[American Thinker] I've long said Hillary Clinton is insufficiently stupid to have believed she could operate an unsecured home server without compromising the security of any data transmitted through it or stored on it.For just as long, it has been my contention that the server was the faucet through which she pumped information she was selling (yes, selling) to foreign entities, both public and private.
I.T. security protocols would've easily flagged attempts at intrusion if targeted toward the State Department's secure servers, through which then-secretary of state Clinton ought to have conducted business. Likewise, the transfer or copying of said information from a secure server is a detectable act with access being tightly controlled and records kept of who looked at what and when.
"Convenience," the excuse proffered by Clinton for not following even the most basic of security procedures, is, in a way, a rare instance of Clinton telling the truth, just not in the way she would have us believe.
She claims that it was more convenient to utilize a home server, using linked devices to conduct business. More truthfully, it was more convenient to offload state secrets absent the prying eyes of government I.T. security staff.
In his now infamous "exoneration presser," fired FBI director James Comey admitted that Clinton's server was "likely compromised" by foreign actors, but he also claimed there was "no evidence" of such an intrusion. During disgraced FBI agent Peter Strzok's recent testimony, we discovered that this assertion was just another in a long line of brazen falsehoods tumbling out of Comey's mouth.
To drink a shot of liquor every time Comey says something that might be true might prove an entertaining parlor game for teetotalers. Beyond stating his name, there's precious little else he might say that is not suspect.