"The piece, by lawyer Anne Tompkins, appears to be part of a didactic operation the Clinton campaign undertook in the last weeks of August. In an interview with the Puffington Host’s Sam Stein, published Aug. 21, communications director Jennifer Palmieri promised, in Stein’s paraphrase, 'an end-of-summer effort to educate the public on the classification process for national security material.'" That would be the process that... Mrs. Clinton’s staffers and other defenders insist is too complicated for anyone, much less Mrs. Clinton, to understand. So when they say they’re going to 'educate the public,' it’s a safe bet they mean 'try to confuse the public.'"
From "The ‘Experts’ Spin/Mrs. Clinton faces no legal jeopardy, they say vacuously," by James Taranto. (Google some text if that link doesn't get you there.)
Try to confuse the public can be an effective strategy, and I think it may work for the email thing. The process is: 1. People realize they're supposed to be concerned about something, 2. They start to pay attention, to fulfill their civic duty to understand something that's supposed to be important, 3. They experience difficulty, confusion, and shame, 4. Now, we're ready for the lifeline to save our time and our pride: The problem has been looked at by experts, and they've said it's not a problem anymore. 5. You want to believe those other people who are still pressuring you to understand this business, or do you want to be free to move on to other things, like maybe, ha ha, did you know the sprinkler system went off at hoity-toity Hillary fundraiser in Southampton and lots of well-dressed, fancy richies like Anna Wintour and Martha Stewart got all wet? Oh, that Hillary! It's just one absurd screw-up after another, but the old dame rolls with the punches.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
१११ टिप्पण्या:
It's just one absurd screw-up after another, but the old dame rolls with the punches.
Well, I was willing to go along with you right up until the end, but then you lost me: your theoretical LIV dopes won't get to "the old dame rolls with the punches"; they'll stop right there at "one absurd screw-up after another" and that's all they'll take away.
The link to the hoity-toity getting drenched ist kaput.
Well, it is interesting to see a D get the Scott Walker 'If there's that much smoke, there must be a fire in there somewhere!' treatment.
I have no particular knowledge, one way or the other, that either person is innocent or guilty. I have lots of journalists and pundits throwing facts and innuendo around (and, to be sure, some of the journalists are probably doing both, not just pundits). As I have a negative view of most media, I tend to think Hillary is probably doing something shady, but I can't prove it.
"Lets confuse the rubes" is Democrat/MSM plan #1. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. It may well work here but for that it might be too late to stop the slide. People get tired of hearing a name all the time, for one thing after another. In this case, she has earned it and more. I don't believe Hillary! will ever pay for her malfeasances in any proportion to what she owes.
P.S. Don't you think she looks tired?
The possibility (actually high probability) that many emails would become classified at a later point ought to be reason enough not to have the private server in the first place.
Her best argument is that she is not a criminal, just a woefully incompetent person who had a private e-mail server...why exactly? This to me is the central problem with the entire Clinton e-mail narrative--they cannot come up with a legitimate reason for having the private server, so we are left to speculate and that leaves no good option. Even trying to spin this in a pro-Hillary way, I cannot come up with one good reason for that server. It only could have been used to hide something.
As for whether she broke the law, I'd rather hear from someone who isn't on her payroll.
The defense is the "smartest woman in the world" is, in reality, a low-level functional retard.
"I didn't KNOW they were classified" is hardly a stellar resume step for "I should be President!!!"
And there's plenty of people dumb enough to vote for her. I have even money on our host voting for her.
All that matters is if law enforcement does their job.
If they do, she is screwed. What the public thinks won't matter.
This to me is the central problem with the entire Clinton e-mail narrative--they cannot come up with a legitimate reason for having the private server, so we are left to speculate and that leaves no good option.
I love her "It's a bad idea and I take full responsibility" line, while trying to blame her staffers for not letting her know they were classified or something.
Do we want somebody suffering from early onset dementia having nukes at her hand?
The possibility (actually high probability) that many emails would become classified at a later point ought to be reason enough not to have the private server in the first place.
Several of her emails already show that she KNEW they were classified and had them sent anyways.
We should also be criminally pursuing the person who sent them from classified systems to unclassified ones. It isn't something one can do accidentally.
Oh, so now it's Lucille Ball for President.
I started a nuclear war with China!
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah!
"All that matters is if law enforcement does their job.
If they do, she is screwed. What the public thinks won't matter."
That's a pretty big "if." Like, a huge gigantic "if." The world's biggest "if." The mother of all "ifs."
And there's plenty of people dumb enough to vote for her.
Around 25% would vote for her while she was sitting in a jail cell in an orange jumpsuit if she had a "D" after her name.
I have even money on our host voting for her.
I put the odds much higher than that.
A great deal of what a Secretary of State says and does is classified regardless of whether it gets emailed, or marked, or not. Clinton's "I never sent anything marked classified, but some got marked later" defense is just like her husband's "it depends on what the meaning of 'is' is."
