We are a commune of inquiring, skeptical, politically centrist, capitalist, anglophile, traditionalist New England Yankee humans, humanoids, and animals with many interests beyond and above politics. Each of us has had a high-school education (or GED), but all had ADD so didn't pay attention very well, especially the dogs. Each one of us does "try my best to be just like I am," and none of us enjoys working for others, including for Maggie, from whom we receive neither a nickel nor a dime. Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders, control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for.
Our Recent Essays Behind the Front Page
Tuesday, August 18. 2015
Story gets increasingly Nixonian (but Nixon was just about ordinary political tricks, nothing important). Or, should I say, increasingly Clintonian?
Related, The Hillary Horror Movie, a Sequel
Display comments as (Linear | Threaded)
"Hillary's email firm was run from a loft apartment with its servers in the BATHROOM..."
As dramatic as that might sound, it's actually irrelevant.
Even if her private email firm operated from inside a mountain with its servers in a deep concrete- and mesh-lined vault, it would still be illegal for those private servers to contain US Government classified information.
very relevant. this is politics, where perception is almost everything. that company looked like a small town dry goods store, meaning there's more to the story than what's surfaced. why this level of amateurism?
the only thing worse would be a server on a volcanic island underground lair.
"this is politics, where perception is almost everything..."
I know, I know.
I guess I'm just venting over the lack of public and media knowledge about classified material handling. As a retired Canadian military officer and former intelligence "insider" I'm gobsmacked at the idea of putting classified materials on an Internet-accessible private email server.
Had I or one of my personnel deliberately downloaded even the lowliest CONFIDENTIAL document to the Internet from a closed secure system (Canadians, as part of the "Four Eyes" intelligence community, work within the same protocols as your people do), we'd have been drummed out and no pension either. If we'd downloaded TS SCI stuff (à la Snowden), we'd be doing the Canadian equivalent of what Bradley Manning is doing right now.
I may be relevant that the server was not in a physically secure location. I'm no expert, but I bet if a real hacker or spy has easy access to the hardware - game over.
Like Woodward said on Sunday, "follow the money". The contributions to the Clinton Foundation, he meant.
Besides, if it's just a bunch of personal e-mails you don't want hanging around, the rest of us yokels just hit the delete button and drag it to the trash.
Who has their "personal" e-mails wiped professionally from a server?
The answer to that question should be everybody. I've been a server administrator, among many other things, in an IT career of over 25 years. There is a procedure for decommissioning a server.
Normally, when you delete a file from a computer, you do not actually remove the contents from the disk medium. What you actually do is delete the entry in a table (gets a bit more complicated in advanced file systems, but general principles apply) that stores the file name, the directory it's located in, and the physical locations on the disk where the file is stored. It's a surprisingly trivial task to run a special program that sweeps the disk medium then locates and catalogs the deleted files.
When decommissioning a server, the accepted practice is to delete the files, and then run what is referred to as a multi-pass DoD wipe. A low-level program runs outside the operating system and overwrites the entirety of the disk medium with a series of patterns designed to obliterate and/or obscure any residual file information on the media. If the server has an array of disks, even better practice is to then remove the individual disks, re-arrange them in a new array, and repeat the process.
If the information held was particularly sensitive, it is best to destroy the physical integrity of the disks, usually by drilling through the outer case and the disk platters themselves.
This still does not remove the information from any backup media, and often times these cannot be destroyed as the system was backed up as a part of a group of servers. In this case, it is vital that the backup media be subject to physical security and off-site retention, and that a chain of custody of all such media (tape, solid-state, or disk) be maintained.
It's that last part, the physical integrity of the servers and backup media that was likely lacking in the converted apartment where the server was located.
I've been known to write zeros to a HDD I was recycling, using the manufacturer's HDD utility, which I considered secure. Is this better, worse or the same as a DoD wipe security-wise? Each seems to take about the same amount of time.
Where is the Gang of Z? Why art they missing in action? Mrs. Clinton NEEDS them NOW. (Help me Z; you're my only hope.)
State Dept finds more e-mails. With the FBI involved, people are beginning to cooperate as the legal heat is turned up. Lying to the FBI is a career changer.
"State Dept finds more e-mails. With the FBI involved, people are beginning to cooperate as the legal heat is turned up. Lying to the FBI is a career changer."
Yes, but the devil is in the details here.
Hate to say it, but Hillary could still claim it's not her fault if someone else downloaded classified material from a government secure system, stripped out the security classifications and emailed it to her.
You're going to need people who can show Hillary knowingly directed and/or approved of such action.
And that's where you'd be wrong about what is done here, in the U.S.
People are prosecuted all the time for mishandling classified information (18USC~1924). By mishandling, that means the defendant took control of and secured classified information in a place or manner not authorized.
Both David Petraeus and Sandy Berger were prosecuted for that offense.
Hillary Clintons private server was not an authorized conduit or receptacle for any classified information. The presence of her server loaded with potential classified information was transferred to a private company in Colorado? WTF??
She'll be lucky if she gets Petraeus's sentence.
"She'll be lucky if she gets Petraeus's sentence."
A $50,000 fine and probation?
Or Berger's sentence: a $100,000 fine and probation?
It is telling that these sentences haven't slowed these two down much (Berger even came back to advise Clinton during her 2008 run).
I think it was Petraeus who got the $100K fine.
The point isn't about her receiving a fine and probation upon conviction.
It's about the end of her political career upon indictment.
A conviction would be the desert.
It's impossible to believe that (A) Hillary didn't know that almost all of the material she was working with as Secretary of State wasn't classified, and (B) she didn't get briefed that she was HANDLING classified info, and (C) she didn't understand that having one UNCLASSIFIED email account that she was doing all her work on for convenience meant that she was handling classified material over unclassified channels.
If we're expected to believe that she's ignorant enough to allow all three of those to apply - then how in the hell are we to think she's capable of being the President?
An 18-year old E-1 is capable of understanding classified information and the rules on how to handle it - we're to believe that someone of her age and experience CAN'T?
I doubt she will get much more than a slap on the wrist and more likely this will all go away quietly.