"This is the biggest load of bull..." Clinton on the emails.

[paperview]

I posted this a few pages back.

Curiously (well, not really) no one responded.

Let's look at someone who mishandled classified and marked TS/SCI information....

How did this all work out?

"While serving as attorney general, Alberto Gonzales mishandled top secret documents, risking the release of classified information about two of the Bush administration's most sensitive counterterrorism efforts - a surveillance program and detainee interrogations.

Mishandling classified materials violates Justice Department regulations and removing them from special secure facilities without proper authorization is a crime. But a report issued Tuesday by the Justice Department's inspector general says the agency decided not to press charges against Gonzales, who resigned under fire last year.

Lawyers for Gonzales acknowledge he did not store or protect the top secret documents - a set of handwritten notes about the surveillance program and 17 other papers - as he should have.
...
At issue is how, and where, Gonzales stored the documents, which are classified as sensitive compartmentalized information, or SCI.

SCI materials are among the highest and most sensitive levels of classified top secret documents and usually relate to national security cases."

DOJ: Gonzales Mishandled Top-Secret Docs
September 2, 2008, 4:12 AM

DOJ: Gonzales Mishandled Top-Secret Docs - CBS News
The damning OIG report is here:
Report - Office of the Inspector General - US Department of Justice

Give it a lil looksee. If you're pressed for time, do a Ctrl^F for TS/SCI markings.

Have fun!

"A small snip: "Gonzales told the OIG that he knew it was “very, very limited access.” However, he stated he could not say whether the program was TS or TS/SCI, although he said he knew it was of the highest level of secrecy.
11
Gonzales said he “assumed” documents related to the program bore classification markings that would have indicated the precise
classification of the program, but that he did not create such documents, so he
could not be certain...."

"The OIG reviewed these additional documents. The two envelopes
contained a total of 17 separate documents. The envelope containing
documents related to the NSA surveillance program bore the handwritten
markings, “TOP SECRET – EYES ONLY – ARG” followed by an abbreviation for
the SCI codeword for the program. The envelope containing the documents
relating to a detainee interrogation program bore classification markings
related to that program. Each document inside the envelopes had a cover
sheet and header-footer markings indicating the document was TS/SCI. "
-----------------------

He took TOP SECRET classified documents home, in an unlocked briefcase, stored them in his home, unprotected. Then later kept them in a safe hall outside his office where uncleared persons had access to him.

And what happened to him? Diddlysquat.

Lawyers for Gonzales acknowledge he did not store or protect the top secret documents - a set of handwritten notes about the surveillance program and 17 other papers - as he should have.

Didn't protect them as he should have? Yeah, that describes Hillary's actions too.

Then later kept them in a safe hall outside his office where uncleared persons had access to him.

Like Hillary's lawyers, who decided which emails to delete, were uncleared persons.

And what happened to him -- after he mishandled MARKED classified information (unlike Hillary's that was not marked) ...

I'll tell you: diddly and squat.

(unlike Hillary's that was not marked)

Mishandling classified info, even if it's unmarked, or if her aides removed the markings, is still a no-no.

I'll tell you: diddly and squat.

When you look at the sheer magnitude of her wrong doing, it in no way compares to what Gonzales did.

Her aides didn't "remove the markings" - you kumquat.

2. How's that indictment coming along?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I posted this a few pages back.

Curiously (well, not really) no one responded.

Let's look at someone who mishandled classified and marked TS/SCI information....

How did this all work out?

"While serving as attorney general, Alberto Gonzales mishandled top secret documents, risking the release of classified information about two of the Bush administration's most sensitive counterterrorism efforts - a surveillance program and detainee interrogations.

Mishandling classified materials violates Justice Department regulations and removing them from special secure facilities without proper authorization is a crime. But a report issued Tuesday by the Justice Department's inspector general says the agency decided not to press charges against Gonzales, who resigned under fire last year.

Lawyers for Gonzales acknowledge he did not store or protect the top secret documents - a set of handwritten notes about the surveillance program and 17 other papers - as he should have.
...
At issue is how, and where, Gonzales stored the documents, which are classified as sensitive compartmentalized information, or SCI.

SCI materials are among the highest and most sensitive levels of classified top secret documents and usually relate to national security cases."

DOJ: Gonzales Mishandled Top-Secret Docs
September 2, 2008, 4:12 AM

DOJ: Gonzales Mishandled Top-Secret Docs - CBS News
The damning OIG report is here:
Report - Office of the Inspector General - US Department of Justice

Give it a lil looksee. If you're pressed for time, do a Ctrl^F for TS/SCI markings.

Have fun!