A hypothetical: Clinton meets with Putin. They talk about something sensitive, no one else there, nothing written down. Clinton leaves the meeting. That information she holds only in her head is "classified" already. If she commits it to unsecured email, or calls Chelsea about it, she has broken the law.
All the FBI has to do is drag their feet for another 16 months. After she's elected, they can throw their hands up and say, "It's a political matter now, you have to impeach her."
I've had a security clearance for 35 of the last 40 years. If I'd done anything even remotely as stupid/malicious as Hillary!, I'd not only be out of work, I'd likely be in jail.
One of the pretty lies we like to tell ourselves is "Equal justice under the law." Of course, everyone knows it's a lie but it sure sounds nice. If we had such as thing as "equal justice under the law," there would be no question about whether Hillary! would be the Democrat nominee next year. The question would be when will she be prosecuted the same as anyone else in the same position.
Another pretty lie is "We are a nation of laws, not of men." But then, Hillary! is a woman so maybe that one doesn't apply.
As long as the DoJ covers its ears and squeezes its eyes shut while loudly humming, the low information types will probably just assume that all this can't be that bad. I mean, after all, if Hillary Clinton really broke the law surely someone would prosecute her, right? So the only thing Hillary has to worry about is her diminishing poll numbers, and probably never becoming President as a result. But she'll (most likely) never go to jail or anything.
Eugene Debs ran for President from a prison cell in 1920 and still got 3.4 percent of the vote. Hillary's chances would be much better if she was the Democrat candidate.
Which is why it's a mistake to focus merely on the legality of her server. In an era when Sony is brought to its knees, OPM gave up sensitive gov't employment data, etc., people should be aware that conducting the business of the State Department on an unsecured server is STUPID!!!
All the FBI has to do is drag their feet for another 16 months. After she's elected, they can throw their hands up and say, "It's a political matter now, you have to impeach her."
The funny thing there is that there is a statute on the books that would presumably prevent her from serving in the govt. if convicted. BUT, it cannot apply to the Presidency (or, presumably as VP). That is because the Constitution sets out the requirements for President, and having committed a federal felony, etc. is not in the list of disqualifications. So, yes, if she is elected, she is, in essence, home free. She could pardon herself and all her minions, or fire all the US Attys, and only appoint new ones who won't indict her, and ditto for her new AG (and, we saw with Eric Holder that if the AG is running interference for the President, nothing can be done to either, absent impeachment).
The thing is, the emails that are being released today are the ones left after the server was scrubbed. They're "clean", even if they confirm everyone's suspicions that she's a paranoid, entitled control freak.
Her problem - and of the Administration - is that everyone who sent her classified information also has a copy, and is just as responsible for the situation as she is. No investigation will be complete until those are looked at.
Whether the Administration wants a complete investigation is another matter.
"That's a pretty big "if." Like, a huge gigantic "if." The world's biggest "if." The mother of all "ifs.""
I'm curious about how strong a case can be made--depending on which laws were broken, it could be a matter of simply proving that she stored, sent or received the e-mails, or it could mean having to prove that she knowingly sent classified material. I don't know what considerations the career FBI investigators or DOJ lawyers have to weigh in cases like this even where the person in question isn't Hillary Clinton.
If there's a strong case, I think she's toast. Obama and his team have no reason to stick his neck out for her, and if anything will want her to step down before it kills his party's chances of retaining the White House (partisan Democratic considerations have to favor getting someone else in there--even Sanders has a better shot at winning than an indicted Hillary). And if the case is strong, and Obama tried to squelch it, it would drag him down with her.
The WSJ apparently has tightened up. I can't even get yesterday's Taranto.
How is she not too stupid to be President?
Thanks for the heads-up about the screwup linking to the screwup. Fixed.
And if the case is strong, and Obama tried to squelch it, it would drag him down with her.
Drag him down where? The difference between Obama and Nixon is that Nixon had a sense of shame. Obama will never resign, will never be impeached, and will never be pursued by a special prosecutor.
"That would be the process that... Mrs. Clinton’s staffers and other defenders insist is too complicated for anyone, much less Mrs. Clinton, to understand."
Wonderful quote.
I have always wondered if the big problem with Hillary isn't just incompetence. Apparently her ardent supporters think so.
Is this the same NYT whose editor, in a response to "Evergreen," Hillary's secret service and ironic code name, promised to splain to David Brooks, who had taken a shot at Hillary in his column "how things worked" at the Times?
That email on Insty was precious.
The WSJ apparently has tightened up. I can't even get yesterday's Taranto.
I can still get it using the google some words method.
it is apparent that the person Hillary learned the most from i life is Richard Nixon.
How ironic.
When she had to ask for help charging her iPad, and for help figuring out if she had wi fi, did that reach supermarket scanner status yet?
If Biden runs Hillary is "toast"! Obama will turn the DOJ loose and it will be indictment time. Hillary will go her own way as Pres. (god forbid), but Joe will be Obama's perfect heir. We are talking Chicago-style politics here. I would welcome Joe's candidacy for any number of reasons, but this is the best.
