Clinton's email excuses are falling apart

[TimothyC]

Hillary Clinton went into damage-control mode when news broke that the inspector general of the intelligence agencies had identified additional classified emails on her private server, including ones containing intelligence on covert “Special Access Programs.” Her campaign even accused the inspector general — an Obama appointee confirmed by a Democratic-controlled Senate — of engaging in a “coordinated leak” with Republicans “for the purposes of hurting her campaign.”

Lash out as she might, Clinton’s constantly changing email story is rapidly falling apart. First, Clinton claimed there was “no classified material” on her private server — which turned out to be untrue. Then she claimed none of the intelligence on her server was “classified at the time” — which also turned out to be untrue. Now, in a National Public Radio interview last week, Clinton said there was no information that was “marked classified.”

But this is not a defense.

It is against the law to remove classification markings from classified information and enter it into an unclassified system — which is the only way this information could have found its way into more than 1,300 emails on Clinton’s personal server. There is no way to “accidentally” send classified information by unclassified email. Senior officials have separate computers in their offices for classified and unclassified information. The two systems are not connected. The only way information from the classified system can make it onto an unclassified system is for someone to intentionally put it there — either by taking a document that is marked classified and typing the information without markings into an unclassified email, or by putting a thumb drive into their classified computer, downloading information and then putting that thumb drive into an unclassified computer, as Edward Snowden did. In either case, it is a crime.

So Clinton’s defense that the information was not “marked” classified does not absolve her of wrongdoing. Quite the opposite, it puts her in greater legal jeopardy.

The revelation that the intelligence on her private server included discussions of Special Access Programs makes the situation even more serious. Having any classified information on your private server is against the law. But Special Access Programs contain information so sensitive, it is given a secret “codeword” and placed into a “compartment” to which only a small number of specially cleared people have access. To see this information, it is not enough to have Top Secret security clearance; you have to be cleared for that specific compartment.

Having that kind of super-sensitive, codeword-protected, compartmented information on her unsecured server in her Chappaqua, N.Y., basement put U.S. national security in grave danger — because foreign powers could easily hack into her system and get it. In August, NBC News reported that “China’s cyber spies have accessed the private emails of ‘many’ top Obama administration officials . . . and have been doing so since at least April 2010. The email grab — first codenamed ‘Dancing Panda’ by U.S. officials, and then ‘Legion Amethyst’ — was detected in April 2010 . . . [and] is still going on.” We also know that Russian hackers successfully penetrated the State Department’s computer systems. Does anyone believe they did not target Clinton’s unsecured private server as well? It would be a miracle if the intelligence on her server was not currently in the hands of foreign intelligence services.

Clinton’s latest defense is that “it’s likely what they are referring to is the forwarding of a New York Times article” containing leaked intelligence about the drone program. First, she has no way of knowing that. Second, even if true, that is still not a defense. Think about her argument: Because the Obama administration leaked highly classified information about our drone program to the New York Times, she was no longer obligated as secretary of state to treat the program as classified? That is not going to go very far with the FBI agents investigating her right now.

Her team says the drone program was an “open secret.” But our government has no category of “open secret,” and the fact that a classified covert action program has been reported by the New York Times does not make it unclassified. When I was in the White House, I wrote President George W. Bush’s speech acknowledging the existence of another special access program — the CIA interrogation program. Its existence had also been reported by the New York Times. But I had to write the speech in a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF) at the National Security Council, on a top-secret computer that was not even connected to the top-secret Internet system. Until Bush delivered it, the details were Top Secret/Codeword intelligence.

For government officials to discuss such a program on a private, unsecured email server is a criminal offense — a fact Clinton should soon learn the hard way.

She's Hillary, so obviously the law doesn't apply to her.

[Ralin]

Wasn't the specific law in question not passed until after she stepped down as Secretary of State? Because that was the explanation I'd heard.

[bilateralrope]

TimothyC, all the articles I can remember you posting make this sound pretty cut and dry. Which raises the question: If the articles are correct, why hasn't Hillary been charged yet ?

[Grumman]

Damn, my hatred of Hillary Clinton is colliding with my hatred of government abuses of power without any kind of oversight.

Wasn't the specific law in question not passed until after she stepped down as Secretary of State? Because that was the explanation I'd heard.

