Clinton Investigation: State Department Suspends Security Review Due to FBI Criminal Investigation
Now that the FBI has moved from their fact-finding mission regarding the use of a private server for Clinton's communications while Secretary of State, and the resulting discovery of top secret information found on it, the U.S. State Department has suspended their internal review so as not to conflict with the ongoing criminal investigation.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/state-department-will-halt-hillary-clinton-e...
"The FBI communicated to us that we should follow our standard practice which is to put our internal review on hold while there is an ongoing law enforcement investigation underway"
Meanwhile, and subsequent to the shift from fact-finding into active interviews by the FBI of key individuals who may have committed crimes, four key Clinton aides have joined together in a group defense strategy, all signing on with Beth Wilkenson as their defending attorney.
While this is simply an investigative interview, no indictment has yet been tendered, it is very interesting that they would all choose to side together. It is often very difficult to maintain the interests of ALL individuals evenly in such an investigation.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/hillary-clinton-fbi-strategy-email...
The quartet includes Clinton’s former chief of staff Cheryl Mills, who counseled Clinton politically and legally; deputy chief of staff Jake Sullivan, whom sources say authored a number of emails to Clinton that are now considered “top secret”; Heather Samuelson, Mills’ deputy who initially sorted Clinton’s work-related emails from personal messages that were then deleted; and Reines, who served as Clinton’s spokesman and also used personal email for work purposes at State.
Wilkinson and the four staffers, as well as the Clinton campaign, did not respond to requests for comment.
The real benefit is that their lawyer will be present for the first interview and will know what the line of questioning will be likely for the next series of interviews. Ultimately it is expected that Hillary Clinton herself will be interviewed in coming weeks.
Hiring the same attorney allows Clinton’s advisers to have one gatekeeper for most of the DOJ's inquiries — and it likely indicates that they expect to offer substantially similar testimony if they're questioned. Lawyers are barred from simultaneously representing people who may have conflicting interests in an investigation, or who would say something negative or potentially legally harmful about the lawyer’s other clients, experts say, although some such conflicts can be waived by the clients.
Thus, the aides' decision to use a so-called “joint-representation” or “common-defense” strategy suggests the staffers believe they’re in this together and are unlikely to turn on each other.Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2016/04/hillary-clinton-fbi-strategy-email...
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook
Comments
IANAL (just a non-law PhD)
From the Politico article there seem to be opposing views on what this means, except I sense those 4 will fall on their swords somehow and she will walk, tainted with skunk for a long time.
Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.
Clinton's always seem to have a Second Secret Service...
Always willing to throw themselves into the line of any subpoenas that come her way.
I do not pretend I know what I do not know.
When you have that much money and power
you can probably get whatever you want.
Which is why she acts like this presidency is to just be handed to her, no questions asked.
Sigh
I remember watching a tRump interview where he said "they" are protecting her. So what does this mean? None of this investigative stuff will come to light as long as she is the "front-runner?"
Well done is better than well said-Ben Franklin
The DOJ had to allow group defense strategy
It is unclear if this is a strategy of falling on sword or if the allowance of group defense by the DoJ is just a way to allow strategic advantage to the Clinton Camp. Another view could be that they believe that Clinton herself is or will be the ultimate target of the investigation.
If you do not understand that being part of the "establishment" is a slur in the minds of 99% of the U.S. population then you are completely out of touch and probably are one.
I think we have seen this as an initial
tactic in other federal cases. It is specifically to show a united front and, most importantly, to enhance a coordinated story by reducing the number of spokespersons to one. In the past, the prosecutors have said"O, ok" and then found wedge issues to separate them with conflicting stories during their depositions. If this DOESN'T happen and they go forward still united, then I will see that as an outward and visible sign that the fix is in.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” Voltaire
Still hoping against hope...
that whatever the FBI's got on Hillary transcends the emails (pay to play arms deals vis a vis the Clinton Foundation, anyone?).
She'll never spend a day in prison, and likely won't even get indicted, but a suspension of her campaign for "health reasons" and to spend more time with her grandchildren would be music to my ears.
It's a big club...and you ain't in it!
It won't happen
This will be swept under the rug like all the denigrations of Democracy. We are now in a place where corruption is the norm: getting around the law is more applauded than upholding it. There is no regard for any institution: only what can be manipulated and stolen. Between the Clinton and Bush regimes any semblance of Democracy was doomed. We are a hollow state, and increasingly a world aggressor with no moral compass.