Personal e-mail will be pounded until election day if Joe doesn't run. It's an easily understood issue by even the lowest of the LIV. Most easily understand the concept that you don't use corporate e-mail for personal messages and vice versa. If Hillary's trustworthy numbers are bad now imagine what they will be after that attack.
"Drag him down where? The difference between Obama and Nixon is that Nixon had a sense of shame. Obama will never resign, will never be impeached, and will never be pursued by a special prosecutor."
If evidence emerges that the president tried to unlawfully interfere with a federal criminal investigation, I think there'd be an impeachment and any defense of him in the Senate would be political suicide. That can't be waved off with "oh it was only committing civil perjury, we shouldn't impeach a president over that!"
But even if Obama thought that was unlikely, why even go through that for Hillary? He owes her nothing and has a lot of justifiable resentment towards her and her husband.
The thing is, the emails that are being released today are the ones left after the server was scrubbed. They're "clean", even if they confirm everyone's suspicions that she's a paranoid, entitled control freak.
To paraphrase Ron Fournier, these are the ones she WANTED you to see. The REALLY bad ones were deleted.
We need to never forget that she deleted a ton of emails and if the ones she kept are bad, it defies logic to assume the deleted ones are innocuous.
Interesting that these long term Clinton supporters and cronies are coming out claiming that Hillary! didn't break any laws. Thomkins (I do seem to remember that name from when Bill was President) claimed that the prosecution of Gen. Petreaus was different due to her claim of mental culpability. But she apparently failed to mention that her office had essentially proferred evidence to the court showing that he should have known, in order to negate any claim of lack of knowledge, and therefore, of intent. And, Hillary! was in a position that made knowledge that much more imputable. After all, she was one of a dozen or so people in the federal govt. who had individual classification authority, presumably because so much of what happens in her department was classified ab initio, since it involved foreign intelligence and secret information from foreign countries. It would be nearing frivolous for her to claim lack of knowledge, etc., and therefore, lack of intent, given her position and the training that anyone with her level of clearance has to apparently go through on a regular basis.
And, yes, it ignores that specific intent is not necessary for at least some of the crimes that some have argued that she violated (mere negligence is sufficient).
Worse maybe, setting up the server, and ignoring standard department (and Executive Branch) rules and regulations is likely constitutes sufficient intent for many, if not most, of those potential crimes.
If evidence emerges that the president tried to unlawfully interfere with a federal criminal investigation, I think there'd be an impeachment and any defense of him in the Senate would be political suicide.
The Democrats in the Senate know the states they are in are highly unlikely to turf them, no matter what. They will just keep throwing mud and sludge to try and confuse an issue that is not remotely confusing. The info she sent was confidential at the moment it was written. And she claimed to know the law when she got the job.
There is, honestly, no defense.
"How is she not too stupid to be President?"
I can see her bumper stickers now--"Too stupid to have committed a crime."
No interview or debate with Hillary should begin without the first question being "why did you use a private server?" She'll give a different answer every time, but it'll be fun to watch it devolve into incoherence.
1. Some of this stuff is classified whether it is so marked or not and wherever it is found, and federal employees with security clearances are expected to know it when they see it.
2. Some of this stuff, whether secret or not, came from classified closed government networks, and it is a federal offense to move any of it over to an internet connected computer.
3. Some of this stuff should have been - and probably was - marked secret in the network it came from. This can be checked, since there are copies still on the network, and it is a felony offense to strip classification markings from messages.
And so on.
But I still say it is the Clinton Global Initiative stuff that is going to get her. Classified material may depend on the meaning of "is," but people understand money and corruption all right.
And she has been warned. If she does not want to play ball, these messages will be "found" and published.
The WSJ apparently has tightened up. I can't even get yesterday's Taranto.
What I did was I clicked on the link Ann gave, which provided a Google link. When I got to the WSJ article, most of it was blanked out. But, the first part was intact, and I Googled that, and when I clicked on the first link (the second was to Ann's blog post), I got the entire Taranto article.
"The Democrats in the Senate know the states they are in are highly unlikely to turf them, no matter what. They will just keep throwing mud and sludge to try and confuse an issue that is not remotely confusing. The info she sent was confidential at the moment it was written. And she claimed to know the law when she got the job."
That's their tack for a defense of what Hillary did--confuse the issue, say that "everyone else did the same", say "it's old news", say it's "partisan witch hunt" and say "no actual law was broken". They revert to these for every scandal they're in.
But if Obama interferes with a DOJ investigation, that's a lot easier to understand. Even if he thought he could survive doing something like that, I don't see why he would risk it--so far he's untouched by this mess and I'm guessing he's smiling at the idea of her getting in trouble after flouting his own directives.
Eisenhower adopted a strategy to "keep them [the public] confused", but unlike Hillary to protect national security, not to cover-up how it was compromised.
