I'm surprised this topic hasn't come up yet. Any thoughts on Signalgate from the "but her emails" crowd?
I never thought "but her emails" was a real problem. Every email has a sender and a recipient. Both have to delete the email, otherwise the email continues to exist. They never proved that she deleted anything that shouldn't have been deleted. They did allege that the server was not secure, and that's more like the signal gate problem, but they never proved that Hillary's security practices on her server were bad. We have proof that the signal chatters had bad security practices.
This is more serious than anything they ever proved Hillary did, for those that care about that kind of thing.
(03-27-2025, 11:02 AM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I never thought "but her emails" was a real problem. Every email has a sender and a recipient. Both have to delete the email, otherwise the email continues to exist. They never proved that she deleted anything that shouldn't have been deleted. They did allege that the server was not secure, and that's more like the signal gate problem, but they never proved that Hillary's security practices on her server were bad. We have proof that the signal chatters had bad security practices.
This is more serious than anything they ever proved Hillary did, for those that care about that kind of thing.
What Hillary (actually her office) did wasn't smart but I agree, this seems more egregious. The email server was actually secured and private, even though they were supposed to be using a government network for official communications. Signal is not particularly secure. Including a journalist in that kind of discussion is bad enough but using non-secure channels to discuss a planned and then ongoing combat operation reeks of incompetence.
Unlike this case posted below, it was not intentional nor was any classified information exposed.... Yes, a HUGE mistake on someones part, but no battle plans or sensitive information was talked about.....
Former Air National Guardsman Sentenced to 15 Years in Prison for Unlawfully Disclosing Classified National Defense Information
“Mr. Teixeira is responsible for engaging in one of the most significant leaks of classified documents and information in United States history, which resulted in exceptionally grave and long-lasting damage to the national security of the United States. He exploited his Top-Secret security clearance to share critical defense information online. In doing so, he exposed sensitive defense information involving our allies, putting our intelligence community and our troops at risk,” said Acting United States Attorney Joshua S. Levy. “Leaking and distributing classified information poses significant and real consequences across the globe. Today, justice was served for all the men and women serving our country overseas with honor and fealty to their oath.”
https://www.justice.gov/usao-ma/pr/forme...classified
The people complaining about this nonsense are the same clowns who shut their faces for 4 years and were perfectly fine with a [BLEEP] shadow government running the Presidency by autopen for the last 4 years.. Their opinions are null and void and mean absolutely dick..
I think both sides run to the camera for a “gotcha moment”. A mistake was made and surprisingly for a change actually acknowledged. The operation was successful and going forward one would expect tighter security. Should it happen again then heads should roll.
(03-27-2025, 12:08 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]I think both sides run to the camera for a “gotcha moment”. A mistake was made and surprisingly for a change actually acknowledged. The operation was successful and going forward one would expect tighter security. Should it happen again then heads should roll.
I agree, and hopefully you were just as blasë about Hillary's emails. If you weren't, that might be hypocrisy on your part.
Trump wasn't. Trump brought up Hillary's email problems incessantly. He's certainly a hypocrite if he doesn't fire someone over this. But I already knew he was a hypocrite and now you do, too.
(03-27-2025, 12:08 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]I think both sides run to the camera for a “gotcha moment”. A mistake was made and surprisingly for a change actually acknowledged. The operation was successful and going forward one would expect tighter security. Should it happen again then heads should roll.
It hasn’t been acknowledged. Well, Waltz admitted adding the journalist was a mistake but nobody has admitted using a commercial chat app for secure communications was a mistake. Military operational communications security is covered by COMSEC. Signal isn’t a secure channel. Any lower level official who’d made that kind of mistake would lose their job at a minimum. Maybe Waltz will be the fall guy but this points to larger issues within the administration.
(03-27-2025, 12:15 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (03-27-2025, 12:08 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]I think both sides run to the camera for a “gotcha moment”. A mistake was made and surprisingly for a change actually acknowledged. The operation was successful and going forward one would expect tighter security. Should it happen again then heads should roll.
