Blog Categories

Hillary Has to Change Tactics

Chicago Tribune article by Megan McArdle of Bloomberg View writes a good article on the Inspector General report regarding Hillary’s emails.

While the report doesn’t find an email with Hillary writing: heh, heh, heh, they’ll never FOIA my emails NOW!!!!” — what it does lay out is deeply troubling, even though her supporters have already begun the typical defense of “nothing to see here, move along.”

It lays to rest the longtime Clinton defense that this use of a private server was somehow normal and allowed by government rules: It was not normal, and was not allowed by the government rules in place at the time.  Hillary Clinton broke the rules in her use of a private email server while serving as secretary of state, according to a report by the State Department’s inspector general May 25, 2016. (Reuters)

It also shreds the defense that “Well, Colin Powell did it too” into very fine dust, and then neatly disposes of the dust. As the report makes very clear, there are substantial differences between what the two secretaries of State did:

– Powell says he set up a private email account, in addition to his internal account, because at the time the State Department “email system in place only only permitted communication among Department staff. He therefore requested that information technology staff install the private line so that he could use his personal account to communicate with people outside the Department.” This is a quite plausible reason that, around the turn of the millennium, a secretary of state would have wanted to use his own account. Powell seems not to have done enough to ensure that those records were maintained, which is a problem (though it’s not clear that he was aware that he should have turned those emails over). But as far as I can tell, the most plausible explanation of Clinton’s behavior is that she set up her email server expressly to keep those emails from being archived as records (and subject to Freedom of Information Act requests), which is a great deal more problematic than setting up an inadequately archived email system because there’s no other way to use an increasingly vital communications technology.

– Powell had an outside line set up in his office, into which he plugged a laptop, which he used alongside his State Department computer. The IT department was, in other words, aware that this was going on, and it seems to have come up in discussions of his drive to get everyone at State access to the Internet at their desk. While the quality of information about Powell’s Internet usage is not as high as it is about Clinton’s (after 10 years, memories fade, people become hard to contact, and records degrade), there’s no indication that he was less than transparent with staff. But folks at State clearly had no idea what was going on with Clinton’s email server and, troublingly, at least two people who asked about it were apparently told to shut up and never raise the subject again.

– Three things have changed pretty dramatically since Powell’s day: the magnitude (and appreciation) of cybersecurity threats, the quality of the State Department systems and government rules surrounding both recordkeeping and cybersecurity. One can argue that Powell should not have used a private computer during his tenure, but he seems to have done so in consultation with the IT folks, at a time when the policy surrounding these things was “very fluid” and the State Department “was not aware of the magnitude of the security risks associated with information technology.” By 2009, the magnitude of the risks was clear, and the policy was also much clearer. As far as the OIG could determine, Clinton took no action to ensure that she was in compliance with that policy, which, in fact, she emphatically was not. Officials at State told the OIG in no uncertain terms that they would not have approved her reliance on a personal email server.

– The OIG found only three instances in which State employees had relied exclusively on personal email: Powell, Clinton and Ambassador J. Scott Gration, U.S. emissary to Kenya from 2011 to 2012. Gration, who served under Clinton, was in the middle of a disciplinary process initiated against him for this email use (among other things) when he resigned. So it is impossible to argue not only that this was somehow in compliance with State’s guidelines but also that Clinton might have thought it was in compliance, unless she somehow failed to notice when or why her ambassador to Kenya went missing.

– The OIG found evidence that the server was attacked and that Clinton’s staff members (and presumably Clinton herself) were aware of it. (Clinton at one point seems to have expressed concern that people might be trying to hack her email.) These incidents should have been reported to computer security personnel, but OIG found no evidence that they were. Clinton’s supporters have offered the wan defense that “attacked” doesn’t mean “actually hacked,” but of course, since they didn’t report it, there was no timely investigation, so we don’t really know what happened, or even whether her server setup and/or server administrator were sophisticated enough to detect a penetration had one taken place.