So, basically, bottom-line
SOS (same ole shit) --- lots of words to say not a fucking thing will be done
Except, like I said above,
since she has "deficiencies" to many voters, most of whom are not connected to daily news like this, she will exit with a skunk smell that won't wash off. Plus a bad taste that again, The Rich Are Different.
If MSM quashes all of this (likely), Republicans will not. Everyone can smell skunk. Bad times.
Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.
yep
has the justice system come back from their 20 year sabbatical from doing their fucking jobs? Not likely
The 4 witnesses with 1 attorney
is crazy. If one of them gets an offer of immunity, what is the lawyer going to do? The potential for conflict of interest is really great. Also, if the Feds impose a condition the interviews are secret, how would the attorney be able to properly prepare the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th witnesses without improperly disclosing witness No 1's area of questioning?
I have once, in a 30 year career, represented 3 co-defendants. (Very cool case. They were accused of trespass, a misdemeanor, while protesting the XL Pipeline.) When I presented them with the conflict of interest waiver, they couldn't wait to sign it. They wanted to get in, get out, to continue protesting, and the fines and court costs were being paid by a national organization. The judge actually reached over his bench to shake their hands. This kind of criminal behavior would not give them the kind of criminal history that would adversely effect them in job interviews in the future.
With the Feds, however, "interviews" can mean ruining your life with the wrong answer.
This is just crazy.
I will have to read more, just sleep on it, to try and figure out how this is a Clinton shield, or a Clinton Trojan Horse.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981
I know nothing of your work
I am not a lawyer, but i did ace the LSAT!!!
Here is my take.
Clinton gets all four in the room and says "OK guys, here is how it's gonna go, see? Your all gonna play this real cool and real smart, see? You WILL do it our way, and we take care of you down the road should anything go bad, got it? We will pay your legal fees. There will always be a job for you at the foundation or someplace in our organization, even if you get a felony on you record. You have my word. If you go it alone, you will not like the feeling of isolation form every ally you have in this world. Will you? No, you won't. And here is why we need you all to have the same lawyer. And sign this waiver."
"First, we need you all to have the same story. One lawyer means he gets to hear all the questions, and will be able to properly prepare the last three of you to be interviewed, and make sure your answers are coordinated."
"Second, you all have one job. To make me innocent and unaware of anything illegal or even fishy. If we are caught where somebody has to confess to something, we will decide for you which of you will confess, and what you will say.
Third, c'mon guys, we are like a family. Right? Cheryl? Cheryl?!!?! We are a family, right?"
They nod their heads like DWS. "Right....good."
GradySeasons
"The nightlife ain't no good life, but it's my life."
Does she sound like Jimmy Cagney there?
When I read that, I heard it in a Jimmy Cagney voice. Seems right.
Yes
I tried to combine a humorous 30s gangster movie take with actual analysis buried within. It's a new form I am experimenting with, that I am confident will soon be ignored across the USA and beyond. But they'll never take me alive.
GradySeasons
"The nightlife ain't no good life, but it's my life."
Clinton paying
the lawyer, obviously. 1st one to break ranks gets fingered as the fall guy by the others.
The good Christian should beware of mathematicians. The danger already exists that mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and confine man in the bonds of Hell. -- St. Augustine of Hippo
I was just commenting to a friend elsewhere on social media
that it may well be that the MOST anyone interested in actual transparency is LIKELY to get from this investigation is the excellent fiction it will no doubt inspire. Two summers from now, there will be a series of international espionage blockbusters loosely based on what's going on now.
'What we are left with is an agency mandated to ensure transparency and disclosure that is actually working to keep the public in the dark' - Ann M. Ravel, former FEC member
WOW! Proof reading might have helped
GradySeasons
"The nightlife ain't no good life, but it's my life."
then watch as the DOJ drafts conspiracy charges, to boot.
HerRoyalClinton
You'd think, but a savvy lawyer like Clinton can’t claim "ignorance" in this one. It won't wash with the FBI who aren't under her spell like the State Dept. Besides, that it was Clinton's decision to ignore both Valerie Jarett and a law against this on the books that Hill was reminded of and had to sign a contract affirming that she will follow regulations on this very issue, is evidence that Clinton was cognizant of but thwarted the law anyway for email communications at State. She won't be able to send the four employees to the slammer in her place on this one.
