• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Why don't the major networks have a Hillary Classified Email Counter... Now over 300

Re: Why don't the major networks have a Hillary Classified Email Counter... Now over

I can only speak to CNN, which is the only American network/cable channel I watch to any extent, but I'd say that the coverage there is pretty fair. CNN is pretty left leaning, in my view, but they've been up to date on this issue and frequently have guests from the Republican Congress who are investigating and former and current members of the intelligence community weighing in and one the other day said that based on what has been leaked and appeared so far, Clinton has disqualified herself as fit to be Commander in Chief. That's a pretty harsh and perhaps fitting conclusion to draw.

The left wing media defended Hillary until they found a suitable replacement. Their dedication to this story mirrors Bernie Sanders poll numbers.
 
Re: Why don't the major networks have a Hillary Classified Email Counter... Now over

No one went to Jail over Iraq... I really wouldn't press your point too hard there bud.

If anyone did Hillary would be one of them would she not or perhaps you have forgotten her voting record................Bud!
 
Re: Why don't the major networks have a Hillary Classified Email Counter... Now over

Some smart person here list the TV stations leaning toward the left then another column of those leaning toward the right. (this is a set up but don't tell the liberals)

Would it look like this?
Left Right
x-----x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
 
Re: Why don't the major networks have a Hillary Classified Email Counter... Now over

Hillary didnt do anything illegal as well.

1
5 mistakes Hillary Clinton made in her latest e-mail press conference


1. She sounds like a lawyer. Her first response is, as it was when she first addressed the existence of the private server back in March, to insist that she is in no legal jeopardy. "What I did was legally permitted, number one, first and foremost, okay?" Clinton said. Sure. No neutral observer has suggested that there is any illegality in what Clinton did. But there's a big difference between how this story plays in a court of law and how it plays in the court of public opinion. Clinton seems not to grasp that simply because she is not being charged with anything doesn't mean that this whole set-up doesn't look bad and raise doubts about her among voters. Talking in legal terms does not help Clinton's political case on this.

 
Re: Why don't the major networks have a Hillary Classified Email Counter... Now over

The FBI still hasn't found any emails that were classified at the time they were sent.
 
Re: Why don't the major networks have a Hillary Classified Email Counter... Now over

The FBI still hasn't found any emails that were classified at the time they were sent.
They are not searching for classified email, they wouldn't know what it was if it was staring them in the face. They are trying to find if any security holes were breached.
 
Re: Why don't the major networks have a Hillary Classified Email Counter... Now over

1
5 mistakes Hillary Clinton made in her latest e-mail press conference


1. She sounds like a lawyer. Her first response is, as it was when she first addressed the existence of the private server back in March, to insist that she is in no legal jeopardy. "What I did was legally permitted, number one, first and foremost, okay?" Clinton said. Sure. No neutral observer has suggested that there is any illegality in what Clinton did. But there's a big difference between how this story plays in a court of law and how it plays in the court of public opinion. Clinton seems not to grasp that simply because she is not being charged with anything doesn't mean that this whole set-up doesn't look bad and raise doubts about her among voters. Talking in legal terms does not help Clinton's political case on this.


All due respects to Chris Cillizza, but on this he doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground. Hillary Clinton will not be in court over this, she did nothing wrong.
 
Re: Why don't the major networks have a Hillary Classified Email Counter... Now over

All due respects to Chris Cillizza, but on this he doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground. Hillary Clinton will not be in court over this, she did nothing wrong.

Cillizza does not claim she will.
 
Re: Why don't the major networks have a Hillary Classified Email Counter... Now over

Cillizza does not claim she will.

He implies she will: But there's a big difference between how this story plays in a court of law and how it plays in the court of public opinion.
 
Re: Why don't the major networks have a Hillary Classified Email Counter... Now over

He implies she will: But there's a big difference between how this story plays in a court of law and how it plays in the court of public opinion.

The meaning of that sentence is the opposite of what you claim.
 
Re: Why don't the major networks have a Hillary Classified Email Counter... Now over

The meaning of that sentence is the opposite of what you claim.

Goodbye Jack.
 
Re: Why don't the major networks have a Hillary Classified Email Counter... Now over

They are not searching for classified email, they wouldn't know what it was if it was staring them in the face. They are trying to find if any security holes were breached.

When it's announced that the FBI is reviewing 300 emails for potentially classified information....then it stands to reason that they really are searching for classified emails.
 
Re: Why don't the major networks have a Hillary Classified Email Counter... Now over

The FBI still hasn't found any emails that were classified at the time they were sent.

