Its not obvious to liberals. They are too stuck on the government tit to notice.
Trump should have no problem winning if it's so obvious to voters that Hillary is "extremely careless", amirite?
rigged system is rigged. Trump was right.
Trump has never been right, he a living breathing anachronism with delusions of being another FDR, and has no class and not the slightest idea how to get there.
The FBI basically gave a big fuck you to the Clinton campaign today. The only way this could be worse for her is if they indicted. This was one step below that. Basically laid out she broke the law but they wont prosecute. They destroyed her entire story. Comey gave the Trump campaign a lot of ammunition today. Including the lack of prosecution which plays into the rigged system msg he is pushing. Him not taking questions was kind of a boss move. Without answering questions makes it hard to attack his statements today.
That said the GOP don fucked up. Any of those other douchebags including Cruz and they win. This is going down as the worst collection of candidates in modern times.
See what happens when Bill Clinton has a private meeting with the AG.
Never underestimate the power of the Clinton machine.
The case is not closed. The voters will either confirm her or reject her in November....that is if we can trust that our votes really matter.
It's extremely careless vs carelessly extreme. The FBI report today hardly vindicated Clinton. If anything, it confirms what most of us already knew. However, we must also accept that negligence and carelessness, while not qualities we should elevate in a President, are not in and of themselves illegal. I personally wasn't hoping for indictment to forward a Trump presidency. I was hoping for indictment to clear the path for a more inspirational choice from the Democrats. Will be interesting to see what the polls do in the wake of the FBI report, which neither ended her political career nor provided momentum.Trump should have no problem winning if it's so obvious to voters that Hillary is "extremely careless", amirite?
Therefore, to even just view classified information required being stationary: working at a classified computer at ones office desk (or, in a very small handful of cases, including that of Clinton herself, using a special setup installed in the homes of very senior government officials).
Those classified desktop computers required a separate login that took over your desktop. In other words, if you were reviewing classified email or working on a classified memo, you had to exit out of it entirely in order to check your regular email or figure out what MINURSO stands for. (Compounding the problem, the government-issued BlackBerrys did not get reliable service inside the State Department building itself.) Classified information was also available in the form of closely controlled printouts that could be taken out briefly from locked safes and could often be viewed only in designated secure rooms accessible only to staff with the proper security clearance. Those constraints were necessary to keep information secure, but they sharply limited the times and ways in which information could be accessed.
This system worked relatively well in a world where most work was done by officials sitting at their desks during normal office hours that is, through the early 2000s. But by the time Clinton arrived at Foggy Bottom, the world of diplomacy like every other sphere had been overtaken by mobile communications. The expectation that information and communications would be available everywhere and at all times unavoidably reshaped the handling of much State Department information. People were in constant communication with colleagues and counterparts around the world, absorbing information and making decisions that would shape policy day and night.
Because unclassified emails were available on mobile devices and classified information was not working with unclassified communications offered an immense practical and strategic advantage in a mobile-enabled world. As a result, a great deal of information that might have been classified in an earlier era was now designated unclassified often with the designation of sensitive but unclassified, or SBU. (SBU information must be treated with care, but can be transmitted unencrypted over the Internet.) For all the complaints in recent years about the problem of overclassification of government material, the rise of mobile devices has actually bred an opposite impulse: to avoid classifying sensitive material in order to make it more readily accessible whenever and wherever an official may need to see it.
One of the messages that is now being scrutinized for possible underclassification a missive in which a Clinton aide conveys information from Chris Stevens, then the U.S. special envoy to the Libyan opposition is a case in point. It is marked (SBU) Per Special Envoy Stevens, meaning that Stevens not Clintons aide assumed responsibility for the level of classification designated. The message itself describes the deteriorating security situation in Benghazi, Libya, and deliberations over whether the envoy and his delegation should depart. While we dont know why Stevens chose to designate the message SBU rather than classified, practical considerations may have been at work. If Stevens or his team did not have access to a classified terminal (they were staying at a hotel), or if they wanted to be sure that the information would be seen as quickly as possible by certain officials back in Washington (it was sent by Clintons aide Timmy Davis at 6:48 a.m. on a Sunday), SBU may have been judged the best avenue. (Tragically, 17 months after conveying that message, Stevens and two other U.S. personnel would be killed in the U.S. diplomatic compound in Benghazi.)