IIRC, that was only the law saying she wasn't allowed to use her own private email account for "business". Any mishandling of classified information would have already been illegal.

[Ralin]

IIRC, that was only the law saying she wasn't allowed to use her own private email account for "business". Any mishandling of classified information would have already been illegal.

Ah.

I don't know the ins and outs of the regulations for how classified information is supposed to be handled. That said, I'd be very surprised if the fucking Clintons don't have very good security on whatever private server they use for their E-mail.

[TimothyC]

TimothyC, all the articles I can remember you posting make this sound pretty cut and dry. Which raises the question: If the articles are correct, why hasn't Hillary been charged yet ?

Because she's Hillary Clinton and the law doesn't apply to her the way it applies to regular people.

[Mr Bean]

TimothyC, all the articles I can remember you posting make this sound pretty cut and dry. Which raises the question: If the articles are correct, why hasn't Hillary been charged yet ?

Because she's Hillary Clinton and the law doesn't apply to her the way it applies to regular people.

Also because she was Secretary of State at the time so the only person who could legally tell her to knock it off was President Obama because no classification authority has the balls to tell it's own boss they are breaking the law. Also in theory Hillary as Sec-State IS classification authority for Department of State classified information so can declassify things within her department at will.

Shame some of the things she asked be declassified were NSA/CIA classified which she has no authority over.

Put it simply were she not Hillary Clinton but Diana Smith she'd have been charged last year.

[Simon_Jester]

When the only part of this which had come out into general knowledge was that Clinton had used private email for work, I said "so what."

At this point, well. Whether I have a moral objection to Clinton putting classified information into private emails would depend on knowing exactly what's in the emails, which I will never know, so I cannot find grounds to condemn her morally for lack of access to the evidence. However, unless there are very good extenuating circumstances I do think it puts a big hole in her fitness for public office.

The problem here being one of self-control and ability to obey laws and regulations. You need those in any person who is supposed to work with an organization in any capacity, especially the ones at the top. People who lack the ability to persistently follow the rules cause more problems than they solve.

[Mr Bean]

Linking stuff from Reddit but let me link to an attributed post from /politics which ended up on /bestof
Summary of the Hillary Clinton email scandal

And an excellent summary of the laws

As a private individual, having classified material on your private computer is grounds for being fired, having your clearance yanked, and potentially losing your freedom after you're on the receiving end of federal prosecution. All personnel who are exposed to and who handle classified information are aware of the risks if exposure occurs. We'd be liable.

If I in my life as a sailor walked out of a Department of Defense secure space with a CD containing copies of Top Secret documents I could and likely would lose both my clearance and possibly be charged under 18 U.S. Code § 1924 at the least.

I know fully suspect the Republicans can now win the election regardless of nomine because if Hillary wins her nomination she will already be under indictment or failing that the Republican challenger will be saying 24/7 he's going to indict her and Obama for failing to indict her because she 100% broke the law. And trust me there's enough bought former General's to make that a talking point for months.

[The Romulan Republic]

Innocent until proven guilty, I suppose, but if Hillary Clinton is likely to be indicted, it would be insanity for the Democrats to nominate her, and it is nothing less than a betrayal of the party and the country to continue to back her when her likely opponent is a borderline Nazi.

Bernie or nothing, now.

[Themightytom]

Is any of this case more substantive than ad hominem built on hearsay built on speculation? The inspector general found emails that contain information that is also in special access programs, but that's pretty much it, and everything beyond that is a giant leap to conclusions that somehow Hilary can't be right in claiming innocence because she is Hilary. Did the Inspector General even state that Hilary PUT the information in her email, or did she reply to someone else talking about a news article or something.

I mean actually none of that, the inspector general's email was leaked too, so let's all get high and mighty about the possibility of a security breach, based on speculation based on a security breach. She hasn't been charged with anything this is another embarrassingly condescending effort to encourage her detractors with a contrived scandal, it's gonna end up in the same coffee stained manilla envelope in a tin foil lined bunker as Banghazi, the 911 Hoaxes, Obama's birth certificate and various mass shootings.

And the whole "hurr hurr Bernie Sanders is my guy" crap, sure, make yourself feel better, but I'm IN NH, Sanders is not getting through the primary, I'd bet money on it.

