Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Comment Re:So basically... (Score 1) 657

So for the record, I'm going to be pulling quotes directly from the FBI.GOV website and the statement released by them. No news sites, just directly from the FBI. Link, in case you are interested

From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification.

So the FBI admits that there were at least 8 emails sent as TS on the unsecured server. Many more contained classified or secret information. These do not include "up-classified" emails, as that would be a bit unfair to include.

None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.

So open admission that they were housed, knowingly, on a insecure server.

Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

Intent to violate the law would never fly for you or me. You either did or you didn't break the law when it comes to criminal actions like this. Already using weasel words. Besides, the case seems to reflect what would happen to anyone under US Title 18 Sec 793 Part F. Possibly part E.

To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who engaged in this activity would face no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions. But that is not what we are deciding now.

In case you missed it

To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions.

And there it is. "We aren't looking into THAT matter, but yeah, if someone does what she did, there is a very high chance of security or administrative sanctions". Even though most people would end up being jailed under the previously listed law, or have their security clearances revoked and unable to be reinstated.

To set the record straight - Donald Trump is a tool. He should not be president. It was a bad move on the party's part. But so was nominating Clinton. This whole election is a shitshow.

Comment Re:So basically... (Score 1) 657

I can guarantee you that if I handled documents in the way that secretary Clinton did, I would be arrested. As a matter of fact, I just had to do training again on handling documents of that nature that reminded me of that. Its not a conspiracy. The rich and powerful get away with things that us meet mortals cannot. Take the kid that did a DUI, killed a bunch of people and got a slap on the wrist because he didn't know any better. If we did something like that, we would be in jail for years. How about Brock Turner?

You can keep defending her all you want, but the court case and the hearing was handled in a very strange way.

Comment Re:So basically... (Score 2) 657

When the FBI drops charges on someone and in the same statement says that other people should not5 do this or they may face criminal charges, it usually means someone did something illegal. They just have the clout to not get arrested like the rest of us. Also, just want to be clear, I don't back anyone this race. Even the 3rd party candidates are a joke.

Comment Re:It's the cost of the labor, stupid (Score 1) 146

My mechanic is cash only, unlicensed. He also gives a 6 month warranty on his work as long as you are running nitrous in the engine. His work is the best I've had and he is the only guy that is extremely upfront with labor and parts cost, and doesn't charge extra for parts. I found this guy by word of mouth, and I now refuse to take my cars anywhere else.

Slashdot Top Deals

"There is nothing new under the sun, but there are lots of old things we don't know yet." -Ambrose Bierce