I only wish that were true
but our DOJ is more interested in World Cup Soccer, than actual malfeasance that affects our lives or security. We are mostly just fungible dupes for all of the machinations of power and wealth.
I only wish that were true
but our DOJ is more interested in World Cup Soccer, than actual malfeasance that affects our lives or security. We are mostly just fungible dupes for all of the machinations of power and wealth.
Good to have your perspective
Not a stretch to think some Clinton minion supplied the attorney and told the 4, "Don't worry we'lll have your back no matter what happens".
Please, please, please keep writing on this
...so cool that you know in your bones and experience how this works. Really want to keep an eye out for your perspective.
'What we are left with is an agency mandated to ensure transparency and disclosure that is actually working to keep the public in the dark' - Ann M. Ravel, former FEC member
Another stupid question for lawyers:
Have any of these four been questioned by Congress? I know the IT guy was, and fifth his way out and then was questioned under immunity. Blumenthall was also questioned, we don't know what he said (interesting that there have been no leaks?). Is Congressional questioning considered contaminating before Justice and FBI questions?
And haven't these four had a long time to coordinate their stories, with what they know about each's activities?
I have never smelled a rat, except lab rats.
Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.
I haven't heard if they were questioned by Congress.
Lying under oath has consequences.
Full disclosure: I am not a feral practitioner, and would be interested if a lawyer here could answer the question you have and that I have.
I know conflicting sworn testimony can be used for impeachment of your credibility, but I do not know if the punishment for lying to Congress is a civil or criminal penalty.
I do know that any statement you make to an fbi agent or federal prosecutor had better damn well be the truth, the whole truth, whether sworn or not.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981
I do not believe that they have.
Probably for three reasons.
a. Trey was too stupid to think of it.
b. Their staff lawyers said leave it to the feds
c. a bit of both
Blumenthal
I heard that Blumenthal had to supply his emails. That's how they discovered HRC had emailed classified info on her personal email -- from their correspondence.
No Russia T Published Blumenthal's email on Bengazi
in 2015?
The staff of the Gawker noticed that it was sent a private account.
Which is how they knew that Hillary had been using a private email address.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-03-03/hdr22clintonemailcom-how-romani...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOEvOObGlAE
feral! omigod!
FEDERAL. Now, stop spitting on the screen. Stop. Right now, dammit.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981
I kinda liked that
and did not think that you were referring to ambulance-chasers, who may be feral.
Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.
Ambulance chasers have more integrity
than "Christian attorneys" who prey on the elderly for shit like "loving trusts" that cost a fortune to create and have horrific tax consequences for the clients.
There is nothing out there that can guilt a client into hiring you and paying you an exorbitant fee than to reach out and pray with them for God's blessings on their case.
Clients and supporters joining with an attorney in a prayer circle in the courtroom means $ for that attorney.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981
You can edit your comments here...
Just a nice feature of this new world of ours...
I'm the only person standing between Richard Nixon and the White House."
~John F. Kennedy~
Economic: -9.13, Social: -7.28,
Oh No!
Criminal investigation? What criminal investigation? Oh, you mean the security review.
(snark, snark)
Mark F. McCarty
Armando, is that you? /sn
Armando, is that you? /sn
"If you're on fire, and running down the street, people will get out of your way." Davey- Cordovan Athabascan Native
Missing Huma
Once again, no mention of Hillary's right hand gal Huma. There is an internet rumor that Huma is already the subject of a sealed indictment, allegedly stemming from an anonymous source in the intelligence community.
Mark F. McCarty
Yep.
It was all Huma, all the time, then crickets.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981
indeed
Found this poking around at that link
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2587100
I have to say, the media has sure made it appear there's a chance this is the case. Not sure it's so nut-jobby for the country to look beneath the surface. Frankly, I've been feeling generally more protective and isolationist as I've been reading about donations to the foundation over the past year.
Forget the presidency as a concept - the woman appears to want to be an EMPIRE unto herself. She wants world domination more than to be the first woman president. I think she fancies herself a righteous evil villain - what was that multiple superhero cartoon? Did they have a Hall of Justice or a League of something? That's the level she sees herself playing on. So far above the rules that one doesn't even remember what it is mere mortals have to abide by.
'What we are left with is an agency mandated to ensure transparency and disclosure that is actually working to keep the public in the dark' - Ann M. Ravel, former FEC member
that underlined part
"... there appears to be coordination between the State Department and the foundation. There was also participation there in America's foreign policy, and we have never had that type of situation."