[Ace Pace]

I'm not sure how well people who don't deal with classified information understand just how improper this behavior is. Legally, my bet is that Hilary is in the clear. Both because if someone sent her information, they probably knew the regs well enough and agreed to it and her being a politician means most of the time, this stuff "just happens" and you assume people know how to manage information.

However, this affair stinks. Recently one of Israels most premier defense officials (in charge of the ABM project) was sacked for mishandling non-classified but still military papers. A brigader general was fired for a similar offense. What Mr. Bean said is very much on the spot, if it was anyone who wasn't a politician they'd be facing some serious repercussions. If the most Hilary gets out of this is being slimed in the media, she got off wonderfully.

[Simon_Jester]

Is any of this case more substantive than ad hominem built on hearsay built on speculation? The inspector general found emails that contain information that is also in special access programs, but that's pretty much it...

Unless I am grossly misunderstanding the evidence, if it is a fact that her personal emails contain information that is classified in a special access program, that is sufficient.

Obviously, we are not and perhaps will never be aware of all the facts. Since classified information is classified, and the details of criminal investigations are confidential. We don't know all the possibly-true things that might exonerate Clinton, nor all the possibly-true things that might further incriminate her.

If, however, it is a fact that she wrote anything in a personal email and stored it in her personal email server that is information from a classified program, there's an issue.

On the other hand, if she replied "no comment" to something someone else sent her that sounds like a horse of a different color.

Did the Inspector General even state that Hilary PUT the information in her email, or did she reply to someone else talking about a news article or something.

To be fair that is a legitimate question.

I mean actually none of that, the inspector general's email was leaked too, so let's all get high and mighty about the possibility of a security breach, based on speculation based on a security breach. She hasn't been charged with anything this is another embarrassingly condescending effort to encourage her detractors with a contrived scandal, it's gonna end up in the same coffee stained manilla envelope in a tin foil lined bunker as Banghazi, the 911 Hoaxes, Obama's birth certificate and various mass shootings.

And the whole "hurr hurr Bernie Sanders is my guy" crap, sure, make yourself feel better, but I'm IN NH, Sanders is not getting through the primary, I'd bet money on it.

We'll see. Let's just say that it makes me nervous.

[bilateralrope]

I know fully suspect the Republicans can now win the election regardless of nomine because if Hillary wins her nomination she will already be under indictment or failing that the Republican challenger will be saying 24/7 he's going to indict her and Obama for failing to indict her because she 100% broke the law. And trust me there's enough bought former General's to make that a talking point for months.

Which is why I'm thinking that the best way time to indict her would be as soon as they have enough to indict her on a single charge. Don't wait until they have the full list of charges they can throw at her.

So I'm thinking a delay means one of three things:
- They don't have enough evidence for an indictment.
- The delay is to intentionally give the republicans an advantage.
- Incompetence.

[Mr Bean]

So I'm thinking a delay means one of three things:
- They don't have enough evidence for an indictment.
- The delay is to intentionally give the republicans an advantage.
- Incompetence.

Keep in mind, the State Department did ask to delay the hand over of the extra emails until the day after Super Tuesday.

[Gaidin]

I know fully suspect the Republicans can now win the election regardless of nomine because if Hillary wins her nomination she will already be under indictment or failing that the Republican challenger will be saying 24/7 he's going to indict her and Obama for failing to indict her because she 100% broke the law. And trust me there's enough bought former General's to make that a talking point for months.

Which is why I'm thinking that the best way time to indict her would be as soon as they have enough to indict her on a single charge. Don't wait until they have the full list of charges they can throw at her.

So I'm thinking a delay means one of three things:
- They don't have enough evidence for an indictment.
- The delay is to intentionally give the republicans an advantage.
- Incompetence.

Let's all ask ourselves why the FBI has interest in breaking what is likely their policy for this? Why not complete the investigation? I ask this with the assumption that they're an agency with employees, analysts and agents spread all over the political spectrum.

[Omega18]

If I in my life as a sailor walked out of a Department of Defense secure space with a CD containing copies of Top Secret documents I could and likely would lose both my clearance and possibly be charged under 18 U.S. Code § 1924 at the least.

The fact of the matter is when you're talking about higher levels like US admirals, they have regularly been taking classified documents home and nothing has happened to them other than perhaps a reprimand at most. (What has been found in for instance Admiral's homes after their deaths and the like has in some cases been fairly amazing and certainly included Top Secret documents which have not been officially declassified.) Maybe it has been tightened up recently, but Clinton also has not been Secretary of State this last several years.

