To my knowledge she never originated classified information on her little bullshit private server, which, given her job, implies she relied heavily on secure cables and generally tried to follow procedures for classified information.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34921352)

The opposite of this is actually true. The most charitable thing you could say was that she was “extremely careless”

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34926999)

-took money from Russia while giving them uranium deal

-lied about conducting confidential state dept business on an illegal private server, destroyed evidence when it was subpoenaed, instructed her minions to lie to investigators after getting caught and colluded with senior FBI agents to cover the entire thing up

-colluded with Obama's DOJ to spy on trump, launch an investigation premised on a fictional dossier which she facilitated the transfer of to US investigators all to institute a fake russia collusion scandal as a pretext for spying on a political opponent and exploiting the nation's highest law enforcement agency to interfere with the 2016 presidential election and ensuing new administration

-took money to give speeches to latam bankers promising an open borders Western Hemisphere

-lies about her shitty health, lies about everything else

-pretends to be a courageous fighter for women while enabling a lifelong rapist and sexual predator

probably missing a lot here tbh

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34921392)

But having the home server, combined with legit classifiedi information on it (hell even convicted pedo Anthony Weiner had acces to it), combined with literally destroying subpoenaed documents and devices, combined with her and her aides lying to the FBI, would put any of us in jail for a very long time. Possibly execution.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34926119)

looks like only 4 and parts of 6 are arguable to me

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34994915)

How did SAP material get from the government JWICS and SIPRnet networks onto Hillary's server? You cannot email this stuff to the outside world via the standard internet. It doesn't work that way.

edit: once you go down this rabbit hole, you realize that Hillary's server acted as a brokerage firm for selling classified documents.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34921558)

Also, setting up her illegal private server to conduct government business should be a crime in and of itself.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34925632)

From a lib perspective, looking at it critically, the level of retardetry and bullshit associated with HRC was just lethal.

That is, more particularly, for whatever reason, the electorate is too dumb, too critically thinking impaired to be able to view hrc as a candidate in any rational light, or to weigh her against Trump.

You can tell me that's the wrongheaded elitism of liberals talking there, but there's an element of truth to it. The electorate is on balance literally too dumb to think critically in light of the garbage out there on hrc, and as a consequence, she just wont work as a candidate.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34926816)

AL should have voted for Moore because he's a nationalist and to prevent the Dem from getting in. That's the main point. Not because he stands by his convictions (although fighting against the smears was nice).

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34926885)

But its okay to pull words out of context from HRC's speeches and say "This is what she believes"?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34927085)

I understand the criticisms of her experience, but if you were looking to hire someone for an executive level job, It would seem to be a smooth transition for her.

But I understand she was shit as a candidate. Not because she was in fact shit, rather, America was just too dumb not to get conned when she had all this baggage that could be spun out into conspiracy theories, etc.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34926847)

She was a bad choice because she was particularly vulnerable to national stupidity. And dems should have realized that sooner.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34926944)

http://www.xoxohth.com/thread.php?thread_id=3831023&mc=1&forum_id=2

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34934010)

Do you know for a fact this hasn't been secured by intelligence agencies?

"Sharing top secret documents with the Japanese, in the open, in his own restaurant."

Was this proven or anonymously sourced? Is this legally within the POTUS' discretion? Do the same rules apply to SoS?

"Leaking confidential and privileged information about security risks re laptops on airplanes."

Is this legally within the POTUS' discretion? Do the same rules apply to SoS?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34934044)

Do you know for a fact this hasn't been secured by intelligence agencies?

It wasn't! For a long time! and perhaps even still although i think he probably had to do something after a certain point.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2017/01/donald-trump-is-still-using-his-unsecured-android-phone.html

"Sharing top secret documents with the Japanese, in the open, in his own restaurant."

Was this proven or anonymously sourced? Is this legally within the POTUS' discretion? Do the same rules apply to SoS?

There are photos taken by diners showing all the stuff out on the table! With random strangers able to snap photos of the shit on his desk! And the President isnt exempt from rules relating to security protocols for top secret intel!

"Leaking confidential and privileged information about security risks re laptops on airplanes."

Is this legally within the POTUS' discretion? Do the same rules apply to SoS?

