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: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 03 2016, @11:22PM
As a Senator, she didn't sponsor one single meaningful bill.
That's a conveniently misleading fact.
Indeed, she only sponsored 3 bills.
But she co-sponsored 70+ bills, including The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 [govtrack.us]
But furthermore, the number of bills sponsored is a piss-poor metric. The work of congress isn't only sponsoring bills, that's just the start of a long process of negotiation, ammendments and running hearings, bringing in experts and people from relevant agencies, etc. Even when a bill is the result of the collaboration of an entire committee, its usually only the chair's name that goes on it. If sponsorship is the only metric that counts, that's like saying no chef has ever made any food, all credit goes to the farmers who grew the vegetables and raised the animals.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday September 03 2016, @11:54PM
...and each of those was to rename a public building for some Liberal.
Anyone impressed yet?
The work of congress isn't only sponsoring bills
Yes, I mentioned that she pushed Neoliberalism (Plantation Capitalism) and Neoconservatism (Imperialism; A police state).