The scale of the blast and the technological leap from fission bomb to the far more powerful thermonuclear bomb were, at Eisenhower's request, kept secret at first. Once president, he ordered the word "thermonuclear" be kept out of government press releases. ("Keep them confused as to fission and fusion," he instructed.) Despite his open demeanor, at press conferences Eisenhower would from time to time pretend to know less than he did, leaving the illusion that he was distracted and ill informed about matters that deeply engaged him.
Well, they've got my number. No dice.
I don't believe for a minute that the press would not provide "flood the zone" coverage for Obama complete with a full on festival of shit throwing from ever Democrat with access to a microphone to prevent any investigation, no matter how richly deserved, from getting started against Obama.
I have always wondered if the big problem with Hillary isn't just incompetence. Apparently her ardent supporters think so.
I wouldn't call her incompetent, but not overly competent either. She is a hard worker, who got where she is through hard work, along with a lot of lying and cheating. Oh, and being married to Bill. She was apparently far from the bottom when it came to performing her duties as a Senator, and probably did better than Kerry is doing right now as Secretary of State. But, then, Kerry (like Biden) has always claimed to be much smarter than he really is.
The place I see her being incompetent is in pulling off illegal and immoral acts, such as here, illegally using a private server to send and receive classified information without leaving a record. Her motives were pristine - to avoid the potential downsides of FOIA requests, should anything go wrong (as it did with Benghazi) or the Vast Rightwing Conspiracy (VRC) tried to discredit her work as Sec. of State. Her husband could have pulled it off, with a twinkle in his eye, with the support of so many progressive women, who tingled at his bad boy antics. But, she isn't Bill, and doesn't have a twinkle in her eye. Rather, she comes across as a vicious harpy, esp. when playing defense. And that, I think, is her true incompetence.
No, there is no excuse for how the use of her private server was set up. However illogical the security/classification system is, its the law, and she is not above it. I expect the FBI/DOJ to slap her hand but nothing else. I expect she'll be the nominee. I'm not sure if she'll win the general but she'll need the media to help destroy the Republican candidate with real stuff, not the weak email type stuff. You know, like because War on Women.
The State of Israel has all of the deleted HRC emails and will release them to the world soon enough. Probably to Bob Woodward and Fox.
The deleted emails will show the bribery scam Bill and Hillary ran with foreign governments, private donors and the Foundation.
I had a government e-mail account for several years. I had a private e-mail account (still do). At no time did I feel compelled to conduct official business via my personal e-mail account.
Please explain to me why Hillary! needed a private e-mail server? To date. I've not heard exactly why she needed one and previous Secretaries of State didn't. Why did she need to use unsecure cell phones and tablets? The State Department would've gladly provided properly configured equipment to her and trained her in their use.
In the end, I can only conclude that she wished to hide something. What was that something?
But I still say it is the Clinton Global Initiative stuff that is going to get her. Classified material may depend on the meaning of "is," but people understand money and corruption all right.
I don't think that it is going to be that easy. I mentioned above that I suspect that the big reason for using her own email server was to not make her emails available to FOIA requests. Part of this, of course, is her normal paranoia. But, I am thinking now that part of it was because of the quid pro quod going on with her foundation, her husband, and all these foreign countries and companies. And, with her attorneys going through her emails before turning them over to the govt. and Congress, I think that there is little likelihood that they will have survived. Remember, contrary to other govt. employees, Hillary got to determine what was work related, and what was not. And, arguably, any Clinton Foundation related business was not work related, because it was family/foundation related.
Please explain to me why Hillary! needed a private e-mail server?
Because anything that would have been sent to her, or by her, on an official govt. account would have been subject to FOIA requests.
I had a government e-mail account for several years. I had a private e-mail account (still do). At no time did I feel compelled to conduct official business via my personal e-mail account.
Having no security clearance at all --- I wonder how she had the classified stuff on her computer? Guys like Snowden and Manning, if memory serves, had to at least USB sticks to purloin their info.
I am almost positive that classified documents cannot be emailed to a private email server without some significant shenanigans.
Part of this, of course, is her normal paranoia. But, I am thinking now that part of it was because of the quid pro quod going on with her foundation, her husband, and all these foreign countries and companies.
If I was a Republican, I'd run ads detailing the exact charges against McDonnell and Clinton and noting that there seems to be a dramatic difference in punishment when the amounts of money are exponentially more.
Blogger tim in vermont said...
When she had to ask for help charging her iPad, and for help figuring out if she had wi fi, did that reach supermarket scanner status yet?
And find tv shows she wanted to watch. And she doesn't know how to drive a car.
Vogue editor Wintour was next to Clinton on the patio at the time and did not get drenched.
Damn it all! I was hoping for a Wicked Witch of West meltdown.
"The State of Israel has all of the deleted HRC emails and will release them to the world soon enough. Probably to Bob Woodward and Fox."
Only if she loses. Why waste the perfect blackmail material?
Please explain to me why Hillary! needed a private e-mail server?
Easier than that. The only way anybody can have a hope of deleting an email is if they own the server and control the backups.