This is the most profoundly amazing part of the whole story: Clinton’s server administrator was hired by State as a political appointee, from which position he continued to provide support to Clinton’s private email server during working hours, without telling anyone this was happening:

Why is Clinton being held to a lower standard?  Well, because she’s a Clinton, and the Clintons have always acted as if the rules applied only to others. And given that Democrats boxed themselves into her name on the ticket so early on, Team Blue had little choice but to rally around and pretend that this is just a minor peccadillo, like forgetting to date the signature on your FEC filings. Lord knows, this election cycle, there’s good reason to view this sort of behavior as the lesser of two evils.

But it isn’t minor. Setting up an email server in a home several states away from the security and IT folks, in disregard of the rules designed to protect state secrets and ensure good government records, and then hiring your server administrator to a political slot while he keeps managing your system on government time is unacceptable behavior in a government official. If Clinton weren’t the nominee, or if she had an R after her name rather than a D, her defenders would have no difficulty recognizing just how troubling it is.

That doesn’t mean you necessarily have to prefer Donald Trump to her. Back when I was surveying #NeverTrump voters, I heard from more than one conservative intelligence type who basically said “I think Clinton should be in jail for what she did, and I still think she’s a better choice than Trump for the presidency.”

Politics is not simply a team sport, and good government is possible only if we’re willing to call out misbehavior no matter who does it. Even if we still hold our nose and pull the lever for the misbehaver come November.

#HiLIARy #HiLIEry

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-hillary-clinton-emails-private-server-20160526-story.html

 

Quotes out of Context

Oh my, am I glad I stumbled upon this file.  There are some very good quotes here from a business meeting from my days in the Interactive Technologies Group of ICON Clinical Research.

No logic here.
– Ken Files

I’m just lying.
– Ken Files

You’re going to stifle my creativity.
– Ken Files

The past is past.
– Martin Cleary

How does this fit into the bigger thing?
– Paul Colombo

Mid-august is not very far away.
– Paul Colombo (stated on July 29)

Rikki also kissed me.
– Debbie McCoy

Alcohol will be involved.
– Ken Files

Check back for more postings. If your name is mentioned and you’d like it removed, please email me at chris@focmnetworking.com and I’ll give your request strong consideration and may even might possibly act on it. Seriously, though I will remove it if you want me to.

Background: This all started at a US Sales meeting and in order to stay focused on what was being said, I started writing down the business cliches, like “let’s circle the wagons”, “let’s table that”, “always be closing” and then count how many times they were said. As I began paying attention, I would hear a phrase that was appropriate for the context in which it was said, but wow, it sure was amusing to see the phrase just sitting there by itself. That lead me to put them into a slide show show so the phrase was seen in its purest form along with the person who said it.  As this practice became known, the slide set became the unofficial and humorous wrap-up presentation, kind of a summary of the things stated over the course of the meeting.

FOCM Political Discourse

Within FOCM Networking are several sub-groups, one of which is the political group.  These “discussions” take place via email and occasionally we have them at this website but we put a password on the discussion group so all can feel free to state their opinion in private.  So to give you an idea of what the FOCM political email discussions can look like, here’s a recent exchange, with all names removed:

FOCM Political Member A

All this would all be so much funnier if it wasn’t so serious!  He is the biggest moron.  All smoke and mirrors as far as his “success” and the biggest liar in the public eye.  He makes the others look like Honest Abe!  And all his supporters are proof of the complete failure of the American educational system!

Hillary 2016!


FOCM Political Member D:

Good Lord, no to Hillary – she’ll hurt the drug companies which will hurt my livelihood and that’s the only thing you should be concerned about – me!  Although I actually have no idea what Trump will do.

What worries me about Hillary is what America would look like in 4 years (if she has a Democratic Congress) –
Long lines at men’s rooms due to a shortage of them – having to convert some to Men who are transitioning to Women; Women who are transitioning to Men, Now Men were Women, Now Women were Men (what about the international symbols for such bathrooms – oy vey!)
Availability of abortions for up to the day before birth
Holding down pharma company profits – breaking one of America’s best industries; stifling innovation
The same access to healthcare for everyone (lowering the quality and increasing the price)
Socialized Medicine (see above – lower quality, longer wait times)
Taxing caucausians to pay remunerations to descendants of slaves and Native Americans
Only Liberal free speech allowed

FOCM Political Member B

A Hillary supporter questioning anyone’s educational level makes me chuckle (and throw up in my mouth a little). Honestly, the woman could strangle a kitten on live tv and her supporters would still vote for her and claim she had nothing to do with it.

