Support NeoGAF

[AndyD]

So I'm a bit confused about something.

Republicans had Condoleezza Rice and Colin Powell, and now they have Ben Carson and Herman Cain...like what happened.

Post Tea Party era, the "public" Republicans went more and more extreme to the point of ridiculous. They are no longer the supposed a social live and let live, fiscal conservative party, they are pretty much a 1% centered far right racist and xenophobic party.

So accomplished people like Powell and Rice dont want to associate themselves with the likes of Trump. Cain and Carson are purely in it for the profit of fame and book sales.

 

[BassForever]

I need scientist man or mr plinkett to try and explain this nonsensical chain of events.

 

[TheCochese]

This is the complete opposite of what Comey said:


FBI Press Release

I imagine you getting hard just writing this.

 

[jack_package_200]

I imagine you getting hard just writing this.

Gotta show off his moral superiority.

 

[JB1981]

It confirms that the standard operating procedure was to use private email. Rice did it before her, Powell did it before Rice.

It gives Hillary a line of attack: If the GOP is so concerned about the use of private email, why don't they speak to Powell, Rice or even Kerry, who used a private email for a bit before the new laws took effect.

She used a private email server though which is a little different

 

[benjipwns]

I'm more curious what Kissinger's piece of advice was, personally.

Young man, you have the courage of a hero. And breath as fresh as a summer ham.

 

[MIMIC]

Gotta show off his moral superiority.

Are you serious right now? Correcting someone's statement with a fact is showing "moral superiority?"

 

[TyphoonStruggle]

.

Here is a missing keyword:

Hillary Clinton told investigators that former Secretary of State Colin L. Powell

 

[lenovox1]

She used a private email server though which is a little different

Yes. Theoretically, it's a more secure solution and should (and has) allowed for more government access, because she owns the records.

Her team has probably had her on private servers since the 90s.

She went with historical precedence over New, at the time, protocol. That's why I've never seen this as a big deal. It's taken 8 freaking years before someone told her, "Maybe you shouldn't be doing that this way. Maybe you should use a .gov address." EIGHT YEARS!

 

[Coolluck]

#colinwasright?

Maybe this will help fuel rebuttals to email...truthers? What are those people called?

 

[Revolver]

I wonder if Powell had a Geocities page? I bet it was full of hamsterdance gifs.

 

[benjipwns]

He needed a private e-mail so he could get ahold of this:

 

[MIMIC]

Colin Powell Blasts Hillary Clinton's Team 'Trying to Pin' Private Email Use on Him

"Her people have been trying to pin it on me," Powell told People Magazine at an event in the Hamptons on Long Island, N.Y., this weekend.

"The truth is, she was using [the private email server] for a year before I sent her a memo telling her what I did," Powell told the magazine.

ABC News

This happens a lot (and is likely to continue): Clinton does something wrong and supporters (and even Clinton herself) try to see how many other people they can blame. And obviously Powell doesn't appreciate being made the fall guy in Clinton's email mess.

 

[Super_Cobra]

Colin Powell Blasts Hillary Clinton's Team 'Trying to Pin' Private Email Use on Him

ABC News

This happens a lot (and is likely to continue): Clinton does something wrong and supporters (and even Clinton herself) try to see how many other people they can blame. And obviously Powell doesn't appreciate being made the fall guy in Clinton's email mess.

I would be happy if she admits that she fucked up and she will make up to the people of the USA instead of trying to pass the blame on someone else. Own up to your shit.

 

[Narpas Sword0]

Colin Powell Blasts Hillary Clinton's Team 'Trying to Pin' Private Email Use on Him

ABC News

This happens a lot (and is likely to continue): Clinton does something wrong and supporters (and even Clinton herself) try to see how many other people they can blame. And obviously Powell doesn't appreciate being made the fall guy in Clinton's email mess.

It's not like the Clinton campaign put out a press release about this shit. It's being reported based on leaked info from the transcript that the FBI sent to the GOP Congress that was supposed to remain secret.

And the 2009 email, also released as part of this investigation, acknowledges that she had made the decision already and that Powell only reinforced it.

Come on man.

 

[MIMIC]

It's not like the Clinton campaign put out a press release about this shit. It's being reported based on leaked info from the transcript that the FBI sent to the GOP Congress that was supposed to remain secret.

