5 ms·

The one question not asked yet. The guy knew probably about Clinton emails case. And made nothing with his personal mailbox having the same problems. He's unlik

by kushti 11y ago

The one question not asked yet. The guy knew probably about Clinton emails case. And made nothing with his personal mailbox having the same problems. He's unlikely to be an idiot(who knows though). So has he thought he's more protected from a prosecution than Hillary?

Phlarp 11y ago
>The guy knew probably about Clinton emails case. Of course he knows about the Hillary situation. Since this is the CIA, would it be entirely tinfoil mad-hat of me to suggest that this was an intentional honeypot left out, knowing it would get hacked and the ensuing leak coverage would reinvigorate the debate over Hillary's misuse of private email for official business? Brennan doesn't exactly strike me as the kind of guy who plays for the Democratic team.
- scintill76 11y ago
  Is it really worth making yourself a laughing-stock to hope the press runs with it and maybe you score a few political points a whole year before the election? If this unnerves/angers the wrong people, he could lose his job and collective CIA morale too. I'm not totally buying that he's really this incompetent, but dragging down Clinton seems a bit far-fetched as a reason this was intentional.
panarky 11y ago
Not only that, but the whole reason Brennan got the job as Director of the CIA was that the prior Director, David Petraeus, resigned[1] in the wake of his own email and information leak scandal. Petraeus and Broadwell used fake names to create free webmail accounts exchanging messages without encryption tools. The FBI, using electronic metadata that pinpointed the times, places and IP addresses, identified Paula Broadwell as the source. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petraeus_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petraeus_scandal
- scintill76 11y ago
  Ooh, I didn't think about Petraeus. I was glad to learn recently that he was actually convicted of unauthorized removal and retention of classified information in April -- two years' probation and $100k fine (fine more than 2x what DoJ asked for!)[0] I'm sure that's all they'll give Snowden. /s (Yeah, I know Snowden is a bigger magnitude, but Petraeus was more reckless and self-serving, and as the leader he should set the example -- he deserves at least a few months in Club Fed.) [0] http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/david-petraeus-to-be-sentenced-in-leak-investigation.html?rref=us&module=Ribbon&version=context&region=Header&action=click&contentCollection=U.S.&pgtype=article&_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/david-petraeus-to-be-se...
rhino369 11y ago
The released docs so far are all dated when he wasn't actually in government. This is his honest to goodness personal email account. So far there is no indication that he's using his personal email as a government work email. In fact, all these emails are from times when he had no government email. Clinton side stepped her official email to use an off the books private server in an official capacity.

by kushti 11y ago

Phlarp 11y ago

>The guy knew probably about Clinton emails case. Of course he knows about the Hillary situation. Since this is the CIA, would it be entirely tinfoil mad-hat of me to suggest that this was an intentional honeypot left out, knowing it would get hacked and the ensuing leak coverage would reinvigorate the debate over Hillary's misuse of private email for official business? Brennan doesn't exactly strike me as the kind of guy who plays for the Democratic team.

scintill76 11y ago
Is it really worth making yourself a laughing-stock to hope the press runs with it and maybe you score a few political points a whole year before the election? If this unnerves/angers the wrong people, he could lose his job and collective CIA morale too. I'm not totally buying that he's really this incompetent, but dragging down Clinton seems a bit far-fetched as a reason this was intentional.

panarky 11y ago

Not only that, but the whole reason Brennan got the job as Director of the CIA was that the prior Director, David Petraeus, resigned[1] in the wake of his own email and information leak scandal. Petraeus and Broadwell used fake names to create free webmail accounts exchanging messages without encryption tools. The FBI, using electronic metadata that pinpointed the times, places and IP addresses, identified Paula Broadwell as the source. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petraeus_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petraeus_scandal

scintill76 11y ago
Ooh, I didn't think about Petraeus. I was glad to learn recently that he was actually convicted of unauthorized removal and retention of classified information in April -- two years' probation and $100k fine (fine more than 2x what DoJ asked for!)[0] I'm sure that's all they'll give Snowden. /s (Yeah, I know Snowden is a bigger magnitude, but Petraeus was more reckless and self-serving, and as the leader he should set the example -- he deserves at least a few months in Club Fed.) [0] http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/david-petraeus-to-be-sentenced-in-leak-investigation.html?rref=us&module=Ribbon&version=context&region=Header&action=click&contentCollection=U.S.&pgtype=article&_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/david-petraeus-to-be-se...

rhino369 11y ago

The released docs so far are all dated when he wasn't actually in government. This is his honest to goodness personal email account. So far there is no indication that he's using his personal email as a government work email. In fact, all these emails are from times when he had no government email. Clinton side stepped her official email to use an off the books private server in an official capacity.