General Petraeus is an exception to a limited degree, but the critical distinction is he specifically actively provided classified materials and information to Paula Broadwell which he knew she should not have access to, which is very different than being merely careless with the information. In his case he also still only pled guilty to a misdemeanor and that's in a situation where the charges he had been looking at included lying to the FBI.

Yes its true there is an obvious unfair divergence regarding how the law has been enforced for low ranking and high ranking individuals, but its been a consistent situation for a long time.

I know fully suspect the Republicans can now win the election regardless of nomine because if Hillary wins her nomination she will already be under indictment or failing that the Republican challenger will be saying 24/7 he's going to indict her and Obama for failing to indict her because she 100% broke the law. And trust me there's enough bought former General's to make that a talking point for months.

The fact of the matter is such an action would be absolutely unprecedented in US history when aimed at such a high ranking individual and an extreme deviation to how the law has been actually applied. This would be particularly true in Clinton's case because she was in office prior to new email policies being implemented restricting use of private email accounts. The related key is Clinton could argue that given the number of people in the State Department who were aware of the email account not being the standard State Department one, she had a somewhat reasonable reason to believe it was an acceptable practice given objections to it were basically really not brought up. (Another aspect is given her age and the fact she was not for instance the State Department IT Director, it is plausible she had some limitations in her technical knowledge and understanding.)

Such statements from a Republican candidate would be actually virtually certain to hurt the Republican candidate and help Hillary because they would make the candidate look motivated to abuse the legal system to target his political enemies. (Crucially as a Presidential candidate the individual in question would not actually have all the fact of the case.) Any former General saying that is going to have a hard time truly sticking to it convincingly given how many of their collegues have also violated the laws in various ways over the years and not actually gotten in trouble for it. Yes its going to be talking point of a Republican candidate, but its questionable its actually going to influence many not already decided on candidates

On top of everything else, to be clear a criminal indicted of Hillary prior to a minimum of November 9th of this year is rapidly becoming less likely every day. (Or at a minimum you could say it has to happen quickly or the plausibility of it happening goes away.) Simply put if the FBI waited much longer on an investigation and then actually went forward in key ways after that date (but prior to the election), they would put the FBI as a whole in exceptional political danger because Democrats will in a large number of cases view them as being a rouge agency which intentionally timed the investigation in order to alter the results of the Presidential election. This would mean that even if Republican won in November, Democrats would remember the situation and be prepared to take action against the FBI when they obtained power again. This is also why a significant number of FBI employees would have a strong motivation to make sure that such a situation doesn't happen and they either go forward with the charges right now or intentionally slow things down to some degree and keep them things under careful raps until after the election. (Its not as if the FBI is investigating Hillary for being a serial murderer and they expect her to go after he next victim soon.)

[Exonerate]

It's ironic that the Republicans have attempted to manufacture so many controversies now that they've actually found one with substance behind it, many people have become so inured that it is dismissed out of hand. The most concerning email so far is this, which implies they're trying to transfer classified info but are having trouble with the secure fax, so the workaround is to just remove the markings and send non-secure. The most charitable interpretation I can think of is she's instructing them to just extract the unclassified parts... but that just begs the question of why it's necessary to send by secure fax or strip the headers if nothing is classified. And when combined with her carefully phrased defense that nothing in her emails was marked classified, well, the most parsimonious explanation is the first explanation. Given that other emails have had to be classified after their handover, I think as the investigation develops, it will be shown that Hillary broke both the spirit and letter of the law. Frankly, the FBI and everybody involved is treading carefully because Hillary has (had?) a strong chance of becoming the next President.

Those who maintain that using a personal email for official business wasn't banned are missing the point entirely - this is a security matter that is separate from keeping FOIA records.

[Patroklos]

1.) People need to keep in mind that we are talking about TS:SCI, which is the very top of classification levels. This is the type of information that is segregated to dedicated computer networks with no physical link to other IT assets. In most cases it is only accessible from specially hardened rooms called SCIFs where entry is logged and physically controlled and hard drives are locked in safes when not in use.