"A small snip: "Gonzales told the OIG that he knew it was “very, very limited access.” However, he stated he could not say whether the program was TS or TS/SCI, although he said he knew it was of the highest level of secrecy.
11
Gonzales said he “assumed” documents related to the program bore classification markings that would have indicated the precise
classification of the program, but that he did not create such documents, so he
could not be certain...."

"The OIG reviewed these additional documents. The two envelopes
contained a total of 17 separate documents. The envelope containing
documents related to the NSA surveillance program bore the handwritten
markings, “TOP SECRET – EYES ONLY – ARG” followed by an abbreviation for
the SCI codeword for the program. The envelope containing the documents
relating to a detainee interrogation program bore classification markings
related to that program. Each document inside the envelopes had a cover
sheet and header-footer markings indicating the document was TS/SCI. "
-----------------------

He took TOP SECRET classified documents home, in an unlocked briefcase, stored them in his home, unprotected. Then later kept them in a safe hall outside his office where uncleared persons had access to him.

And what happened to him? Diddlysquat.

Lawyers for Gonzales acknowledge he did not store or protect the top secret documents - a set of handwritten notes about the surveillance program and 17 other papers - as he should have.

Didn't protect them as he should have? Yeah, that describes Hillary's actions too.

Then later kept them in a safe hall outside his office where uncleared persons had access to him.

Like Hillary's lawyers, who decided which emails to delete, were uncleared persons.

And what happened to him -- after he mishandled MARKED classified information (unlike Hillary's that was not marked) ...

I'll tell you: diddly and squat.

(unlike Hillary's that was not marked)

Mishandling classified info, even if it's unmarked, or if her aides removed the markings, is still a no-no.

I'll tell you: diddly and squat.

When you look at the sheer magnitude of her wrong doing, it in no way compares to what Gonzales did.

Her aides didn't "remove the markings" - you kumquat.

2. How's that indictment coming along?

Her aides didn't "remove the markings"

Then how were the markings removed on classified material she sent?

 

[paperview]

I posted this a few pages back.

Curiously (well, not really) no one responded.

Let's look at someone who mishandled classified and marked TS/SCI information....

How did this all work out?

"While serving as attorney general, Alberto Gonzales mishandled top secret documents, risking the release of classified information about two of the Bush administration's most sensitive counterterrorism efforts - a surveillance program and detainee interrogations.

Mishandling classified materials violates Justice Department regulations and removing them from special secure facilities without proper authorization is a crime. But a report issued Tuesday by the Justice Department's inspector general says the agency decided not to press charges against Gonzales, who resigned under fire last year.

Lawyers for Gonzales acknowledge he did not store or protect the top secret documents - a set of handwritten notes about the surveillance program and 17 other papers - as he should have.
...
At issue is how, and where, Gonzales stored the documents, which are classified as sensitive compartmentalized information, or SCI.

SCI materials are among the highest and most sensitive levels of classified top secret documents and usually relate to national security cases."

DOJ: Gonzales Mishandled Top-Secret Docs
September 2, 2008, 4:12 AM

DOJ: Gonzales Mishandled Top-Secret Docs - CBS News
The damning OIG report is here:
Report - Office of the Inspector General - US Department of Justice

Give it a lil looksee. If you're pressed for time, do a Ctrl^F for TS/SCI markings.

Have fun!

"A small snip: "Gonzales told the OIG that he knew it was “very, very limited access.” However, he stated he could not say whether the program was TS or TS/SCI, although he said he knew it was of the highest level of secrecy.
11
Gonzales said he “assumed” documents related to the program bore classification markings that would have indicated the precise
classification of the program, but that he did not create such documents, so he
could not be certain...."

"The OIG reviewed these additional documents. The two envelopes
contained a total of 17 separate documents. The envelope containing
documents related to the NSA surveillance program bore the handwritten
markings, “TOP SECRET – EYES ONLY – ARG” followed by an abbreviation for
the SCI codeword for the program. The envelope containing the documents
relating to a detainee interrogation program bore classification markings
related to that program. Each document inside the envelopes had a cover
sheet and header-footer markings indicating the document was TS/SCI. "
-----------------------

He took TOP SECRET classified documents home, in an unlocked briefcase, stored them in his home, unprotected. Then later kept them in a safe hall outside his office where uncleared persons had access to him.

And what happened to him? Diddlysquat.

Lawyers for Gonzales acknowledge he did not store or protect the top secret documents - a set of handwritten notes about the surveillance program and 17 other papers - as he should have.

Didn't protect them as he should have? Yeah, that describes Hillary's actions too.

Then later kept them in a safe hall outside his office where uncleared persons had access to him.

Like Hillary's lawyers, who decided which emails to delete, were uncleared persons.