I read an email chain, where Blumenthal sends secret info he found somewhere and says, "blah, blah, bombs, guns, death, wherever," then HRC responds, "Oh, my!"
Blum says, "They're gonna need Logistics blah blah support, I could set up a company and be in there tomorrow."
HRC: "Oh good, you're hired."
Guys, this is the Washington
Guys, this is the Washington Examiner we're talking about - a RW rag in a news media littered with less right-wing rags. Also, their source is Marsha freakin' Blackburn! Forget about international trade and policy ethics, she doesn't understand the basic facts of contraception and how it works!
I'm no fan of Clinton, but let's try to stay out of the gutter, OK?
Self-exiled from DKos, ahead of the arrival of the Clinton Thought Police.
Markos' transition from gatecrasher to gate-polisher is now complete.
"Guys, this is the Washington Examiner..."
Since you responded directly to me, I'll note that I was recounting an email chain belonging to Hillary Clinton, and just musing that the article quoted above reminded me of the actual emails btwn HRC and Blum. But ... thanks ... for policing us.
Even s**t heads like Blackburn get it right some time.
Yeah, Marsha's pretty dumb. But even dumb people smell skunk. So don't discredit the message because of the messenger.
Even the National Enquirer got one story right
Remember John Edwards, his mistress when his wife was going through cancer treatments, a daughter born to his mistress...?
Even a blind pig finds truffles.
I believe in an America where the separation of church and state is absolute ..., where no church or church school is granted any public funds or political preference. — President John F. Kennedy, Houston, TX, 12 September 1960
Well, aren't they just so loyal?
Somehow that statement just isn't believable. It smells like a PR contrivance to pretend that there's a united front on the Clinton campaign. If there's really some there there to all this stuff, someone will turn.
Best to watch for bus undercarriages and said staffers. Damn, to be friends with any of them on social media, so I could see what they really think!
You think they'd post THAT on social media?
Or were you jesting? Lunachickie (so good to see you btw), if I were one of them, I wouldn't post how I feel and what I think anywhere, not even my eyes only. If you don't want it known, don't post it online anywhere, because everything's crackable. Especially if you have a TLA for a name.
Don't take 'em with you - save lives, sight, and more. Let your family and your DMV know you want to be an organ donor.
(waves) Hi there, KR, great to see you here, too!
Just so you know, that notion of mine was said as kind of a joke. But wouldn't it be great to get that lucky? Stupider things have happened
Well, I can't put my finger on it
without more info.
It seems they each have very different functions. Why would a spokesperson have intimate knowledge of what an IT guy was doing? Hell, I am not certain what my paralegal is doing during work hours.
So, what is the thing or things upon which they are perfectly in agreement and coordination? It most definitely is not what they did daily on the job.
"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." ---- William Casey, CIA Director, 1981
I'm surprised this *isn't* an April Fool's prank n/t
There is no justice. There can be no peace.
Never surrender.
By Grabthar's hammer!...
Don't take 'em with you - save lives, sight, and more. Let your family and your DMV know you want to be an organ donor.
My worst nightmare in this
is that we go into the general election with several of her aides indicted and the walls starting to close in on Hillary. You know, exactly the place that Nixon found himself in in 1972. (And I'm so glad to have found a place where we can say things like this without being summarily booted out!)
The drama of the race against time in all this is spectacular
...as I've said up thread, we are absolutely going to get some good box office showings down the road. The meta in all this makes such good suspense and drama on screen!
There's all this potentially criminal stuff while also there's been all this work to keep Bernie's voice canned long enough that the people won't hear him ahead of having a chance to vote. And he hasn't been behaving (even in the face of a campaign head who really does not seem to believe in him, imho) and the people ARE finding him, perhaps in the nick of time to actually pull of (in the eyes of the media and the Dem establishment) nearly impossible odds.
'What we are left with is an agency mandated to ensure transparency and disclosure that is actually working to keep the public in the dark' - Ann M. Ravel, former FEC member
If Hillary's levee breaks,
please let it be before the convention. If it's after the convention, but before the general election, she'll lose (she might lose anyway). Please, not after the election, if she wins. Then the entire country loses. Any indictment of Hillary (or even being named an unindicted coconspirator) that happens after she's nominated (if that happens) but before the general would be an unmitigated disaster for us all.