Probably within his discretion. Probably should have secured usual protocols before doing so. As for same rules applying? Probably not.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34934069)

The president indeed has the legal authority to share classified information if he wants. Contrary to what McMaster claimed, this doesn't make his choice to do so automatically appropriate.

LEGALLY he was allowed to do so. HRC?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34934213)

That's why he brought Clinton on board as SOS and anointed her to be his heir.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/07/2016-barack-obama-hillary-clinton-democratic-establishment-campaign-primary-joe-biden-elizabeth-warren-214023

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34935395)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34935444)

But I think this convo might go in the way of talking about how dems are blacks and blacks are dumb.

Well, here's the thing though, blacks, in politics, know they don't know. Whereas trumpmos think they know when they don't know and they don't even know they don't know.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34927119)

CNN ran 24/7 "Trump = Hitler" stories for two years but "the electorate was too dumb to think critically" about Hillary violating security protocols and then lying to federal investigators about it and so the 'most qualified presidential candidate in history' was cheated out of her birthright because the (((media))) reluctantly reported the fact that she was the subject of an ongoing federal investigation? wut?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34926883)

I'm prepared to give her a pass on everything, most of which is conservative hyperventilating akin to liberals flailing about Trump, EXCEPT bleaching her server post-subpoena.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34926859)

As for Trump, I think he's incredibly unaware of himself, narcissistic and dangerously idiotic. All of that is at odds with someone who is masterminding this giant Russian collusion with a coverup.

In general, I think the flailing on both sides of the political spectrum is embarrassing but not unexpected. Sad for our democracy.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34926904)

But I'm going to bump this thread when Trump's shit comes to light.

Hasn't he been particularly cavalier with classified information? Like, right out of the box?

Just curious how trumpmos, to the extent they can understand the comparison, how do they say Trump's shit was okay when I suspect its not going to be too hard to find that what Trump has done with classified information even thus far is technically illegal.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34926940)

BUT, for example, using his own cell phone. Sharing top secret documents with the Japanese, in the open, in his own restaurant. Leaking confidential and privileged information about security risks re laptops on airplanes. Not to mention the pretty active exploitation of his hotels and restaurants as PResident (which presumably only requires de minimus action in order to be violative of law.)

But I think and am concerned in this thread that what I say here you wont understand as trumpmos and it will just be hooting or a "fuck you spaceporn" at the end of the day when I really am trying to get some understanding here.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34926988)

no clue what you are talking about with "classified info" with the exception of Trump talking about stuff to Russian ambassador (which dumb or not, as POTUS he is allowed to talk about that stuff, freely).

EDIT: also, social media is a cancer to social cohesion.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34926972)

A ton of people aren't better off today than they were 20 years ago. A lot of people think their children will be worse off than they were. This undercuts the very core of the American dream, which is really the driver of our social identity -- come here and be better.

And here's the thing: it's true. If I'm living in vast swathes of the country right now, I am materially worse off and my children have worse prospects. This isn't a small group of people, and those people are going to vote according to their incentives. This group of people feel divorced from the American dream and Fox news preys on that emptiness while MSNBC delights and calling them all inbred hicks.

People keep trying to move this to a left/right perspective, but it just isn't. Left/right is about the relationship between government and the people. The next 50 years is about the relationship between technology and people with government having very little ability to impact that relationship.

I feel bad for all of the people left behind, but I don't see many solutions to the problem. What do you do when the vast majority of human work will be eventually better done by machines? I don't see a coal miner retraining to be a Virtual Reality headset designer.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34942192)

Also, it's created terrible incentives for news media chasing clicks. I'm pretty devoted on the anti-Trump side and I find myself reading some of the shit put out and wondering how the fuck it got past an editor it is so slanted. Not every idiotic thing Trump does is a threat to a republic connected to some broader scheme. I don't blame the right for being suspicious of MSM but it is incredibly dangerous for us to not have some source of reliable facts.

I dunno man, it just sucks. I spend a lot of time reading the Trump fans posts on here trying to figure out how my perspective is supposed to find a bridge to them.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34926978)

I've had some really fantastic debates on here at times, but the amount of horseshit I had to wade through to get to one of those is disappointing. I find the disagreements between me and most posters on here the primary reason it is worth coming back and when I get people to engage, it is incredibly satisfying to have a discussion with someone a perspective I don't fully understand but grow to appreciate through the course of debate.