2.) The recent scuttlebutt is that some emails are so close to their source classified documents that they are tripping plagiarism software. Or in other words the thought process is that hard copies were made which were then scanned into NIPR networks and copy and pasted into emails sans the classification markings. Or they were hand typed. The point is that if the text is recognizably similar its obvious that the transcription was blatantly intentional and there is no way the person who did it was unaware of this. We will have to wait for the details to emerge to see if it was actually this egregious.

3.) There are several emails where Hillary explicitly tells people to send classified information via unclassified transmission, including specifically asking for markings to be removed.

4.) Being granted a clearance means being able to recognize clearly classified information and stopping the flow and reporting such information that comes into your procession improperly. Or in other words "I didn't know it was classified!" or "I knew but it wasn't marked as such!" or "It came to me on an unclassified network so I figured it was cool!" are no excuse at all. If I can teach 17 year old high school educated SN Timmy this, I can expect Hillary and her minions to be capable of such. There are some things that are leaked that do get slaps on the wrist. If SN Timmy sends an email home telling his wife he is currently in the Med an its BORING thats an OPSEC violation and technically a compromise of low level classified information. Its illegal, he should know better, was intentional, and he will be punished for it but he probably won't have lasting career ending consequences if its not a habit. We are talking about national level tasking involving satellites, large scale military operations, and most impotently the holiest of holies human intelligence. Nobody, even most of you here with zero experience with this sort of thing, would see that cross your desk and consider it okay to forward. Most of you would be on the phone with your closest security manager instantly because it is just that obvious.

5.) We still only have the emails Hillary wanted us to see. If there was truly anything that was blatantly incriminating we have to assume they are deleted. She gave us this information with the claim that there was no classified information within it and with the obvious expectation that we would not find such. Her claim that there was never any classified information is obviously false, so the question is if this is what escaped her staff and cleaners attention what didn't?

You will note her story has changed, including the weasel words "no classified information" to "no marked classified information." She isn't a candidate for benefit of the doubt at this point.

[Dominus Atheos]

And the whole "hurr hurr Bernie Sanders is my guy" crap, sure, make yourself feel better, but I'm IN NH, Sanders is not getting through the primary, I'd bet money on it.

How much money are we talking? Sanders is up by something like 15 points in NH.

[The Romulan Republic]

So I'm thinking a delay means one of three things:
- They don't have enough evidence for an indictment.
- The delay is to intentionally give the republicans an advantage.
- Incompetence.

Keep in mind, the State Department did ask to delay the hand over of the extra emails until the day after Super Tuesday.

Horrible. That makes it appear, rightly or wrongly, that the Obama State Department is deliberately trying to suppress information to affect the results of the Primary and favour Clinton over Sanders.

At which point, we're getting into "government rigging the election" territory, in my opinion.

[The Romulan Republic]

Done a little digging, and according to this article, the emails would actually be released shortly before Super Tuesday.

Still politically dodgy either way.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... on-emails/

The reporter whose case has forced the release of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emails accused the Obama administration on Monday of political tampering by asking to delay making the final set of messages public until after the first four states have already voted in the Democratic presidential primary.

Another 11 states are slated to vote March 1, just hours after the State Department has said it wants to release the final 4,000 or so emails — which are likely to include some of the most controversial messages. That means nearly 45 million voters won’t have enough time to digest the emails before having to vote, Jason Leopold, a reporter at Vice, said in a court filing opposing the State Department’s new schedule.


Ads by Adblade

How Canadians get RICH?? You will be shocked! Watch this video & become one of them TODAY!

Trade With Jake Pertu In Canada. Invest $250 And Gain Pure Trading Profit Of $10,000 A Day!

A Proven System Can Trade $800 Every 5 Minutes With A Clean $15,000 Profit! After A Deposit Of $250!
“If the court allows State to delay release of thousands of pages of Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s official work emails, a substantial portion of the electorate will be forced to vote without the benefit of important information to which it is entitled about the performance of one of the candidates for U.S. president while serving as secretary of State,” Mr. Leopold said in his court filing.

PHOTOS: See Obama's biggest White House fails

Judge Rudolph Contreras has yet to rule on the State Department’s request, made just ahead of Friday’s snowstorm, asking for a one-month delay from the original deadline of Jan. 29.

The State Department blamed both the snowstorm and its own “oversight” in not sending out thousands of pages of emails to other agencies for their review.

