Breaking: Clinton Gave Staffers Clintonemail.com Addresses Too
from the it's-turtles-all-the-way-down dept
There has been quite a kerfuffle around the apparent fact that Hillary Clinton solely used her personal email account for government business. This piqued my curiosity, especially since I've been playing with a service called Conspire lately.Conspire is a startup that analyzes your email and then seeks to provide you with an email chain with which to introduce you to the desired person. So, say I wanted to email my current business crush, Marcus Lemonis, Conspire's system found a path with which I could ask for an introduction. In my case, my friend Espree could email her friend Nathan for an introduction to Marcus. Neat. I can definitely see how Conspire could become a useful tool, albeit one that raises some very interesting privacy questions.
So, I looked for Hillary Clinton's now famous hdr22@clintonemail.com email address in Conspire. No luck. Conspire is still growing, so I suppose it makes sense that none of its members have yet to email Hillary. But then I tried just the clintonemail.com domain in the search, and got one hit. Huma Abedin, Hillary's long-time aide, had an email address with the clintonemail.com domain in Conspire's records. Unfortunately, I have no connection path to Ms. Abedin, so I can't ask the system to facilitate an introduction, but it is fascinating. What other Clinton staffers were using email addresses at the clintonemail.com domain? Seems like at least one was.
Clinton’s personal aide, Huma Abedin, and her communications adviser, Philippe Reines, regularly used unofficial email accounts for work-related email, former colleagues said.This also makes me wonder what other new communications mediums our government officials are using. Could world leaders be SnapChatting each other? Or perhaps sending international YO's? Or trolling each other on YikYak? And, if they are, are they complying with records retention laws?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: clinton, clintonmail, email, foia, hillary clinton, huma abedin, transparency
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Don't they work for us?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Don't they work for us?
Have a nice little pat on the head. I'm looking forward to senility when I can believe such fairy tales again too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Don't they work for us?
I think that it's a bad idea to make fun of people for this. Although our governmental employees don't think they work for us and act as if they don't, we have to never let go of the fact that they they are, in fact, our subservients rather than our masters.
If we discourage people from thinking the we are the bosses, we are encouraging the people to accept a subservient role and to stop fighting to make sure that's the fact in practice. In other words, that sort of sentiment only makes the notion of "there's nothing we can do so we should do nothing" stronger.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Don't they work for us?
The truth hurts. "Of the people, by the people, for the people ..." contains about as much truth and reality today as Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the Tooth Fairy combined. If the Internet's done anything, it's at least shown the world what a crock of !@#$ all that "American Exceptionalism" is worth. It's BS. Your elections are staged by the incumbents, your cops kill twice as many civilians as the FBI is willing to admit even while they rob you blind assuming your stuff is forfeit due to the Drug War, and you have to be a millionaire (at least) to get an education or survive a lawsuit. I won't even bother with affordable health care or prescription drugs. Meanwhile, you're no less racist than you were at the end of the Civil War, and that may even be getting worse. Jeffrey Stirling and John Kiriaku go to jail, and Petraeus gets a wave. For what purpose, other than to hide illegality, would a Sec. of State former FLOTUS ignore rules on email?
I am *so* glad I'm not subject to the crap you people suffer, and pay your taxes for, daily. The world will rejoice when the USA collapses and breaks up into multiple warring, Balkanized provinces, disappearing into history. Good riddance!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Don't they work for us?
the hell of it is, i agree with both of you: john seems like a great guy from his writings, don't really 'know' tqk, but can't refute what he says... a little harsh, perhaps, but we are w-a-a-a-y past the point of being polite (or voting) having any real effect on TPTB...
and on alternate days, i can be understanding of sincere -yet frustratingly pollyannish- citizens who have yet to be awoken, and give them a pass, if not try to edumacate them; but then on days i am fed up with The System and ignorant, i can lampoon willfully blind sheeple mercilessly myself...
to paraphrase whitman (?): do i contradict myself ? very well, i am full of multitudes, therefore i contradict myself...
the truth of the matter, is that the 'blame' lies somewhere in between the sociopathic .1 to 1% who fuck it all up PURPOSEFULLY for their own greedy ends; and the 99 to 99.9% who are too busy, stupid, misinformed, uninformed and/or cowed to rise up on their hind paws and bare their fangs at our 'superiors'...
Empire must fall.
the sooner the fall,
the gentler for all...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Don't they work for us?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Don't they work for us?
That is how it is supposed to work. Make them earn their keep!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Use of private email by state department is great news!
Government lawyers cannot claim with a straight face that people have no expectation of privacy in email accounts run by companies, when the government itself thought that email was secure enough to conduct State Department business.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Use of private email by state department is great news!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Interesting Privacy Questions, Like: Did Abedin Let a Third Party Access Her Email?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Interesting Privacy Questions, Like: Did Abedin Let a Third Party Access Her Email?
True. Though it's also possible that it was just someone who had emailed with her who used Conspire.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe private email servers work better?
Maybe private email servers could be viewed as more secure than government servers which may have secret unelected watchers secretly watching everything secretly in secret from a secret remote location. While these snoops could easily monitor the private servers, they have to know you are using them first.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Maybe private email servers work better?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Maybe private email servers work better?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Maybe private email servers work better?
no.
https://www.techdirt.com/blog/netneutrality/articles/20141012/06344928801/revealed-isps-al ready-violating-net-neutrality-to-block-encryption-make-everyone-less-safe-online.shtml
when the ISP's get in the middle - it doesn't really matter where your email goes - it is unsecure. Which is (small) part of the whole FCC Neutrality debate - whether or not ISP's can muck with the the transmission speed or inject their ads - or turn TLS off for you.
Maybe email servers could be viewed as more secure than government servers which may have secret unelected watchers secretly watching everything secretly in secret from a secret remote location.That's the NSA.
While these snoops could easily monitor the private servers, they have to know you are using them first.This is the point of "only the metadata" - now we know where you connect to, and can just watch the connection, not you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Headlines
Please don't do that. It's tacky.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh, really?
You think?
This is a spear-phisher's gold mine. It's one of the most useful resources I could think of for them to lay their hands. And best of all: someone else is building it for them at no expense.
So, sure. Let it analyze your email. That's one of the best ways to help abusers target the people you correspond with: you know, your friends, family, coworkers. Great choice.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Today's headline news
[ link to this | view in chronology ]