And the 2009 email, also released as part of this investigation, acknowledges that she had made the decision already and that Powell only reinforced it.

Come on man.

What did Powell reinforce?

 

[DTKT]

How can you work at a top level government position and not be aware of basic cyber-security procedures. Especially when you main mean of communication is bloody emails.

It's insane to think that it went on for so long on a server hosted in her home and barely secured.

 

[B-Dubs]

I would be happy if she admits that she fucked up and she will make up to the people of the USA instead of trying to pass the blame on someone else. Own up to your shit.

She already did! Also she hasn't been touting this, someone leaked the FBI report Congress got that was supposed to remain secret.

How can you work at a top level government position and not be aware of basic cyber-security procedures. Especially when you main mean of communication is bloody emails.

It's insane to think that it went on for so long on a server hosted in her home and barely secured.

As is explained in every single thread like this: THERE IS A DIFFERENT SYSTEM FOR CLASSIFIED MATERIALS.

 

[Abounder]

Colin Powell Blasts Hillary Clinton's Team 'Trying to Pin' Private Email Use on Him

ABC News

This happens a lot (and is likely to continue): Clinton does something wrong and supporters (and even Clinton herself) try to see how many other people they can blame. And obviously Powell doesn't appreciate being made the fall guy in Clinton's email mess.

True that. Deflects to Powell/Rice for emails, and Obama for big $. It's no wonder that she is the worst Democratic frontrunner

 

[Dubbedinenglish]

What did Powell reinforce?

Powell told her to use her own email, as he had done, except for classified communications, which he had sent and received via a State Department computer," Conason writes, according to The Times.

It's in the article

 

[iammeiam]

What a difference two months and some attention can make. While Powell apparently no longer remembers the dinner conversation, he did recall parts of it back in June when the author asked about it:

But last June, while reporting on Powell’s advice to Clinton for my book, I contacted his office for comment—and got a very different answer.

His principal assistant, Margaret “Peggy” Cifrino, informed me then via email that their calendar showed that the Albright dinner had occurred in June 2009. While he didn’t recall some details of the dinner because it had occurred seven years ago, according to Cifrino, he remembered what he did and didn’t say to Clinton on the topic in question that evening:

He does recall sharing with Secretary Clinton his use of his email account and how useful it was and transformative for the Department. He knew nothing then or until recently about her private home server and a personal domain, nor, therefore, could he have advised her on that or suggested it. By June I would assume her email system was already set up.

Does that mean her server is his fault? No. Does that conversation seem like something that would make sense to bring up when discussing her server usage with the FBI as someone reinforcing that it's a good idea? I kind of think so.

Edit: FWIW, Clinton herself never brought up the discussion when talking with the author:

She didn’t mention Powell when I interviewed her for my book in 2013, and during the past seven years she has never spoken publicly about his advice, which she considered private. Although she told FBI agents about it earlier this year, she had every reason to expect that interview would remain confidential.

 

[RedAssedApe]

What a difference two months and some attention can make. While Powell apparently no longer remembers the dinner conversation, he did recall parts of it back in June when the author asked about it:



Does that mean her server is his fault? No. Does that conversation seem like something that would make sense to bring up when discussing her server usage with the FBI as someone reinforcing that it's a good idea? I kind of think so.

Edit: FWIW, Clinton herself never brought up the discussion when talking with the author:

people conveniently ignore the details.

 

[Metaphoreus]

As is explained in every single thread like this: THERE IS A DIFFERENT SYSTEM FOR CLASSIFIED MATERIALS.

And? Even excluding the classified material that's supposed to stay on a different system (and some of which didn't, recall), she's still dealing with sensitive high-level government information that should have been handled securely, which she didn't do.

 

[Nazgul_Hunter]

And? Even excluding the classified material that's supposed to stay on a different system (and some of which didn't, recall), she's still dealing with sensitive high-level government information that should have been handled securely, which she didn't do.

That reasoning makes sense in the abstract, but not when you consider that the State email system that she would've used instead, actually was hacked.

