State Dept. inspector general report sharply criticizes Clinton’s email practices

[apdst]

No. What I'm saying is there's nothing criminal she did. Pay attention...there is a difference here.

The OIG Report is essentially saying that although Hillary may have violated federal law, there's nothing criminal about what she did. While she could face punitive action for violating administrative procedures (i.e., a fine or written reprimand), there's nothing criminal (i.e., felony charge equating to jail time) about her failure to adhere to federal administrative records management standards. However, there are those like yourself who firmly believe in the more extreme point of view which is "any violation of federal law is a criminal offense", but that doesn't appear to be the case here. For example, where I work in state government the rules clearly state that when I leave my office I am suppose to secure my work area by putting records away or locking my door if a client's file is open and accessible to the public (i.e., other visiting patient constitutes "the public"). While I may close the record or turn documents over to prevent passers-by from seeing private health information, I don't lock my office door - I just close it because in most cases I'm never gone for any extended period of time and the section where I work has very limited foot traffic from the public. So, should I be prosecuted for that? No. BUT...

If in my brief absence someone comes in and copies a patient's SSN and uses it, now I could be in trouble for allowing patient health information to fall into the wrong hands.

So, what I and the OIG Report am trying to get across is while Hillary clearly violated administrative procedures, nothing she did (thus far) was considered a criminal offense. Of course, their job wasn't to find criminal activity. They left that up to the FBI to figure out and I'm perfectly fine with that. If their investigation finds criminal wrong doing I'll be right there demanding she be placed in cuffs and hauled off to federal prison. But until then, I say there's really nothing Earth shattering about the OIG's findings. I know some of you think there is...hoped there would be, but there really isn't anything damning about her actions in this report.

The rules are in place because of the law. If she broke the rules, she broke the law.

 

[justabubba]

The rules are in place because of the law. If she broke the rules, she broke the law.

no, it means she broke the rule

 

[Absentglare]

That's the date of the current, active, regulation. The same regulation was in place during Clintons term. That's explicitly stated in the IG report. She was supposed to use govt systems when available. They were available to her, she chose not to use it. Also specified in the IG report.

Look, The IG report says clearly that she is at fault...even liberal media outlets like the Washington Post and NY Times acknowledge that.

Violating an email policy is hardly equivalent to feeding state secrets outside the government.

 

[Moot]

The moment a BlackBerry enables a cellular data connection or a WiFi data connection, it's pretty much guaranteed that it's 'on' (connected to) the Internet.

How else to send or receive emails? How else to connect to her server all the way back in NY from where ever she was on planet Earth?

The network path is pretty straight forward, connect to the local cellular carrier or WiFi, then to the Internet, and make a connection all the way to the NY server to send or receive email.

But don't you need an ISP to go on the internet? As far as I know she only had an email address.

 

[eohrnberger]

But don't you need an ISP to go on the internet? As far as I know she only had an email address.

ISP is included in the network path discussed. For the cellular data connection the ISP would be her cell phone carrier, for WiFi access, could be any number of local providers in the area where she was located at the time of the connection.

Hillary had more than just one email address. She had an entire email server in her basement with multiple email addresses for herself (no report I know of as to how many) and pretty much everyone on her staff which reported directly to her. Her own little private email empire of which she had 100% control over. In this instance, she became her own GMail, if you will.

 

[Moot]

Which is incorrect, as the IG report specifically states that Clinton was notified in 2014 that they were not automatically captured. Which means she lied multiple times post 2014 where she insisted it to be true, as did Harf above.

Clinton believed they were captured when she worked at the DS....and in 2015....so did the State Department.

MS. HARF: First, the notion that the Department didn’t have the content of these emails until she turned them over isn’t accurate. A vast majority of them were to or from State.gov addresses or to addressees. So they were obviously retained and captured in that moment. So that notion is just not accurate and I wanted to put that out there first.​

So if Hillary was notified in 2014 that her emails weren't automatically captured then why in 2015 did the DS spokesperson say they were? If she believed the State IT system was automatically capturing her emails but it wasn't....then that would be the fault of the DS....not Hillary. Regardless, she also saved her emails on a thumb drive....so either way, she complied with the rules.


If someone believes something to be true that doesn't make them a liar. For if it did....you'd be one, too.

 

[Moot]

ISP is included in the network path discussed. For the cellular data connection the ISP would be her cell phone carrier, for WiFi access, could be any number of local providers in the area where she was located at the time of the connection.