I honestly don’t get what is to admire. Her hunger for power at all costs? I don’t see her at all as a woman who has forged her own way. I see her as opportunistic at best. As a woman, working mother, wife and veteran, she stands for nothing I hold in esteem. I can abide a buffoon far more easily than an intentional manipulator who seems to have a compulsion for lying.

FOCM Political Member A

Love Kasich.  I blame the slimy media that more people don’t know why he’s the best candidate.  All they care about is hype and Trump is a media darling.  It’s a shame since he is the only qualified Republican.

FOCM Political Member B

But the resounding rationale I hear for supporting her and calling those with differing opinions uneducated is simply that she isn’t as bad as the other guy……followed by dismissive laughter.

Don’t expect any clear reasons beyond that she isn’t Trump. If Trump is no longer in the picture I, like so many others, will be waiting with bated breath to hear about all of her astounding leadership and fight for the common man or woman (with whom she has zero in common).

Trump might not be presidential in demeanor,  but you’re right on one thing….he’s showing up the racket for what it is. So is Sanders. Neither of them would have any traction if not for Hillary. Kasich is taking the higher ground in many respects. Cruz has his fair argument to make.

FOCM Political Member A

No one lies more than Trump.  And I don’t vote for buffoons.

Hillary 2016!

FOCM Political Member B

No one leaves more ambassadors to die and makes up fake cover stories than Hiilary.

Hillary for prison 2016!

FOCM Political Member A

Trump is a criminal, a narcissist, misogynist, racist, pathological liar, has no plan AT ALL and no idea how to run a country.  He’s a complete joke.

Trump for prison 2016!

Hillary for president 2016!

FOCM Political Member C

John Kasich is the one to vote for.

The one good thing Trump has done is release this country from the shackles of PC speech.  We are once again free to say what we believe!  However he is not presidential material and neither is Hillary.

Why she believes she has the moral authority to demand lower CEO pay when as a multi-millionaire she demands more for a ONE hour speech than the average US CEO makes in a year.  Her rationale for charging this much was that she was just doing what previous secretaries of state had done.  Given her wealth I see that as nothing more than pure greed on her part.  Every day I struggle to understand how she can be worth $30+ million and have only left her secretary of state job 3 years ago…. that’s about $10 million per year…sounds like CEO pay to me.  Please, someone, anyone, help me understand what economic added value enterprise she was running for the last three years that justifies that kind of income.

I’d love to read her Wallstreet speech transcripts. Even the Huffington Post thinks she is afraid to release them. But, as with anything else her supporters don’t like, heads go into the sand and fingers get pointed at others to somehow justify it all.

FOCM Political Member B

Hopefully, someone will reply to your question with a logical justification, but I doubt it. A vote for Hillary is a vote for the status quo.

 

 

 

 

Donald Trump Raw Transcript

From the NY Times comes this interview with Donald Trump and when I read the words to his answers, it’s comical in its lack of substance or content.  I know many politicians evade answering questions, but they usually go to a substantive point they want to make, but not Donald.

Donald J. Trump, the Republican presidential candidate, had two telephone interviews with Maggie Haberman and David E. Sanger of The New York Times. Here are some excerpts:

On whether he would be willing for the United States to be the first to use nuclear weapons in a confrontation with adversaries:

“An absolute last step. … I personally think it’s biggest problem the world has, nuclear capability … And the first one to use them, I think that would be a very bad thing. And I will tell you, I would very much not want to be the first one to use them, that I can say.”

What!?!  Nuclear capability is the biggest problem the world has?  I think he means, countries with nuclear capabilities.  And, uh, no shit, the first one to use them would be a very bad thing.

