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) by captain normal on Sunday September 04 2016, @04:43AM
Maybe I missed something. Just what court order did she disobey? In the US one cannot be convicted of something that was not a crime at the time.
When life isn't going right, go left.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 04 2016, @05:31AM
What you missed is that all the clinton hate is about "proving" what the haters already know: She's a bitch.
That's the only logic that applies. I used to be mildly negative towards her because I dislike political dynasties and I thought her capture of democratic party delegates before any of the primary voting even began was bullshit exploitation of the system.
But all these haters have convinced me otherwise because whenever I actually dig past the headlines and deep into the facts, there is never anything there. Its like reading the hysterical conspiracy theories of anti-vaxxers and climate-change deniers. It is a tale. Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Sunday September 04 2016, @05:34AM
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday September 04 2016, @06:19AM
The FBI's own words from the released documents:
Clinton told the FBI that she directed her legal team to provide any work-
related or arguably work-related e-mails to State; however she did not participate in the
development of the specific process to be used or in discussions of the locations of where her
e-mails might exist. Clinton was not consulted on specific e-mails in order to determine if they
were work-related.
I'm sure that doesn't matter because, you know, she's a bitch!
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday September 04 2016, @06:22AM
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday September 04 2016, @01:20PM
There's a term for that. "Plausible deniability". The ignorant, the naive, and the stupid believe that shit. To the rest of us, it's simply not plausible.