That defense is no longer operative.

n the small fraction of emails made public so far, Reuters has found at least 30 email threads from 2009, representing scores of individual emails, that include what the State Department's own "Classified" stamps now identify as so-called 'foreign government information.' The U.S. government defines this as any information, written or spoken, provided in confidence to U.S. officials by their foreign counterparts.

This sort of information, which the department says Clinton both sent and received in her emails, is the only kind that must be "presumed" classified, in part to protect national security and the integrity of diplomatic interactions, according to U.S. regulations examined by Reuters.

"It's born classified," said J. William Leonard, a former director of the U.S. government's Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO). Leonard was director of ISOO, part of the White House's National Archives and Records Administration, from 2002 until 2008, and worked for both the Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations.

"If a foreign minister just told the secretary of state something in confidence, by U.S. rules that is classified at the moment it's in U.S. channels and U.S. possession," he said in a telephone interview, adding that for the State Department to say otherwise was "blowing smoke."

Exclusive: Dozens of Clinton emails were classified from the start, U.S. rules suggest | Reuters
 
Re: Why don't the major networks have a Hillary Classified Email Counter... Now over

That defense is no longer operative.

n the small fraction of emails made public so far, Reuters has found at least 30 email threads from 2009, representing scores of individual emails, that include what the State Department's own "Classified" stamps now identify as so-called 'foreign government information.' The U.S. government defines this as any information, written or spoken, provided in confidence to U.S. officials by their foreign counterparts.

This sort of information, which the department says Clinton both sent and received in her emails, is the only kind that must be "presumed" classified, in part to protect national security and the integrity of diplomatic interactions, according to U.S. regulations examined by Reuters.

"It's born classified," said J. William Leonard, a former director of the U.S. government's Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO). Leonard was director of ISOO, part of the White House's National Archives and Records Administration, from 2002 until 2008, and worked for both the Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations.

"If a foreign minister just told the secretary of state something in confidence, by U.S. rules that is classified at the moment it's in U.S. channels and U.S. possession," he said in a telephone interview, adding that for the State Department to say otherwise was "blowing smoke."

Exclusive: Dozens of Clinton emails were classified from the start, U.S. rules suggest | Reuters


"...The State Department's own regulations, as laid out in the Foreign Affairs Manual, have been unequivocal since at least 1999: all department employees "must ... safeguard foreign government and NATO RESTRICTED information as U.S. Government Confidential" or higher, according to the version in force in 2009, when these particular emails were sent..."​

Where does it say in the "Foreign Affairs Manual - 2009 version" that state officials and employees can't use a secure private server for confidential or higher information?
 
Re: Why don't the major networks have a Hillary Classified Email Counter... Now over

Where does it say in the "Foreign Affairs Manual - 2009 version" that state officials and employees can't use a secure private server for confidential or higher information?

We've already established that Hillary's server wasn't secure.

It was running without certificates, which means it was entirely unsecure.

They couldn't even have used a decent encryption scheme because there were no certificates.

Hillary wasn't running a "secure" server, she was running a very insecure server.
 
Re: Why don't the major networks have a Hillary Classified Email Counter... Now over

We've already established that Hillary's server wasn't secure.
No, we haven't really. In fact, her server was probably more secure than the governments....

[url="http://www.cnbc.com/2015/08/06/russia-hacks-pentagon-computers-nbc-citing-sources.html]Russia hacks pentagon computers[/url]

U.S. government hack could actually affect 18 million - CNNPolitics.com


It was running without certificates, which means it was entirely unsecure. They couldn't even have used a decent encryption scheme because there were no certificates. Hillary wasn't running a "secure" server, she was running a very insecure server

Her server had certificates....

"...The Venafi scanning effort discovered that "clintonemail.com" did, in fact, have SSL/TLS certificates in place on the site. The analysis found three different certificates were issued since 2009, with one issued by Network Solutions for "mail.clintonemail.com" in March 2009 that expired in September 2013.

There is another certificate for "mail.clintonemail.com" that was issued by GoDaddy in September 2013 that is valid until September 2018. Additionally, a certificate was issued in February 2012 by Network Solutions for the "sslvpn.clintonemail.com" domain that is valid until February 2013.

"The 2009-issued 'mail.clintonemail.com' and 2012-issued 'sslvpn.clintonemail.com' certificates were found in the historical archives," Bocek told eWEEK. "The TrustNet scanning engine acquired the current 2013-issued 'mail.clintonemail.com' certificates."

Though Clinton's server wasn't using the most advanced forms of cryptographic protections for her email, at this time, there is no indication of current certificate misuse, Bocek said..."​

Hillary Clinton's Private Email Use and the State of SSL/TLS Security
 
Last edited:
Re: Why don't the major networks have a Hillary Classified Email Counter... Now over

No, we haven't really. In fact, her server was probably more secure than the governments....