 

[mercenar1e]

Colin Powell Blasts Hillary Clinton's Team 'Trying to Pin' Private Email Use on Him

ABC News

This happens a lot (and is likely to continue): Clinton does something wrong and supporters (and even Clinton herself) try to see how many other people they can blame. And obviously Powell doesn't appreciate being made the fall guy in Clinton's email mess.

Clintons team pinned the deletion of her emails on Chelsea because she had Postpartum depression.

 

[DragonSworne]

I would be happy if she admits that she fucked up and she will make up to the people of the USA instead of trying to pass the blame on someone else. Own up to your shit.

What exactly did she "fuck up"?

Please tell me and then maybe we can start blaming her for something.

And? Even excluding the classified material that's supposed to stay on a different system (and some of which didn't, recall), she's still dealing with sensitive high-level government information that should have been handled securely, which she didn't do.

Colin Powell used aol.....

 

[Metaphoreus]

That reasoning makes sense in the abstract, but not when you consider that the State email system that she would've used instead, actually was hacked.

How does that justify using a less-secure system?

Colin Powell used aol.....

And the rules were different at that time. State didn't even have an email system, if memory serves. In any event, so what? It's no skin off my back if Powell and Clinton both did something wrong (and they did).

 

[antonz]

Colin Powell had a private setup but the difference is it was used within the state department. They installed a new line etc. in his office. They knew about it.

 

[Balphon]

How does that justify using a less-secure system?

It implies that the "secure" system wasn't, you know, secure, which makes the arbitrary standard you're crafting impossible to meet.

And the rules were different at that time. State didn't even have an email system, if memory serves. In any event, so what? It's no skin off my back if Powell and Clinton both did something wrong (and they did).

Because you're now stuck defending a double standard.

 

[Bam Bam Baklava]

Clintons team pinned the deletion of her emails on Chelsea because she had Postpartum depression.

It's not his fault but he can't seem to get his story straight either. This no recollection of the dinner statement is clearly BS.

 

[Metaphoreus]

It implies that the "secure" system wasn't, you know, secure, which makes the arbitrary standard you're crafting impossible to meet.

Pure applesauce. That a more-secure system was hacked can't justify using a less-secure system, which is, by definition, more susceptible to unauthorized access. The prudence of using one system or another can't be judged in hindsight--for instance, it's better to share confidential information using a secure email system than to post it publicly at a URL that nobody's likely to discover, even if it turns out that the former was hacked while nobody did, in fact, visit the latter.

You're also ignoring the non-arbitrary (with respect to Clinton) distinction between using a system that State Department rules require to be used, and using a system that is not sanctioned by State.

Because you're now stuck defending a double standard.

No, I'm not. That little parenthetical at the end should have tipped you off.

 

[DragonSworne]

Pure applesauce. That a more-secure system was hacked can't justify using a less-secure system, which is, by definition, more susceptible to unauthorized access. The prudence of using one system or another can't be judged in hindsight--for instance, it's better to share confidential information using a secure email system than to post it publicly at a URL that nobody's likely to discover, even if it turns out that the former was hacked while nobody did, in fact, visit the latter.

You're also ignoring the non-arbitrary (with respect to Clinton) distinction between using a system that State Department rules require to be used, and using a system that is not sanctioned by State.



No, I'm not. That little parenthetical at the end should have tipped you off.

You keep saying Hillary broke rules but she didn't, did she?

 

[MIMIC]

Because you're now stuck defending a double standard.

It's not a double standard if Clinton was specifically told not to do something because of the evolving nature of cybersecurity.

Clinton and her allies frequently compare Clinton’s use of personal email to Powell’s use. But the IG report was pointed in drawing key differences between Clinton and past secretaries. It said the rules governing personal email and the use of nongovernment systems were “considerably more detailed and more sophisticated” during Clinton’s time in office.

“Secretary Clinton’s cybersecurity practices accordingly must be evaluated in light of these more comprehensive directives,” the report said.

FactCheck.org

More:

In what reads like a direct rebuttal to Clinton’s claim that other secretaries of state have done the same thing, the IG report notes that the department’s policies on the use of personal email and nongovernment computer systems were “considerably more detailed and more sophisticated” during Clinton’s tenure. It said she should be “evaluated” differently than her predecessors.