It’s the third major bungle for the department, which has had to be prodded by Congress, the courts and the department’s own inspector general throughout the process.


PHOTOS: Infamous Courtroom Sketches

The Clinton emails were kept on a server maintained at her home in New York rather than using the State Department’s official accounts. She only returned the messages to the department in late 2015, or nearly two years after she left office — and only then under the prodding of the congressional probe into the 2012 Benghazi terrorist attack.

Sued for access under open records laws, State Department officials had asked to deliver all of the messages later this year, but Judge Contreras rejected that proposal, ordering monthly releases.

Those releases have proved embarrassing to Mrs. Clinton, with some 5 percent of them containing now-classified information. Mrs. Clinton says that none of the information was labeled classified at the time she sent it, and asserts that none of it needed to be — though auditors have disagreed with that assertion.

The auditors say several of the messages contain information that should be classified above the top secret level — and those messages have yet to be released in redacted form.

Several federal judges have pressed the State Department on its slow pace of processing, and now Mr. Leopold says the latest request for a delay could have a severe impact on primary voters, who are increasingly wondering whether Mrs. Clinton could face legal troubles that could derail her presidential aspirations.

Under Judge Contreras’ original schedule, the final emails were to be released Friday, three days before Iowa voters hold the caucuses that kick off the primary season. A week later voters in New Hampshire go to the polls, followed by Nevada’s caucuses and South Carolina’s primary, all in February.

The State Department’s new schedule would push the full email release until after all of those states have voted, and until just hours before 11 other states and American Samoa hold primaries or caucuses on March 1.

State Department spokesman Mark Toner said they will release some emails that have cleared the process this Friday, but acknowledged they are missing the court’s original schedule.

“The remaining emails are also the most complex to process as they contain a large amount of material that required interagency review,” he said, though he also said the delay is not related to the intense scrutiny over Mrs. Clinton’s handling of potentially classified material.

[The Romulan Republic]

Done a little digging, and according to this article, the emails would actually be released shortly before Super Tuesday.

Still politically dodgy either way.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... on-emails/

The reporter whose case has forced the release of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s emails accused the Obama administration on Monday of political tampering by asking to delay making the final set of messages public until after the first four states have already voted in the Democratic presidential primary.

Another 11 states are slated to vote March 1, just hours after the State Department has said it wants to release the final 4,000 or so emails — which are likely to include some of the most controversial messages. That means nearly 45 million voters won’t have enough time to digest the emails before having to vote, Jason Leopold, a reporter at Vice, said in a court filing opposing the State Department’s new schedule.


Ads by Adblade

How Canadians get RICH?? You will be shocked! Watch this video & become one of them TODAY!

Trade With Jake Pertu In Canada. Invest $250 And Gain Pure Trading Profit Of $10,000 A Day!

A Proven System Can Trade $800 Every 5 Minutes With A Clean $15,000 Profit! After A Deposit Of $250!
“If the court allows State to delay release of thousands of pages of Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s official work emails, a substantial portion of the electorate will be forced to vote without the benefit of important information to which it is entitled about the performance of one of the candidates for U.S. president while serving as secretary of State,” Mr. Leopold said in his court filing.

PHOTOS: See Obama's biggest White House fails

Judge Rudolph Contreras has yet to rule on the State Department’s request, made just ahead of Friday’s snowstorm, asking for a one-month delay from the original deadline of Jan. 29.

The State Department blamed both the snowstorm and its own “oversight” in not sending out thousands of pages of emails to other agencies for their review.

It’s the third major bungle for the department, which has had to be prodded by Congress, the courts and the department’s own inspector general throughout the process.


PHOTOS: Infamous Courtroom Sketches

The Clinton emails were kept on a server maintained at her home in New York rather than using the State Department’s official accounts. She only returned the messages to the department in late 2015, or nearly two years after she left office — and only then under the prodding of the congressional probe into the 2012 Benghazi terrorist attack.

Sued for access under open records laws, State Department officials had asked to deliver all of the messages later this year, but Judge Contreras rejected that proposal, ordering monthly releases.

Those releases have proved embarrassing to Mrs. Clinton, with some 5 percent of them containing now-classified information. Mrs. Clinton says that none of the information was labeled classified at the time she sent it, and asserts that none of it needed to be — though auditors have disagreed with that assertion.