I have not been able to find that on any other forum I have gone to.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34927049)

As for the critical thinking aspect, many of the other things laid at her doorstep are good examples of that. Things like the Clinton Foundation -- it's politically stupid as fuck but I don't see a criminal case there. It did bear an investigation though, precisely because of how bad it looked.

Honestly, I think she has some of the worst political instincts I've ever seen. The speeches to Goldman Sachs being my favorite example.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34926931)

FWIW, I think when you say political instincts you at meaning something similar to what I am meaning which is that the electorate is too dumb and riled up to see past the conspiracy nut shit but I am putting some of the blame on the electorate for being too fucking stupid and you are not. you are just accepting the stupidity as baseline. which is fine I suppose.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34927034)

for instance, it doesn't fucking matter if The Clinton foundation is a criminal conspiracy (it most likely is). it's political quid pro quo and profiteering on the most repugnant level we've ever seen in our lives. it's allowing a purported US civil servant to literally become obligated to foreigners while seeking the highest office. there is criminality and then there's basic right and wrong. there's common fucking sense. this HRC bitch simply does not have a moral compass and despite his supposed failings, I genuinely cannot say the same about Donald Trump.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34935319)

How the fuck is it a criminal conspiracy you fucking moron. It's been investigated like a dozen times! If it was criminal wouldn't there be prosecutions for same?

you dipshits just like following made up shit and cant tell reality from the back of your ass.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34941354)

I only mention that because my views on HRC aren't meant to be protective of her. I've read enough on the subject to feel that it warranted an investigation because the optics demanded it but I would have been surprised if there was an explicit quid pro quo that was actionable under the law. I don't think there's enough publicly available to make a affirmative assessment. Generally people who do have a definitive view on the subject have it in service of a political preference, which I don't have here. If she broke the law, she should pay the price. The only place where I feel very strongly we have enough evidence that she did break the law is bleaching the server.

At a minimum there should have been an obstruction claim there and I don't fully understand why there wasn't. I'm assuming there was something about the timeline that gave her a veneer of plausible deniability, but it's super suspicious to me.

As for Trump, he has a very defined set of preferences related to how he views himself. His outlook is entirely egocentric. His only saving grace is how thin-skinned he is and how comprehensively that undermines his ability to do anything.

I respect the desire to re-orient how our republic works. It's a very powerful drive in politics right now and it is seeded in what I view as legitimate complaints about the failure of our government to serve the interests of broad cross-sections of the voting public. That said, choosing a populist is a terrible fucking idea. Trump even more so.

There needs to be a goal other than "tear it all down" and "drain the swamp". We need a vision for what we are supposed to be and how we are supposed to work together. I don't see that any more -- it's all delighting in the mayhem of our disagreements. It's terrifying.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34942303)

This is HRC's story, which just so happens to be perfectly tailored to avoid anyone having requisite mental state for an obstruction charge:

1) HRC's team supposedly told the IT contractor to change the email retention policy on the server to a set period of time. I think it was 90 days.

2) HRC's team told IT contractor to wipe backups of the server.

3) The subpoena was issued.

4) An employee for the IT contractor claims he had an "oh shit" moment and realized the backups were not wiped. He then proceeded to wipe the server on his own initiative. First he claimed he wasn't aware of the subpoena, but later admitted he knew of the subpoena when he wiped the server but didn't know it pertained to the backups. This same employee made a number of posts on Reddit during this time period inquiring about how to modify dates of emails in a way that doesn't reveal they have been altered.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34991658)

It really confuses me because I'm generally inclined to view Comey as an honest actor in all of this but I have a super hard time swallowing this.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34994884)

What Hillary did is treason in the eyes of many in this world (except the top echelons of the Deep State). She transmitted classified information in the clear. The repercussions of this are so far reaching and profound, it's likely that lives have already been lost. This might sound like hyperbole, but it honestly isn't. The security of operational information is only as secure as the weakest link. Hillary Clinton created a weak link on purpose, which hackers could and probably did use as an access point to gain access to more secure networks. If you think this is sci-fi, then well this is exactly how STUXNET was spread:

"Once the two elements were married, the entire package might then have been delivered to someone with access to Natanz (or to a related installation). Wittingly or not, this Patient Zero began the infection process, perhaps by plugging a USB flash drive into a critical network. The virus probably spread with the help of foreign contractors and engineers, whose computers were infected during visits to Iranian installations."

