Reply With Quote
You Lie, you're in this thread, Thanks For Coming!
just out of curiosity, when do you feel the urge to vent to spurstalk... the place where nobody pays attention to the you post?
You Lie, you're in this thread, Thanks For Coming!
While Clinton used home email, State's networks were at risk
Hillary Rodham Clinton has come under fierce criticism for doing business over personal email while secretary of state, putting sensitive data at risk of being hacked. But her communications may not have been any more secure had she used a State Department email address, judging by years of independent audits that excoriated the department over poor cyber security on Clinton's watch.
The State Department's unclassified email system was breached by hackers linked to Russia last year who stole an unspecified number of emails. The hackers hit a department that was among the worst agencies in the federal government at protecting its computer networks while Clinton was secretary from 2009 to 2013, a situation that continued to deteriorate as John Kerry took office, according to independent audits and interviews.
The State Department's compliance with federal cybersecurity standards was below average when Clinton took over but grew worse in each year of her tenure, according to an annual report card compiled by the White House based on audits by agency watchdogs. Network security continued to slip after Kerry replaced Clinton in February 2013, and remains substandard, according to the State Department inspector general.
In each year from 2011 to 2014, the State Department's poor cybersecurity was identified by the inspector general as a "significant deficiency" that put the department's information at risk. The latest assessment is due to be published in a few weeks
http://phys.org/news/2015-10-clinton...-networks.html
\
Oops, They Did It Again: While Attacking Clinton, House Republicans Out CIA Source
Yes, Republicans have released more secret information in their efforts to undermine 2016Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, according to Politico.
House Benghazi Committee Chairman Trey Gowdy “accidentally” released the name of a CIA source.
This is the same source Republicans are attacking Clinton over, claiming she jeopardized national security by using her private email server for an email with his name on it.But it gets even better. It turns out
this outing is no biggie, according to the CIA. And that’s bad news for Republicans because they cited this as a “prime example of her misusing her private email server to receive and send highly classified information.
”The credibility of the Republican-led Benghazi committee came under fresh attack Sunday after the CIA informed the panel that it does not view a 2011 email forwarded by then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton as including any classified information. The committee chairman, Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., had cited Clinton’s handling of the March 18, 2011, email as a prime example of her misusing her private email server to receive and send highly classified information.
Josh Gerstein at Politico noticed that the Republicans had mistakenly outed the very source they were attacking Clinton for allegedly not being careful with:
The email posted Sunday on the panel’s website included in one instance the name of Mousa Koussa, a former Libyan government spy chief, and foreign minister. The name appeared to have been redacted in several other instances but was included in a subject line of a forwarded email.
Republicans tried to excuse their breach by saying they released the email regarding the sources so the American people “could decide for themselves.”
Select Committee on Benghazi Chairman Trey Gowdy today released the following letter in response to yet another Democrat missive that seeks to distort the majority’s investigative effort. He also released the redacted email in question so the American people could decide for themselves regarding concerns about sources and methods. The committee will continue to protect sensitive information related to this email.Of course, that explanation does not justify why he didn’t redact the sources name.Which the Committee did this morning.So it’s possible.It’s not like Democrats didn’t warn Gowdy. On Sunday, Rep. Elijah E. mings, the Ranking Member of the House Select Committee on Benghazi, sent a letter to Chairman Trey Gowdy about the Republican claim that the email contained “some of the most protected information in our intelligence community, the release of which could jeopardize not only national security but human lives.”
Oh, dear.
mings wrote, “The problem with your accusation—as with so many others during this investigation—is that you failed to check your facts before you made it, and the CIA has now informed the Select Committee that you were wrong. I believe your accusations were irresponsible, and I believe you owe the Secretary an immediate apology.”
Gowdy countered on Sunday by saying that even if the CIA doesn’t care, he was gonna protect that source’s name!
Gerstein pointed out in his Politico piece, “The CIA normally would treat the names of its alleged sources as confidential. However, Kousa’s contacts with U.S. intelligence have been publicly acknowledged for years.Much ado about nothing, but we do know that Republicans are the last people who should be pointing fingers about leaks and security issues.