Hillary had more than just one email address. She had an entire email server in her basement with multiple email addresses for herself (no report I know of as to how many) and pretty much everyone on her staff which reported directly to her. Her own little private email empire of which she had 100% control over. In this instance, she became her own GMail, if you will.

Did she have a cell phone carrier? What is the difference between a carrier and provider? Because if she had her own server....wouldn't that make her the provider? The only person that had access to her server was her and her computer guy. I don't know, but that seems more secure than letting someone outside the DS provide the service....like Powell did.

 

[eohrnberger]

So if she had her own server....wouldn't that make her the provider? The only person that had access to her server was her and her computer guy. I don't know, but that seems more secure than letting someone outside the DS provide the service....like Powell did.

Yes, it would make her her own email provider. Everyone who has an email account on that server has access at the user level. It would have been wise to only have the IT guy with administrator access, and then, only from the non-Internet network connection.

Any servers connected to the Internet 24x7 is a target of opportunity for any hacker in the world. There is no such thing as a totally secure server, the same way as there is nothing that humans do that's 100% perfect.

Server operating systems, the software that make the hardware become a server and do something useful like serve email, always have weaknesses and exploits that allow hackers in, allows them to snoop around, copy and / or destroy data, and / or implant malware which further compromises the server for future exploits.

 

[Moot]

Yes, it would make her her own email provider. Everyone who has an email account on that server has access at the user level. It would have been wise to only have the IT guy with administrator access, and then, only from the non-Internet network connection.

Any servers connected to the Internet 24x7 is a target of opportunity for any hacker in the world. There is no such thing as a totally secure server, the same way as there is nothing that humans do that's 100% perfect.

Server operating systems, the software that make the hardware become a server and do something useful like serve email, always have weaknesses and exploits that allow hackers in, allows them to snoop around, copy and / or destroy data, and / or implant malware which further compromises the server for future exploits.

I think I'm going to make you my new go to tech guy.

In Hillary's defense....she must have had a pretty smart tech guy because in 2011 he caught a couple of attacks on her server before they could get in to do any damage. Too bad the DS can't say that about their system.

 

[eohrnberger]

I think I'm going to make you my new go to tech guy.

Well thanks. I've only been at it for 30 years. I had better picked up on some of this stuff in that time.

In Hillary's defense....she must have had a pretty smart tech guy because in 2011 he caught a couple of attacks on her server before they could get in to do any damage. Too bad the DS can't say that about their system.

It's never the attack that you spotted and stopped that's the problem. It's the one that you've not spotted and haven't stopped that's the problem.

Hackers out on the Internet regularly trade scripts and code that exploit / compromise / attack various types of servers that are connected the the Internet 24x7.

Hackers even have lists of millions of people's PCs which have remote control software on them called a 'BotNet'. Hackers trade botnet lists with each other for other stuff like the latest exploit scripts and code, lists of compromised credit card numbers, instructions as to how to access already hacked server systems, lists of valid email addresses to send spam to, email servers (compromised or mis-configured) that will relay spam emails, and any manner of hacker related things. It really is an underground economy and trade exchange.

Tell each of those PCs in the botnet to start pinging (sending a 'hello respond to me back' packet) a particular server on the Internet and the result is a DDOS (Distributed Denial Of Service) Attack, as the server and it's network connection are so flooded with these ping packets nothing useful can get through.

 

[Samhain]

Clinton believed they were captured when she worked at the DS....and in 2015....so did the State Department.

MS. HARF: First, the notion that the Department didn’t have the content of these emails until she turned them over isn’t accurate. A vast majority of them were to or from State.gov addresses or to addressees. So they were obviously retained and captured in that moment. So that notion is just not accurate and I wanted to put that out there first.​

So if Hillary was notified in 2014 that her emails weren't automatically captured then why in 2015 did the DS spokesperson say they were? If she believed the State IT system was automatically capturing her emails but it wasn't....then that would be the fault of the DS....not Hillary. Regardless, she also saved her emails on a thumb drive....so either way, she complied with the rules.


If someone believes something to be true that doesn't make them a liar. For if it did....you'd be one, too.

Read the IG report; it specifies she was notified in 2014, which means anyone who stated otherwise is a dirty liar.

