What can you say to this incredible level of naivete combined with arrogance?

So now we have yet another reason this person should not be a presidential candidate. We are in the digital age and she knows nothing about it. Her ignorance is dangerous to all of us.

And when I think of the expense our government has gone to in protecting state secret--and how she disregarded it!

Everytime I see her on TV she defends herself, "Well, so and so did it and so did so and so." I just want to slap her. That's the kind of argument you get from a sixth grader.


Cher

If a foreign entity hacked Hillary's emails because there was no password, and then discovered the name of a US asset, yes, there would be the death penalty.

Because that asset would be hacked to death in some back alley somewhere, or dragged to some prison basement and then shot in the back of the head.

Ok somebody help me here. She didn't use the State Dept. computer so not having a password means nothing. If she used the computer and it had no password that would be a wow moment. But it's my understanding that she didn't use a State Dept. computer. Am I wrong about this?

EDIT: I just found my answer in the actual deposition.

is not about her server. It's about a State Dept. computer that was offered to her but was NEVER set up and NEVER used.

From the original article:

"As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton never used a password to protect her computer emails, and she was clueless about how regular emails work on a conventional computer, according to a deposition of a foreign service officer at the State Department."

So what's going on here? Evidently, a computer was offered, but that offer was declined. What about Hillary's other computers? Were they password-protected? The article implies that the answer to that question is no.

is wrong. She never used the State Dept. computer so not having a password is meaningless. Implying that she didn't use a password on other computers is not EVIDENCE it's supposition. The Clinton server in her home, mishandling classified emails, not complying with FOIA and the FBI investigation are all serious issues deserving of discussion. But having obvious non-facts interjected into the conversation only muddies the waters.

So she was clueless about emails and declined the use of the computer provided for her, but she had her own email server? How does someone who's clueless about emails end up with their own email server in a closet? That makes no sense.

Not a Bern or die kind of guy myself, but this is really stranger than I expected.

Seems both are equally poor judgement.

read my post earlier in the thread.

I think the fact that the State Dept. computer was offered with no password shows that she was offered a computer that would certainly be convenient to use. Perhaps they are trying to show that even though she was offered this convenient to use computer she rejected it and chose to have her own server at home. I don't know if this is where the attorneys are going but this would be my guess?

perhaps we will find out when the FBI finishes their investigation.

the Richard Stallman of U.S. gubmint secrets.


Cher

Maybe on DU we should double check claims from Fox news. The actual testimony was that she was offered a desktop computer which did not require a password. BUT SHE TURNED IT DOWN!

earlier in the thread.

She liked her BB and private server.

If this is true that there was NO security at all to access her email she should be in jail. However, I find it hard to believe there wasn't some security to hit the networkserver where the email was. I work in IT and have set up an email server on a server that was exposed to the internet. To access the server you needed a Password to get on the box itself. After I was on the box (through that security access point) I could then go into the email account and email server without needing a second password. So, I sure hope HRC had something like that...otherwise, wow. I'll be following this story for sure!

her at State. She was Not Happy about not being allowed to take her BlackBerry into a secure area (at State), so they offered to set up a desktop machine for her to handle email. That's the machine they were talking about having no password. Still pretty amazing to me, but it's not the server.

the state.gov firewall and on the internet.

But she never used that computer because it was never set up. Offered? Yes. Set up? NO

This isn't about her server. This was the one that they offered to her at State but she didn't want a computer at State. She wanted her own server at home.

Obviously she never set it up, so I agree you this is moot here.

It's perplexing moreso that the State Dept would offer this up to her. They're foolish to allow this here. It also speaks to how much clout she has that they'd suspend common sense security to make things convenient for her.

It also speaks to what we can expect from her. How tough do you think her email password was on clintonmail? Are you going to be surprised if she ignored security protocols with her blackberry?

if she ignored security protocols on her blackberry because I've already read stories that talk about her doing just that.

Yes, it is stunning that they would offer her a computer at State with NO password protect. That's crazy. But as crazy as that was what she actually did with the home server was crazier.

You don't expect Hillary Rodham Clinton to have to remember a bunch of silly passwords do you. So inconvenient and terribly trying on a person.

Come on now!

can't keep all her lies straight, let alone those cussed passwords.

It's all just too much for a Goldwater girl.

Cher

So true my friend.

Silver!

I am afraid one has to question her feasability for the presidency

alarming communication at "3:00 a.m." will come via telephone. It rings. You pick up the receiver and say "Hello?" Simple.

The framing of it being from sworn testimony lends it some extra "gasp" factor.

I'm thinking Trump may end up having to debate Bernie afterall........