Nowadays, decisions on classification often factor in the need for speed of dissemination and accessibility of information. Sharing something on the classified system the so-called high side means that people can look at it only when sitting at their desks at the office and when they have time to log in to a separate system. For those traveling or even just moving around to diplomatic meetings or functions during the course of the day or for any developments that occur after hours sharing info on the classified system can involve hours or even days of delay. Because access to classified systems is constrained, there is also uncertainty about how quickly a message will be seen. While the State Department does have a 24-hour Operations Center that can alert officials to important classified messages, even the Ops Center cannot convey that classified information to them unless and until they can get themselves to a terminal or a secure phone line. Another thing: An unclassified message cannot be made classified unless the recipient retypes the text while sitting at a classified terminal or sends it through to an IT administrator. The converse is also obviously and necessarily true: A classified message cannot be converted over to the unclassified system other than through a lengthy process involving the departments systems administrators. The classified and unclassified systems dont talk to one another, and information born on one system almost invariably lives and dies only there.
In situations where a time-sensitive message needs to get to an official who is headed to the airport, is sitting in a U.N. meeting, or is in the midst of negotiations overseas, sending a classified email runs the risk that they may not see the information soon enough to act on it. When negotiations are in progress, when breaking news developments demand an immediate response, or when considerations of imminent safety and security are at stake, immediacy is not a matter of convenience, but of necessity. While the secretary of state had better access to classified information than most of her colleagues (due to special setups at her home and on the road), much of the information being funneled to her was already on the unclassified system because everyone else who needed to see it could do so far more quickly that way.
Also, a significant portion of classified information instructions on how to vote as a U.N. resolution reaches the floor, details on a fast-changing security situation, or advance word of breaking events needs to be classified only very briefly. Once the vote is cast, the situation changes, or the events are public, the details may no longer be sensitive. The same factors that make always-on information channels an unequivocal necessity for running virtually any modern business or institution also operate in the round-the-clock world of diplomacy.
You know maybe if Secretary of State Clinton just got a fucking whatever.gov e-mail address in the first damn place.... threads like these wouldn't exist.
__________________
Yes they would. People would just find something else to bash her with.
25 years of propaganda has an effect.
Don't act like Hillary did nothing wrong.Yes they would. People would just find something else to bash her with.
25 years of propaganda has an effect.
so because of what other people do, Hilary should do whatever she wants
Go back to arguing with bumper stickers, imbecile.
It would be impossible to strip the president or someone who became the president of their clearance as the president is the source of all clearances.
That was a nice bit o' wishful thinking. That reality bubble is amazing.
Yes they would. People would just find something else to bash her with.
25 years of propaganda has an effect.
They do need a fall back scandal... Otherwise millions of outraged gossip junkies will be going cold turkey.
When we erode away at peoples ability to reason their way through a situation, then unreason will rule. And not just abut scientific topics, but any topics. We see nonsense passed off as fact all the time by politicians, including attacks by Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, on theNational Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, claims by Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, that theres been a pause in global warming, the GOP attacks on Planned Parenthood, and more. People will still believe what these politicians say, long, long after the claims have been shown to be completely false.
Theres another factor at work here: The anti-intellectualism that has been a mainstay of the conservative movement for decades also makes its members easy marks. After all, if you are taught to believe that the reigning scientific consensuses on evolution and climate change are lies, then you will lack the elementary logical skills that will set your alarm bells ringing when you hear a flim-flam artist like Trump. The Republican war on science is also a war on the intellectual habits needed to detect lies.
so because of what other people do, Hilary should do whatever she wants
Don't act like Hillary did nothing wrong.
They don't any of that past 25 years fiction... if they weren't corporate shills themselves they could bash her on her support (or at the very least going by her delgates on the democratic platform committees' votes lack of real oppostition) for the TPP.
Hell even though Trump has taken advantage of trade deals he is already slamming her on it.
It's like her wallstreet masters told her "yeah, fine fine do whatever on social issues but don't you dare fuck with our money."
____________