An absolute lie. Hillary's server was given an F rating by Qualsys on March 9th of this year. One day later, after the e-mail controversy surfaced, the server had magically been upgraded to a B. However the Qualsys logs from March 9th still exist and they can be publicly accessed on the internet. They show beyond any shadow of a doubt that not even the SSL on Hillary Clinton's server was working.

[url="http://www.cnbc.com/2015/08/06/russia-hacks-pentagon-computers-nbc-citing-sources.html]Russia hacks pentagon computers[/url]

U.S. government hack could actually affect 18 million - CNNPolitics.com

Irrelevant.

Her server had certificates....

"...The Venafi scanning effort discovered that "clintonemail.com" did, in fact, have SSL/TLS certificates in place on the site. The analysis found three different certificates were issued since 2009, with one issued by Network Solutions for "mail.clintonemail.com" in March 2009 that expired in September 2013.

"Issuing" certificates is not the same as having them installed and working properly.

There is another certificate for "mail.clintonemail.com" that was issued by GoDaddy in September 2013 that is valid until September 2018. Additionally, a certificate was issued in February 2012 by Network Solutions for the "sslvpn.clintonemail.com" domain that is valid until February 2013.

Srlsy? GoDaddy? ???

Seriously? ???

:lamo :lamo :lamo

"The 2009-issued 'mail.clintonemail.com' and 2012-issued 'sslvpn.clintonemail.com' certificates were found in the historical archives," Bocek told eWEEK. "The TrustNet scanning engine acquired the current 2013-issued 'mail.clintonemail.com' certificates."

WHICH historical archives, exactly? Please link to the details of this claim.

Though Clinton's server wasn't using the most advanced forms of cryptographic protections for her email, at this time, there is no indication of current certificate misuse, Bocek said..."

Hillary Clinton's Private Email Use and the State of SSL/TLS Security

Check the reader comments - thousands of people noticed the exact same thing I did, in real time. We were actually watching when and while the "emergency fix" was occurring. Clinton's Private Email System Gets a Security "F" Rating - Slashdot
 
Re: Why don't the major networks have a Hillary Classified Email Counter... Now over

An absolute lie. Hillary's server was given an F rating by Qualsys on March 9th of this year. One day later, after the e-mail controversy surfaced, the server had magically been upgraded to a B. However the Qualsys logs from March 9th still exist and they can be publicly accessed on the internet. They show beyond any shadow of a doubt that not even the SSL on Hillary Clinton's server was working.

Irrelevant.

"Issuing" certificates is not the same as having them installed and working properly.

Srlsy? GoDaddy? ???

Seriously? ???

:lamo :lamo

WHICH historical archives, exactly? Please link to the details of this claim.

Check the reader comments - thousands of people noticed the exact same thing I did, in real time. We were actually watching when and while the "emergency fix" was occurring. Clinton's Private Email System Gets a Security "F" Rating - Slashdot


From your link....I clicked on the link to Qualys SSL Labs that did the scan and they gave her server an A rating. How do you explain that?

https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=mail.clintonemail.com

Psst....you've got egg all over your face. :lamo
 
Last edited:
Re: Why don't the major networks have a Hillary Classified Email Counter... Now over

From your link....I clicked on the link to Qualys SSL Labs that did the scan and they gave her server an A rating. How do you explain that?

https://www.ssllabs.com/ssltest/analyze.html?d=mail.clintonemail.com

Psst....you've got egg all over your face. :lamo

LOL - those ratings are done in real time! LOLOL! See? You're arguing about something you don't even understand.

Screen-Shot-2015-05-22-at-09.58.16.png
 
Re: Why don't the major networks have a Hillary Classified Email Counter... Now over

LOL - those ratings are done in real time! LOLOL! See? You're arguing about something you don't even understand.

Screen-Shot-2015-05-22-at-09.58.16.png

Apparently, that was March Patch Day...2015. Would that have something to do with it? Kinda of a coincidence don't you think?

https://community.qualys.com/blogs/laws-of-vulnerabilities/2015/03/10/patch-tuesday-march-2015


NTL....Hillary left office in 2013..and some of the certificates expired in 2013 as well. Then there's the question of what name they used to scan her server since she had several and the one they scanned may not have been in use because of the expired certificates. Anyway, I fail to see how a scan in 2015 proves that her server wasn't secure 2009 - 2013.

Btw....when did government suddenly become superior to private enterprise? Did you know the government hires a private company to run it's servers, too? With her connections, is it possible that Hillary hired the same techies to set up and maintain her server that government uses? As for security.....no one's email is secure....not even the governments. At least that's what they said on the Qaulys discussion board.
 
Back
Top Bottom