Intelligence Community: On second thought, Hillary's emails did not contain top secrets

[Iceweasel]

Apparently the defense is she's too stupid to understand what classified meant.

 

[Care4all]

...and how did she receive any classified material on a secure server if she only used her own server?

The FBI found 2 e-mails containing data MARKED as 'TS/SCI'. TS/SCI information can and only is handled, sent, and received on a server approved for TS/SCI material. It is totally separate from UNCLASS and SECRET Servers. The TS/SCI data had to be ILLEGALLY moved from a TS/SCI-designated server to Hillary's 'SECRET' server.

She also said what she tried to delete was 'personal' UNCLASS documents. There are no such things once they have been stored on a classified server. To remove them and use them as UNCLASS they would have to be downgraded from SECRET to UNCLASS.
You don't combine data on 1 server. She obviously either did not understand how to handle classified (which makes sense since she broke the law by never taking the training) OR knew and didn't give a damn.

Nope! Gobbledygook!!

Those two emails are the ones that are now being noted in this op, as NOT being top secret...the reason being, is that the information that was sent to her, was PUBLIC INFORMATION, retrieved from everyday news articles and other things out there in the open for you and me to find and read and the sender, nor the recipient, got this information from any top secret info gathered. They found when they researched it, the intelligence community's gathering of supposed top secret info did not happen until after she had been sent this info that was out there in the public arena already. In other words, it simply was NOT top secret info, it was info available to anyone and everyone, in the Public.

And you have it all wrong on the emails, and are not up to date on the debunking of those accusations... the emails she deleted, and NOTE, not wiped clean, merely deleted, were personal emails and not State department emails at all, and according to government rules, were not suppose to be forwarded to be archived, they were SUPPOSE to be deleted....THOSE ARE THE RULES...for every single government employee....so nothing nefarious in her behavior at all....it was a GOVERNMENT REQUIREMENT.

 

[easyt65]

Nope! Gobbledygook!!

Those two emails are the ones that are now being noted in this op, as NOT being top secret...the reason being, is that the information that was sent to her, was PUBLIC INFORMATION, retrieved from everyday news articles and other things out there in the open for you and me to find and read and the sender, nor the recipient, got this information from any top secret info gathered.

I like how you just make Shi'ite up as you go...like Hillary does.

At least 60 (SIXTY) e-mails have now been flagged as being / containing 'classified' information, and 2 have been identified as containing 'TS/SCI':

"Among the first 60 flagged emails, nearly all contained classified secrets at the lowest level of “confidential” and one contained information at the intermediate level of “secret,” officials told the Times.

Those 60 emails do not include two emails identified in recent days by Intelligence Community Inspector General I. Charles McCullough III as containing “top-secret” information, possibly derived from Pentagon satellites, drones or intercepts, which is some of the nation’s most sensitive secrets."
LINK: Number of Hillary Clinton's emails flagged for classified data grows to 60 as review continues - Washington Times


1. All it takes is ONE mishandled piece of classified informatuin for someone to break the law.

2. Even if only 2 pieces of classified information (1 SECRET and 1 TS/SCI) were found on her server that means she violated NUMEROUS laws.

• Un-Lawful storage of Classified Information: 1) On an UN-Lawful Server (Security encryption not approved, installed incorrectly and did not match requirements); 2) SECRET / TS/SCI and SECRET information stored and accessed from the same server. 3) Server located in an un-secured unauthorized facility (bathroom?) maintained by a company and personnel without the proper security clearances and authority for the classification level of the information.
• Un-lawful handling of Classified information: IT company and personnel that did not have the proper security clearances and authorizations to handle SECRET / TS/SCI data; Hillary's lawyer walking around with all that classified information without a security clearance on a memory stick he was keeping OUTSIDE of an approved facility (who knows WHO the hell had access to the info while he was illegally walking around with it); she hung classified information on THE CLOUD - an unsecure network.
• Unlawful destruction (attempted destruction) of classified data: After lying about what she did and did not have on her server and in her e-mail (PERJURY), she tried to wipe her server...and failed. There are laws and legal processes required for the destruction of classified, NONE of which she followed.