_____

On whether the United States should spy on its allies, and whether President Obama was right to stop the listening in on Angela Merkel’s cellphone:

“You know, I’d rather not say that. I would like to see what they’re doing. Because you know, many countries, I can’t say Germany, but many countries are spying on us. I think that was a great disservice done by Edward Snowden. That I can tell you.”

So, he would like to continue spying on our allies to see what they’re doing?, but he’d rather not say that?

_____

 

On his standards for using American troops abroad, such as for homeland protection, for humanitarian intervention, or to aid allies:

“It sounds nice to say, ‘I have a blanket standard; here’s what it is.’ No. 1 is the protection of our country, O.K.? That’s always going to be No. 1, by far. That’s by a factor of 100… After that it depends on the country, the region, how friendly they’ve been toward us. You have countries that haven’t been friendly to us that we’re protecting. So it’s how good they’ve been toward us, etc., etc.”

I guess it’s nice that he speaks at the 5th grade level, so that everyone can understand what little substance he says, but these phrases like: “number 1 by far by a factor of 100”.
WHAT?!

_____

On recent American engagement in the Middle East:

“If you would go back 15 years ago, and I’m not saying it was only Obama, it was Obama’s getting out, it was other people’s getting in, but you go back 15 years ago, and I say this: If our presidents would have just gone to the beach and enjoyed the ocean and the sun, we would’ve been much better off in the Middle East, than all of this tremendous death, destruction, and you know, monetary loss.”

HUH?!?

_____

On his recent comments questioning the effectiveness of NATO and its ability to combat terrorism:

“I’ll tell you the problems I have with NATO. No. 1, we pay far too much. … NATO is unfair. … Because it really helps them more so than the United States, and we pay a disproportionate share. Now, I’m a person that – you notice I talk about economics quite a bit, in these military situations, because it is about economics, because we don’t have money anymore because we’ve been taking care of so many people in so many different forms that we don’t have money. … So NATO is something that at the time was excellent. Today, it has to be changed. It has to be changed to include terror. It has to be changed from the standpoint of cost because the United States bears far too much of the cost of NATO.”

I know I may be nitpicking, but the sentences and grammar – ugh: so NATO has to be changed to include terror.  What does that mean?

_____

On whether Russia will end up dominating Ukraine:

“Well, unless, unless there is, you know, somewhat of a resurgence frankly from people that are around it. Or they would ask us for help. But they don’t ask us for help. They’re not even asking us for help. They’re literally not even talking about it, and these are the countries that border the Ukraine.”

HUH?

_____

 

Trump Transcripts are Funny

I’ve now read a couple of interviews or portions of interviews with Donald Trump.  Watching and listening to him talk and answer questions is one thing but reading them is different, amazing – kinda and funny.  Like other politicians who don’t answer a question – they give an answer to a question they’d rather answer, Trump also doesn’t answer, or well, he kinda answers but with a jibberish statement.

Here’s an example: he was answering a question about the North Carolina new law that includes barring individuals in the state from using public bathrooms that don’t correspond to their biological sex — the one listed on their birth certificate.

“North Carolina did something — it was very strong — and they’re paying a big price,” Mr. Trump said. “And there’s a lot of problems. And I heard — one of the best answers I heard was from a commentator yesterday saying, leave it the way it is, right now.”  (okay, see what I mean – what kind of answer is this? leave what the way it is right now; right now it is the law as passed or does he mean before the law)

He added that before the law passed, there had been “very few problems” but now North Carolina is experiencing an exodus of businesses and “strife” from people on both sides of the issue.

“You leave it the way it is,” he said. “There have been very few complaints the way it is.”

“You know, there’s a big move to create new bathrooms,” Mr. Trump said. “Problem with that is for transgender. That would be — first of all, I think that would be discriminatory in a certain way. It would be unbelievably expensive for businesses and for the country. Leave it the way it is.”  (Really, there is a big move to create new bathrooms? and how is a “big move to create new bathrooms” a problem for transgender people? How are new bathrooms discriminatory?)