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2011/03/stuxnet-201104

For this very reason, all American intelligence networks (JWICS and SIPRnet) are separate from the internet. They are physically separate with an independent infrastructure spanning the globe at the cost of billions of dollars. Highly sensitive information like Special Access Programs (SAP) exist within these networks with explicit "air gaps" that are created using SCIFs (Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility) where the nature of these secrets is psychologically reinforced by really burly men and tough women with guns who will shoot you if you act funny. The terminals themselves are isolated from the rest of the world electrically, acoustically, thermally, and electromagnetically. (you're in a Faraday cage with a known power source and a white noise generator)

For even greater security, no one individual outside of certain key decision makers have broad ranging access. Information is compartmentalized according to the role and very few people see an entire file, let alone all of the intelligence stored within this system. This is a protocol reinforced at the cost of billions of dollars, because it contains the name of our spies, analysts, what our diplomats are up to, our strategies... The whole works. Hillary Clinton compromised the security of this system so thoroughly that Edward Snowden is a blessing in comparison.

She acted as a purposeful bridge between JWICS/SIPRNet and an unsecured channel. She purposefully jeopardized the security of every single man and woman involved within American clandestine operations across the world. There are people who might have died because of this. It is that serious. In fact, we KNOW that her emails were compromised.

Again, the information she did this with isn't garden variety classified stuff like details of ports or ships. Her infractions involved Special Access Programs - these are the programs with live operational details and only a handful of people have broad access to them. This handful includes the Secretary of State and POTUS. They are that sensitive.

Now the question is (has always been), how did she get this stuff from JWICS/SIPRNet onto her server? There is no way this stuff was emailed to her email. How did it get there?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34926947)

some staff member is able to go view some SAP stuff in a SCIF and write it all down on a notepad and walk out? lol get the fuck outta here.

Again, how did this material end up on Hillary's server when there is no way you could have emailed it to her?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34935155)

As for what HRC did wrong, we've got all sorts of conspiracies here but nothing more than that she was boomerific with some emails and she had a lot of baggage that morons who don't know they are morons will have a lot of opinions on.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34927194)

"BUT, for example, using his own cell phone. Sharing top secret documents with the Japanese, in the open, in his own restaurant. Leaking confidential and privileged information about security risks re laptops on airplanes. Not to mention the pretty active exploitation of his hotels and restaurants as PResident (which presumably only requires de minimus action in order to be violative of law.)"

Can you respond substantively?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34927251)

Going to lunch. hopefully they'll be something responsive here when I come back.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34927286)

Keep in mind that a President literally cannot leak classified information. And if you’re going for the Emoluments Lcuase with the last one, lol at you. There’s a reason why even hardcore libs have moved on to other things.

I won’t respond to your rebuttal and will give you the last word, because you never shut the fuck up when you think you’re being smart (the hallmark of your 90IQ genetic conditions I’m sure)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34933958)

Keep in mind, the laws that require supreme care in treating this information as confidential apply to EVERYONE, president isnt exempt

Also, the emoluments issue is currently in court and will be raised again pretty hard core in 2018, fwiw

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34933987)

You can call me names in other threads for a while unitl you get fatigued but i just want to point out im not really hearing a substantive response.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34934020)

Look, i now fully recognize you’re entirely well executed flame. Dumb, usually lib politics analysis. Shitlaw pedigree barely making it. Shrew Asian wife. Tiny penis. There’s no way someone would have this constellation of attributes, and then on top of that, share all of them with a board like this. You’ve created a persona that is the opposite of the XO ideal, and in so doing, like any good satire, you shine a spotlight on all of our inadequacies. Well done, FRIEND.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34934090)

I'm trying to stay on track here about what we KNOW HRC did compared to what we KNOW Trump did. This may be too cognitively demanding for you.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=3829263&forum_id=2#34934121)