“Beginning in late 2005 and continuing through 2011, the Department revised the FAM [Foreign Affairs Manual] and issued various memoranda specifically discussing the obligation to use Department [computer] systems in most circumstances and identifying the risks of not doing so,” the report says. “Secretary Clinton’s cybersecurity practices accordingly must be evaluated in light of these more comprehensive directives.”

In addition to the policies we outlined from the mid-2000s, the report noted specific instances in which State Department officials acted to discourage the use of personal email for government business.

For example, on March 11, 2011, the assistant secretary for diplomatic security sent a memo to Clinton that said there has been “a dramatic increase since January 2011 in attempts by [redacted] cyber actors to compromise the private home e-mail accounts of senior Department officials.” That was followed by two high-level meetings in April and May 2011 on cybersecurity that were attended by “the Secretary’s immediate staff.”

What followed was a cable that went out under Clinton’s name that “recommended best practices for Department users and their family members to follow, including ‘avoid conducting official Department business from your personal e-mail accounts,’” the report said, quoting from Clinton’s cable.

And not to mention the big ol' fact that she had a private server.

 

[Metaphoreus]

You keep saying Hillary broke rules but she didn't, did she?

Old news: Yes.

 

[DragonSworne]

It's not a double standard if Clinton was specifically told not to do something because of the evolving nature of cybersecurity.


FactCheck.org

More:



And not to mention the big ol' fact that she had a private server.

So what were these rules that were broken? Care to specify.

 

[atr0cious]

It's not a double standard if Clinton was specifically told not to do something because of the evolving nature of cybersecurity.

.

Which is why she had a private server. Or are we saying she should've just used a public account like Powell, who relied on tech just not being good enough to be too harmful to operations?

 

[Fenderputty]

Where Bernie or Busters and Metaphoreus paths meet: The Thread.

 

[gutter_trash]

He needed a private e-mail so he could get ahold of this:

a cake recipe?

 

[MIMIC]

So what were these rules that were broken? Care to specify.

They say it repeatedly in the link. Specifically:

The IG report said that it has been department policy since 2005 — four years before Clinton took office — that “normal day-to-day operations” be conducted on government servers.

The report also said that in 2007 the department adopted additional policies requiring “non-Departmental information systems” used to “process or store department information” to meet the same security controls as the department’s systems, and requiring that they be registered with the department. Clinton did not adhere to either policy.

 

[Lord Frieza]

These e-mails threads really show how few people actually read the articles, and how many just read the titles

 

[Balphon]

Pure applesauce.

Are you actually the ghost of Antonin Scalia?

That a more-secure system was hacked can't justify using a less-secure system, which is, by definition, more susceptible to unauthorized access. The prudence of using one system or another can't be judged in hindsight--for instance, it's better to share confidential information using a secure email system than to post it publicly at a URL that nobody's likely to discover, even if it turns out that the former was hacked while nobody did, in fact, visit the latter.

I'm not contesting that. I'm saying that the standard you're advocating -- that non-classified communications be handled "securely" -- is vague and in any event has not been met by many individuals at high levels of government, let alone throughout State in the last 10 years.

If you want to say Clinton's behavior is deficient according to whatever standard should exist, fine. But so deficient as to justify this disproportionate a response? I don't buy it.

You're also ignoring the non-arbitrary (with respect to Clinton) distinction between using a system that State Department rules require to be used, and using a system that is not sanctioned by State.

If that's to be the standard, I'm not sure why the imprimatur of the State Department solves your concerns over "security." State evidently can't prevent intrusion into state.gov accounts and at at least one point in the last decade an AOL account has been "secure" enough for it. Why place that much stock into its judgment vis-a-vis cybersecurity?

No, I'm not. That little parenthetical at the end should have tipped you off.

Yes, you are, unless you're willing to concede that Clinton's actions in this area have received a disproportionate level of scrutiny. If so, fair enough, but I'd question why you need to be forced to make that observation.

 

[DragonSworne]

They say it repeatedly in the link. Specifically:

Who sets these rules?

 

[Oblivion]

Even if the server wasn't allowed, Comey said that what Hillary did was not a criminal offense to begin with. He said that a person lower than Hillary's position would be reprimanded by their department, but not be imprisoned. And considering Hillary was the head of her department, I'm not sure what punishment could be applied to her. Maybe Obama would put her on coffee duty for two weeks?

