When will Hillary Clinton give up her candidacy ? Part 2

BupkiS

I'm sorry CI, I think someone either messed with your link or you made a mistake. Your link concerns the 2008 election and Obama's Palestine/Israel views, which in my opinion, have always been gotten wrong by most people. I never saw him as being pro Palestinian except when it comes to Israel building illegal settlements. It is one of the areas I disagree with both Obama and Hillary Clinton about. Detainees lack of rights have been another one.

In any case, it would be interesting to look up and see how many votes might have been effected by the FBI reopening of Hillary Clinton email investigation or votes which might still be effected by it.

Apparently there is a lot of chatter of Hillary Clinton losing her firewall on states that were previously thought to be locked in for her. (what a lot of political jargon...sorry)

Vox explains the different ways she still could win even if she does lose some of her previously locked in states.

How Hillary Clinton could win 270 electoral votes

Quote blatham:

Which brings up the matter of Diebold screen voting machines switching votes from Hillary to Trump in minority neighborhoods. A friend, African-American, originally from Georgia told me a couple of days ago about his friend still down there using one of the screen voting machines. He voted for Hillary, pressed the Vote button, and had the thing giving out a Trump vote. When he brought the matter to the attention of the poll workers, they somehow managed to record the vote for Hillary but had no response for his urgent questions about people who voted for Hillary but did not look at the printed receipt about who the vote was actually recorded for.

This is extremely bad news. The Republicans have already put in the theme of the "low information voter", (minorities), so that they can say that black people simply don't know how to follow simple directions about how to vote. It is beginning to look to they have been setting this up for several years, piece by piece.

I've bumped into one other anecdotal account of this happening but for me to get seriously suspicious it would require many more such instances coming to light and being validated through investigation.

So you're in the Trump camp of rigged elections?

The Diebold conspiracy pops up every election.

Which is why you should stick to marking a cross on a bit of paper.

Unwise to be too flip about this. We've seen in this cycle that a competing world power has the means to effect an election. In the digital era, these capacities look certain to advance further in sophistication and effect.

Social media responds that it took them 11 months to go through 33,000 emails, and just 11 days to go through 650,000 emails. (lots of dick picks, I guess)



So I guess it could be several lifetimes before they're actually finished this task, right?

The show must go on.

It took 11 months not to search 33,000 emails, but to obtain warrants, track down devices, interview people, follow up on leads, piece together bits of forensic data, etc.

Edward Snowden mentioned that it wouldn't take more than a couple hours for a computer 10 years old to sift through that many emails filtering by emails sent to or sent by HRC. I'm sure the FBI then ran the emails that popped up through an electronic database search for specific keywords and then reviewed what popped, I'm sure they reviewed a lot individually as well.

Non-issue, just like most of us knew it to be. It's freaking email we're talking about here.

CLINTON: "I never received nor sent any material that was marked classified." NBC interview, July 2016.

THE FACTS: Clinton has separately clung to her rationale that there were no classification markings on her emails that would have warned her and others not to transmit the sensitive material. But the private system did, in fact, handle emails that bore markings indicating they contained classified information, Comey said.

He said the marked emails were "a very small number." But that's not the only standard for judging how officials handle sensitive material, he added. "Even if information is not marked classified in an email, participants who know, or should know, that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it."

---

CLINTON: "I responded right away and provided all my emails that could possibly be work related" to the State Department. News conference, March 2015.

THE FACTS: Not so, the FBI found.

Comey said that when his forensic team examined Clinton's server it found there were "several thousand work-related emails that were not in the group of 30,000" that had been returned by Clinton to the State Department.

---

CLINTON: "I thought it would be easier to carry just one device for my work and for personal emails instead of two." News conference, March 2015.

THE FACTS: This reasoning for using private email both for public business and private correspondence didn't hold up in the investigation. Clinton "used numerous mobile devices to view and send email" using her personal account, Comey said. He also said Clinton had used different servers.