I agree, and hopefully you were just as blasë about Hillary's emails. If you weren't, that might be hypocrisy on your part.
Trump wasn't. Trump brought up Hillary's email problems incessantly. He's certainly a hypocrite if he doesn't fire someone over this. But I already knew he was a hypocrite and now you do, too.
There is a stark difference in my opinion. In one case the parties involved vehemently denied everything, the other acknowledged the incident. One tried to hide everything the other fessed right up.
(03-27-2025, 12:15 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (03-27-2025, 12:08 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]I think both sides run to the camera for a “gotcha moment”. A mistake was made and surprisingly for a change actually acknowledged. The operation was successful and going forward one would expect tighter security. Should it happen again then heads should roll.
I agree, and hopefully you were just as blasë about Hillary's emails. If you weren't, that might be hypocrisy on your part.
Trump wasn't. Trump brought up Hillary's email problems incessantly. He's certainly a hypocrite if he doesn't fire someone over this. But I already knew he was a hypocrite and now you do, too.
The issue I had about Hillary's server in the bathroom deal was first it was a deliberate attempt to bypass security. Why? well in my opinion there were 2 reasons. One she didn't want to carry 2 devices around. Second she wanted a secure area to plot and plan like ALL politicians do. The real issue was after everything was subpoenaed she had everything destroyed. (as they said in the Godfather
"it is always better if there are no witnesses") This would have landed anyone else in jail for a long time.
We do not know everything concerning the current issue at the moment. This can go more than a few ways. Like a prudent man, I'll wait and see what is uncovered before forming an opinion.
(03-27-2025, 12:26 PM)MarleyJag Wrote: [ -> ] (03-27-2025, 12:08 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]I think both sides run to the camera for a “gotcha moment”. A mistake was made and surprisingly for a change actually acknowledged. The operation was successful and going forward one would expect tighter security. Should it happen again then heads should roll.
It hasn’t been acknowledged. Well, Waltz admitted adding the journalist was a mistake but nobody has admitted using a commercial chat app for secure communications was a mistake. Military operational communications security is covered by COMSEC. Signal isn’t a secure channel. Any lower level official who’d made that kind of mistake would lose their job at a minimum. Maybe Waltz will be the fall guy but this points to larger issues within the administration.
Reprimands are in order, the severity depends on your political leanings.
(03-27-2025, 12:29 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ] (03-27-2025, 12:15 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]I agree, and hopefully you were just as blasë about Hillary's emails. If you weren't, that might be hypocrisy on your part.
Trump wasn't. Trump brought up Hillary's email problems incessantly. He's certainly a hypocrite if he doesn't fire someone over this. But I already knew he was a hypocrite and now you do, too.
There is a stark difference in my opinion. In one case the parties involved vehemently denied everything, the other acknowledged the incident. One tried to hide everything the other fessed right up.
That's not how I remember it.
By the time the public knew that Hillary had a private server, many of the emails were already deleted. She handed over her hard drives, saying "here they are, but I deleted some of them," as if she was confident that she didn't do anything wrong.
Both of these are cases of folks doing wrong things that they didn't think were wrong.
(03-27-2025, 01:05 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (03-27-2025, 12:29 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]There is a stark difference in my opinion. In one case the parties involved vehemently denied everything, the other acknowledged the incident. One tried to hide everything the other fessed right up.
That's not how I remember it.
By the time the public knew that Hillary had a private server, many of the emails were already deleted. She handed over her hard drives, saying "here they are, but I deleted some of them," as if she was confident that she didn't do anything wrong.
Both of these are cases of folks doing wrong things that they didn't think were wrong.
Lol.
(03-27-2025, 01:05 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (03-27-2025, 12:29 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]There is a stark difference in my opinion. In one case the parties involved vehemently denied everything, the other acknowledged the incident. One tried to hide everything the other fessed right up.
That's not how I remember it.
By the time the public knew that Hillary had a private server, many of the emails were already deleted. She handed over her hard drives, saying "here they are, but I deleted some of them," as if she was confident that she didn't do anything wrong.
Both of these are cases of folks doing wrong things that they didn't think were wrong.
Well, you have a bad memory. (not that it surprises anyone) She destroyed the phones and server hard drives. Actually bleached the hard drives. This is from CNN too. LOL
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2016...nr-sot.cnn
(03-27-2025, 12:26 PM)MarleyJag Wrote: [ -> ] (03-27-2025, 12:08 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]I think both sides run to the camera for a “gotcha moment”. A mistake was made and surprisingly for a change actually acknowledged. The operation was successful and going forward one would expect tighter security. Should it happen again then heads should roll.
It hasn’t been acknowledged. Well, Waltz admitted adding the journalist was a mistake but nobody has admitted using a commercial chat app for secure communications was a mistake. Military operational communications security is covered by COMSEC. Signal isn’t a secure channel. Any lower level official who’d made that kind of mistake would lose their job at a minimum. Maybe Waltz will be the fall guy but this points to larger issues within the administration.
It was a big time screw up. As far as encryption goes, Signal is secure. However, the most secure safe in the world isn't secure if the combination is given to the wrong person. But as you say, it is not an authorized platform for communicating official business, although, some in the Biden administration were using it as well. Whether they were using it for official business is unknown.
To the bolded: Of course you think that.
(03-27-2025, 01:15 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ] (03-27-2025, 01:05 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]That's not how I remember it.
By the time the public knew that Hillary had a private server, many of the emails were already deleted. She handed over her hard drives, saying "here they are, but I deleted some of them," as if she was confident that she didn't do anything wrong.
Both of these are cases of folks doing wrong things that they didn't think were wrong.
Well, you have a bad memory. (not that it surprises anyone) She destroyed the phones and server hard drives. Actually bleached the hard drives. This is from CNN too. LOL
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2016...nr-sot.cnn
No, no, no. They just wiped them with a cloth.
(03-27-2025, 01:05 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (03-27-2025, 12:29 PM)copycat Wrote: [ -> ]There is a stark difference in my opinion. In one case the parties involved vehemently denied everything, the other acknowledged the incident. One tried to hide everything the other fessed right up.
That's not how I remember it.
By the time the public knew that Hillary had a private server, many of the emails were already deleted. She handed over her hard drives, saying "here they are, but I deleted some of them," as if she was confident that she didn't do anything wrong.
Both of these are cases of folks doing wrong things that they didn't think were wrong.
I’ll be magnanimous and just say your memory is fuzzy.
Wasn't Hillary's home server known to have been compromised as well? The difference is one event was clearly at best an accident by a staffer and at worst sabotage, the other event was at best incompetence (doubtful) and at worst serving one's own interests above the country's. The attempt to equate the two is absurd.
(03-27-2025, 01:15 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ] (03-27-2025, 01:05 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ]That's not how I remember it.
By the time the public knew that Hillary had a private server, many of the emails were already deleted. She handed over her hard drives, saying "here they are, but I deleted some of them," as if she was confident that she didn't do anything wrong.
Both of these are cases of folks doing wrong things that they didn't think were wrong.
Well, you have a bad memory. (not that it surprises anyone) She destroyed the phones and server hard drives. Actually bleached the hard drives. This is from CNN too. LOL
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2016...nr-sot.cnn
She did destroy some devices with hammers. But she thought she was complying with the law. She turned over a lot of emails willingly. She admitted deleting and destroying things, as if she thought it was normal and OK to do.
(03-30-2025, 01:30 PM)mikesez Wrote: [ -> ] (03-27-2025, 01:15 PM)Jag149 Wrote: [ -> ]Well, you have a bad memory. (not that it surprises anyone) She destroyed the phones and server hard drives. Actually bleached the hard drives. This is from CNN too. LOL
https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2016...nr-sot.cnn
She did destroy some devices with hammers. But she thought she was complying with the law. She turned over a lot of emails willingly. She admitted deleting and destroying things, as if she thought it was normal and OK to do.
LOL. now this is such a load of poo. Court ordered subpoenas state not to do this. you crack me up at times....