to talk. He was encouraged by HRC and her campaign to talk but he wanted immunity, b/c probably that's wise when you smell a witch hunt going on!

I would think the former President of the United States and the Secretary of State - who were both traveling the world on a regular basis - could have a simple system set up by their IT guy Bryan Pagliano - which they did!

Install some fairly competent firewalls, good to go!

It was not set up for "classified" material. Why would it be? As we are now quite familiar - her State Department emails are a public record!

This is all part of the "Benghazi Committee" goal of hindering Hillary's chances in the 2016 election.

The shame of it is when Democrats take the bait.

My understanding The server was installed using the same security measures which are installed every State department email server. While many US government servers have been hacked, including some belonging to the Department of Defense, according to the security logs of the server there were hacking attempts Hillary server, but none of them were successful.

As an IT professional myself, I'm not surprised. Most of the hacking done on servers is performed using a technique called human engineering. That is tricking people into revealing their passwords, etc. Obviously the more people using a server the easier it is to breach its security using this methodology. One server is owned by one person, human engineering doesn't work very well

By the way the reason why the employee didn't want to talk to the Feds without immunity was because he wasn't exactly forthcoming about what Hillary paid him for his work installing and maintaining the server on his taxes. So his lawyer strongly suggested that he not talk with the FBI about his work for Hillary without immunity from prosecution for his tax problems. It was never about his fear of prosecution for anything he did for Hillatry. That's why Hillary has been urging him to tell everything he knew from the start.

I had just assumed that the guy was afraid, as a mid level staff person, of being abused by the Republicans investigating this so-called 'scandal'.

Post that fucker Ken Starr, who was willing to destroy innocent people's lives in the Republican vendetta against Bill Clinton, demanding immunity was not exactly a reach by a cautious attorney. Even if the tax related issues would normally have just resulted in a monetary fine/penalty, who knows what they might have tried to do to this staffer.

I think I understand this now.

I have a friend who had a long career at DoD. His take on this is the entire system of classification in our Federal government is filled with archaic policies, incompetence, over-classification, and classifications performed by unauthorized people using only their imaginations without performing the required risk assessments. Just because something is on the classified network does not mean it is classified or merits classification. People who perform work on the classified network use the email system on that network for both classified and unclassified communications.

It certainly seems the policies need to be updated to reflect current technology. Bottom line is there's no way DoJ will prosecute Hillary for this. It sounds like the policies were about as clear as mud.

Last edited Sat May 28, 2016, 05:55 PM - Edit history (1)

And was cleared for top secret for a specific set of briefings about the air operations over Vietnam.

Some classiforcations are purely for CYA. For the uninitiated that's the technical term for "cover your ass". As you can imagine there are circumstances where military or government officials screw up and don't to be embarrased when the story gets out. So suddenly the information is classified.

As you can imagine, there can be and are many disagreements from department to department over whether certain information should be classified or not. That's why particular a email discussing Newsweek magazine article was one of the 23 emails on Hillary' server which was classified by some government organization or the another. Some security agency thought it might security problem and the State Departant did not.

Some of the government care nothing about the public's need to know, and will classify anything that in some weird way might be have a very small risk of being a security concern. They're all about being "better safe than sorry". This attitude can also lead to an abuse of the security system.

Last edited Sat May 28, 2016, 09:21 PM - Edit history (1)

As I recall that knowledge was scavenged from several articles I've read since the server issue first surfaced and from some CNN reports.

If you want it all in one place I could put that post on my blog and you could link that.

And some of it is based on my known knowledge of IT procedures

This is a recent article about the Inspector General's report about the security of Hillary's

http://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-email-scandal-not-scandal-464414

As for the department’s unclassified system, the inspector general's report demonstrates that it was horribly insecure, and that hackers obtained terabytes worth of documents out of it; on the other hand, Clinton’s email system was quite secure and, when evidence emerged that someone was trying to hack in, the security officer overseeing the server immediately shut it down, then notified the relevant officials at State. In other words, while boxcars of documents were digitally pulled out of the agency, there is no evidence a single email was snagged out of Clinton’s server. So it could be the Clinton arrangement didn’t follow the security procedures laid out in the federal regulations—the inspector general did not reach a conclusion as to whether it did or not—but, as often happens, private security contractors did a better job than the government.

I don't even know his name, so don't know how to Google.

By the way the reason why the employee didn't want to talk to the Feds without immunity was because he wasn't exactly forthcoming about what Hillary paid him for his work installing and maintaining the server on his taxes. So his lawyer strongly suggested that he not talk with the FBI about his work for Hillary without immunity from prosecution for his tax problems. It was never about his fear of prosecution for anything he did for Hillatry. That's why Hillary has been urging him to tell everything he knew from the start.