"Just call me Hillbilly Dem(exit)."
-H/T to Wavey Davey
It almost looks like that's what's being planned
I have to wonder if, after that video meltdown, TPTB aren't going to reward Hillary after all. Especially if she loses NY:
Meanwhile, how much dirt does anybody really have on John Kasich? I honest-to-God have thought that's a distinct possibility of an end-game. That dude is being way too quiet.
Hopefully the answer to that scenerio
will be the election of Jill Stein.
Beware the bullshit factories.
I may be the only one here ...
but i still do not see anything potentially criminal here. Security lapses - sure (and the State dept / FBI investigations would try to find out whether there were actually any leaks because of these, so far I have not even seen a suggestion that there was - and I refuse to count the Washington Examiner and such as sources).
But it's acknowledged that these 'top secret' emails were not classified as such at the time when they were sent, so there was nothing criminal about them. IT security has been tightened since then, it would now be against the rules to have this kind of private server setup - but it wasn't at the time.
I see a fishing expedition, and the righties are trying to make the most of it. We're just taking our eyes off the ball when we play along with it - there is so much about Hillary that I disagree with! The TPP. Hawkish foreign policy. Wall street reform. Bernie himself has said that America is tired of hearing of these emails!
You guys think Hillary might lose the general because of that - have you considered that she might lose the primary because of the 'pending investigation', then the investigation goes up in smoke, and Bernie loses the general because HRC supporters are so pissed off that they won't forgive?
Or Hillary wins the primary anyway, investigation is resolved, she wins the general and just exiles anyone from the Sanders camp to Outer Mongolia, and we won't get any say in her administration?
I am in no way saying the investigation should be shut down, or that you can't game out your theoretical scenario - but so can I, right?
And if we support progressive causes, we should not be distracted by a minor issue like these emails IMO.
Gandalf and Saruman unite, demand to bring back Greywolfe359!
I agree with some but not the Outer Mongolia one
should Hillary win we'll be exiled whether or not this or anything else happens, just like we've been exiled from the Obama administration. Hillary would have no problem using us for the purpose of getting elected but this is not a parliamentry government. She wouldn't have to make an alliance, she'd just ignore us or maybe, because she loves Obama's style so much, she'll spend her time insulting us.
true dat
We won't get a seat at the table by counting on fairness. I still believe that deals can be made and broken by differences in the atmosphere, and eg pressure on TPP and KXL has moved Hillary to the left (at least publicly - but if she is forced to repeat it often enough, it tends to stick). Suspicions of criminality with no solid basis will not move her and can serve only one purpose, to really rile up Democrats against each other.
I've heard the argument "if we don't litigate this now, the Repubs will after the primary" - and I don't think it's convincing, since they have tried to make this stick for how many? 3? 4? years now.
Investigations need to run their course, but when I hear Washington Examiner and Martha Blackburn, I'll just switch off.
Gandalf and Saruman unite, demand to bring back Greywolfe359!
Republican incompetency is not a repudiation of guilt
Republicans, led by intellectual giants like Trey Gowdy, have mightily offed up their investigations. But this is not to say that their failure means there is nothing to the email charges--and I believe that deliberately breaching national security is criminal. And now comes the "other shoe" ready to drop: investigations into Clinton Foundation's pay-for-play agenda. As more and more states get ready to vote, the more this pile of Clintonian shit gets heated up--wafting its foul vapors over the electorate that not even the stench of Trump/Cruz can obliterate.
security lapses are a criminal matter
especially giving TS information to those not authorized to see it. This is much different than a "leak", in the common sense...which we are all so used to.
The "not classified at the time" is such a smokescreen. If you have access to Top Secret information, and you write the content of that information in an email to your Aunt Martha, you have broken some major laws...whether or not you put a Top Secret header on your email. It's the information that is secret. Yes, her emails were classified retro-actively, because they had to be; they contained information that was previously classified.
It was completely illegal to have the server set up the way she did. TS/SCI has to be strictly controlled, under very specific guidelines. A private server in your basement is not among them.
"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X
How could it have been classified at the time
when the classifiers were deliberately left out of the loop? If they had seen it on day one, would they have classified it then? Yes. This is one of the most wonderful absurdities in modern American political history.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” Voltaire
It's the insure of the nfo, not the markings,
That make something classified.
There's a classification guide that says if info deals with thus & so it's confidential, or secret, or top secret, based on the damage it would cause if released. When we put the info down in writing we add markings to indicate the classification level.
