Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius (Post 11899599)

However, as long as the FBI is investigating the issue, it remains an issue in the campaign as well as it reflects on her fitness to serve as President.

Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius (Post 11899599)

Bernie might be a nice guy, and personally I like him, but he missed an obvious opportunity to score heavily by not pursuing her weakest point in the debates. You can't expect Trump to pull a Romney on it. Politics has always been a blood sport in this country and a clear plurality of Republican voters want a street fighter as their nominee, not a high-minded loser. I'm still on the fence, leaning to Cruz, but not happy about that either.

Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius (Post 11899622)

I would still like you to tell us whether sophisticated national entities like the Russian and Chinese cyber experts can penetrate a server without leaving a trace that a security log would record. What is your opinion?

Originally Posted by sir_eccles (Post 11899646)

If you're that paranoid, then we should go back to spies running messages around in microdots under their tongues. We know that they know, they know that we know that they know, etc.



And later said he lied. John McAfee lied about San Bernardino shooter's iPhone hack to 'get a s**tload of public attention'

Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius (Post 11899353)

Alright, alright. Yes, I was making an assumption that when the State Department spends millions of dollars and hires the best available (not necessarily the very best, but the best available) experts to devise the most secure systems they can, that the system would be more secure than a private email server put together by one guy and maintained in Hillary's garage.

The point you made that even the Pentagon's email server - after all those layers of security - was hacked, suggests that hacking Hillary's server would have been child's play for the Russians, Chinese and Iranians, not to mention Guccifer, a Romanian hacker.

Was her refusal to use the State Department's server and use her own illegal? That appears to be a grey area. It certainly violated the security protocols of the State Department, a copy of which she signed when she became Secretary of State and the FBI briefed her on the requirements for keeping all classified information on the State's system. As we discourse, over 100 FBI agents are investigating whether her actions warrant presentation to a grand jury.

I have to defer to you as someone who deals with internet security. However, I have to ask you whether or not what I have read elsewhere is true, i.e. that a computer hack at the level of sophistication employed by the Russians and Chinese, not to mention the Iranians, Brits, French and Germans, could be done so as to leave no trace that a security log would have recorded it. If so, the fact that Hillary's security log shows no breach would not be very reassuring.

Originally Posted by dakota44 (Post 11899692)

She broke no law regarding having confidential material on her server...because...when sent to her, it was not classified. You may recall that Powell came out and criticized the retroactive classification of emails. He had a private server too. If the information was not classified when received...then one cannot be guilty of a crime that in reality did not exist.

Originally Posted by dakota44 (Post 11899692)

She broke no law regarding having confidential material on her server...because...when sent to her, it was not classified. You may recall that Powell came out and criticized the retroactive classification of emails. He had a private server too. If the information was not classified when received...then one cannot be guilty of a crime that in reality did not exist.

Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius (Post 11899717)

To all the posters leaping to Hillary's defence on the email server issue (as they do on every criticism regarding her, however minor) and setting forth opinions as to what the FBI is doing and who is the target, let's await their conclusion, not the DOJ's.

Originally Posted by Giantaxe (Post 11899726)

That's pretty rich given it's been you primarily that's been jumping to conclusions about the legality (or lack thereof) of Clinton's private email server.

Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius (Post 11899731)

Relentless. Just can't let it rest can you? Whoever takes a position on her use of the private email server is jumping to a conclusion. As I posted earlier, let the FBI work it out and let's await their conclusion.

Originally Posted by Giantaxe (Post 11899737)

Really, your debating tactics are pretty transparent: dump out all the right wing talking points, castigate those that defend Clinton, and then claim you're taking the high ground by saying we need to wait for the FBI's conclusions.

Originally Posted by FlaviusAetius (Post 11899731)

Relentless. Just can't let it rest can you? Whoever takes a position on her use of the private email server is jumping to a conclusion. As I posted earlier, let the FBI work it out and let's await their conclusion.

Originally Posted by Anian (Post 11899745)

You're the one who keeps bringing it up, you can't tell everyone else not to comment on it.

Originally Posted by sir_eccles (Post 11899780)

Romney now endorses Cruz in Utah. Is anyone actually taking him seriously anymore?