And what happened to him -- after he mishandled MARKED classified information (unlike Hillary's that was not marked) ...

I'll tell you: diddly and squat.

(unlike Hillary's that was not marked)

Mishandling classified info, even if it's unmarked, or if her aides removed the markings, is still a no-no.

I'll tell you: diddly and squat.

When you look at the sheer magnitude of her wrong doing, it in no way compares to what Gonzales did.

Her aides didn't "remove the markings" - you kumquat.

2. How's that indictment coming along?

Her aides didn't "remove the markings"

Then how were the markings removed on classified material she sent?

^ Didn't watch the hearings. Comey squashed that one down, cowboy.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Lawyers for Gonzales acknowledge he did not store or protect the top secret documents - a set of handwritten notes about the surveillance program and 17 other papers - as he should have.

Didn't protect them as he should have? Yeah, that describes Hillary's actions too.

Then later kept them in a safe hall outside his office where uncleared persons had access to him.

Like Hillary's lawyers, who decided which emails to delete, were uncleared persons.

And what happened to him -- after he mishandled MARKED classified information (unlike Hillary's that was not marked) ...

I'll tell you: diddly and squat.

(unlike Hillary's that was not marked)

Mishandling classified info, even if it's unmarked, or if her aides removed the markings, is still a no-no.

I'll tell you: diddly and squat.

When you look at the sheer magnitude of her wrong doing, it in no way compares to what Gonzales did.

Her aides didn't "remove the markings" - you kumquat.

2. How's that indictment coming along?

Her aides didn't "remove the markings"

Then how were the markings removed on classified material she sent?

^ Didn't watch the hearings. Comey squashed that one down, cowboy.

Has the State Department released a smoking gun in the Hillary Clinton e-mail scandal? In a thread from June 2011, Hillary exchanges e-mails with Jake Sullivan, then her deputy chief of staff and now her campaign foreign-policy adviser, in which she impatiently waits for a set of talking points. When Sullivan tells her that the source is having trouble with the secure fax, Hillary then orders Sullivan to have the data stripped of its markings and sent through a non-secure channel.

That should be game, set, and match, yes?



“If they can’t, turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure.” That’s an order to violate the laws handling classified material. There is no other way to read that demand. Regardless of whether or not Sullivan complied, this demolishes Hillary’s claim to be ignorant of marking issues, as well as strongly suggests that the other thousand-plus instances where this did occur likely came under her direction.

Whoa: Hillary e-mail instructs aide to transmit classified data without markings - Hot Air

On the campaign trail, the presidential candidate has insisted that no classified information was sent or received through her private email server.

But in one email exchange between Clinton and staffer Jake Sullivan from June 17, 2011, the then-secretary advised her aide on sending a set of talking points by email when he had trouble sending them through secure means.

Part of the exchange is redacted, so the context of the emails is unknown, but at one point, Sullivan tells Clinton that aides "say they've had issues sending secure fax. They're working on it."


Play Video
Politics
Clinton: " I did not email any classified material"
Hillary Clinton defended the use of her personal email as U.S. Secretary of State at a news conference at the United Nations. She said firmly tha...

Clinton responds, "If they can't, turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure."

In email, Hillary Clinton tells aide to send talking points "nonsecure" - CBS News

LOL!

 

[paperview]

And what happened to him -- after he mishandled MARKED classified information (unlike Hillary's that was not marked) ...

I'll tell you: diddly and squat.

(unlike Hillary's that was not marked)

Mishandling classified info, even if it's unmarked, or if her aides removed the markings, is still a no-no.

I'll tell you: diddly and squat.

When you look at the sheer magnitude of her wrong doing, it in no way compares to what Gonzales did.

Her aides didn't "remove the markings" - you kumquat.

2. How's that indictment coming along?

Her aides didn't "remove the markings"

Then how were the markings removed on classified material she sent?

^ Didn't watch the hearings. Comey squashed that one down, cowboy.

Has the State Department released a smoking gun in the Hillary Clinton e-mail scandal? In a thread from June 2011, Hillary exchanges e-mails with Jake Sullivan, then her deputy chief of staff and now her campaign foreign-policy adviser, in which she impatiently waits for a set of talking points. When Sullivan tells her that the source is having trouble with the secure fax, Hillary then orders Sullivan to have the data stripped of its markings and sent through a non-secure channel.

That should be game, set, and match, yes?



“If they can’t, turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure.” That’s an order to violate the laws handling classified material. There is no other way to read that demand. Regardless of whether or not Sullivan complied, this demolishes Hillary’s claim to be ignorant of marking issues, as well as strongly suggests that the other thousand-plus instances where this did occur likely came under her direction.

