Octopus Overlords

Hillary Clinton rattled off a series of claims about Donald Trump on Tuesday that seemed too strange to be true. Some were. Some weren't. Yes, he once described climate change as a hoax invented by China. But her suggestion that he might sell the Statue of Liberty or Yosemite National Park veered toward the fantastical. Clinton took liberties with her own record as well as Trump's when she delivered a broadside against her Republican presidential opponent in an Ohio speech.

CLINTON: "The Republican primary featured the Trump immigration plan: round up and deport more than 11 million people — almost all of whom are employed or are children going to school — then build a wall across our border and force Mexico to pay for it."

THE FACTS: It's highly unlikely "almost all" the people who are in the country illegally are working or going to school. A majority appears to be, but by nature of their status, such immigrants are under the radar and defy precise counting.

The Migration Policy Institute, a Washington think tank, estimates 64 percent of people in the country illegally (age 16 or older) work. When the estimated number of children in school and young adults in post-secondary education is added, it appears that a little over 70 percent of people in the country illegally are thought to be either working or in school. That's a rough estimation, but probably a ceiling, and far short of "almost all."

State Department staffers wrestled for weeks in December 2010 over a serious technical problem that affected emails from then-Secretary Hillary Clinton's home email server, causing them to temporarily disable security features on the government's own systems, according to emails released Wednesday.

The emails were released under court order Wednesday to the conservative legal advocacy group Judicial Watch, which has sued the State Department over access to public records related to the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee's service as the nation's top diplomat between 2009 and 2013.

The emails, reviewed by The Associated Press, show that State Department technical staff disabled software on their systems intended to block phishing emails that could deliver dangerous viruses. They were trying urgently to resolve delivery problems with emails sent from Clinton's private server.

"This should trump all other activities," a senior technical official, Ken LaVolpe, told IT employees in a Dec. 17, 2010, email. Another senior State Department official, Thomas W. Lawrence, wrote days later in an email that deputy chief of staff Huma Abedin personally was asking for an update about the repairs. Abedin and Clinton, who both used Clinton's private server, had complained that emails each sent to State Department employees were not being reliably received.

After technical staffers turned off some security features, Lawrence cautioned in an email, "We view this as a Band-Aid and fear it's not 100 percent fully effective."

The AP initially reported Wednesday that the emails described security features being turned off on Clinton's own private server, but State Department spokesman John Kirby clarified hours later that the emails described "a series of troubleshooting measures to the department's system — not Secretary Clinton's system — to attempt to remedy the problem."

Days after the technical crisis, on Jan. 9, 2011, an IT worker was forced to shut down Clinton's server because he believed "someone was trying to hack us." Later that day, he wrote, "We were attacked again so I shut (the server) down for a few min." It was one of several occasions when email access to Clinton's BlackBerry smartphone was disrupted because her private server was down, according to the documents.

The AP reported last year that in the early morning hours of Aug. 3, 2011, Clinton received infected emails, disguised as speeding tickets from New York. The emails instructed recipients to print the attached tickets. Opening an attachment would have allowed hackers to take over control of a victim's computer.

In a blistering audit released last month, the State Department's inspector general concluded that Clinton and her team ignored clear internal guidance that her email setup broke federal standards and could leave sensitive material vulnerable to hackers. Her aides twice brushed aside concerns, in one case telling technical staff "the matter was not to be discussed further," the report said.

Isgrimnur wrote:You've got it backwards. The Clintons are the Lannisters. They have been the power behind the (party) throne for decades. They traffic in money and power, and only the death of the leader and a Cersei to completely misplay her hand will result in their downfall.

Trump is Walder Frey.

Isgrimnur wrote:You've got it backwards. The Clintons are the Lannisters. They have been the power behind the (party) throne for decades. They traffic in money and power, and only the death of the leader and a Cersei to completely misplay her hand will result in their downfall.

Trump is Walder Frey.

