SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the did-not-think-to-ask-for-training dept.
Politico reports:
Hillary Clinton never received training on how to handle classified information. By her own admission, she had little ability to discern whether a document included sensitive information. And when she did handle sensitive materials, she relied on her subordinates to ensure that nothing important was compromised.
Taken together, her responses to questions from FBI [US' Federal Bureau of Investigation] investigators reveal a high-level government executive who apparently had little grasp of the nuances and complexities around the nation's classification system — a blind spot that helped allow classified communications to pass through her private email server.
While Clinton is clear that she never had any intention to mishandle classified documents, a fact that FBI Director James Comey noted as a factor in his decision not to recommend any charges against the former secretary of state, answers she gave to FBI agents during a July 2 interview are likely to reinforce the Republican characterization of her as having been reckless with government secrets.
Bloomberg reports that Clinton Used Eight BlackBerrys, but [the] FBI Couldn't Get Them:
In addition to the eight devices she used as secretary of state, the FBI said there were at least five additional mobile devices they sought as part of their inquiry. Clinton's lawyers said they could not provide any of the mobile devices she used. One person interviewed by the FBI said he recalled two instances in which Clinton's devices were destroyed by "breaking them in half or hitting them with a hammer." The FBI released the summary Friday to provide context on its decision not to recommend prosecution of Clinton or her aides for using the private system. The Democratic presidential nominee was interviewed about her use of private e-mail by FBI agents and federal prosecutors for 3 1/2 hours on July 2. The bureau then recommended that the Justice Department not pursue criminal charges.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by fustakrakich on Saturday September 03 2016, @06:38PM
The Trump thing is making things a bit difficult for the democrats. If they win too many seats in congress, they won't be able to use "republican obstructionism" as an excuse to break election year promises. So the democrats have to put their most corrupt politicians on the ballot to avoid too big a majority. Without the 50/50 split their rotating villain shifting blame game will no longer work.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 03 2016, @07:27PM
I remember when democrats held a supermajority in in all branches of government.
Pressing on their list of concerns- bathroom equality for women!
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/latest-news/article24460222.html [mcclatchydc.com]
At this point, I have to imagine democrats are as use to disappointment as small government (ahem) republicans, partisan blaming aside.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 03 2016, @10:43PM
Damn fuska! Do you got some serious back-fitting skills! Is there any scenario that isn't the result of a gynormous deep conspiracy?
The all-power illuminati run everything anyway, so why do they bother with the charade? Especially this charade. Entertainment value? What? Why didn't wait so long many decades to run Trump? He's been talking about it since the 80s.
They are so powerful that they can do anything, but so weak they can't just run shit openly and save everybody the hassle.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Sunday September 04 2016, @12:54AM
why do they bother with the charade?... Entertainment value?
Yes. Distraction is very valuable [hollywoodreporter.com]
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 04 2016, @02:17AM
The Republicans said the same things about Obama and Kerry.
Kerry: remember the Swift boats? Seems Kerry lied about his heroism in the war and actually betrayed his mates. That story died after the election.
Obama: remember Rev. Wright, Bill Ayres, Indonesia, and the missing birth certificate? Obama was some secret Muslim radical who was going to institute Sharia Law on the entire USA.
Rove, Ailes, and the others who run the Republican media establishment - and they have DISPROPORTIONATE influence on American politics, given their ratings - know very well that the way to make a story "have legs" is to keep replaying it 24x7x365.
Otherwise, people would say, private email server? Gimme a break, let's talk about something important. That's what Bernie Sanders said and he was Hillary's main opponent.
(Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Sunday September 04 2016, @03:47AM
:-) Excuse me, but your partisanship is showing.
I don't pretend to concern myself with the email thing. That also is a distraction from the quid pro quo that permeates the entire political process on both sides. Bernie was never in opposition to Hillary. He said at the very beginning of his campaign that he would endorse her after she wins the nomination. His sole purpose was to keep the "idealists'" money and attention within the democrat party. And he sure brought in plenty of that. And now, as his job is done, he too has disappeared off the TV and other mass media.
And as always, 95% of congress will be reelected, totally dominated by democrats and republicans, not a single real independent in the bunch. The system works! It is a well oiled machine. Richard Daley would be most proud.
La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Sunday September 04 2016, @05:10AM
Kerry: ..... That story died after the election.
Well it wasn't criminal so other thanbar him from the Presidency, what else is there to do about it. The story didn't die, just not much point in talking about it. But we still make jokes about Lurch and call him John "who served in Vietnam" Kerry in a mocking way.
Obama: remember Rev. Wright, Bill Ayres, Indonesia, and the missing birth certificate?
First off, get your history right. It was a Clinton minion who floated the birth certificate thing. The other are of course entirely 100% true. The birther thing was a huge head fake to distract from the obvious by allowing any discussion of Obama's origin story to be tossed in the Conspiracy Theory kill file. The real story was sitting in plain sight. The only sane reading of the Natural Born Citizen clause, based on the understanding of the concept at the time the words were written, excludes Mr. Obama. That requires no evidence beyond Obama's (and Bill Ayers as ghostwritter) own book. A core requirement is that an NBC is born of American parents. Obama Sr. never even entertained the notion of American Citizenship, q.e.d. The Natural Born Clause was intended to prevent those with divided loyalty from holding our highest office. Mr. Obama holds American citizenship by way of his mother, Kenyan and British by way of his father and Indonesian by being legally adopted by his stepfather. If someone with four countries holding a claim to his loyalty that our government recognizes the legitimacy of, if such a person is "Natural Born" then the clause is null and void.
Much like now, if the clear statutes that explicitly exclude intent as an element of the crime are to now be waived because.... why exactly? Can we now even pretend that the Rule of Law still applies? If we really do place someone whose best defense is "I'm brain damaged, leave me alone!" into our highest office, are we not all insane?