"Bruce Hayden said...
Please explain to me why Hillary! needed a private e-mail server?
Because anything that would have been sent to her, or by her, on an official govt. account would have been subject to FOIA requests."
Well, of course. But that's hardly a legal reason for compromising informational security at the highest levels of Government. Therefore, how can anyone justify Hillary!'s actions. We may conclude that she is either dishonest or incompetent or both.
Hagar said...
1. Some of this stuff is classified whether it is so marked or not and wherever it is found, and federal employees with security clearances are expected to know it when they see it.
2. Some of this stuff, whether secret or not, came from classified closed government networks, and it is a federal offense to move any of it over to an internet connected computer.
3. Some of this stuff should have been - and probably was - marked secret in the network it came from. This can be checked, since there are copies still on the network, and it is a felony offense to strip classification markings from messages.
There are established procedures to download files from a classified system. These procedures predate Hillary! as Secretary of State. While it's possible some of her staffers downloaded files and stripped out the classification markings (a potential felony), but that leaves fingerprints. Classified servers keep a log of all downloaded files and who did the downloading. It may be more likely that they decided to paraphrase ("talk around") the classified information. That is also a security violation and could explain how Hillary! can claim that she didn't receive anything that was marked classified. There are some types of information that are classified at birth and any competent government employee (including cabinet members) would know what types of information fall into that category.
@ David Begley Interesting idea and why not? Somebody has all the e-mails, whether its is the Chinese, Russians Brits or Israelis. I can't believe otherwise. The Brits have always been really good at that kind of thing.
"Vogue editor Wintour was next to Clinton on the patio at the time and did not get drenched."
Probably didn't get any sun either. Hillary is like a solar eclipse.
As I have remarked before, Mike Morell was on TV stating that he was sure all the competent intelligence services had been monitoring Hillary!'s server, and I am sure that Mr Morell, with his background, includes the U.S. intelligence services among the "competent" ones.
So no, it will not be difficult to produce copies if needed.
Israel will give the FBI some time to recover the deleted emails. But if the FBI can't or won't do the job, Israel will release the emails this year.
Too risky for Israel if HRC is elected. Leak will have to be this year so Dems can select another nominee.
damikesc wrote: I have even money on our host voting for [Hillary Clinton]
I give it 3 to 1.
the inevitable refrain of Clinton supporters/ Democrat Party members/ leftists everywhere:
"You can't PROVE it!!!"
Trying to delete an email is like trying to destroy a fax by burning the original.
Shorter NYTimes Editorial: "She is not a crook!"
Brando said...
"That's a pretty big "if." Like, a huge gigantic "if." The world's biggest "if." The mother of all "ifs.""
I'm curious about how strong a case can be made--depending on which laws were broken, it could be a matter of simply proving that she stored, sent or received the e-mails, or it could mean having to prove that she knowingly sent classified material.
NO. It doesn't matter at all if she knew and it doesn't matter that she was stupid...
Title 18, 793, (f)
Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document,... (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
Guilty, Guilty, Guilty.
She was grossly negligent. She stored classified material that she was trained to recognixed. She delivered it to others and it was stolen (the Blumenthal hack).
Guilty, Guilty, Guilty.
You can tell when an email is classified by looking at the date when it can be "unclassified". 15 years after it was orignated. Look at some copies of her emails and you can see they were classified before they Sate adept classified them.
If you are on twitter follow a guy @20committee he was a former NSA employee/lawyer who appears to know USC and what sections HRC could potentially be charged under. Now, do I think she will be charged? Hell no.
Oh there's more...
(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States.
I would like to know how keeping stuff on your private server is not "having custody" and how an email is not a "document" or "other thing." and how deleting 30k of them is not obliteration.
She gets off though, because it says "forfeit his office, and she has a vagina.
Presumably.
It is not about Israel.
Obama is not going to have Clinton, Inc. cross up his "legacy." He, and his crew, will want a controllable party stalwart, such as Joe Biden, f. ex. to follow him in office.
Let me review the alternatives;
1. Somebody downloaded classified files and moved them to an unclassified system. Very very unlikely because it would imply three things
- serious systemic State security procedures, and
- a really dumb staffer who was not afraid to have their fingerprints on
- a traceable felony that was blazing there for all to see.
2. somebody (many somebodies) attended briefings, read marked documents and then produced executive summaries for the Boss. Reports that said in part, "NSA analysis reveals", or the "CIA reports", again, less blatant, but clearly traceable crimes and ones that likely happened. Only the originator or the President can downgrade marked materials.
3. Clinton and other staffers created State department materials as the result of interacting with officials from foreign governments. By the State rules, these staffers are supposed to know that at birth, these reports are classified. Apparently this was commonplace on the Clinton server. Whether or not the "The originator of the email decides the classification", e.g. "marks them", those communications ARE classified.
Though let me expand. Every organization has a corporate culture about classified materials. I've held a TS continuously for more than 45 years now, with SCI access off and on.