 

[MIMIC]

Who sets these rules?

Do you have a point? You seem to just be asking random questions (that have all been answered).

 

[DragonSworne]

Do you have a point? You seem to just be asking random questions (that have all been answered).

My point is Hillary being Secretary of State probably had a say in what the day to day operations of the her department should be. She is de facto arbitrator of what is best practice and standard procedure regardless of what previous people in the position thought.

 

[Lord Frieza]

Even if the server wasn't allowed, Comey said that what Hillary did was not a criminal offense to begin with. He said that a person lower than Hillary's position would be reprimanded by their department, but not be imprisoned. And considering Hillary was the head of her department, I'm not sure what punishment could be applied to her. Maybe Obama would put her on coffee duty for two weeks?

I mean, that's really what it all boils down: it's already been settled. I can understand not agreeing with that assessment (although I think anyone who thinks Clinton should legitimately be imprisoned are being beyond ridiculous), but the fact that this burning so bright even after it's been settled by the FBI is so dumb. It's clearly just the right-wing trying hard to make it another Benghazi, and unfortunately, a lot of even non-right wing advocates are falling right into the narrative.

 

[Metaphoreus]

So what were these rules that were broken? Care to specify.

5 FAM 443.3
5 FAM 431.5(d)
5 FAH-4 H-217.1(c)
5 FAH-4 H-217.2
36 CFR 1230.14
12 FAM 544.2
12 FAM 544.3

There may be others, but is that specific enough?

I'm not contesting that. I'm saying that the standard you're advocating -- that non-classified communications be handled "securely" -- is vague and in any event has not been met by many individuals at high levels of government, let alone throughout State in the last 10 years.

The standard I'm advocating is that sensitive but unclassified communications be handled as the State Department requires.

If that's to be the standard, I'm not sure why the imprimatur of the State Department solves your concerns over "security." State evidently can't prevent intrusion into state.gov accounts and at at least one point in the last decade an AOL account has been "secure" enough for it. Why place that much stock into its judgment vis-a-vis cybersecurity?

Well, let me ask you this: what about State's requirements in 2009, when Clinton took office, was deficient? What made her private system superior to it, such that it justified her ignoring the rules to use it?

Yes, you are, unless you're willing to concede that Clinton's actions in this area have received a disproportionate level of scrutiny. If so, fair enough, but I'd question why you need to be forced to make that observation.

Couldn't I just say that Powell received a disproportionately low level of scrutiny? I could also point out, as many have before, that Clinton deserves a higher level of scrutiny given her desire to serve as president--what's Powell even up to these days?

My point is Hillary being Secretary of State probably had a say in what the day to day operations of the her department should be. She is de facto arbitrator of what is best practice and standard procedure regardless of what previous people in the position thought.

No, "day-to-day operations" is pretty cut and dry. It means the things you do day-to-day, whatever they are. Anyways, are you seriously going to argue that Clinton didn't engage in day-to-day operations, such that she wasn't violating the rule by using a non-governmental email exclusively?

 

[elrechazado]

Wow Hillary pulled a Kobe to powell's shaq

 

[DragonSworne]

5 FAM 443.3
5 FAM 431.5(d)
5 FAH-4 H-217.1(c)
5 FAH-4 H-217.2
36 CFR 1230.14
12 FAM 544.2
12 FAM 544.3

There may be others, but is that specific enough?



The standard I'm advocating is that sensitive but unclassified communications be handled as the State Department requires.



Well, let me ask you this: what about State's requirements in 2009, when Clinton took office, was deficient? What made her private system superior to it, such that it justified her ignoring the rules to use it?



Couldn't I just say that Powell received a disproportionately low level of scrutiny? I could also point out, as many have before, that Clinton deserves a higher level of scrutiny given her desire to serve as president--what's Powell even up to these days?



No, "day-to-day operations" is pretty cut and dry. It means the things you do day-to-day, whatever they are. Anyways, are you seriously going to argue that Clinton didn't engage in day-to-day operations, such that she wasn't violating the rule by using a non-governmental email exclusively?

I'm arguing that the rules are arbitrary and can be set by Hillary just like how they were established by people prior. But it looks like there are several references to laws looking up the directives, so I guess that it isn't so simple.