Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root"

gatorfan · 1 Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/28/2016, 10:50 am

gatorfan

Posts : 1919
Join date : 2014-06-11

This is a rather long but objective look at the HRC email debacle. It's obvious she intended to circumvent policy from the very beginning and was willing to risk breaches of national security information for her convenience.

One interesting point at the heart of the matter:

“What you are talking about is retroactive classification,” she said during a recent debate. “And I think what we have got here is a case of overclassification.” Her statement appears to conflict with a report to Congress last year by inspectors general from the State Department and the group of spy agencies known as the Intelligence Community. They made their report after the discovery that four emails, from a sample of 40 that went through her server, contained classified information.

“These emails were not retroactively classified by the State Department,” the report said. “Rather these emails contained classified information when they were generated and, according to IC classification officials, that information remains classified today. This classified information should never have been transmitted via an unclassified personal system.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/how-clintons-email-scandal-took-root/2016/03/27/ee301168-e162-11e5-846c-10191d1fc4ec_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_clintonemail_430pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

Vikingwoman

Vikingwoman

Posts : 3590
Join date : 2014-08-25

Hillary Clinton doesn't classify info. The INR does so that's on them. She designates the authorities who do that but she doesn't do it herself.

gatorfan

gatorfan

Posts : 1919
Join date : 2014-06-11

Vikingwoman wrote:Hillary Clinton doesn't classify info. The INR does so that's on them. She designates the authorities who do that but she doesn't do it herself.

That's not an accurate statement but it's also not the issue.

https://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/dos-class.pdf

Vikingwoman

Vikingwoman

Posts : 3590
Join date : 2014-08-25

That is an accurate statement and the issue is whether she sent classified email. If the email is classified after she did not send classified email and she does not classify period! You need to read your own source. The guide is for contractors not sec. of state.

gatorfan

gatorfan

Posts : 1919
Join date : 2014-06-11

Vikingwoman wrote:That is an accurate statement and the issue is whether she sent classified email. If the email is classified after she did not send classified email and she does not classify period! You need to read your own source. The guide is for contractors not sec. of state.

Nope, from the document I provided (for your benefit):

"This Classification Guide is for the use of State Department employees in classifying information under the terms of Executive Order 12958 on National Security Information in documents they create or control."

If you choose to make up information, well nothing I can do about that.

I've had high level security clearances and routinely assigned a classification level to message traffic I needed to send based on the information they contained.

The real point is HRC's determined effort to have things her way in spite of many rules to the contrary. Those efforts on her part potentially exposed classified information and probably caused the loss of documents she was required (by law) to turn over.

Not that you and many other liberal apologists apparently care.

Vikingwoman

Vikingwoman

Posts : 3590
Join date : 2014-08-25

U)
This
Classification
Guide
is for
the
use
of
State
Department
employees
in
classifying
information
under
the
terms
of
Executive
Order
12958
on
National
Security
Information
in
documents
they
create
or
control.
It
constitutes
the
classification
authority
to
be
cited
by
persons
without'
original
classification
authority
(OCA)
and
should
be
used
also
by
persons
with
OCA
when
the
Guide
properly
describes
and
characterizes
the
information
to
be
classified.
Documents
that
are
classified
using
this
Guide
are
derivatively
classified
under
its
authority.
This
Guide
does
not
affect
the
authority
and
procedures
for
classifying
derivatively
from
other
documents.
While
this
Guide
provides
the
authority
for
the
protection
of
national
security
information,
it
does
not
replace
sound
judgment
by
classifiers
as
to
the
need
for,
level,
and
duration
of
classification.
Persons
approving
documents
dratted
by
subordinates
who
have
used
this
guide
to
classify
.
information
should
assume
responsibility-for
assuring
that
it has
been
done
properly.
For
purposes
of
contractor
compliance
with
national-level
safeguarding
'directives,
this
Guide
is
a compliance
document
for
State
Department
contractors.
(U)
This
Guide
aims
particularly
at the
type
of
information
most
often
c

Vikingwoman

Vikingwoman

Posts : 3590
Join date : 2014-08-25

Don't know why it came out like that but it clearly says she does not classify info.

gatorfan

gatorfan

Posts : 1919
Join date : 2014-06-11

Vikingwoman wrote:Don't know why it came out like that but it clearly says she does not classify info.

Perhaps you could highlight the part that "clearly says doesn't classify info".

Since the policy deals with ALL employees (and the SecState is an employee too) and if you read the Executive Order they both document responsibility for protecting classified information.

Why is this concept so difficult? As if I don't already know......

Markle

Markle

Posts : 17531
Join date : 2012-06-16
Age : 79
Location : Tallahassee

Vikingwoman wrote:That is an accurate statement and the issue is whether she sent classified email. If the email is classified after she did not send classified email and she does not classify period! You need to read your own source. The guide is for contractors not sec. of state.

Sorry, but the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton is subject to all the laws, rules and regulations as anyone else.

IGNORANCE is not a defence.

Guest

Guest

She originated over 100 of the classified emails on a private server as the official in charge of the state dept.

It was her responsibility to determine that they were sensitive in nature and to be protected as required by law.

She was the fricking sos. No competent person would act so recklessly and negligently without ulterior motives.

Markle

Markle

Posts : 17531
Join date : 2012-06-16
Age : 79
Location : Tallahassee

Vikingwoman wrote:Don't know why it came out like that but it clearly says she does not classify info.

Where?

What happens when she creates a Top Secret email?

You're flailing in the dark. Your desperation to rewrite history has become laughable.

Bad news for Hillary Clinton and you.

FBI to Hillary Clinton: LET'S TALK!

As we all know, the FBI, as a general rule, won't interview the suspect until they already have the answers to the questions they will be asking. See Martha Stewart, see Bill Clinton.

Clinton email probe enters new phase as FBI interviews loom
By Del Quentin Wilber Contact Reporter
Marcy 27, 2016

Federal prosecutors investigating the possible mishandling of classified materials on Hillary Clinton’s private email server have begun the process of setting up formal interviews with some of her longtime and closest aides, according to two people familiar with the probe, an indication that the inquiry is moving into its final phases.

Those interviews and the final review of the case, however, could still take many weeks, all but guaranteeing that the investigation will continue to dog Clinton’s presidential campaign through most, if not all, of the remaining presidential primaries.

No dates have been set for questioning the advisors, but a federal prosecutor in recent weeks has called their lawyers to alert them that he would soon be doing so, the sources said. Prosecutors also are expected to seek an interview with Clinton herself, though the timing remains unclear.

The interviews by FBI agents and prosecutors will play a significant role in helping them better understand whether Clinton or her aides knowingly or negligently discussed classified government secrets over a non-secure email system when she served as secretary of State.

The meetings also are an indication that much of the investigators' background work – recovering deleted emails, understanding how the server operated and determining whether it was breached – is nearing completion.

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-clinton-email-probe-20160327-story.html

Vikingwoman

Vikingwoman

Posts : 3590
Join date : 2014-08-25

http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/fixgov/posts/2015/08/13-hillary-clinton-classified-emails-lempert

Presidents seldom get involved in the classification process, however. Rather classification authority is delegated down to the federal agencies that deal with security and diplomatically-relevant information. Within each agency, the agency head is the highest classification authority. Thus, if the allegedly classified information in Clinton's e-mails had been labeled Secret or Top Secret by some lower ranking State Department official, there would be no issue beyond one of Clinton's good judgment if she decided to declassify and discuss it. An agency head cannot, however, declassify information first classified by a different agency. Thus according to news reports, the e-mails provided the Justice Department apparently mention only information classified by CIA and NSA.

Markle

Markle

Posts : 17531
Join date : 2012-06-16
Age : 79
Location : Tallahassee

Vikingwoman wrote:http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/fixgov/posts/2015/08/13-hillary-clinton-classified-emails-lempert

Presidents seldom get involved in the classification process, however. Rather classification authority is delegated down to the federal agencies that deal with security and diplomatically-relevant information. Within each agency, the agency head is the highest classification authority. Thus, if the allegedly classified information in Clinton's e-mails had been labeled Secret or Top Secret by some lower ranking State Department official, there would be no issue beyond one of Clinton's good judgment if she decided to declassify and discuss it. An agency head cannot, however, declassify information first classified by a different agency. Thus according to news reports, the e-mails provided the Justice Department apparently mention only information classified by CIA and NSA.

Lest you forget, this is MARCH 28, 2016 This is NOT August 13, 2015.

Please try to keep up.

2seaoat

2seaoat

Posts : 36130
Join date : 2012-08-30

Not that you and many other liberal apologists apparently care.

Sec of Defense Carter has had a private server like Clinton, and Powell before.....Sec of Defense is not a liberal. This is stupid......beyond stupid to think any informed person thinks that Hillary Clinton, SOS Powell, or now defense Sec Carter are guilty of crimes......political propaganda cannot work if the electorate is literate and well read. Trump is going to be nominated, and folks here continue to post nonsense about emails.....common denominator is clear.

Guest

Guest

Only 147 agents are investigating her setup... including the clinton slushfund foundation apparently. I'm sure that's nothing in scale and scope or even the profile of the target compared to the fbi investigations you directed tho.

Guest

Guest

Vikingwoman wrote:http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/fixgov/posts/2015/08/13-hillary-clinton-classified-emails-lempert

Presidents seldom get involved in the classification process, however. Rather classification authority is delegated down to the federal agencies that deal with security and diplomatically-relevant information. Within each agency, the agency head is the highest classification authority. Thus, if the allegedly classified information in Clinton's e-mails had been labeled Secret or Top Secret by some lower ranking State Department official, there would be no issue beyond one of Clinton's good judgment if she decided to declassify and discuss it. An agency head cannot, however, declassify information first classified by a different agency. Thus according to news reports, the e-mails provided the Justice Department apparently mention only information classified by CIA and NSA.

OMG, if she had an email marked from the original classification authority as secret or top secret, she CANNOT declassify it. It's not her call to declassify an email. Did you not read EO 12958 that Markle gave to you?

Vikingwoman

Vikingwoman

Posts : 3590
Join date : 2014-08-25

What? wrote:

Vikingwoman wrote:http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/fixgov/posts/2015/08/13-hillary-clinton-classified-emails-lempert

Presidents seldom get involved in the classification process, however. Rather classification authority is delegated down to the federal agencies that deal with security and diplomatically-relevant information. Within each agency, the agency head is the highest classification authority. Thus, if the allegedly classified information in Clinton's e-mails had been labeled Secret or Top Secret by some lower ranking State Department official, there would be no issue beyond one of Clinton's good judgment if she decided to declassify and discuss it. An agency head cannot, however, declassify information first classified by a different agency. Thus according to news reports, the e-mails provided the Justice Department apparently mention only information classified by CIA and NSA.

OMG, if she had an email marked from the original classification authority as secret or top secret, she CANNOT declassify it. It's not her call to declassify an email. Did you not read EO 12958 that Markle gave to you?

That's what it says. Are you incoherent? It says she cannot declassify info from another agency but from the state she can. Geez!

2seaoat

2seaoat

Posts : 36130
Join date : 2012-08-30

Only 147 agents are investigating her setup.
..........
Too funny. Now the FBI after leaking what they are doing to your sources, told you how many agents have been assigned......does it ever occur......like a light going on, that maybe your sources are not so reliable.....especially when they were consistently wrong about almost everything....Benghazi....IRS.....and now email......when do you and Mr. Markle put your tails between your legs and change the subject......kind of like the month of December in 2008 and the month of December in 2012......but it did not take long.....Benghazi.....IRS.....gunrunning........too funny......I do find a certain satisfaction having never been wrong on these subjects, after being told that I am a shill for Obama or Hillary......again too funny.....it has little to do with politics, but much more to do with a grasp of reality.

Markle

Markle

Posts : 17531
Join date : 2012-06-16
Age : 79
Location : Tallahassee

Vikingwoman wrote:

What? wrote:

Vikingwoman wrote:http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/fixgov/posts/2015/08/13-hillary-clinton-classified-emails-lempert

Presidents seldom get involved in the classification process, however. Rather classification authority is delegated down to the federal agencies that deal with security and diplomatically-relevant information. Within each agency, the agency head is the highest classification authority. Thus, if the allegedly classified information in Clinton's e-mails had been labeled Secret or Top Secret by some lower ranking State Department official, there would be no issue beyond one of Clinton's good judgment if she decided to declassify and discuss it. An agency head cannot, however, declassify information first classified by a different agency. Thus according to news reports, the e-mails provided the Justice Department apparently mention only information classified by CIA and NSA.

OMG, if she had an email marked from the original classification authority as secret or top secret, she CANNOT declassify it. It's not her call to declassify an email. Did you not read EO 12958 that Markle gave to you?

That's what it says. Are you incoherent? It says she cannot declassify info from another agency but from the state she can. Geez!

Show us. Geez!

Markle

Markle

Posts : 17531
Join date : 2012-06-16
Age : 79
Location : Tallahassee

2seaoat wrote:Only 147 agents are investigating her setup.
..........
Too funny. Now the FBI after leaking what they are doing to your sources, told you how many agents have been assigned......does it ever occur......like a light going on, that maybe your sources are not so reliable.....especially when they were consistently wrong about almost everything....Benghazi....IRS.....and now email......when do you and Mr. Markle put your tails between your legs and change the subject......kind of like the month of December in 2008 and the month of December in 2012......but it did not take long.....Benghazi.....IRS.....gunrunning........too funny......I do find a certain satisfaction having never been wrong on these subjects, after being told that I am a shill for Obama or Hillary......again too funny.....it has little to do with politics, but much more to do with a grasp of reality.

Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" AnimatedLaughterPink

2seaoat

2seaoat

Posts : 36130
Join date : 2012-08-30

Show us. Geez!

How about a simple resolution. Please give us your time estimate when Hillary will be indicted. We have heard on this forum for almost 15 months that she is a criminal and she will be indicted.....now pk knows how many agents have been assigned and you know she is going to get indicted.....how about enough BS and give us a date certain......I will give you a date with certainty.....Hillary Clinton will not get indicted before she takes office as President of the United States in January of 2017. See that was not hard.....and heck with all your inside info....a date should be a lay down.

Markle

Markle

Posts : 17531
Join date : 2012-06-16
Age : 79
Location : Tallahassee

2seaoat wrote:Show us. Geez!

How about a simple resolution. Please give us your time estimate when Hillary will be indicted. We have heard on this forum for almost 15 months that she is a criminal and she will be indicted.....now pk knows how many agents have been assigned and you know she is going to get indicted.....how about enough BS and give us a date certain......I will give you a date with certainty.....Hillary Clinton will not get indicted before she takes office as President of the United States in January of 2017. See that was not hard.....and heck with all your inside info....a date should be a lay down.

You really should read some news other than the Mediamatters, the DailyKOS, Alternet and The Nation.

The number of agents has been in the major news.

Lame Duck President Obama is going to shield Hillary Clinton from an indictment. That's why she has been so lovey-dovey with him of late. Well known is the fact that the Clintons and Obama hate each other with a passion.

My guess is that indictments will be handed down in two to three months. At least for Huma Abedin, Cheryl Mills and probably Sidney Blumenthal.

IF President Obama blocks an indictment, unquestionably the FBI will leak the information they have on her.

2seaoat

2seaoat

Posts : 36130
Join date : 2012-08-30

IF President Obama blocks an indictment, unquestionably the FBI will leak the information they have on her.

Why would President Obama waste energy "blocking" an indictment......if he was going to do that he would simply pardon SOS Clinton......but then again we both know none of this is going to happen which was confirmed by your failure to give a drop dead date......too funny about reading the number of agents in the paper......hilarious..........

Markle

Markle

Posts : 17531
Join date : 2012-06-16
Age : 79
Location : Tallahassee

2seaoat wrote:IF President Obama blocks an indictment, unquestionably the FBI will leak the information they have on her.

Why would President Obama waste energy "blocking" an indictment......if he was going to do that he would simply pardon SOS Clinton......but then again we both know none of this is going to happen which was confirmed by your failure to give a drop dead date......too funny about reading the number of agents in the paper......hilarious..........

"Pardoning" Hillary Clinton would stamp her as GUILTY. Much better to block the indictment.

Are you saying that the number published is not true or are you saying that it was never published?

Doubtful either as it would be a snap to find in Bing. You're just working hard to be a geat foil.

Vikingwoman

Vikingwoman

Posts : 3590
Join date : 2014-08-25

Farkle, weren't you the one saying Obama was born in Kenya and would be kicked out of office? LOL!

Sponsored content

Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root"

1 Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/28/2016, 10:50 am

gatorfan

2 Re: Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/28/2016, 12:01 pm

Vikingwoman

3 Re: Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/28/2016, 12:11 pm

gatorfan

4 Re: Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/28/2016, 12:32 pm

Vikingwoman

5 Re: Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/28/2016, 12:55 pm

gatorfan

6 Re: Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/28/2016, 1:36 pm

Vikingwoman

7 Re: Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/28/2016, 1:37 pm

Vikingwoman

8 Re: Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/28/2016, 1:56 pm

gatorfan

9 Re: Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/28/2016, 2:07 pm

Markle

10 Re: Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/28/2016, 2:09 pm

Guest

11 Re: Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/28/2016, 2:12 pm

Markle

12 Re: Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/28/2016, 3:08 pm

Vikingwoman

13 Re: Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/28/2016, 4:07 pm

Markle

14 Re: Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/28/2016, 5:49 pm

2seaoat

15 Re: Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/28/2016, 6:01 pm

Guest

16 Re: Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/28/2016, 6:07 pm

Guest

17 Re: Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/28/2016, 9:26 pm

Vikingwoman

18 Re: Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/28/2016, 11:55 pm

2seaoat

19 Re: Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/29/2016, 12:04 am

Markle

20 Re: Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/29/2016, 12:10 am

Markle

21 Re: Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/29/2016, 12:11 am

2seaoat

22 Re: Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/29/2016, 12:28 am

Markle

23 Re: Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/29/2016, 12:40 am

2seaoat

24 Re: Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/29/2016, 12:48 am

Markle

25 Re: Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root" 3/29/2016, 3:28 am

Vikingwoman

26 Re: Willful Deceit "How Clinton’s email scandal took root"

Sponsored content