Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

SoylentNews is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop. Only 12 submissions in the queue.
posted by n1 on Tuesday July 05 2016, @08:54PM   Printer-friendly
from the what-difference-does-it-make? dept.

Even as a European*, I find this of interest, because of the level of corruption it shows.

Headline: "Clinton Was 'Extremely Careless' With Email But Should Not Be Charged".

In his statement, Comey said that the FBI's investigation had found 110 emails on Clinton's servers that had contained classified information when they were sent or received, of which eight contained material at the highest classification level of "top secret." Noting that this information was being stored on "unclassified personal servers" less secure even than commercial services like Gmail and that Clinton's use of the private account was widely known, Comey said it was "possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton's personal email account." Said Comey: "Any reasonable person should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that kind of information."

So: The FBI knows that she mishandled classified information. When you receive your security clearance, you are informed of the rules and the penalties for breaking them. Storing Secret, much less Top Secret information on a civilian server outside the control of the government violates those rules.

Yet, she will not be prosecuted. She was just "careless", no big deal. Laws are for the little people.

*Full disclosure: I used to be American, but turned in my passport some years ago. Various reasons, not least of which are the US tax policies. But the politics (The Shrub, Obama, and now...possibly Hillary!) - it's like a banana republic, only with nukes.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by edIII on Tuesday July 05 2016, @09:02PM

    by edIII (791) on Tuesday July 05 2016, @09:02PM (#370257)

    1. Whatever goes on two legs is an enemy.

    2. Whatever goes on four legs, or has wings, is a friend.

    3. No animal shall wear clothes.

    4. No animal shall sleep in a bed.

    5. No animal shall drink alcohol.

    6. No animal shall kill any other animal.

    7. All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.

    --
    Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=2, Informative=1, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 05 2016, @09:31PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 05 2016, @09:31PM (#370281)

    It's like Americans today have never read Animal Farm. Truthfully, every president we've had since Reagan has been the icon of a pig from this book.

  • (Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 05 2016, @09:47PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 05 2016, @09:47PM (#370298)

    It's funny you bring this up. Ok, actually it's not.

    When this was required reading in high school, I couldn't help but read the book thinking yep, yep, this is exactly like the American government. Exactly, without any error. Nothing is awry here, this is exactly how things are. Yep, yep.

    Only after we'd finished reading the book and the teacher started comparing this to communism did I start going, "Hey, wait a minute.. that's not right. This is the _American_ government, and this book is _clearly_ a reflection on the United States. Why else would it be required reading for American students?" Throughout that whole discussion, this shit-talk Russia had no sway whatsoever, and I still feel that Animal Farm completely and correctly represents the American government. I have no feelings one way or another about whether or not it represents any other government, but it so _perfectly_ captures the American system that they really need not be considered.

    Throughout the entire reading of the book, I had no idea that they were slamming Communism until the teacher specifically brought that up as a talking point. Of course, I wrinkled my brow, and went to myself, 'The US isn't communist..'

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 05 2016, @10:11PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 05 2016, @10:11PM (#370320)

      I believe specifically Orwell meant to slam the Russian Revolution [wikipedia.org]. See the article about Animal Farm [wikipedia.org].

      Not disagreeing with your impression.

    • (Score: 2, Insightful) by redneckmother on Wednesday July 06 2016, @04:16AM

      by redneckmother (3597) on Wednesday July 06 2016, @04:16AM (#370466)

      And there, you have it.

      "Four legs good, two legs BETTER."

      Meanwhile, the wise old horse goes to the glue factory.

      In many ways, both systems have the same faults.

      It's past time for people to step back and think about things from outside the popular/published context.

      --
      Mas cerveza por favor.
    • (Score: 3, Interesting) by TheRaven on Wednesday July 06 2016, @09:10AM

      by TheRaven (270) on Wednesday July 06 2016, @09:10AM (#370554) Journal

      The end result may be the same, but the route is different. Animal Farm is commentary on the subversion of the communist ideals to impose a totalitarian state. During the Russian Revolution, power was initially devolved to Soviets (small community decision-making groups where everyone had a say). Shortly after, it was consolidated centrally by people who kept spouting the same rhetoric as the early revolutionaries, but simply as a way to control the masses. It's arguable whether Russia was ever communist (it skipped several steps proposed by Marx), but if it were then it only remained so for a year or two before becoming an oligarchy.

      The USA's use of democracy and freedom as talking points has been quite similar, but the USA was never really in a position where everyone had a say in the governing of the country. It had moved towards oligarchy long before universal suffrage.

      --
      sudo mod me up