Andrew Napolitano: Mrs. Clinton’s folks are preparing for the worst.

originally posted by: introvert
It's also possible that what we have been led to believe on this issue is incorrect, and she didn't violate any laws. I'd love to see Hillary out of the race, but as we learned yesterday in another thread, many of the emails we think are classified and proof of her guilt, are anything but.

From what I understand, there doesn't have to be anything "knowingly" done by her, nor do the emails have to have been stamped as classified or top-secret or really anything--the basis of the potential charges has to do with negligently handling information.

I haven't read the specifications of the potential charges for myself, but I have listened to a couple legal experts who have noted what I said, so I'm taking their word for it at this point.

But of course, when it comes to indicting people, there's always a possibility that they didn't violate any laws--that's what the trial and the jury verdict is used to determine.

The Justice department won't let Hillary get indicted.

Then her fans will claim she was innocent.

All hail Queen Hillary!

originally posted by: interupt42
a reply to: SkepticOverlord

the server was essentially wide-open to anyone with moderate "script-kiddie" capabilities, the probability that some information is in Kremlin hands is actually very high

Not to mention, than you have to ask if that was done on purpose?

Leaving a wide open server with top security information would be a very clever sneaky method to sell espionage to foreign gov't without being directly tied to it.

You would think somebody at that level would be able to properly hire a qualified individual to setup her server . Then you have all the questions around her financial ties with foreign officials.

Yes, just send donations to the Clinton Foundation, we will give you access.

a reply to: SkepticOverlord

Interesting, I don't 'think I've ever seen a Sorcha Faal source have any legitimacy.

It should be an interesting few weeks in that case.

~Tenth

a reply to: Profusion

Hilary going down for her crimes would be a truly amazing event. It would restore some of my faith in justice...even for the rich an powerful.

a reply to: tothetenthpower

Some "Sorcha Faal" stories are deep cover controlled opposition psy-ops operations.

The point of such operations is to make it look or sound so bazaar that most people will automatically dismiss anything as speculation and fiction.

a reply to: xuenchen

Some "Sorcha Faal" stories are deep cover controlled opposition psy-ops operations.

"Some"?

That means you can provide examples, correct?

Please be kind enough to do so and also prove they are "deep cover controlled opposition psy-ops operations".

It was really stupid of her to have her own server. That kind of careless and selfish thinking would probably not serve the nation well.

From an IT perspective it wouldn't be hard to find that server. If you have just one email from her that the header was not scrubbed on you will see the IP history of the email. If she had her own public domain which was available via the path of the root servers you would have had her server's IP addresses via the mx (mail exchanger) records for the domain.

From there it's a matter of what kind of smtp server process you are running and how secure it is. And, of course, if you cannot hack the smtp process you can be sly with an email sent to her that was carefully crafted.

Bottom line, you silly twat you have no business running your own server. I'm sure some IT people looked at it for her but you need to be auditing what is coming in all the time. What countries are your SMTP connects coming from? Did you block reverse lookups for xyz countries? Did you only allow certain IP blocks in or trusted mail servers? What all was running on that server and how many ports were forwarded to it? etc....

a reply to: Apollumi

Do you have an IT background?
If so, what would the address M-A-U / S-U / I-T @ mean to you?

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: IAMTAT
...Pantsuit on Fire!

I wish.

Over in Pakistan, they set women on fire for being an unsatisfactory wife.
They'd probably drop her in a volcano.

Those polyester pants suits she wears are an inferno waiting to happen. The old biddies at Walmart laugh at her.

If Vlad had a server in his closet.

And our guys didn't have every email.

I would be disappointed...

Security review... FBI investigation,,,Law Enforcement Investigation...

At this point, what does it matter anyways?

Somebody is in some extremely deep doo doo.


Tick Tock goes the clock.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
a reply to: Apollumi

Do you have an IT background?
If so, what would the address M-A-U / S-U / I-T @ mean to you?

I typically work as a net admin. Means nadda to me. Doesn't look like a regex, command, or valid email to me.

a reply to: introvert

"but as we learned yesterday in another thread, many of the emails we think are classified and proof of her guilt, are anything but."

LOL LOL LOL a victory in your own little mind.

Put up or shut up... you got a link to the State Department or the FBI that proves anything of what you claim? No you do not.

You keep posting the same BS and get shot down, then the next day you claim victory hoping no one will go back to check...

C'mon man.... give em something that disproves every Blumenthal classified email has been debunked... but unless it is straight from the FBI or the State Department....it's BS.