Whoa: Hillary e-mail instructs aide to transmit classified data without markings - Hot Air

On the campaign trail, the presidential candidate has insisted that no classified information was sent or received through her private email server.

But in one email exchange between Clinton and staffer Jake Sullivan from June 17, 2011, the then-secretary advised her aide on sending a set of talking points by email when he had trouble sending them through secure means.

Part of the exchange is redacted, so the context of the emails is unknown, but at one point, Sullivan tells Clinton that aides "say they've had issues sending secure fax. They're working on it."


Play Video
Politics
Clinton: " I did not email any classified material"
Hillary Clinton defended the use of her personal email as U.S. Secretary of State at a news conference at the United Nations. She said firmly tha...

Clinton responds, "If they can't, turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure."

In email, Hillary Clinton tells aide to send talking points "nonsecure" - CBS News

LOL!

^ Didn't watch the hearings. Comey squashed that one down, clownboy.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

(unlike Hillary's that was not marked)

Mishandling classified info, even if it's unmarked, or if her aides removed the markings, is still a no-no.

I'll tell you: diddly and squat.

When you look at the sheer magnitude of her wrong doing, it in no way compares to what Gonzales did.

Her aides didn't "remove the markings" - you kumquat.

2. How's that indictment coming along?

Her aides didn't "remove the markings"

Then how were the markings removed on classified material she sent?

^ Didn't watch the hearings. Comey squashed that one down, cowboy.

Has the State Department released a smoking gun in the Hillary Clinton e-mail scandal? In a thread from June 2011, Hillary exchanges e-mails with Jake Sullivan, then her deputy chief of staff and now her campaign foreign-policy adviser, in which she impatiently waits for a set of talking points. When Sullivan tells her that the source is having trouble with the secure fax, Hillary then orders Sullivan to have the data stripped of its markings and sent through a non-secure channel.

That should be game, set, and match, yes?



“If they can’t, turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure.” That’s an order to violate the laws handling classified material. There is no other way to read that demand. Regardless of whether or not Sullivan complied, this demolishes Hillary’s claim to be ignorant of marking issues, as well as strongly suggests that the other thousand-plus instances where this did occur likely came under her direction.

Whoa: Hillary e-mail instructs aide to transmit classified data without markings - Hot Air

On the campaign trail, the presidential candidate has insisted that no classified information was sent or received through her private email server.

But in one email exchange between Clinton and staffer Jake Sullivan from June 17, 2011, the then-secretary advised her aide on sending a set of talking points by email when he had trouble sending them through secure means.

Part of the exchange is redacted, so the context of the emails is unknown, but at one point, Sullivan tells Clinton that aides "say they've had issues sending secure fax. They're working on it."


Play Video
Politics
Clinton: " I did not email any classified material"
Hillary Clinton defended the use of her personal email as U.S. Secretary of State at a news conference at the United Nations. She said firmly tha...

Clinton responds, "If they can't, turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure."

In email, Hillary Clinton tells aide to send talking points "nonsecure" - CBS News

LOL!

^ Didn't watch the hearings. Comey squashed that one down, clownboy.

Take the video Wallace played on Fox News Sunday. In it, Clinton said, "I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified materials" (March 10, 2015); "I am confident that I never sent nor received any information that was classified at the time" (July 25, 2015); "I had not sent classified material nor received anything marked classified" (Aug. 18, 2015).

But Comey reported that, of the tens of thousands of emails investigators reviewed, 113 individual emails contained classified information, and three of them bore markings signifying their classification status. (Information can still be classified even if it does not have a label.) Eight email threads contained top-secret information, the highest level of classification, 36 contained secret information, and the remaining eight contained confidential information.

About 2,000 emails have been retroactively classified, or up-classified, meaning the information was not classified when it was emailed, but it is now.

"Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information," Comey said in a July 5 statement.

Then, there was this exchange between Comey and Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., at the congressional hearing:

Gowdy: "Secretary Clinton said there was nothing marked classified on her emails either sent or received. Was that true?"

Comey: "That’s not true."

Gowdy: "Secretary Clinton said, ‘I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.’ Was that true?"

Comey: "There was classified material emailed."

In fairness to Clinton, Comey said some of the classified emails were insufficiently marked, and it’s understandable that she didn’t realize that some of the ones without labels were actually classified.

But he also said of some of the classified emails that did not bear markings, "There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton's position or in the position of those with whom she was corresponding about the matters should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation."

Clinton spins FBI director's comments about her email

DERP!

 

[paperview]

And what happened to him -- after he mishandled MARKED classified information (unlike Hillary's that was not marked) ...

I'll tell you: diddly and squat.

(unlike Hillary's that was not marked)

Mishandling classified info, even if it's unmarked, or if her aides removed the markings, is still a no-no.