EVEN if it was only 1 - 2 e-mails, SHE BROKE THE LAW....OVER AND OVER! She KNOWINGLY and WILLFULLY compromised our national security to save her own ass and protect 'her turn' as President!

 

[flacaltenn]

That's not how folks get in trouble for compromising security of classified documents. You are guilty if you even mishandle it or remove it from the security protections that the rules require..

Doesn't have to be an intentional leak..

and how many people have actually gone to jail for that? Because I asked OKT that very question, and the best he could come up with was guys the FBI thought were spying and they came up short.

Guys, seriously, you would think after 25 years of trying this, you'd have learned by now. You aren't going to nail the Clintons on some legal technicality.

Certainly thousands a year lose their clearances and jobs for mishandling classified documents. Here's one you might remember..

http://nypost.com/2015/09/27/yes-hillary-clinton-broke-the-law/

On April 23, Petraeus pled guilty to a single misdemeanor charge of unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or materials under 18 USC §1924. Many in the intelligence community were outraged at the perceived “slap on the wrist” he received, at a time when the Justice Department was seeking very strong penalties against lesser officials for leaks to the media.

According to the law, there are five elements that must be met for a violation of the statute, and they can all be found in section (a) of the statute: “(1) Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, (2) by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, (3) knowingly removes such documents or materials (4) without authority and (5) with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location [shall be guilty of this offense].”

The Petraeus case meets those conditions. Does Clinton’s?

To KNOWINGLY set-up an electronic drop box "at an unauthorized location" is guilty of AT LEAST this statute.
If she LIED about the details to authorities or Congress -- you can add a few charges to that.

You LOSE YOUR CLEARANCES as Secretary of State ---- you would have to be removed or resign. No other choices. So even WITHOUT a civil prosecution -- she should have been REMOVED from that post.

 

[easyt65]

And Hillary has been caught violating a lot more than Patraeus ever did...

 

[flacaltenn]

...and how did she receive any classified material on a secure server if she only used her own server?

The FBI found 2 e-mails containing data MARKED as 'TS/SCI'. TS/SCI information can and only is handled, sent, and received on a server approved for TS/SCI material. It is totally separate from UNCLASS and SECRET Servers. The TS/SCI data had to be ILLEGALLY moved from a TS/SCI-designated server to Hillary's 'SECRET' server.

She also said what she tried to delete was 'personal' UNCLASS documents. There are no such things once they have been stored on a classified server. To remove them and use them as UNCLASS they would have to be downgraded from SECRET to UNCLASS.
You don't combine data on 1 server. She obviously either did not understand how to handle classified (which makes sense since she broke the law by never taking the training) OR knew and didn't give a damn.

Nope! Gobbledygook!!

Those two emails are the ones that are now being noted in this op, as NOT being top secret...the reason being, is that the information that was sent to her, was PUBLIC INFORMATION, retrieved from everyday news articles and other things out there in the open for you and me to find and read and the sender, nor the recipient, got this information from any top secret info gathered. They found when they researched it, the intelligence community's gathering of supposed top secret info did not happen until after she had been sent this info that was out there in the public arena already. In other words, it simply was NOT top secret info, it was info available to anyone and everyone, in the Public.

And you have it all wrong on the emails, and are not up to date on the debunking of those accusations... the emails she deleted, and NOTE, not wiped clean, merely deleted, were personal emails and not State department emails at all, and according to government rules, were not suppose to be forwarded to be archived, they were SUPPOSE to be deleted....THOSE ARE THE RULES...for every single government employee....so nothing nefarious in her behavior at all....it was a GOVERNMENT REQUIREMENT.

Nope -- Easy was largely correct. This Politico piece in the OP is about a debate on the classified nature of just TWO emails (maybe three) with higher classifications. The public will never know the arguments for or against and it's largely heresay. What Easy was trying to tell you..