I will point you right back to the fact that Blumenthals emails were originally classified which it states very clearly on the State Department website...

So you go right ahead and claim retroactive classification and over classification run amok.. that is your right...

But you keep making it so clear why this will go to court...

She says retroactively classified... classification run amok. The FBI and other reviewing agencies disagree.

The only way to resolve this is for it to go to court...it is not magically going to go away or disappear... Hillary Clinton may very well turn out to be 100% innocent when this is said and done.... but that will only be proven with a "Not Guilty" verdict.....wait a minute...verdict? That means she would have been indicted and prosecuted and found innocent.

None of that happens without the common denominator...it has to be determined in a court of law... only one way for it to go to court at this point is obvious.



For months you have been claiming it is a security review.... what do you call it now? I call it Hillary and her supporters getting more nervous as each and every day goes by.

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord

originally posted by: tothetenthpower
The bit about the Kremlin having 20K of her emails is a lie though.

Sourced via Sorcha Faal, so yeah.

It's actually plausible.

Does The Kremlin Have Hillary Clinton’s Emails?
March 2015

According to Smoking Gun (which broke the story in 2013), when Guccifer breached Blumenthal’s account, he discovered Clinton’s email address [email protected]. When Guccifer supplied Russia’s RT, an official Kremlin media agency, with the Blumenthal emails, it’s a distinct possibility that he supplied the Clinton email address as well.

If not, Kremlin cyber-security would have been keenly interested and could have used the Guccifer emails as guides to find the Clinton email address on its own. If either had happened, the Kremlin would have had Mrs. Clinton private email address since 2013 – an account, which apparently has no special security protections. If the Kremlin penetrated Clinton’s email account, it would have the most complete record of her secretary of state correspondence outside of the Clinton inner circle.

There has been well-founded speculation that Russian intelligence was aware of [email protected] well before it became a story. And since the server was essentially wide-open to anyone with moderate "script-kiddie" capabilities, the probability that some information is in Kremlin hands is actually very high.

Yes.
It isn't outlandish to think that other countries may have the information too.
Hillary carried her private Blackberry with her in Beijing early on in her stint as SOSUS. Easily hacked, the Blackberry was linked to her private server.
Most IT people think that it would be silly to think that the Chinese didn't hack her Blackberry when she was there.

I think the question in this 21st technological century is, "if you intentionally or by negligence make it easy for a foreign intelligence entity to hack into your system and/or email to obtain sensitive and valuable information, is it espionage?"

Proving THAT would be pretty difficult, I would think. The doddering-old-lady-technologically-challenged act that she plays so well would make the 'intent' part hard to prove.

Do not get hung up on the willfully or willful intent BS put out by the Clinton Campaign.

In order to be charged under 793 (f), all they need to prove is negligence... the sheer amount proves gross negligence..

No intent is needed... just stupidity will suffice... that is what that is used for... "I didn't know it was classified...I wasn't aware that it was classified....it was classified after you took it from me not when I had it"... all of that falls under gross negligence. In the business, we used to call it the "too stupid to know better clause"... because no matter how stupid you pretend to be... that clause will bite you in the ass in the end. It is one of the few clauses that require no proof of intent or willfulness.

The President even said it himself..... "Hillary got a little careless with some of her emails"....


www.merriam-webster.com...

Law Dictionary: careless
adjective care·less
Legal Definition of careless

: not showing due care : negligent — compare reckless

So even the President can admit that Hillary was negligent in the handling of her emails.... if her emails contained classified information, then by default she was negligent in the mishandling of classified information.



Film at 11

a reply to: queenofswords

Doddering old lady or not, this cooks her goose:

...or by negligence ...

a reply to: Sillyolme

You just can't help yourself but to post on every one of these threads, can you?

Have primary and verifiable sources diisputing his claims?

No?

That's what I thought.

The ice upon which you are skating is growing thinner each day...

For me the 800 lb gorilla in the room is the NSA. Are you folks telling me that the NSA had no idea that the Sec. of State was running her private low-level email server. Really, …???

What about the possibility they wanted it to be hacked so false info could find its way into other servers. Possibly with a NSA Trojan horse attached …

It's so obvious that this is all a dog & pony show.

originally posted by: SkepticOverlord
There has been well-founded speculation that Russian intelligence was aware of [email protected] well before it became a story.

There's no doubt in my mind they got everything and what direction the Dept of State was heading. Let's not forget the entirety of the CIA is task oriented to the DoS.

I'd love to see just the headers of all the e-mails in and out of that box. The Russians probably looked at it like it was a honey-pot. LOL