Rip wrote:

"This should trump all other activities," a senior technical official, Ken LaVolpe, told IT employees

Rip wrote:

In a blistering audit released last month, the State Department's inspector general concluded that Clinton and her team ignored clear internal guidance that her email setup broke federal standards and could leave sensitive material vulnerable to hackers. Her aides twice brushed aside concerns, in one case telling technical staff "the matter was not to be discussed further," the report said.

Two staff in S/ES-IRM reported to OIG that, in late 2010, they each discussed their concerns about Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal email account in separate meetings with the then-Director of S/ES-IRM. In one meeting, one staff member raised concerns that information sent and received on Secretary Clinton’s account could contain Federal records that needed to be preserved in order to satisfy Federal recordkeeping requirements. According to the staff member, the Director stated that the Secretary’s personal system had been reviewed and approved by Department legal staff and that the matter was not to be discussed any further. As previously noted, OIG found no evidence that staff in the Office of the Legal Adviser reviewed or approved Secretary Clinton’s personal system. According to the other S/ES-IRM staff member who raised concerns about the server, the Director stated that the mission of S/ES-IRM is to support the Secretary and instructed the staff never to speak of the Secretary’s personal email system again.

Max Peck wrote:

Rip wrote:

In a blistering audit released last month, the State Department's inspector general concluded that Clinton and her team ignored clear internal guidance that her email setup broke federal standards and could leave sensitive material vulnerable to hackers. Her aides twice brushed aside concerns, in one case telling technical staff "the matter was not to be discussed further," the report said.

Not so much, unless "Director of S/ES-IRM" is State Department nomenclature for "Clinton's aide." What the IG report actually says (on page 43) is:

Two staff in S/ES-IRM reported to OIG that, in late 2010, they each discussed their concerns about Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal email account in separate meetings with the then-Director of S/ES-IRM. In one meeting, one staff member raised concerns that information sent and received on Secretary Clinton’s account could contain Federal records that needed to be preserved in order to satisfy Federal recordkeeping requirements. According to the staff member, the Director stated that the Secretary’s personal system had been reviewed and approved by Department legal staff and that the matter was not to be discussed any further. As previously noted, OIG found no evidence that staff in the Office of the Legal Adviser reviewed or approved Secretary Clinton’s personal system. According to the other S/ES-IRM staff member who raised concerns about the server, the Director stated that the mission of S/ES-IRM is to support the Secretary and instructed the staff never to speak of the Secretary’s personal email system again.

Maybe the AP should unleash their vaunted fact-checkers on the AP...

A State Department staffer who oversaw security and technology issues for Hillary Clinton is refusing to answer Senate investigators’ questions about the former secretary of state’s use of a private email server — marking the second time an ex-State employee has declined to talk to lawmakers.

John Bentel, a now retired State employee who managed IT security issues for the top echelon at the department, declined to be interviewed by GOP staff on the Senate Judiciary and Homeland Security committees, according to a letter obtained by Politico.

On Dec. 4, 2015, Judiciary and Homeland investigators reached out to Bentel’s lawyer to schedule an interview. But Turk told them Bentel had already been asked about the matter when he sat before the House Benghazi Committee. Turk said Bentel told the committee he had “no memory of knowledge” of the server issue and there was “little point” in telling another committee the same thing, according to the letter.

But both Senate panels say Bentel may have been aware of the sever, noting that their investigators have been told that some of Bentel’s subordinates knew about the home setup: “It appears that you were an integral figure in the operations of the Executive Secretariat and that you would have particular and unique knowledge relevant to the committees’ inquiry. Indeed, Department personal have noted that your subordinates in the Executive Secretariat’s office, who reported directly to you, had knowledge of Secretary Clinton’s private email server, which leads one to conclude that you were likely made aware of the server.”

YellowKing wrote:As an IT guy, I feel a little sorry for the IT staffers in the email debacle.

There have been numerous times over the course of my IT career when I said, "This needs to be done this way," and management overruled me against my protests. I can't imagine the pressure when your boss is the freaking Secretary of State and former First Lady.

I used to work for the Corps of Engineers, which is headed up by an army general. And walking into his office to even replace a keyboard was an incredibly nerve-wracking experience.

Sadly, turning off security features is an all-too-common solution when higher ups need their mail RIGHT NOW and it's a choice between compromising security and losing your job.