You don't combine data on 1 server. She obviously either did not understand how to handle classified (which makes sense since she broke the law by never taking the training) OR knew and didn't give a damn.

..... is absolutely correct. The public nor the media understands the different levels and handling of classified material and those who DO -- aren't gonna openly lecture them about it. But there are documents you can CARRY (with authorization and in a secure facility) and documents that NEVER LEAVE A VAULT.

And the other 400 or so classified documents that the FBI is investigating are STILL being analyzed. I even posted a Politico article that notes these high numbers. And it's MIND-BLOWING that folks can't get it thru their heads that 10s of MILLIONs of folks know how this works and Hillary is just pissing us all off by being so damn flippant about "wiping it with a cloth"...

 

[chikenwing]

In a flip flop that is going to make the Hillary-obsessed conservative members of this board, Politico reports that the Clinton e-mails contained no top secrets as the DNI previously said. James Clapper himself is admitting the "oops".

It is likely that conservatives in this board will pretend this is a cover-up as they always do when they are wrong.
Key Clinton emails did not contain highly classified secrets, inquiry finds

Ill wait for the FBI to finish their work.

 

[flacaltenn]

Just so that A. Perez doesn't think FlaCalTenn is bullshitting him -- I'll let a senator tell you that ALL "top secret" clearances are not alike. And that's it's insufficient to say that the lawyer had "one"...

Sen. Grassley Grills Hillary Clinton's Lawyer About Security Clearance - Breitbart



Senator Grassley notes these developments in his letter to Kendall, then sets about challenging the glib assurances from Clintonworld that Kendall was fully cleared and properly trained to handle the data placed in his custody:

In light of that particular classification, which generally requires advanced protocols such as a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) and other similar arrangements to possess and view, it appears the FBI has determined that your clearance is not sufficient to allow you to maintain custody of the emails. Consistent with that determination, the FBI is now in custody of not only the thumb drives previously in your possession that allegedly contain all of Secretary Clinton’s emails, but also Secretary Clinton’s personal server that was used to maintain the top secret emails outside of a government facility.

Further reporting indicates that Secretary Clinton may have provided you copies of her emails in December 2014 and that government officials realized that the emails contained classified information in May 2015 yet the Department of State did not deliver a safe to store the thumb drives until July 2015. Thus, since at least May 2015 and possibly December 2014, it appears that in addition to not having an adequate security clearance, you did not have the appropriate tools in place to secure the thumb drives. Even with the safe, there are questions as to whether it was an adequate mechanism to secure TS/SCI material. Given the importance of securing and protecting classified information, especially TS/SCI material, it is imperative to confirm when, how, and why you, and any of your associates, received a security clearance in connection with your representation of Ms. Clinton and whether it was active while you had custody of Secretary Clinton’s emails.

Appears that even her "top secret" lawyer had no genuine appreciation of the proper procedures or handling and is likely WHY all that was whisked out of his hands by the FBI....

old propaganda, already debunked.

there was no top secret emails on her server thus far, so grassly was wrong about the lawyer not having clearance....

STILL do not know if those few emails were TS/SCI material. And WE or the media willl NEVER KNOW the determination of that. Politico has "an unidentified source" -- because that source would likely LOSE their clearances for weighing in with "their opinion" to the media..

 

[OKTexas]

Well, just keep on regurgitating the talking points, we'll see what the FBI has to say. In the mean time you might want to read the link.

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/88404.pdf

Why do you keep pretending that you will respect the FBI's decision? You are going to be the first one to claim that the FBI covered up for Hillary.

So now you claim to be a freaking psychic, any more hidden talents. Actually I think the FBI will do their job and refer charges, it will be the DOJ burying it, just like they did with Holder and Learner.

If the FBI doesn't "refer charges", will you say it was a coverup?

I'll wait and see what their reasoning is.

 

[OKTexas]

That's not way classified material is handled, treated or secured. Hillary was responsible for KNOWING the classification of material in ANY message that crossed her eyes. REGARDLESS of whether it bears a proper label or not. Every individual protecting a certain security class KNOWS classified info when they read it.

And as Secretary of State -- she was the one to be enforcing the proper discipline for classified material in that organization. NOT --- being an ABUSER of that system..

p.s.
we aren't talking about how classified material is handle ... the allegation is that hillary had classified material on her sever ... to date not one has turned up to be classified on her server... and you of all people can't say there is

So you're claiming she never ever contacted any foreign official thorough her email?

there isn't any regulation against her contacting a foreign official on her email ... there aren't any allegations stating she had contacted any foreign official with classified information off her private account ... and you nor the congress or the FBI has any document saying she ha is what I'm saying ... what is being implied here and in the right wing press is they believe she has... the Key word here is believe not we have found... she has just a lot of maybes, might have, or we believe, coming from the right ... I have challenged any one to show us where she has, so far just a lot of name calling and not one bit of factual evidence

Well, just keep on regurgitating the talking points, we'll see what the FBI has to say. In the mean time you might want to read the link.

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/88404.pdf

the law you quote is again after the fact ... you ass wipes keep quoting the law that doesn't not apply in this case ... if the email is marked after the fact it does not apply here ... try again... hell right in the very first sentence it defines sensitive ... in her case it wasn't marked sensitive ... when are you ass wipes going to grasp that ??? soon I hope... and yes you keep "regurgitating the talking points" that doesn't apply to her situation

So your defense is the head of a federal agency is too stupid to know what may be sensitive or classified when they see it? And you think such a person should be president? You're more stupid than that slime ball bitch.

Also you have no clue how open source email is routed.

 

[bravoactual]

In a flip flop that is going to make the Hillary-obsessed conservative members of this board, Politico reports that the Clinton e-mails contained no top secrets as the DNI previously said. James Clapper himself is admitting the "oops".

It is likely that conservatives in this board will pretend this is a cover-up as they always do when they are wrong.
Key Clinton emails did not contain highly classified secrets, inquiry finds

our

THE F.B.I. has already admitted as much.

11-Hours in front of Goober Gowdy and Kangaroo Court and they ain't got nothing.

 

[The Rabbi]

p.s.
we aren't talking about how classified material is handle ... the allegation is that hillary had classified material on her sever ... to date not one has turned up to be classified on her server... and you of all people can't say there is

So you're claiming she never ever contacted any foreign official thorough her email?

there isn't any regulation against her contacting a foreign official on her email ... there aren't any allegations stating she had contacted any foreign official with classified information off her private account ... and you nor the congress or the FBI has any document saying she ha is what I'm saying ... what is being implied here and in the right wing press is they believe she has... the Key word here is believe not we have found... she has just a lot of maybes, might have, or we believe, coming from the right ... I have challenged any one to show us where she has, so far just a lot of name calling and not one bit of factual evidence

Well, just keep on regurgitating the talking points, we'll see what the FBI has to say. In the mean time you might want to read the link.

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/88404.pdf

the law you quote is again after the fact ... you ass wipes keep quoting the law that doesn't not apply in this case ... if the email is marked after the fact it does not apply here ... try again... hell right in the very first sentence it defines sensitive ... in her case it wasn't marked sensitive ... when are you ass wipes going to grasp that ??? soon I hope... and yes you keep "regurgitating the talking points" that doesn't apply to her situation

So your defense is the head of a federal agency is too stupid to know what may be sensitive or classified when they see it? And you think such a person should be president? You're more stupid than that slime ball bitch.

Also you have no clue how open source email is routed.

Again, and I hate to repeat myself. Whether the email was marked Classified or not is irrelevant. If it contained classified material she is in violation.

 

[gipper]

So you're claiming she never ever contacted any foreign official thorough her email?

there isn't any regulation against her contacting a foreign official on her email ... there aren't any allegations stating she had contacted any foreign official with classified information off her private account ... and you nor the congress or the FBI has any document saying she ha is what I'm saying ... what is being implied here and in the right wing press is they believe she has... the Key word here is believe not we have found... she has just a lot of maybes, might have, or we believe, coming from the right ... I have challenged any one to show us where she has, so far just a lot of name calling and not one bit of factual evidence

Well, just keep on regurgitating the talking points, we'll see what the FBI has to say. In the mean time you might want to read the link.

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/88404.pdf

the law you quote is again after the fact ... you ass wipes keep quoting the law that doesn't not apply in this case ... if the email is marked after the fact it does not apply here ... try again... hell right in the very first sentence it defines sensitive ... in her case it wasn't marked sensitive ... when are you ass wipes going to grasp that ??? soon I hope... and yes you keep "regurgitating the talking points" that doesn't apply to her situation

So your defense is the head of a federal agency is too stupid to know what may be sensitive or classified when they see it? And you think such a person should be president? You're more stupid than that slime ball bitch.

Also you have no clue how open source email is routed.

Again, and I hate to repeat myself. Whether the email was marked Classified or not is irrelevant. If it contained classified material she is in violation.

Yet it appears nothing will be done about it.

 

[The Rabbi]

Well, just keep on regurgitating the talking points, we'll see what the FBI has to say. In the mean time you might want to read the link.

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/88404.pdf

Why do you keep pretending that you will respect the FBI's decision? You are going to be the first one to claim that the FBI covered up for Hillary.

So now you claim to be a freaking psychic, any more hidden talents. Actually I think the FBI will do their job and refer charges, it will be the DOJ burying it, just like they did with Holder and Learner.

here is another republican in denial ... I can hear him now ... wow!!!!! its a FBI conspiracy

You're a lying son of a bitch.

Youv'e just figured that out?

 

[The Rabbi]

In a flip flop that is going to make the Hillary-obsessed conservative members of this board, Politico reports that the Clinton e-mails contained no top secrets as the DNI previously said. James Clapper himself is admitting the "oops".

It is likely that conservatives in this board will pretend this is a cover-up as they always do when they are wrong.
Key Clinton emails did not contain highly classified secrets, inquiry finds

our

THE F.B.I. has already admitted as much.

11-Hours in front of Goober Gowdy and Kangaroo Court and they ain't got nothing.

They proved Hillary lied about Benghazi. WHere were you when this was happening?

 

[OKTexas]

Well, just keep on regurgitating the talking points, we'll see what the FBI has to say. In the mean time you might want to read the link.

Unless the FBI has an e-mail with a thread titled 'Our top secret stuff" addressed to [email protected], no reasonable person is going to really think Hillary did anything wrong.

Hey, here's a crazy idea. How about you guys nominate a candidate who doesn't think crazy shit like Mexicans are all rapists or the Pyramids were grain silos and then we can have a sensible discussion about whether or not that person might be a better president than Mrs. Clinton.

Great deflection there regressivecrat.

why didn't you show us a email that she is in violation here??? could it be that you are the Great deflection repub-lie-can't ???? could you???

You're just not very smart are you, any such email would be in the 700 that weren't released.

 

[flacaltenn]

Well, just keep on regurgitating the talking points, we'll see what the FBI has to say. In the mean time you might want to read the link.

Unless the FBI has an e-mail with a thread titled 'Our top secret stuff" addressed to [email protected], no reasonable person is going to really think Hillary did anything wrong.

Hey, here's a crazy idea. How about you guys nominate a candidate who doesn't think crazy shit like Mexicans are all rapists or the Pyramids were grain silos and then we can have a sensible discussion about whether or not that person might be a better president than Mrs. Clinton.

Great deflection there regressivecrat.

why didn't you show us a email that she is in violation here??? could it be that you are the Great deflection repub-lie-can't ???? could you???

YOU will never see any of those emails deemed classified. Good thing too !!!

 

[OKTexas]

Just so that A. Perez doesn't think FlaCalTenn is bullshitting him -- I'll let a senator tell you that ALL "top secret" clearances are not alike. And that's it's insufficient to say that the lawyer had "one"...

Sen. Grassley Grills Hillary Clinton's Lawyer About Security Clearance - Breitbart



Senator Grassley notes these developments in his letter to Kendall, then sets about challenging the glib assurances from Clintonworld that Kendall was fully cleared and properly trained to handle the data placed in his custody:

In light of that particular classification, which generally requires advanced protocols such as a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) and other similar arrangements to possess and view, it appears the FBI has determined that your clearance is not sufficient to allow you to maintain custody of the emails. Consistent with that determination, the FBI is now in custody of not only the thumb drives previously in your possession that allegedly contain all of Secretary Clinton’s emails, but also Secretary Clinton’s personal server that was used to maintain the top secret emails outside of a government facility.

Further reporting indicates that Secretary Clinton may have provided you copies of her emails in December 2014 and that government officials realized that the emails contained classified information in May 2015 yet the Department of State did not deliver a safe to store the thumb drives until July 2015. Thus, since at least May 2015 and possibly December 2014, it appears that in addition to not having an adequate security clearance, you did not have the appropriate tools in place to secure the thumb drives. Even with the safe, there are questions as to whether it was an adequate mechanism to secure TS/SCI material. Given the importance of securing and protecting classified information, especially TS/SCI material, it is imperative to confirm when, how, and why you, and any of your associates, received a security clearance in connection with your representation of Ms. Clinton and whether it was active while you had custody of Secretary Clinton’s emails.

Appears that even her "top secret" lawyer had no genuine appreciation of the proper procedures or handling and is likely WHY all that was whisked out of his hands by the FBI....

old propaganda, already debunked.

there was no top secret emails on her server thus far, so grassly was wrong about the lawyer not having clearance....

The lawyer only had clearance to view documents related to the Benghazi investigation in the State Dept, he had no clearance that extended to his private office.

 

[flacaltenn]

why is it you losers cant find anybody willing to put their name on a claim highly classified documents didnt cross hillary's email server??

...and how did she receive any classified material on a secure server if she only used her own server?

Hey Weasel --- that's the issue here. HELLO ??? 400 classified documents on her own server.. NOT a DOD approved secure server.. It was in the course of doing her job from a fucking blackberry for convenience, rather than giving a good damn about the security implications of that action..

 

[OKTexas]

That's not way classified material is handled, treated or secured. Hillary was responsible for KNOWING the classification of material in ANY message that crossed her eyes. REGARDLESS of whether it bears a proper label or not. Every individual protecting a certain security class KNOWS classified info when they read it.

And as Secretary of State -- she was the one to be enforcing the proper discipline for classified material in that organization. NOT --- being an ABUSER of that system..

p.s.
we aren't talking about how classified material is handle ... the allegation is that hillary had classified material on her sever ... to date not one has turned up to be classified on her server... and you of all people can't say there is

So you're claiming she never ever contacted any foreign official thorough her email?

there isn't any regulation against her contacting a foreign official on her email ... there aren't any allegations stating she had contacted any foreign official with classified information off her private account ... and you nor the congress or the FBI has any document saying she ha is what I'm saying ... what is being implied here and in the right wing press is they believe she has... the Key word here is believe not we have found... she has just a lot of maybes, might have, or we believe, coming from the right ... I have challenged any one to show us where she has, so far just a lot of name calling and not one bit of factual evidence

Well, just keep on regurgitating the talking points, we'll see what the FBI has to say. In the mean time you might want to read the link.

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/88404.pdf

uhhh, THAT was issued AFTER Hillary left office, in March of 2013, so why would we need to read that link?

OH NO! you fucked up again, it was updated in Mar 2013, had you bothered to read the document, the majority of the dates contained in it are 2005. But hey let's not let reality interfere in a good story.

From the link:

12 FAM 542 IMPLEMENTATION (CTS-117; 11-04-2005) This policy is effective 11-04-2005.

12 FAM 543 ACCESS, DISSEMINATION, AND RELEASE (CTS-161; 03-01-2011)

12 FAM 544 SBU HANDLING PROCEDURES (CTS-117; 11-04-2005)

I could go on, but I think I've proved my point.