---

CLINTON: "It was on property guarded by the Secret Service, and there were no security breaches. ... The use of that server, which started with my husband, certainly proved to be effective and secure." News conference, March 2015.

Why FBI director slammed Clinton but rejected criminal charges

CLINTON campaign website: "There is no evidence there was ever a breach."

THE FACTS: The campaign website claimed "no evidence" of a breach, a less categorical statement than Clinton herself made last year, when she said there was no breach. The FBI did not uncover a breach but made clear that that possibility cannot be ruled out.

"We assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton's personal email account," Comey said.

He said evidence would be hard to find because hackers are sophisticated and can cover their tracks. Comey said his investigators learned that Clinton's security lapses included using "her personal email extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related emails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries." Comey also noted that hackers breached the email accounts of several outsiders who messaged with Clinton.

Comey did not mention names, but a Romanian hacker who called himself Guccifer accessed and later leaked emails from Sidney Blumenthal, an outside adviser to Clinton who regularly communicated with her.

---

CLINTON: "I opted for convenience to use my personal email account, which was allowed by the State Department." News conference, March 2015.

THE FACTS: Comey did not address Clinton's reason for using a private server instead of a government one, but he highlighted the perils in routing sensitive information through a home server.
____________________________________________

The FBI found that Clinton's personal server was "not even supported by full-time security staff like those found at agencies and departments of the United States government or even with a commercial email service like Gmail," the director said.

A May 2016 audit by the State Department inspector general found there was no evidence Clinton sought or received approval to operate a private server, and that she "had an obligation to discuss using her personal email account to conduct official business with their offices." Courts have frowned on such a practice.

In an unrelated case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled Tuesday that the purpose of public records law is "hardly served" when a department head "can deprive the citizens of their right to know what his department is up to" by maintaining emails on a private system.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/fact-check-how-do-hillary-clintons-email-claims-hold-up-fbi/

I find you to be very informed but,,,,,,,Can I ask you a serious question about reality that only you can answer?

Lots of computer people both left and right say it not only is possible but could have been done in just hours. Google it.

The Clinton ground game is looking good.

A good friend of mine (who ran Canadian political campaigns at the local and national level - helped bring in Brian Mulroney, former long-term Progressive Conservative prime minister) is a Clinton/Kaine volunteer in Virginia. His reports on what's happening on his call-outs/visits is impressive. They know who their core voters are. He reports a lot of knowledge and enthusiasm.

Interesting, he and his reports. Someday, not at all necessary immediately, I'll like to know what a progressive conservative is. I'll look it up, but not today, says ms. election nervous.

for what they needed to do with those emails - basic software could identify any emails of interest in a couple of hours max. Apparently, there weren't many non-dups that needed a look. A friend in the IT world said he estimated it would take 2 - 8 hours in total.

Pretty basic IT stuff.

wired.com take

https://www.wired.com/2016/11/yes-donald-trump-fbi-can-vet-650000-emails-eight-days/

Edward Snowden on twitter

I do have to agree with you, it reminds me of all of those people who tried to say that the good ship Jesus was a bad ship.

One day Hitlary will be understood just as the good ship Jesus will be.

WASHINGTON — Government investigators said Friday that they had discovered classified information on the private email account that Hillary Rodham Clinton used while secretary of state, stating unequivocally that those secrets never should have been stored outside of secure government computer systems.

Mrs. Clinton has said for months that she kept no classified information on the private server that she set up in her house so she would not have to carry both a personal phone and a work phone. Her campaign said Friday that any government secrets found on the server had been classified after the fact.

But the inspectors general of the State Department and the nation’s intelligence agencies said the information they found was classified when it was sent and remains so now. Information is considered classified if its disclosure would likely harm national security, and such information can be sent or stored only on computer networks with special safeguards.
____________________________________________

This is called gross negligence. The appeal to an authority who chooses to not to see it for what it is does not change the fact of what it is.