 

[Jack Hays]

Well, if the State IT system wasn't an appropriate means of preserving records then what is? Most of Clinton's emails were captured on the State ID system...and she had her emails stored on a thumb drive. Which if I understand correctly complies with the new 2013 NARA guidelines to store records electronically instead of on paper.

Not all her emails made it to the State IT system, and you still have the problem that she unilaterally decided which were personal, and therefore excluded. You really need to get off this line of defense. State's IG has established the terms of debate.

 

[polgara]

Well thanks. I've only been at it for 30 years. I had better picked up on some of this stuff in that time.



It's never the attack that you spotted and stopped that's the problem. It's the one that you've not spotted and haven't stopped that's the problem.

Hackers out on the Internet regularly trade scripts and code that exploit / compromise / attack various types of servers that are connected the the Internet 24x7.

Hackers even have lists of millions of people's PCs which have remote control software on them called a 'BotNet'. Hackers trade botnet lists with each other for other stuff like the latest exploit scripts and code, lists of compromised credit card numbers, instructions as to how to access already hacked server systems, lists of valid email addresses to send spam to, email servers (compromised or mis-configured) that will relay spam emails, and any manner of hacker related things. It really is an underground economy and trade exchange.

Tell each of those PCs in the botnet to start pinging (sending a 'hello respond to me back' packet) a particular server on the Internet and the result is a DDOS (Distributed Denial Of Service) Attack, as the server and it's network connection are so flooded with these ping packets nothing useful can get through.

Greetings, Erik. :2wave:

I sure didn't know all that! :shock: When my PC has a problem - notice how I shifted blame here :lol: - I just call my IT guy and he comes to my house and fixes it. I made the mistake once of asking him what the problem was . . . and since he was apparently answering my question in ancient Sumarian, as near as I could tell, I've never asked again, since I know I'm not going to understand the answer. Saves us both a lot of grief! :lamo: In return, I always start some Brandywine heirloom tomato plants from seed for him, because he and his wife both love that tomato and he refuses to take any money for helping me. His wife always fills a bag with mint from my garden, too, so we're all happy! Nice people!

 

[apdst]

no, it means she broke the rule

The rules exist because of the law.

 

[eohrnberger]

Greetings, Erik. :2wave:

I sure didn't know all that! :shock: When my PC has a problem - notice how I shifted blame here :lol: - I just call my IT guy and he comes to my house and fixes it. I made the mistake once of asking him what the problem was . . . and since he was apparently answering my question in ancient Sumarian, as near as I could tell, I've never asked again, since I know I'm not going to understand the answer. Saves us both a lot of grief! :lamo: In return, I always start some Brandywine heirloom tomato plants from seed for him, because he and his wife both love that tomato and he refuses to take any money for helping me. His wife always fills a bag with mint from my garden, too, so we're all happy! Nice people!

Greetings, Polgara. :2wave:
What a nice arrangement you've got there. It sure sounds like everyone it ahead in the end, so that's a good deal for everyone.

I myself do IT work for a local Porsche shop, and it manages to help keep my toy car (see blog) in tip top shape for the track (which is just sooooo much fun!).

Have to admit I like the "ancient Sumarian" reference.

Be well!

 

[Jack Hays]

Greetings, Erik. :2wave:

I sure didn't know all that! :shock: When my PC has a problem - notice how I shifted blame here :lol: - I just call my IT guy and he comes to my house and fixes it. I made the mistake once of asking him what the problem was . . . and since he was apparently answering my question in ancient Sumarian, as near as I could tell, I've never asked again, since I know I'm not going to understand the answer. Saves us both a lot of grief! :lamo: In return, I always start some Brandywine heirloom tomato plants from seed for him, because he and his wife both love that tomato and he refuses to take any money for helping me. His wife always fills a bag with mint from my garden, too, so we're all happy! Nice people!

I believe that you are the poster who has most clearly learned the secret of living well.:mrgreen:

 

[polgara]

I believe that you are the poster who has most clearly learned the secret of living well.:mrgreen:

Greetings, Jack. :2wave:

:thumbs: He has the responsibility for all the computers used in the school district in which he lives, both administrative and all the classrooms, so he stays busy, but I've never had to wait more than a day. He gave me an older loaner to use a while back, and it's really slow, but it beats not having access to the internet at all! He told me he will be busy all Summer on some kind of a changeover their school system is doing.

