held that posistion if she can't follow a simple rule like "you can't use your own email at home, you must use this instead"

I mean shit, how complicated is it to just do what the pro's and guidelines tell you to do?

This is our next president, the cause for concern is legit, calling people sheltered when technology has nothing to do with common sense decision making is rather hostile

It is incredibly dismissive, because anyone who has ever spent an iota of time working with any accomplished professionals and people in position of power and prominence knows that if IT policy was some kind of qualifier for competency, the entire world's balance would fall off kilter.

How complicated is it to do what the pros and guidelines tell you to do? Not that complicated, and an overwhelming amount of people don't care. What matters is how policy governs a population as a whole and that whatever rules broken aren't egregious. If you think the wonderful policies that govern organizations, public/private, corporations/academia, whatever, isn't being broken by the metric ton by the day while the world carries on, I have a bridge I'd like to sell you.

I'm not really some die-hard Hillary fan, but the amount of monkey-dancing on display because "she didn't follow email rules" is mind-boggling.

 

[Reagan's BR]

What gets me is that wrong or right, however you are choosing to spin this, no other candidate present or past, Republican or Democrat would survive a PR fiasco of this magnitude.

Obama, Bush, Trump, Gore, Kerry, McCain, Romney, all of them would be absolutely devastated by this.

I'm not pro-Trump over here but it blows my mind that Hillary remains unscathed by this.

 

[makingmusic476]

I work in IT for a university. I have no problem believing any of this. Old people* can be incredibly smart but terrible with IT.

*Surprisingly quite a lot of young people too.

Yup. The chair of the music department at UNO was one of the most brilliant musicians and men I've ever met, but I had to walk him through how to approve me for certain classes during my first semester because he was very timid around new technology he didn't understand.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

What gets me is that wrong or right, however you are choosing to spin this, no other candidate present or past, Republican or Democrat would survive a PR fiasco of this magnitude.

Obama, Bush, Trump, Gore, Kerry, McCain, Romney, all of them would be absolutely devastated by this.

I'm not pro-Trump over here but it blows my mind that Hillary remains unscathed by this.

How is she unscathed? This has done plenty of damage and it's still not clear exactly what the angle is supposed to be. Was it nefariousness or carelessness?

At the same time, Trump has done plenty himself and yet here we are.

 

[Aselith]

What gets me is that wrong or right, however you are choosing to spin this, no other candidate present or past, Republican or Democrat would survive a PR fiasco of this magnitude.

Obama, Bush, Trump, Gore, Kerry, McCain, Romney, all of them would be absolutely devastated by this.

I'm not pro-Trump over here but it blows my mind that Hillary remains unscathed by this.

Swift boat

 

[DontBeThatGuy]

What gets me is that wrong or right, however you are choosing to spin this, no other candidate present or past, Republican or Democrat would survive a PR fiasco of this magnitude.

Obama, Bush, Trump, Gore, Kerry, McCain, Romney, all of them would be absolutely devastated by this.

I'm not pro-Trump over here but it blows my mind that Hillary remains unscathed by this.

This is nonsense.

 

[Nafai1123]

What gets me is that wrong or right, however you are choosing to spin this, no other candidate present or past, Republican or Democrat would survive a PR fiasco of this magnitude.

Obama, Bush, Trump, Gore, Kerry, McCain, Romney, all of them would be absolutely devastated by this.

I'm not pro-Trump over here but it blows my mind that Hillary remains unscathed by this.

Lol you think she's been unscathed? The only reason the race is as close as it is right now is because of all this shit.