So, an example: that the allied invasion would occur on 6 June & the landing would be at Omaha beach was probably top secret+. But some clerk who typed up dispatches that has this info or whatever has too much to drink, is trying to impress a girl with the info he knows and tells her the date and time. And someone overhears him. Man, is he in a world of trouble. They were serious about leaking secrets back then. But it's verbal, it can't have markings, how can it be secret? Because of the nature of the info.
So you can type up an email with info that according to the classification guide should be secret. Only you know you're sending it over an unclassified system so you don't add the markings. Still Classified.
And don't get me started on in on the old days you'd try to talk around classified info on the phone, Rather than using the stu 3. Big no no.
Opinions may vary
as to whether something should be classified. The guidelines are just that, and even between the agencies there are differences of opinion - the NSA/CIA would like to classify more than the State Dept.
I believe that State argued over precisely this during the course of one of these investigations - and even if ultimately they claim to agree that something was TS, it's plausible that someone at State would consider something not TS-worthy at the time they sent it. Especially because we know that the CIA classified some of Snowden's material even after it was out in the open, or stuff you could read in newspapers.
Gandalf and Saruman unite, demand to bring back Greywolfe359!
Don't you see...or is it me?
All arguments about differences of opinion are moot and null and void if the classifier is not given access to the information BEFORE it goes out/is passed on. State says this, NSA says that...they couldn't say anything in this case because they never DREAMED the the Secretary of State would be stupid enough or unethical enough or nefarious enough to send ALL of the information passing through her on a private server in her basement!!!!!! What am I missing here?
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” Voltaire
I reject "not classified at the time" is legitimate defense
Think about this: HRS was SecState x 4 miserable years (unless you're a hawk or MIC insider). During that time she authored or received 60,000 emails on a non-secure, non-government server. Essentially ALL of her actual work as SOS was sent or received by that same system. How is it possible that NOT ONE of those emails contained secret information? It is not possible. You see the following playing ostrich: not-so-Hilarious Clinton, Sidney Blumenthal, Cheryl Mills, Huma Abedin, and perhaps several dozen others (possibly including obstructionist-cum-deflector number one at Justice: Loretta Lynch) pretending it (security breaches) just didn't happen. Entirely illogical. In diplomacy, secrets are essential to the art. No secrets = no diplomacy. Therefore, if no secrets = no diplomacy, then who the hell was running the diplomatic corps (or corpse, depending upon your viewpoint). HRC's actions and subsequent cover-ups are unforgivable, probably criminal, and possibly treasonous.
Right...everybody KNOWS
that a Secretary of State NEVER gets ANY classified material so why not run EVERYTHING through a private server in shillary's basement? Yup...there you have it: 60,000 emails and NOT ONE was classified...what a co-inkydink!
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” Voltaire
And half of those 60,000
were deemed "personal" by multiple layers of people paid by HRC and trashed (wiped) off the personal protection device called server-in-the-basement.
Hey! my dear friends or soon-to-be's, JtC could use the donations to keep this site functioning for those of us who can still see the life preserver or flotsam in the water.
cminus:Criminal is beside the point.
Every single person that lives under NSA snooping every day of their lives, every single person who shouted that Edward Snowden is a traitor, every single citizen that agrees that official transparency is a requirement for a viable democracy MUST regard Hillary's actions here as those that disqualify her for consideration to ANY elected position. Her response that it was done out of "convenience" shows utter contempt for everything more distant from her than one micron from the surface of her skin. If this is all okay, then classification of materials obviously does not matter. If classification of materials does not matter, then there are no secrets. If there are no secrets, then I want to know everything NOW! Fishing expedition, eh? Spoken like someone that has swallowed the bait hook, line and sinker. I certainly hope that you ARE the only one that agrees with what you are saying.
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” Voltaire
I am pretty sure that I am the only one
here who has had a TS/SCI clearance...though I know there are some others who had TS clearances here, and they feel the same way I do, because they understand the requirements to get that clearance and be trusted with that kind of information.
"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X
only secret,
But feel the same.
So not criminal? just unethical?
First, snooped on by NSA - that's all of us. Agree on transparency - many of us. Snowden a traitor - some said that, but certainly not me. To me, he rather belongs up there with Daniel Ellsberg.