Their Benghazi probes have resulted in more leaks than a busted pipe. Who can forget when House Republicans outed a CIA base?
The House Republican legacy as bumbling fools is intact and being rubbed into everyone’s face, just in case they don’t get it yet.
Want to screw up the economy, ruin government and make buffoons of yourselves? You need a job in the House.
Democrats just released a damning report that shows there is no evidence of wrongdoing on Clinton’s part.
Granted, it’s a Democratic report, but it’sbased on evidence obtained from the Select Committee, and it corroborates previous findings in other Benghazi probes. Sigh.
Let us all recall that the House that Ryan built defunded security for consulates, even after Secretary of State Hillary Clinton “warned that Republicans’ proposed cuts to her department would be “detrimental to America’s national security” — a charge Republicans rejected.
http://www.politicususa.com/2015/10/...iticus+USA+%29
i'm in the thread, but i'm not reading those walls of text you keep spamming
This mother er is the true definition of a social cripple, tbh..
Bou s logic:
> Benghazi = "wing-nut outrage"
> Has a 38-page thread about how "the madness of the GOP is the central issue of our time"
Yep... radical Islam, illegal immigration, and the economy aren't central issues - but if a Republican politician says something dumb in an interview, this country is doomed!
"radical Islam, illegal immigration"
... which bills have the Repugs passed on these?
"economy"
... Repugs's austerity of cutting govt and state spending has put and kept Ms out of work, out of good jobs, greatly extending the recovery of the Banksters Great Depression.
The Repugs/VRWC/1% are the MAJOR threats, DETRIMENTS to America, Americans, the environment, and mankind, much more dangerous and fatal than immigrants, jihadis.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 10-20-2015 at 05:18 AM.
While Clinton used home email, State's networks were at risk
Hillary Rodham Clinton has come under fierce criticism for doing business over personal email while secretary of state, putting sensitive data at risk of being hacked. But her communications may not have been any more secure had she used a State Department email address, judging by years of independent audits that excoriated the department over poor cyber security on Clinton's watch.
The State Department's unclassified email system was breached by hackers linked to Russia last year who stole an unspecified number of emails. The hackers hit a department that was among the worst agencies in the federal government at protecting its computer networks while Clinton was secretary from 2009 to 2013, a situation that continued to deteriorate as John Kerry took office, according to independent audits and interviews.
The State Department's compliance with federal cybersecurity standards was below average when Clinton took over but grew worse in each year of her tenure, according to an annual report card compiled by the White House based on audits by agency watchdogs. Network security continued to slip after Kerry replaced Clinton in February 2013, and remains substandard, according to the State Department inspector general.
In each year from 2011 to 2014, the State Department's poor cybersecurity was identified by the inspector general as a "significant deficiency" that put the department's information at risk. The latest assessment is due to be published in a few weeks.
State Department officials don't dispute the compliance shortcomings identified in years of internal audits, but argue that the audits paint a distorted picture of their cybersecurity, which they depict as solid and improving. They strongly disagree with the White House ranking that puts them behind most other government agencies. Senior department officials in charge of cybersecurity would speak only on condition of anonymity.
"We have a strong cybersecurity program, successfully defeating almost 100 percent of the 4 billion attempted intrusions we experience each year," spokesman Mark Toner said.
Two successive inspectors general haven't seen it that way. In December 2013, IG Steve Linick issued a "management alert" warning top State Department officials that their repeated failure to correct cybersecurity holes was putting the department's data at risk.
In late 2014, cyber intruders linked to Russia were able to break into the State Department's email system, infecting it so thoroughly that it had to be cut off from the Internet in March while experts worked to eliminate the infestation.
http://phys.org/news/2015-10-clinton...-networks.html
Benghazi Hearings Cancelled After Clinton Drops Out of Race !!!
WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—Washington was in turmoil on Tuesday morning as a House select committee abruptly cancelled its Benghazi hearings shortly after former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton announced that she was withdrawing from the Presidential race.
Secretary Clinton’s stunning announcement came at 9:00 A.M., followed by the committee chairman Trey Gowdy’s decision to cancel the hearings at 9:04.
“As you know, we have been preparing for this week’s hearings for months,” Gowdy said. “However, after meeting with fellow committee members over the past four minutes, we’ve come to the conclusion that we know all we need to know about Benghazi.”
Gowdy flatly denied that the decision to cancel the long-awaited Benghazi hearings had anything to do with Clinton’s sudden departure from the race. “We wish her well in whatever her future endeavors may be,” he said.
But shortly after Gowdy’s announcement, Clinton called an impromptu press conference at 9:13 to announce that she was jumping back into the race. “I was just trying to prove a point,” she told reporters, before heading off to campaign stops in Iowa and New Hampshire.
Minutes after Clinton’s second announcement, an irate Gowdy called her decision to reenter the race “beyond unethical” and revealed that the committee’s investigators had just uncovered fresh evidence about Benghazi.
http://www.newyorker.com/humor/borowitz-report/benghazi-hearings-cancelled-after-clinton-drops-out-of-race?mbid=nl_102015%20Borowitz%20Newsletter%20(1)& CNDID=&spMailingID=8172512&spUserID=MjczNzc0Njk0ND AS1&spJobID=782593066&spReportId=NzgyNTkzMDY2S0
Latest Gowdy Fakery: Name Of CIA Source In Clinton Email Was No Secret
For anyone disappointed by the absence of troubling material from Hillary Clinton’s emails – not to mention the cratering of the House Select Committee on Benghazi — Michael Isikoff provided a moment of hope last Monday on Morning Joe. According to the Yahoo News investigative correspondent, one of the emails newly released by the Benghazi committee was “evidence of the commission of a federal crime by someone, not Hillary Clinton,” because it included the name of a CIA source in Libya.
Even more thrilling, to some people at least, was the iden y of the supposedly incriminating message’s author: none other than Clinton’s often-demonized friend Sidney Blumenthal (who also happens to be a friend of mine).
“This is maybe the single most problematic email exchange we’ve seen with Hillary Clinton yet of all the emails that have been raised,” explained Isikoff. “What you have there is Blumenthal telling the secretary that somebody at the CIA gave the name of a sensitive human intelligence source to somebody who wasn’t at the CIA.”
Certainly this appeared to be a damaging story, if accurate – but its origin in Rep. Trey Gowdy’s discredited outfit should have raised immediate su ion. Had any of the journalists covering Gowdy checked carefully, we might have learned earlier what we now know: The CIA had reviewed that same email at the behest of the State Department before it was released and “made no redactions to protect classified information.”
In other words, Blumenthal’s email naming a certain Libyan political figure – the late dictator Muammar Qaddafi’s former intelligence chief Moussa Koussa — did not disclose any classified information, let alone intelligence secrets.
So why did Isikoff – and other credulous journalists – consider that March 18, 2011 email so damaging to Clinton and Blumenthal?(because Isikoff is a Jew?)
Evidently because Gowdy or his staff had redacted the name of the former Libyan official themselves — while adding the usual CIA phrase “redacted due to sources and methods” for dramatic emphasis. As released, the do ent seemed to show that the agency had blacked out the man’s name to protect a source. That was an intentional deception, reminiscent of the dirty trick that got David Bossie fired from the staff of the House Oversight Committee.
http://www.nationalmemo.com/latest-gowdy-fakery-name-of-cia-source-in-clinton-email-was-no-secret/?utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign =Morning%20Memo%20-%202015-10-20&utm_term=MM_frequency_six
Last edited by boutons_deux; 10-20-2015 at 09:38 AM.
It Gets Worse For Republicans As GOP Busted For Lying About Access To Emails
Democrats caught Republican Benghazi Select Committee members in a stone cold lie when Trey Gowdy and Lynn Westmoreland claimed that Congress did not have access to Amb. Ted Stevens’ emails.