YellowKing wrote:Sadly, turning off security features is an all-too-common solution when higher ups need their mail RIGHT NOW and it's a choice between compromising security and losing your job.

Little Raven wrote:

YellowKing wrote:Sadly, turning off security features is an all-too-common solution when higher ups need their mail RIGHT NOW and it's a choice between compromising security and losing your job.

As an IT guy who works for a high level state executive - yup. Happens all the time. You're talking about people who are used to being the most powerful person in almost any room. These people do not understand the tech, nor do they care. They don't want to hear about how whatever they're asking for is a bad idea, they simply expect that you will make it work RIGHT NOW. No questions asked.

And having had the privilege of working with a few of my counterparts from other countries, it's absolutely global. As far as I can tell, it's built into the DNA of the kind of person that achieves positions of power.

WSJ.com wrote:In email, she appeared to express concern about her correspondence being accessible to public

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton didn’t turn over a key email where she appeared to express concern about her correspondence being accessible by the public, the State Department acknowledged Thursday.

In a 2010 email exchange with top aide Huma Abedin, Mrs. Clinton expressed reservations about being put onto the State Department’s email system.

“Let’s get separate address or device but I don’t want any risk of the personal being accessible,” Mrs. Clinton wrote in response to Ms. Abedin’s suggestion that she obtain a government email account.

The email exchange in question was previously uncovered as part of a State Department Inspector General investigation into the use of email by Mrs. Clinton and other secretaries of state. However, it wasn’t included in the emails that Mrs. Clinton turned over to the State Department, raising questions about the thoroughness of her disclosures to the government and her record-keeping practices as secretary of state.

State Department spokesman John Kirby said the email “was not part of the approximately 55,000 pages provided to the State Department by Former Secretary Clinton.” He said it was instead obtained by the department as part of a trove of emails turned over by Ms. Abedin in 2015.

According to federal record-keeping laws, work emails from Mrs. Clinton and her staff were federal records that were required to be preserved and turned over upon their departure from government service. In addition, under the Freedom of Information Act, emails from agencies like the State Department are eligible for possible public release.

Last year, Mrs. Clinton certified under oath to a federal court that she had turned over all the work-related emails in her possession on her private server. “I have directed that all my e-mails on clintonemail.com in my custody that were or potentially were federal records be provided to the Department of State, and on information and belief, this has been done,” she wrote in a document filed in U.S. District Court in August.

hepcat wrote:I'm not sure I understand why this is a big deal. I keep a gmail account for my personal correspondences. My exchange email is work related. Most people do the same.

you don't want the company to be able to see your personal e-mail?

hepcat wrote:In that article linked above, she simply expressed to her coworker that she wanted to use a non-work email server for her personal emails. Many folks do that.

you don't want the company to be able to see your personal e-mail?

who does?

YellowKing wrote:She acted exactly as I would expect someone in that position of power would act. IE - she doesn't understand technology or security, she just wants her shit to work and she doesn't want to hear excuses. I'm not saying that's OK, and I'm not saying she had zero understanding of the ramifications of work email going to a private server. But I'm saying I have seen many, many, many managers who are far less important than she is with the same God complex, so that behavior doesn't surprise me in the least. In fact, I'm surprised we don't hear about it more often.

I would bet multiple paychecks that there are numerous politicians out there who are not following recommended security practices on both sides of the aisle.

Newly released State Department emails help reveal how a major Clinton Foundation donor was placed on a sensitive government intelligence advisory board even though he had no obvious experience in the field, a decision that appeared to baffle the department’s professional staff.

The emails further reveal how, after inquiries from ABC News, the Clinton staff sought to “protect the name” of the Secretary, “stall” the ABC News reporter and ultimately accept the resignation of the donor just two days later.

A prolific fundraiser for Democratic candidates and contributor to the Clinton Foundation, who later traveled with Bill Clinton on a trip to Africa, Rajiv K. Fernando’s only known qualification for a seat on the International Security Advisory Board (ISAB) was his technological know-how. The Chicago securities trader, who specialized in electronic investing, sat alongside an august collection of nuclear scientists, former cabinet secretaries and members of Congress to advise Hillary Clinton on the use of tactical nuclear weapons and on other crucial arms control issues.