And we MUST think something? no, I don't. Government was slow to catch up with internet security issues - that's not news. I have no clearance, but work at a University, and we were only recently forced to encrypt our private laptops (of course, someone lost his with tons of student data ...).
It won't help one bit, by the way.
Sending emails over an unclassified system to a private server was not against the rules at the time, and this was not a drunk operator talking to his girlfriend - these were people on both ends who were authorized to see the information, it was _their job_! And when you've got a couple thousand emails in your inbox like me, you do look for maximum convenience - the leakages come from other places, usually (you know that story where the military tested their own security procedures, and in one case where the hacker team could not get in, obtained the password simply by calling as "Jeff from Maintenance"?).
"Classification does not matter" sets up a false dichotomy, by the way - I did not and do not argue for that.
Gandalf and Saruman unite, demand to bring back Greywolfe359!
Criminal If you or I did it.
Some of the Jan 2009 emails recovered show that she knew that the private server presented a security risk, but the imperative to avoid the FOIA was greater, because .gov accounts are automatically archived.
We are already exiled: have
We are already exiled: have been for a long time: and may face much worse.
Below is a paragraph from a Non-disclosure Agreement
That one must sign as part of a TS/SCI clearance. I know you haven't been exposed to this stuff, and it seems very foreign. My explanations obviously aren't making a dent. See if this makes any sense to you.
"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X
(No subject)
"I’m a human being, first and foremost, and as such I’m for whoever and whatever benefits humanity as a whole.” —Malcolm X
thank you
for bringing up some genuine documentation!
Forgive me for being stubborn - you are saying that Hillary's actions violated some of these terms?
There are two kinds of conditions triggering a security review in this document (I am sure that such NDAs look all very similar): content, and what I intend to do with it.
The first kind, content: I was arguing that a State Dept official might well have considered some material _not_ to contain any SCI, or to describe any activities related to the production of SCI etc etc. when eg the CIA would later disagree. Since we are on the side of transparency, we would perhaps side with the State Department in such disputes?
The second kind, purpose: these emails were not intended for disclosure to anybody without clearance! The questions are whether there were sufficient safeguards against unauthorized access, whether there was any such access, and whether Hillary should have known better. So these conditions
I contemplate disclosing to any person not authorized to have access to SCI or that I have prepared for public disclosure
don't apply to the situation here.
Gandalf and Saruman unite, demand to bring back Greywolfe359!
ok...how bout Blumenthal?
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” Voltaire
Wouldn't it be funny?
State Department security knew that HRC was using her personal bb and a private email address and, I believe, a private server (I heard that her aides would request help from the State IT department if the server went down). Wouldn't it be funny if they hacked her emails and turned her bb into a private listening device?
The email story
The email story has pissed me off ever since we found out about, because I am an IT professional. Why didn't any of the IT staff with the State Department blow the whistle on her? I've had to make choices like that in my career, and even if it was HRC with all the political power she wields, I'd have no problem reporting her to whoever - whether she setup that server with the intent to conduct business away from official records to avoid FOIA requests, or she just used it because it was convenient and out of utter ignorance, it wouldn't matter. Security is security is security. There's no wiggle room.
Besides - I'd like to think that the State Department with a much larger budget than HRC's personal fortune could afford some significant security around their mail services, whereas a server in a basement is RIPE to be hacked by anyone from a script kiddie to a state sponsored actor. JFC the level of utter stupidity with this private mail server is mind-boggling to me.
Why not blow the whistle?
because it was apparently common at the time?
And I'm not against Big Government, but in terms of catching up with internet security, I am sure they'll always be way behind the curve.
The _could_ afford, sure - but I am also quite sure that they had gaping holes. The military has made efforts to tighten up their act, but a huge loquacious agency like the State Department? I'd almost be tempted ... right now. ... hmmmmm Besides, reporting was not an option if there were no rules against it at the time, right? they only created these after Hillary left (and in my job, only last year we had some new restrictions which still leave gaping holes).
Gandalf and Saruman unite, demand to bring back Greywolfe359!
You know, cminus, you are either totally out of reach or
you are just having some fun at my expense. HAHA the Secretary of State (who HAS called Mr. Snowden a traitor) ran all of her official emails through her own private server in her basement. HOHO she did it because NSA and State don't agree on what classified is and besides, they classify too much stuff anyways. HEEHEE she did cuz it was convenient. See? Now I'm laughing, too! So...you win!
“Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” Voltaire