The auditors say several of the messages contain information that should be classified above the top secret level — and those messages have yet to be released in redacted form.

Several federal judges have pressed the State Department on its slow pace of processing, and now Mr. Leopold says the latest request for a delay could have a severe impact on primary voters, who are increasingly wondering whether Mrs. Clinton could face legal troubles that could derail her presidential aspirations.

Under Judge Contreras’ original schedule, the final emails were to be released Friday, three days before Iowa voters hold the caucuses that kick off the primary season. A week later voters in New Hampshire go to the polls, followed by Nevada’s caucuses and South Carolina’s primary, all in February.

The State Department’s new schedule would push the full email release until after all of those states have voted, and until just hours before 11 other states and American Samoa hold primaries or caucuses on March 1.

State Department spokesman Mark Toner said they will release some emails that have cleared the process this Friday, but acknowledged they are missing the court’s original schedule.

“The remaining emails are also the most complex to process as they contain a large amount of material that required interagency review,” he said, though he also said the delay is not related to the intense scrutiny over Mrs. Clinton’s handling of potentially classified material.

[Omega18]

It's ironic that the Republicans have attempted to manufacture so many controversies now that they've actually found one with substance behind it, many people have become so inured that it is dismissed out of hand. The most concerning email so far is this, which implies they're trying to transfer classified info but are having trouble with the secure fax, so the workaround is to just remove the markings and send non-secure. The most charitable interpretation I can think of is she's instructing them to just extract the unclassified parts... but that just begs the question of why it's necessary to send by secure fax or strip the headers if nothing is classified.

I would point out there are significantly more charitable possible interpretations such as if the talking points were created by the State Department in the first place, Hillary could have subsequently established in conversations outside the email chain with other staff that the contents did not actually need to be classified after all, so that's why she issued in instruction in the email. In that case the fault was being sloppy in explaining the reasons it was acceptable to be removing the markings in the email, but its certainly likely she didn't expect her emails to be looked at with a microscope at this point in her career.

An alternate key point is its not at all clear the information was sent, so she could have simply gotten a response back on why it would be a bad idea and dropped it, which brings up the question if the email would actually show anything illegal regardless of your interpretation of its actual contents. Its certainly safe to say at a minimum a boss making an improper request of the method to transmit classified data is certainly not ordinarily prosecuted if no transmission actually occurs unless evidence surfaces that the goal of the transmission was to let the Russians access the data or something. (At least they would have to generally persist after being specifically told why it could not be done.) Yes depending on the details it certainly could represent bad judgement, and it could theoretically represent evidence to help establish a pattern of misconduct in a criminal case where other evidence is going to be more crucial, but the most incriminating interpretations do require a degree of speculation since we don't actually have the full details.

I would be interested in seeing any other examples of this occurring from Patroklos since this is the specific instance I am aware of.

[Mr Bean]

Its certainly safe to say at a minimum a boss making an improper request of the method to transmit classified data is certainly not ordinarily prosecuted if no transmission actually occurs unless evidence surfaces that the goal of the transmission was to let the Russians access the data or something. (At least they would have to generally persist after being specifically told why it could not be done.) Yes depending on the details it certainly could represent bad judgement, and it could theoretically represent evidence to help establish a pattern of misconduct in a criminal case where other evidence is going to be more crucial, but the most incriminating interpretations do require a degree of speculation since we don't actually have the full details.

No no no, Omega18 have you held a clearance? I have, I spent my four years in the Navy and used my clearance and I knew one and heard about three sailors losing their clearance for modest fuckups of mishandling classified information. I know off a Rear Admiral getting retired out for using a briefcase where he mixed SCIF business with his normal work and went home with a TS report in said briefcase He spent about four months under investigation making damn sure he had made zero copies of said report or transmitted zero copies of said report in the 11 hours it spent in his home. The only reason he was not charged rather than fired was because the review board literally was 50% his best friends and he still got forced out of the Navy and lost his clearance for a single fuckup.


It's a cycle, every few years the authorities ease up on being complete and utter dickwads about this sort of thing then we find a spy who got a bunch of stuff out because of lax standards and the hammer comes down again. The most recent ass kicking was Snowden and since him they have been utterly relentless with even the smallest mistakes in handling or transmitting classified information.