Grifman wrote:Here is another example of poor judgement and political business as usual for Clinton:

Grifman wrote:She's surrounded herself with yes women

Defiant wrote:

Grifman wrote:Here is another example of poor judgement and political business as usual for Clinton:

Slowpoke

One of the flaws for Clinton is among her many advisors are some bad ones.

Unagi wrote:

Grifman wrote:She's surrounded herself with yes women

really?

On Feb. 17, 2009, less than a month into Clinton’s tenure, the issue came to a head. Department security, intelligence and technology specialists, along with five officials from the National Security Agency, gathered in a Mahogany Row conference room. They explained the risks to Cheryl Mills, Clinton’s chief of staff, while also seeking “mitigation options” that would accommodate Clinton’s wishes.

“The issue here is one of personal comfort,” one of the participants in that meeting, Donald Reid, the department’s senior coordinator for security infrastructure, wrote afterward in an email that described Clinton’s inner circle of advisers as “dedicated [BlackBerry] addicts.”

Clinton used her BlackBerry as the group continued looking for a solution. But unknown to diplomatic security and technology officials at the department, there was another looming communications vulnerability: Clinton’s Black­Berry was digitally tethered to a private email server in the basement of her family home, some 260 miles to the north in Chappaqua, N.Y., documents and interviews show.

Those officials took no steps to protect the server against intruders and spies, because they apparently were not told about it.

From the earliest days, Clinton aides and senior officials focused intently on accommodating the secretary’s desire to use her private email account, documents and interviews show.

Throughout, they paid insufficient attention to laws and regulations governing the handling of classified material and the preservation of government records, interviews and documents show. They also neglected repeated warnings about the security of the BlackBerry while Clinton and her closest aides took obvious security risks in using the basement server.

Senior officials who helped Clinton with her BlackBerry claim they did not know details of the basement server, the State Department said, even though they received emails from her private account. One email written by a senior official mentioned the server.

Because Clinton did not use desktop computers, she relied on her personal BlackBerry, which she had started using three years earlier.

One year earlier, during her own presidential campaign, Clinton had said that if elected, “we will adopt a presumption of openness and Freedom of Information Act requests and urge agencies to release information quickly.”

But in those first few days, Clinton’s senior advisers were already taking steps that would help her circumvent those high-flown words, according to a chain of internal State Department emails released to Judicial Watch, a conservative nonprofit organization suing the government over Clinton’s emails

Leading that effort was Mills, Clinton’s chief of staff. She was joined by Clinton adviser Huma Abedin, Undersecretary Patrick Kennedy and Lewis Lukens, a senior career official who served as Clinton’s logistics chief. Their focus was on accommodating Clinton.

In early March, Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security Eric Boswell delivered a memo with the subject line “Use of Blackberries in Mahogany Row.”

“Our review reaffirms our belief that the vulnerabilities and risks associated with the use of Blackberries in the Mahogany Row [redacted] considerably outweigh the convenience their use can add,” the memo said.

He emphasized: “Any unclassified Blackberry is highly vulnerable in any setting to remotely and covertly monitoring conversations, retrieving e-mails, and exploiting calendars.”

Nine days later, Clinton told Boswell that she had read his memo and “gets it,” according to an email sent by a senior diplomatic security official. “Her attention was drawn to the sentence that indicates (Diplomatic Security) have intelligence concerning this vulnerability during her recent trip to Asia,” the email said.

But Clinton kept using her private BlackBerry — and the basement server.

Hillary Clinton and liberal stalwart Elizabeth Warren campaigned together Monday in Ohio, symbolizing the coming together of the Democratic Party for Clinton's presidential campaign. A sampling of their statements and how they compare with the facts:

WARREN: "A lot of America is worried — worried and angry. Angry that too many times, Washington works for those at the top and leaves everyone else behind. That Washington ... lets giant oil companies guzzle down billions of dollars in tax subsidies, but then says there's no money to help kids refinance their student loans."