How did we ever manage to live without computers when we were kids, Jack? :lamo

 

[Jack Hays]

Greetings, Jack. :2wave:

:thumbs: He has the responsibility for all the computers used in the school district in which he lives, both administrative and all the classrooms, so he stays busy, but I've never had to wait more than a day. He gave me an older loaner to use a while back, and it's really slow, but it beats not having access to the internet at all! He told me he will be busy all Summer on some kind of a changeover their school system is doing.

How did we ever manage to live without computers when we were kids, Jack? :lamo

Greetings, Polgara.:2wave:

I played baseball.:mrgreen:

 

[justabubba]

The rules exist because of the law.

which tells us she broke a rule

NOT necessarily a law

 

[Moot]

You can prove that that's the official procedure?

No, she can't. You know why? Because that's not how it works.

"If you are a Federal Government Employee, you have Federal records management responsibilities. Use this site to learn more!"

https://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/

4. What is the role of Federal employees in email management?

Currently, in many agencies, employees manage their own email accounts and apply their own understanding of Federal records management. This means that all employees are required to review each message, identify its value, and either delete it or move it to a recordkeeping system. Some email, such as spam or all-staff announcements, may be deleted immediately. On the other hand, substantive policy discussions conducted in email may be appropriate for preservation for several years or ultimate transfer to NARA.

NARA recognizes that placing the responsibility on employees to make decisions on an email-by-email basis can create a tremendous burden. As a result, NARA recommends that agencies immediately begin to adopt automated or rules-based records management policies for email management, such as the Capstone approach.

https://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/bulletins/2014/2014-06.html


Read it and weep, boyz. :2razz:

 

[Jack Hays]

"If you are a Federal Government Employee, you have Federal records management responsibilities. Use this site to learn more!"

https://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/




https://www.archives.gov/records-mgmt/bulletins/2014/2014-06.html


Read it and weep, boyz. :2razz:

This does nothing to exculpate HRC or mitigate the State IG's findings.

 

[Moot]

This does nothing to exculpate HRC or mitigate the State IG's findings.

That wasn't the point.

 

[Objective Voice]

The rules are in place because of the law. If she broke the rules, she broke the law.

Ok, fine...she broke the law. :roll: What exactly should be her punishment for:

1) having access to classified information.

2) for having classified information on her private email server.

3) for sending and receiving classified information (marked or unmarked; and I'm going to assume that she was well aware of the level of information she sent since to date we still don't have confirmation that she ever sent classified information to unauthorized personnel or that there was a successful breach to her server).

(Notice that all three of the above would have been in the normal day-to-day performance of her job as Secretary of State.)

Did she receive authorization outside of the State Department to have her own private server? No.

Did she turn over all work-related (official) documents to the proper authorities prior to leaving office? No

Did she follow established IT/records management protocols? No

Is any of this criminal?

Did any classified information remain in her possession?

Did any classified information fall into enemy hands?

Those would be the criminal actions. So, when that FBI report discovers that her skirting the rules allowed classified information to fall into enemy hands, let me know. Until then, we're done with this discussion.

 

[polgara]

Greetings, Polgara. :2wave:
What a nice arrangement you've got there. It sure sounds like everyone it ahead in the end, so that's a good deal for everyone.

I myself do IT work for a local Porsche shop, and it manages to help keep my toy car (see blog) in tip top shape for the track (which is just sooooo much fun!).

Have to admit I like the "ancient Sumarian" reference.

Be well!

What a great looking car you own! :thumbs: Porsche's just can't help looking classy! I worked with a gal once who drove a white Porsche, and she had just the right personality for it! Everyone loved her! The "funnest" car I ever owned was a metallic gold Corvette, stick shift, and I liked the protocol of greeting other Corvette owners with a "thumbs up" when you saw them on the road, and it was always returned with a big grin! :happy:

 

[eohrnberger]

What a great looking car you own! :thumbs: Porsche's just can't help looking classy! I worked with a gal once who drove a white Porsche, and she had just the right personality for it! Everyone loved her! The "funnest" car I ever owned was a metallic gold Corvette, stick shift, and I liked the protocol of greeting other Corvette owners with a "thumbs up" when you saw them on the road, and it was always returned with a big grin! :happy:

Why thanks Polgara. Yeah, I still recall getting a Matchbox 911 from my Opa, and of course, it won all my matchbox races.

This one is a real track toy, and beefed up and tightened so that it's just short of comfortable on the beat up roads we have around here.