State IMHO has a very lax culture. The Clinton WH had a lax culture. Everything we have seen about the Clinton machine, its minions and the head office of State (I know that's redundant) indicate that they were even more relaxed. All these aides attended lots of TS/SCI briefs for the boss lady. Both inside State and at the IC and DoD. In some of those places, they were cautioned about taking notes, in others, they were encouraged to have their notes logged wrapped and couriered back to State. In others, they just walked out with TS/SCI notes, went home and transcribed the jist of the meeting, w/o marking to the boss lady.
People who think the rules don't apply. They ought to be made to pay full price.
I'd start right now by opening security incidents on all the authors of Hillary emails that State has now redacted because they contain classified material. I'd suspend those clearances and get written statements from all concerned.
Kerrey won't, but it is the only way to clean out the rot.
khesanh0802 said...
@ David Begley Interesting idea and why not? Somebody has all the e-mails, whether its is the Chinese, Russians Brits or Israelis. I can't believe otherwise. The Brits have always been really good at that kind of thing.
Romanians at Least. We know because a Romanian Hacker got to Blumenthal's classified email exchanges with Hill over Benghazi. Emails that Hill deleted, becuz they were "personal". We only know they exist becuz Sid honored his subpoena and of course after the hacker kept him honest....
So she lied about the deletions and she is lying now...
Words offered up by poll respondents when asked what popped into their head when prompted with "Hillary" in a Quinnipiac poll last week:
liar 178
dishonest 123
untrustworthy 93
experience 82
strong 59
Bill 56
woman 47
smart 31
crook 21
untruthful 19
criminal 18
deceitful 18
Democrat 16
intelligent 15
email 14
politician 13
Benghazi 12
corrupt 12
crooked 11
capable 10
determined 10
good 10
leader 9
murder 9
qualified 9
Tot
trustworthy 9
bitch 8
competent 8
phony 8
president 8
cheat 7
deceptive 7
honest 7
scandal 7
sneaky 7
ambitious 6
arrogant 6
brilliant 6
dependable 6
fair 6
sec-of-state 6
thief 6
confident 5
corporate 5
dedicated 5
devious 5
first-lady 5
lady 5
liberal 5
unqualified 5
I haven't heard of any higher-ups at the state department being fired yet. This is ominous as far as a conspiracy existing between the President and Mrs Clinton.
It looks like the Republicans are lap dogs on this issue.
I don't see how it could affect her campaign, as Congress is playing dead since getting the majority.
P.S. Don't you think she looks tired?
Todd, I don't want you to think no one appreciated the entirely apropos Dr. Who reference. Bravo!
Coupe said...
I don't see how it could affect her campaign, as Congress is playing dead since getting the majority.
I think she's dead. Aurvey I saw a week ago went someething like:
On Clinton's email problem is she
Telling the truth: 2%
Lying? 65%
Don't know: 33%
The difference between Obama and Nixon is that Nixon had a sense of shame. Obama will never resign, will never be impeached, and will never be pursued by a special prosecutor.
One more. Nixon cared about his underlings and that brought him down as he tried to take care of them.
Obama and Hillary have absolutely no interest in anyone who works for them except that they toe the current line.
Well that is their plan, OK. The problem is that it won't work. Even the lawn service guy knows to use his company email for work. He knows he would get the heave-ho if he went on his own. Hillary is counting on people to be as technologically stupid as she is. They are not.
Why apply the coup de grace now? Why not let it boil through to next summer? The Democrats are like so many cattle penned in on their way to the barn to be milked, dimly unaware that they have a choice. They won't throw her over. No need to rush. This drip drip drip strategy is working just fine, penetrating the defenses the media have raised.
"The Democrats are like so many cattle penned in on their way to the barn to be milked, dimly unaware that they have a choice."
That's what they say back at corral, but the guy at the end of the chute doesn't have a milking machine. psst, it looks like a nail gun :)
Caller: Particularly Carly, uh you know, she jumped in and supported, uh, Meg uh Kelly against Trump uh and played you know the feminist victim..
Rush: Well, you know, that's that's the solidarity in the vaginas
Caller: Yeah, yeah, so we need to fight this political correctness
Rush: Wait a second now, vaginas have monologues, we know this, there was a play.. all right, bleep it, let's not even play, just just Mike just hit the bleep button, no it's not too late, we didn't we haven't gone anywhere near, you telling me it's too late to bleep it now?!
Caller: Anyway we have to fight political correctness.
2:27:20 EST
In what sense is that a coup? A Hillary hack goes out in public to defend Hillary. How is that a coup?
"Somebody has all the e-mails, whether its is the Chinese, Russians Brits or Israelis."
So if (if!) we have competent intel/hackers, presumably we would know some of what the other guys know, correct? Might the NSA have Hillary!'s emails? Someone should ask.
I've held a Top Secret clearance. Knowingly receiving classified information on an unsecure network is criminal conduct, full stop.