I'll tell you: diddly and squat.

When you look at the sheer magnitude of her wrong doing, it in no way compares to what Gonzales did.

Her aides didn't "remove the markings" - you kumquat.

2. How's that indictment coming along?

Her aides didn't "remove the markings"

Then how were the markings removed on classified material she sent?

^ Didn't watch the hearings. Comey squashed that one down, cowboy.

Has the State Department released a smoking gun in the Hillary Clinton e-mail scandal? In a thread from June 2011, Hillary exchanges e-mails with Jake Sullivan, then her deputy chief of staff and now her campaign foreign-policy adviser, in which she impatiently waits for a set of talking points. When Sullivan tells her that the source is having trouble with the secure fax, Hillary then orders Sullivan to have the data stripped of its markings and sent through a non-secure channel.

That should be game, set, and match, yes?



“If they can’t, turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure.” That’s an order to violate the laws handling classified material. There is no other way to read that demand. Regardless of whether or not Sullivan complied, this demolishes Hillary’s claim to be ignorant of marking issues, as well as strongly suggests that the other thousand-plus instances where this did occur likely came under her direction.

Whoa: Hillary e-mail instructs aide to transmit classified data without markings - Hot Air

On the campaign trail, the presidential candidate has insisted that no classified information was sent or received through her private email server.

But in one email exchange between Clinton and staffer Jake Sullivan from June 17, 2011, the then-secretary advised her aide on sending a set of talking points by email when he had trouble sending them through secure means.

Part of the exchange is redacted, so the context of the emails is unknown, but at one point, Sullivan tells Clinton that aides "say they've had issues sending secure fax. They're working on it."


Play Video
Politics
Clinton: " I did not email any classified material"
Hillary Clinton defended the use of her personal email as U.S. Secretary of State at a news conference at the United Nations. She said firmly tha...

Clinton responds, "If they can't, turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure."

In email, Hillary Clinton tells aide to send talking points "nonsecure" - CBS News

LOL!

It gets so old having to repeat this shit for you doofs.

Two things: Those were public talking points. If a classification originated from the State Dept, she has the authority to remove classification.

You know that right?

2nd - in that case, there was no evidence any stripping of classification markings had occurred.


FBI Director James Comey Testifies Hillary | Video | C-SPAN.org

Here's one bit:

CHAFFETZ: How did the Department of Justice, or how did the FBI view the incident in which Hillary Clinton instructed Jake Sullivan to take the markings off of a document that was to be sent to her?

COMEY: Yes, we looked at that pretty closely. There was some problem with their secure fax machine and there was an e-mail in which she says in substance, take the headers off of it and send it as a non- paper and as we've dug into that more deeply, we've come to learn that at least this one view of it that is reasonable, that a non-paper in State Department parlance (ph) means a document that contains things we could pass to another government. So essentially take out anything that's classified and send it to me.

Now it turned out that didn't happen, we actually found that the classified fax was then sent, but that's our best understanding of what that was about.

CHAFFETZ: So this was a classified fax?

COMEY: Correct.

CHAFFETZ: So Hillary Clinton sends to Jake Sullivan, Jake -- well let me go back, Jake Sullivan says they say they had issues sending secure fax, they're working on it. Hillary Clinton sends to Jake Sullivan, if they can't, turn into non-paper with no identifying heading and send non-secure. So you're telling me it's a classified piece of information, she's taking off the header and she's instructing them to send it in a non-secure format. Is that not intent?

COMEY: Well that actually caught my attention when I first saw it and what she explained to us in her interview was, and other witnesses too as well, is what she meant by that is make it into a non-classified document, that's what a non-paper is in their world, and send it to us because I don't need the classified stuff I just need the...

CHAFFETZ: Then why take off the heading if it's going to be turned into a non-classified document, why take off the heading?

COMEY: I assume because it would be non-classified anymore so you wouldn't have a classified header on it. Because what she said during her interview...

CHAFFETZ: Because she wanted to be technically correct, is that what you're saying, that you're...

COMEY: No, I think what she said during the interview is I was telling him in essence, send the unclassified document, take the header off, turn it into a non-paper, which is a term I had never heard before but I'm told by people I credit that in diplomatic circles something we can pass to another government...

CHAFFETZ: You are very generous in your accepting of that. Did any unclear individuals receive any classified information over Hillary Clinton's server?

COMEY: Did any uncleared (ph) people receive classified information? I don't think any of the correspondents on the classified e-mails were uncleared people. These were all people with clearances working, doing State Department business, on the unclassed (ph) system."

so...as Comey says, he investigated it pretty thoroughly, and it isn't at all what the RW bloggers and Fox's and other *uhOh* media had been screaming about for months.