THE FACTS: It's not true Washington has empty pockets on the matter of student debt.

More borrowers are taking advantage of income-dependent repayment plans that make monthly expenses less burdensome and provide the possibility of debt forgiveness. Roughly $240 billion worth of loans are in repayment plans based on incomes, compared with just $72 billion in the middle of 2013, according to the Education Department.

Separately, the department erased $132 million in student loans for former students of the for-profit Corinthian Colleges, which collapsed last year amid evidence of fraud.

Interest rates are higher than what the senator from Massachusetts has advocated in the past, and today's debt relief is not as substantial as what Clinton has proposed, but claiming "no money" is available for college debt relief is a significant stretch.

___

WARREN: "After my middle brother, John, got out of the Air Force, he got a good union job operating a crane. Today he has a pension because of that job. I learned from him that unions built America's middle class and unions will rebuild America's middle class."

THE FACTS: The U.S. economy would have to undergo an improbable structural shift for unions to have the numbers and clout to rebuild the middle class. Just 11.1 percent of workers belong to unions, down from 20.1 percent in 1983, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

___

WARREN: "Donald Trump ... wants to abolish the minimum wage. Hillary Clinton believes no one should work full time and live in poverty, and that means raising the minimum wage," paid family and medical leave, and more.

THE FACTS: Trump hasn't been a model of clarity on the minimum wage, sketching out positions that seem at odds with each other.

The presumptive Republican nominee has said he would not raise the federal minimum wage, implying he'd leave it as is. He's said at other times that he favors a higher base wage, but the matter should be left to the states — meaning the federal minimum would essentially be abolished.

Recently he's said he favors an increase (and accused Warren of lying about his position). Warren has chosen to play up the Trump position that suits Democrats politically.

Clinton has supported a $12 federal minimum wage, but encouraged states and local communities to set the higher level of $15 sought by the liberal wing of the party personified by Warren and primary rival Bernie Sanders.

...lets giant oil companies guzzle down billions of dollars in tax subsidies, but then says there's no money to help kids refinance their student loans."

THE FACTS: It's not true Washington has empty pockets on the matter of student debt.

More borrowers are taking advantage of income-dependent repayment plans that make monthly expenses less burdensome and provide the possibility of debt forgiveness. Roughly $240 billion worth of loans are in repayment plans based on incomes, compared with just $72 billion in the middle of 2013, according to the Education Department.

WARREN: "After my middle brother, John, got out of the Air Force, he got a good union job operating a crane. Today he has a pension because of that job. I learned from him that unions built America's middle class and unions will rebuild America's middle class."

THE FACTS: The U.S. economy would have to undergo an improbable structural shift for unions to have the numbers and clout to rebuild the middle class. Just 11.1 percent of workers belong to unions, down from 20.1 percent in 1983, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

El Guapo wrote:Man, sometimes those fact checkers get incredibly obtuse:

WARREN: "After my middle brother, John, got out of the Air Force, he got a good union job operating a crane. Today he has a pension because of that job. I learned from him that unions built America's middle class and unions will rebuild America's middle class."

THE FACTS: The U.S. economy would have to undergo an improbable structural shift for unions to have the numbers and clout to rebuild the middle class. Just 11.1 percent of workers belong to unions, down from 20.1 percent in 1983, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Obviously Warren is talking about *the past*, when unions were stronger. On top of that, "building the middle class" is obviously metaphorical, and intended to represent helping people to be not poor. On top of that, obviously Warren's policy preference would be to do something to help unions "undergo an improbable structural shift" in their favor (i.e., to make them stronger again).

hepcat wrote:Have republicans started blaming Hillary for World War II yet?

hepcat wrote:Have republicans started blaming Hillary for World War II yet?

Fitzy wrote:

hepcat wrote:Have republicans started blaming Hillary for World War II yet?

Nope, but after 2 years and $7 million investigating Benghazi! (again) they found...nothing.

Most impressive re-investigation ever. Also it's 800 pages long. That seems sort of short to say nothing at all.