Sending classified information on an unsecure network is criminal conduct, full stop.
Storing classified information on an uncleared server in your basement is criminal conduct, full stop.
Making false statements to federal investigators stating you had not done any of the above when in fact you have is criminal conduct, full stop. (Look up "exculpatory no," if you don't think the feds are serious about this matter. Or look up why, specifically, Martha Stewart spent a year in prison.
The fact that the feds would come down on Stewart but still give Hillary and that Lois Lerner twat a pass is an insult to the electorate.
They cannot comment on n ongoing imvestigation - until they can.
And she may well "look tired." For Hillary! this must be like fighting Bøygen on Hardangervidda.
---The possibility (actually high probability) that many emails would become classified at a later point
You don’t get it. When the Secretary of State produces an email about an area of Secrecy the EMAIL IS CLASSIFIED because it contains the CONTENTS!!!!
She should have been asking the question 'Should I classify this?” with EVERY SENTENCE SHE WROTE/DICTATED!!!!
------A hypothetical: Clinton meets with Putin..... If she commits it to unsecured email, or calls Chelsea about it, she has broken the law.
Well said.
Bruce Hayden said...
I wouldn't call her incompetent, but not overly competent either. She is a hard worker, who got where she is through hard work, along with a lot of lying and cheating. Oh, and being married to Bill. She was apparently far from the bottom when it came to performing her duties as a Senator, and probably did better than Kerry is doing right now as Secretary of State. But, then, Kerry (like Biden) has always claimed to be much smarter than he really is.
9/1/15, 3:30 PM
Yeah Bruce, she did great as secretary of state: The Reset Button mistranslation/The rise of Russian aggression in eastern Europe, The Arab Spring flame out/Syria and Libya debacles, declining and damaged relations with all American allies, The Obama/Clinton coalition to fight Assad assembling in toto Iran and Al-Quaeda, Snowden still at large in Russia with American intelligence, Foreign ally governments openly expressing reservations about American allegiance, China extending its influence in the Pacific rim and antagonizing American interests, losing Iraq to extremists, overthrowing Morsi and having him replaced by the Muslim Brotherhood... I'm not even trying but there's a lot more failure than that. Well, at least we're not at war with Canada- Heckuva job, Hillary2016!
Interesting to me is that just as her people and donors are coming out and claiming that there is nothing to prosecute, that she was unaware that the classified information in emails was classified, etc, emails are continuing to emerge that show just the opposite, that every one in her inner circle was in on it, and worked to get around the restrictions in the State dept classified email systems so they could get classified information to Hillary! on her own insecure server. I don't think that there are any smoking guns that would directly indict her, that doesn't appear to be the case for some of her minions, with maybe the exception of her sending classified information from her personal account to Sidney Blumenthal, who most likely didn't have sufficient security clearance to receive such, given his being a persona non grata by the White House. I am reconsidering my assertion earlier here that she wasn't really incompetent -I think that she is looking more and more so in regards to the cover up.
One interesting email that has come out was from Huma to Hillary! in regards to Egypt. Huma seemed to be congratulating "H" for the fall of the Mulberrick govt and the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood, which her parents had been prominent leaders. Or something like that. We all know how that ultimately turned out, with the military being forced to reassert control and again ban that group, essentially ending the Muslim Spring in Egypt. It makes you wonder whether Huma, intentionally or not, was behind the disasters we created across North Africa, with her pushing the Muslim Brotherhood and their theories of Islamic extremism and terrorism. Making things worse, maybe, is that through part of her time as a paid State dept employee, Huma was double and triple dipping, collecting money from employers trying to influence US international policy while also taking a federal paycheck. And controlling Hillary's schedule while she was doing that. Smells worse and worse as time goes on.
Let me rephrase my previous post - I don't think that there have been any smoking guns yet that directly indict Hillary!, except maybe the sending of classified information to Blumenthal. But the game is probably still in theearly stages, and there are still plenty of her emails to be read. Everything is indirect so far, with emails showing her minions apparently doing her will, but no emails from her directly instructing them to commit federal crimes by intentionally mishandling classified, etc material in order to get it to her on her personal, insecure, server. We are left right now trying to determine, or maybe even guess, whether her people scrubbed emails showing her involvement before they turned over the rest of them, or the orders from her were verbal, or the minions were just doing what they thought she wanted. In any case, probably plausible deniability on her part, at least so far.
Sorry - my 6:06 post talked about the "Muslim Spring". It was, instead, the "Arab Spring". I think I had "Muslim" on the brain as I talked about Huma and her family's connections to the Muslim Brotherhood.
Average - can you honestly say that John Kerry is any better? His big accomplishment so far seems to have been getting Iran to maybe agree to some restrictions in their nuclear program, as long as we let them control the inspections, and we will get their sanctions lifted, netting their govt spend many more billions every year pushing Islamic terrorism around the world. In Hillary's defense here, she had a full four years to screw up in, and Kerry hasn't had three yet. And his seem fated to kill more, probably many more, people around the world.