Select Committee Chairman Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) said on Face The Nation, “none of the seven previous committees bothered to access the emails of our Ambassador.”
Republican Select Committee Member Rep. Mike Pompeo said on Meet The Press, “How on earth could any of the other committees have completed their work properly without access to the senior person on the ground’s emails?”
Today on CNN, Committee Member Lynn Westmoreland said on CNN, “Wouldn’t you want to know the emails of the guy that was there that was murdered and what he had asked for as far as help from the people he worked for? We’ve just now gotten those emails. We have just now gotten them. Nobody else had requested them. I haven’t had a chance to read them. We didn’t get them until the day before yesterday.”
The Democrats on the Benghazi Committee responded by crushing this Republican lie:
Contrary to Republican claims, multiple committees of Congress—including the Oversight Committee on which Chairman Gowdy serves—had access to many of Ambassador Stevens’ emails for years. On November 24, 2014, and December 9, 2014, the State Department produced to the Select Committee approximately 25,000 pages of do ents that had already been “previously produced to Congress.”
The lies are piling up, and House Republicans have nowhere to go but down. Democrats are shredding the Benghazi investigation before Hillary Clinton sits down to testify.
http://www.politicususa.com/2015/10/...iticus+USA+%29
Stop Hillary PAC supported Gowdy and his Stop Hillary Committee
Today, the Washington Post reported on newly discovered links between Rep. Trey Gowdy, the Chairman of the House Select Committee on Benghazi, and Stop Hillary PAC, which describes itself as “created for one reason only—to ensure Hillary Clinton never becomes President of the United States.” [. . .]There is nothing wrong with Gowdy's affiliation with the Stop Hillary PAC.
On September 2, 2015, Backer—on behalf of Stop Hillary PAC—filed a report with the FEC reporting an expenditure of $10,000 in “support” of Chairman Gowdy.
The “purpose of expenditure” is listed as “digital messaging delivery and robocalls.” The “name of federal candidate” is listed as “Trey Gowdy.”
What is wrong is his use of public monies on behalf of the Stop Hillary cause, otherwise known as the Select Benghazi Committee.
That's illegal.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/1...28Daily+Kos%29
another day.... another day where booboo is the only one talking about benghazi
Prior to Benghazi, were there 13 attacks on embassies and 60 deaths under President George W. Bush?
Of these 39 attacks, 20 resulted in at least one fatality. (Our complete list is here.) This is higher than Garamendi's claim, though if you only count attacks on embassy and consular property, there were 13.
Garamendi also understated the number of deaths. In the 20 incidents with at least one fatality, the total death toll was 87 -- quite a few more than the 60 Garamendi cited. If you only count those at embassies and consulates proper, the number of deaths drops to 66.
We should note that the vast majority of these deaths were not Americans. We counted 63 deaths that were either of non-Americans or of people whose nationality is unknown. Another three were U.S. civilians. Another 21 were workers at the U.S embassy or consulate, either of American or foreign nationality.
So, using what we think is the most reasonable definition, Garamendi's numbers are a bit low.
"As always, what causes the problem is not so much what happens, but the response to it," said Theodore R. Bromund, a senior research fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation. "‘If the administration had come out shortly after the attack and said, ‘Our consulate was attacked by organized Islamist forces, and we will pursue these terrorists and bring them to justice, one way or the other,’ I very much doubt there would be much juice in these hearings, if indeed they were being held at all."
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-me...embassies-and/
How many Congressional select committees for the 39 attacks under dubya?
mr. mings keeping it 80+20
First! to quote Trill Clinton's only post in the political forum not dealing with white on black crime.
Yeah. That was a pointless waste of time. No new information.
It's a real scandal that no one gives a about. But none of it makes Hillary look good.
The Repugs made her look real good today
Just when I thought I couldn't hate these closet got regressives more, they go and give Shillary the campaign gift of a lifetime.
SMH. ing idiots.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