It was noted in other places about what happened with these headers, but you'll have to read through the transcripts yourself:

CNN.com - Transcripts

CNN.com - Transcripts

CNN.com - Transcripts

 

[paperview]

Her aides didn't "remove the markings" - you kumquat.

2. How's that indictment coming along?

Her aides didn't "remove the markings"

Then how were the markings removed on classified material she sent?

^ Didn't watch the hearings. Comey squashed that one down, cowboy.

Has the State Department released a smoking gun in the Hillary Clinton e-mail scandal? In a thread from June 2011, Hillary exchanges e-mails with Jake Sullivan, then her deputy chief of staff and now her campaign foreign-policy adviser, in which she impatiently waits for a set of talking points. When Sullivan tells her that the source is having trouble with the secure fax, Hillary then orders Sullivan to have the data stripped of its markings and sent through a non-secure channel.

That should be game, set, and match, yes?



“If they can’t, turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure.” That’s an order to violate the laws handling classified material. There is no other way to read that demand. Regardless of whether or not Sullivan complied, this demolishes Hillary’s claim to be ignorant of marking issues, as well as strongly suggests that the other thousand-plus instances where this did occur likely came under her direction.

Whoa: Hillary e-mail instructs aide to transmit classified data without markings - Hot Air

On the campaign trail, the presidential candidate has insisted that no classified information was sent or received through her private email server.

But in one email exchange between Clinton and staffer Jake Sullivan from June 17, 2011, the then-secretary advised her aide on sending a set of talking points by email when he had trouble sending them through secure means.

Part of the exchange is redacted, so the context of the emails is unknown, but at one point, Sullivan tells Clinton that aides "say they've had issues sending secure fax. They're working on it."


Play Video
Politics
Clinton: " I did not email any classified material"
Hillary Clinton defended the use of her personal email as U.S. Secretary of State at a news conference at the United Nations. She said firmly tha...

Clinton responds, "If they can't, turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure."

In email, Hillary Clinton tells aide to send talking points "nonsecure" - CBS News

LOL!

^ Didn't watch the hearings. Comey squashed that one down, clownboy.

Take the video Wallace played on Fox News Sunday. In it, Clinton said, "I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified materials" (March 10, 2015); "I am confident that I never sent nor received any information that was classified at the time" (July 25, 2015); "I had not sent classified material nor received anything marked classified" (Aug. 18, 2015).

But Comey reported that, of the tens of thousands of emails investigators reviewed, 113 individual emails contained classified information, and three of them bore markings signifying their classification status. (Information can still be classified even if it does not have a label.) Eight email threads contained top-secret information, the highest level of classification, 36 contained secret information, and the remaining eight contained confidential information.

About 2,000 emails have been retroactively classified, or up-classified, meaning the information was not classified when it was emailed, but it is now.

"Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information," Comey said in a July 5 statement.

Then, there was this exchange between Comey and Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., at the congressional hearing:

Gowdy: "Secretary Clinton said there was nothing marked classified on her emails either sent or received. Was that true?"

Comey: "That’s not true."

Gowdy: "Secretary Clinton said, ‘I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.’ Was that true?"

Comey: "There was classified material emailed."

In fairness to Clinton, Comey said some of the classified emails were insufficiently marked, and it’s understandable that she didn’t realize that some of the ones without labels were actually classified.

But he also said of some of the classified emails that did not bear markings, "There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton's position or in the position of those with whom she was corresponding about the matters should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation."

Clinton spins FBI director's comments about her email

DERP!

How'd that all work out, braindamage?

 

[paperview]

Some more good chewables:

CUMMINGS: I wanted to clear up some things. I want to make sure I understand exactly what you testified to on the issue of whether Secretary Clinton sent or received e-mails that were marked as classified.

On Tuesday you stated, and I quote, "only a very small number of the e-mails containing classified information bore markings, and I emphasis bore markings, indicating the presence of classified information."

Republicans have pounced on this statement as evidence that Secretary Clinton lied. But today we learned some significant new facts and I hope the press listens to this. First you clarify that you were talking about only three e-mails out of 30 thousand. Your office is reviewed. Is that right?

COMEY: Three, yes.

CUMMINGS: Three out of 30 thousand, is that right?

COMEY: Yes at least 30 thousand.

CUMMINGS: At least 30 thousand. Second, you confirmed that these three e-mails were not properly marked as classified at the time based on Federal guidelines and manuals.They did not have a classification header; they did not list the original classifier, the agency, officer of origin, reason for classification, or date for declassification. Instead these e-mails included only a single quote see parenthesis, end parenthesis and then end of quotation mark for confidential on one paragraph lower down in the text, is that right?

COMEY: Correct.

CUMMINGS: Third, you testified that based on these facts it would have been a quote "reasonable inference for Secretary Clinton to" quote "immediately" end of quote conclude that these e-mails were not in fact classified. So that was also critical new information. But there's one more critical fact that these e-mails were not in fact, and that is this Director, and to the press these e-mails were not in fact classified.

The State Department explained to us yesterday -- they reported that these e-mails are not classified and that including the little C on these e-mails was a result of a human error. The bottom line is that those little Cs should not have been on those documents because they were not in fact classified.

When Representative Watson Coleman asked you a few minutes ago about this you testified that you had not been informed. And I understand that, I'm not beating up on you I promise you. But can you tell us why Director Comey -- because I want -- because republicans are pouncing saying the Secretary lied and I want to make sure we're clear on this. Can you tell us why Director Comey did you consult, and we're just curious, did you consult about these three e-mails out of the more than 30 thousand or did this just not come up? What happened there?

COMEY: Yes I'm not remembering for sure while I'm here. I'm highly confident we consulted with them and got their view on it. I don't know about what happened yesterday. Maybe their view has changed or they found things out that we didn't know. But I'm highly confident we consulted with them about it.

CUMMINGS: So this is solely different than what we understood yesterday. Today we learned that these e-mails were not in fact classified, they should not have been included in those -- they should not have included those straight (ph) markings. They were not properly marked as classified and the Director of the FBI believes it was reasonable for Secretary Clinton to assume that these documents were not classified.
...

CUMMINGS: Today 10s of thousands of Secretary Clinton's e-mails are probably available on the State Department's website. And our staff have been reviewing the e-mails that were retroactively determined to include classified information. Based on this review, it appears that these e-mails included more than one thousand individuals who sent or received the information that is not redacted as classified. Let me make that clear. About one thousand people sent or received the same information that was contained in Secretary Clinton's e-mails and retroactively classified. Were you aware of that?

COMEY: No, the number doesn't surprised me though.

CUMMINGS: Why not?

COMEY: Because this was -- they were doing the business of the State Department on this e-mail system, so I don't know how many thousands of people work in the State Department. But it doesn't surprise there'd be lots of people on these chains.

CUMMINGS: And would you agree that something needs to be done with regard to this classification stuff because classified things are classified then they're not classified, then they are retroactively classified. I mean does that go into your consideration when looking at a case like this?

COMEY: Yes I don't pay much attention to the up classified stuff because we're focused on intent. So if someone classifies it later, it's impossible that you formed intent around that because it wasn't classified at the time. I know that's a process -- I wasn't familiar with it before this investigation, but I don't spend a lot of time focused on it in the course of a criminal investigation.

CUMMINGS: I understand. We also reviewed who these people are and they include a host of very experienced career diplomats with many years of experience. So let me ask you this. When you received this referral from the Inspector General about Secretary Clinton's e-mails, did you also receive any referrals for any of the other one thousand people who sent and received those e-mails? Did you?

COMEY: No.

CNN.com - Transcripts

 

[toomuchtime_]

Where, indeed! Clearly, there were grounds to indict her for intentionally mishandling classified information and clearly the integrity of the Justice Department has been compromised by political considerations. This case cries out for a special prosecutor.

No. Not clearly.

Look, you can quack till the cows come home -- but this will not change: The persons charged with looking into that explored it, and found no there there.

The FBI was unanimous in this regard. Tough cookies.

What will not change is that she showed clear intent to mishandle classified information, clear intent to deceive the country about what she did and the Justice Department was clearly compromised by political considerations. Under these circumstances, when the Justice Department has a clear conflict of interests, a special prosecutor should be called. If she wins the election, it is all the more reason to have a special prosecutor look into this situation to examine the Hillary's actions and the actions of those in the Obama administration who sought to influence the investigation.

Dream on, bubba.

It's over -- and the GOP candidate is dropping like a rock.

Along with the party.

In fact, it's not at all clear there is a place for Sanders supporters in the Democratic Party. If Trump loses, Hillary will may have to face an independent prosecutor, and when that investigation reveals how deep the corruption goes in the Democratic Party, the US may become a one party system.

Keep hope alive!

You do know the sign over DNC headquarters reads, "Abandon all hope you who enter here."

 

[paperview]

No. Not clearly.

Look, you can quack till the cows come home -- but this will not change: The persons charged with looking into that explored it, and found no there there.

The FBI was unanimous in this regard. Tough cookies.

What will not change is that she showed clear intent to mishandle classified information, clear intent to deceive the country about what she did and the Justice Department was clearly compromised by political considerations. Under these circumstances, when the Justice Department has a clear conflict of interests, a special prosecutor should be called. If she wins the election, it is all the more reason to have a special prosecutor look into this situation to examine the Hillary's actions and the actions of those in the Obama administration who sought to influence the investigation.

Dream on, bubba.

It's over -- and the GOP candidate is dropping like a rock.

Along with the party.

In fact, it's not at all clear there is a place for Sanders supporters in the Democratic Party. If Trump loses, Hillary will may have to face an independent prosecutor, and when that investigation reveals how deep the corruption goes in the Democratic Party, the US may become a one party system.

Keep hope alive!

You do know the sign over DNC headquarters reads, "Abandon all hope you who enter here."

You should see the sign above the RNC headquarters lately.

 

[toomuchtime_]

What will not change is that she showed clear intent to mishandle classified information, clear intent to deceive the country about what she did and the Justice Department was clearly compromised by political considerations. Under these circumstances, when the Justice Department has a clear conflict of interests, a special prosecutor should be called. If she wins the election, it is all the more reason to have a special prosecutor look into this situation to examine the Hillary's actions and the actions of those in the Obama administration who sought to influence the investigation.

Dream on, bubba.

It's over -- and the GOP candidate is dropping like a rock.

Along with the party.

In fact, it's not at all clear there is a place for Sanders supporters in the Democratic Party. If Trump loses, Hillary will may have to face an independent prosecutor, and when that investigation reveals how deep the corruption goes in the Democratic Party, the US may become a one party system.

Keep hope alive!

You do know the sign over DNC headquarters reads, "Abandon all hope you who enter here."

You should see the sign above the RNC headquarters lately.

It says, "Welcome everyone!"

 

[paperview]

Dream on, bubba.

It's over -- and the GOP candidate is dropping like a rock.

Along with the party.

In fact, it's not at all clear there is a place for Sanders supporters in the Democratic Party. If Trump loses, Hillary will may have to face an independent prosecutor, and when that investigation reveals how deep the corruption goes in the Democratic Party, the US may become a one party system.

Keep hope alive!

You do know the sign over DNC headquarters reads, "Abandon all hope you who enter here."

You should see the sign above the RNC headquarters lately.

It says, "Welcome everyone!"

It say's "We're fucked."

 

[toomuchtime_]

In fact, it's not at all clear there is a place for Sanders supporters in the Democratic Party. If Trump loses, Hillary will may have to face an independent prosecutor, and when that investigation reveals how deep the corruption goes in the Democratic Party, the US may become a one party system.

Keep hope alive!

You do know the sign over DNC headquarters reads, "Abandon all hope you who enter here."

You should see the sign above the RNC headquarters lately.

It says, "Welcome everyone!"

It say's "We're fucked."

Actually it says, "If Hillary wins, America is fucked."

Vote for Trump and help save America from the debauched, rapacious Clintons.

 

[Papageorgio]

she had never received any emails that are classified

If she never received any classified emails or sent any classified emails on her private server,
how did she send and received classified info?

That has always been one of my question that no one seems to know the answer to.

 

[paperview]

she had never received any emails that are classified

If she never received any classified emails or sent any classified emails on her private server,
how did she send and received classified info?

That has always been one of my question that no one seems to know the answer to.

Answered. OVer and over.


SCIF.

Derp.

 

[Papageorgio]

she had never received any emails that are classified

If she never received any classified emails or sent any classified emails on her private server,
how did she send and received classified info?

That has always been one of my question that no one seems to know the answer to.

Answered. OVer and over.


SCIF.

Derp.

Never saw it, sorry, I guess I don't spend all my life here like you whackadoodle.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[kaz]

she had never received any emails that are classified

If she never received any classified emails or sent any classified emails on her private server,
how did she send and received classified info?

That has always been one of my question that no one seems to know the answer to.

Answered. OVer and over.


SCIF.

Derp.

Agreed. Hillary sent them there

 

[paperview]

she had never received any emails that are classified

If she never received any classified emails or sent any classified emails on her private server,
how did she send and received classified info?

That has always been one of my question that no one seems to know the answer to.

Answered. OVer and over.


SCIF.

Derp.

Never saw it, sorry, I guess I don't spend all my life here like you whackadoodle.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Do you get paid for every use of the word "whackdoodle" like the con-idiot who has 40,000+ posts that use the phrase "far left drone?"

 

[paperview]

she had never received any emails that are classified

If she never received any classified emails or sent any classified emails on her private server,
how did she send and received classified info?

That has always been one of my question that no one seems to know the answer to.

Answered. Over and over.


SCIF.

Derp.

Agreed. Hillary sent them there

Again. Making no sense. It seems to be your thing.