Bruce said...Everything is indirect so far, with emails showing her minions apparently doing her will, but no emails from her directly instructing them to commit federal crimes by intentionally mishandling classified, etc material in order to get it to her on her personal, insecure, server.
How about the email released yesterday that went something like: Hill sends an email to George Mitchell, our Peace Talks Rep on the topic of what the Italian FM thinks about the Palestinian position with the email subject being: "Reply to this email account" meaning her private server. Knowing any contents presenting other countries diplomatic positions is born classified by State rules and both parties must know that. Mitchell proceeds to respond with info from the Italians. The State released the email with Mitchell's material completely redacted citing the rules I mentioned.
That to me means "through gross negligence"
This is a standard defense of politicians, especially the Clintons. There is no "smoking gun" evidence they violated criminal law.
In a democracy, citizens have the duty to use common sense in judging their would be leaders, even and especially if, the facts are incomplete. After all, if more facts would exonerate the would-be bigshot, he can always trot them out.
The reason there are rules about conducting public business on government owned systems is that we want accountability and a public and historical record. When Hillary keeps a private server and then destroys it when the fact it discovered, the common sense explanation is that there is much on the server she is ashamed of.
The truly funny part is that there art going to people that art going to vote for her no matter what she does. Democrats would vote PolPot into office.
Huma Abedin did not engineer the "Arab Spring" calamity, but she may have been instrumental in bringing Hillary! onboard with the conspiracy, convincing her that that it would be a great success to ride into the presidency.
"The possibility (actually high probability) that many emails would become classified at a later point ought to be reason enough not to have the private server in the first place."
-- The problem is the emails that started classified and the instruction to send classified information. Any lesser being would be sizing up orange jumpsuits.
heh. Martha spent time in prison for much less. And she is a Hillary Supporter? Good to know. I won't be buying anything with a "Martha Stewart" label.
"We should also be criminally pursuing the person who sent them from classified systems to unclassified ones. It isn't something one can do accidentally."
-- Or at all. You can't send from SIPR to NIPR [at least, with what I've worked with.] You'd have to use a thumbdrive, scan it, print it and hand copy it, etc., etc.
You couldn't just boot up your SIPR email and click send to your NIPR [if you could, IMAGINE the accidental spillage there would be every day!]
"They're "clean", even if they confirm everyone's suspicions that she's a paranoid, entitled control freak."
-- I'm impressed with what she kept. "Let's leave the email where I say it is OK to send me classified information on this. Oh, and the one where I admit to not knowing how to look things up in TV guide."
"The place I see her being incompetent is in pulling off illegal and immoral acts, such as here, illegally using a private server to send and receive classified information without leaving a record."
-- The problem is she's paranoid with a hair trigger temper [Vast Right Wing Conspiracy! Sluts and whores!] who vastly under estimates her opponents [They're all hillbilly idiots!] while over stating her side's strengths.
She's a classic flawed and tragic hero, if only she'd, you know, killed a giant or something first.
"Having no security clearance at all --- I wonder how she had the classified stuff on her computer? Guys like Snowden and Manning, if memory serves, had to at least USB sticks to purloin their info."
-- If I recall, during an FBI sting/was willingly handed over after multiple requests, the FBI is now in custody of a thumbdrive full of files that a Clinton aide/lawyer was using.
Drill SGT: I think #1 is possible if the staffer were incredibly loyal, had already done some minor crimes for the Clinton machine, and thought she'd win the White House. It's a gamble, but I could see someone who was already compromised willing to take another risk for a shot to live large.
"are"
Absolutely no classified information what-so-ever. Ok, pack it in team HC, it's over. No one is going to believe that anyone thought that SPY SATELLITE DATA ABOUT NORTH KOREA'S NUCLEAR ASSETS were Unclassified information meant for everyone.
It's got SPY right in the name.
DoD Satellite Data or talking about the data is TS/SCI SI, TK, NOFORN
It's at least 3 to 1 that our hostess will vote for the Democratic nominee, whoever it is. No matter whom the Republicans nominate, she will suddenly, unaccountably get the willies at the thought of supporting him or her. We've seen this movie before.
-- If I recall, during an FBI sting/was willingly handed over after multiple requests, the FBI is now in custody of a thumbdrive full of files that a Clinton aide/lawyer was using.
Why is her lawyer not in legal trouble, out of curiosity? Possessing classified info is hardly legal.
Interesting article from NRO: Hillary to Staffer Wary of Sending Classified Info: ‘Just Email It’. Her minion was balking at sending her classified information on her personal email system, and she, in essence, said "do it". From a legal point of view, if he did, ultimately send it to her, and it was classified information at that time, then wouldn't she have some sort of primary liability under the theory of respondeat superior? She, as his boss, essentially ordered him to violate the law. Not good.
Simply want to say your article is as surprising. The clarity on your put up is simply cool and i could suppose you're an expert in this subject. Kindly Visit my site here Danger Dash Game Apk
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा