Slashdot Mirror
Clinton Surrendering Email Server/Data To Feds After Top Secret Mail Found
An anonymous reader writes: Hillary Clinton's lawyer has surrendered three thumb drives with copies of emails from her server to the Justice Department, which is also where the controversial Clinton personal email server is destined as well. The FBI determined that Clinton's lawyer could no longer retain the thumb drives after two emails from a small sample were found to contain information classified as "Top Secret/Sensitive Compartmented Information," which would also taint the server. There is no evidence that encryption was used to protect the emails. From the limited reviews to date, Secretary Clinton and her aides exchanged emails containing classified information with at least six people with private email addresses. So far four of Clinton's top aides have turned over emails to the State Department, and there are demands that six more do so. The State Department's inspector general has stated that his office is reviewing "the use of personal communications hardware and software by five secretaries of state and their immediate staffs." Current U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry has stated, "it is very likely" that China and Russia are reading his emails.
But it's such lovely clickbait. When she got the email it was not classified and so it came to her personal server. Given that the joint chiefs email was read by the Russians using her personal server might well have been more secure.
Now if there was suspected classified information on anyone else's mail server, would the government wait for proof or seize the server, look through it, and then say "My bad!" and give it back to you.
This was all done to make sure she had time to clean that server up and make it presentable, so no Clintons end in jail.
Idiot. The emails were "unmarked." That means not stamped with a classification. More, they reached her on an unclassified network. Clinton had every reason to believe they contained no classified information. Indeed, the claim that they do contain classified information remains unsubstantiated.
WHY THE FUCK WAS SHE CONDUCTING OFFICIAL STATE DEPARTMENT BUSINESS ON A PRIVATE EMAIL SERVER IN THE FIRST PLACE?!?!
Because she knew what the NSA was up to and wanted to keep her business private/secure from them. Not saying what she did was right, just saying I understand completely why she want to keep her emails private from the snoops of the NSA. Not to mention the government hasn't actually shown they can keep their servers secure anyways.
Be seeing you...
What a bunch of crap! She was 'in charge', she had all the available briefings and security clearance. Not only should she have known, she was breaking the law by conducting official business on a private server. I had a Top Secret SCI clearance for years. The first rule is 'if there is the potential that information is classified' treat it as it were classified and safe guard it until such time it is deemed not classified. If I had done what she has I would be in Leavenworth! Its always the same with Clintons they can do what ever the hell they want and idiots will defend them. What do you think would happen to a Military member or even a civil servant if he was caught have sex with subordinate in his office? Bill Clinton was the commander in chief of the armed forces! What a Clinton says one day is no longer true latter. First she said: "I didn't have classified information on it, it is all personal correspondence". Then she said: "None of it was classified at the time" Then she said : "It wasn't marked" Newsflash! If I tell you verbally something classified, its still classified even if I don't have a classification stamp on my forehead! The idiots are those gullible to believe anything she says!
Any normal person would have their security clearance revoked after a breech of much lesser magnitude, which interestingly makes you unable to perform a job that requires handling classified material, it's one of the few ways to actually get fired from a government job.
This is an interesting dilemma. Suppose someone is elected by the people and their office requires the handling of classified material. Then suppose their background investigation reveals problems that, if they were an ordinary bureaucrat or contractor, they would not be issued a clearance. Or suppose they had previously mishandled classified information and had too many black marks on their record.
What can you do in that situation? The law and constitution outline specific circumstances where you can remove someone from office, and I don't think "not approved by clearance investigator" is one of them.
Not its not her job. However the security of the Nation is and so she should still be aware when handling sensitive information. She should better than most be in a position to recognize when something that is unclassified perhaps ought to be and care about that. She could enough about operational security to care a second cell phone for personal/family matters if that is what it takes.
I don't really care what happens to Hillary in her personal life, if she gets fined/goes to jail/is given a president medal of freedom for her service, none of that matters to me!
I do care if she is elected president after she had demonstrated reckless behavior that many of us would have lost our jobs over. She isn't fit to serve and this is proof of that much. The standard of being suitable to lead the free world ought to be a little higher than "well technically she isn't a felon".
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Personally, I would love to see Trump vs Sanders. And perhaps a good showing from a Libertarian Candidate to really screw up the Electoral College.
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
The point of the Clinton server was to shield the Clintons from Freedom of Information Act requests. It was intentionally set up to prevent both the government and the people from ever prying into their communications. Her office had a duty to secure and store those communications for posterity for the National Archives, and she rebuffed it.
This was not an accident, nor something set up on a whim to make life more convenient. It was deliberate -- and her office was warned multiple times that it was not acceptable before and during its use. Hillary's own office sent out e-mails to her staff advising them not to use their own private e-mail WHILE she was using her own private e-mail against the advice of the State Dept.'s own security experts.
She's only now sending the server to the feds -- since it's verified she crossed a line with top secret info on it that's been sent unencrypted over the internet to others. I would not be surprised if that server has been scrubbed top to bottom with any incriminating evidence purged and over-written with excuses galore over why data is missing or not retained (and unrecoverable).
Still, slap her with a fine and send her on her way -- and make it an impeachable offense for future Secretaries of State to ever do this again. Worse case scenario, they charge her with intentionally divulging top secret info and give her a suspended sentence.
The 99% are not in control. They simply get to choose between the options left after the 1% has chosen which candidates the 99% get to pick from. You cannot possibly believe that the 20 or so candidates for president are the best out of a pool of millions of Americans that could do the job. How did we get THESE candidates? Money. Only rich people or those backed by rich people can afford to run a presidential campaign. Recently, Rick Perry ran out of cash and his people are working for free while his SuperPAC takes over the advertising. I doubt he'll be in the race much longer as his funding has dried up.
When you have a 2 party system where both candidates are bought by special interests and 1%'ers, your choices are between a rock and a hard place. The Party is indeed what matters most -- because the funding for those candidates came from party supporters who have agendas to push for that party. I would vote for a chicken with a D on it before I'd vote for most Republicans in the race (Maybe Bush as the exception.. he seems more sane on immigration, gay rights, and healthcare than the rest).
If we had a sane voting system where a vote for one candidate was not the same as a vote against all other candidates, we might be able to support a multi-party system -- or even multiple candidates for the same party all the way up to the general election. Say, a Likert scale -- each candidate gets a vote from 1 to 10, we average out all the votes and the one that gets the highest score wins. 3rd parties wouldn't steal votes... and we'd have more room for moderates.
The 'retroactively classified' was simply a pr lie Hillary's team has been pushing from the beginning.
2 IG's reviewed a small handful of her emails and found information that was always considered classified by various intelligence agencies. These latest emails supposedly contained the type of information that goes beyond general classification of 'top secret' to the point that only people officially 'read in' are allowed to view it.
Of course that's just my opinion...... you could be wrong!
I'm not a Republican and frankly I thought they were just muckraking till now, however if this information is correct then she is likely guilty of violating 18 U.S. Code 798 - Disclosure of classified information (if not other laws and oaths as well) and should be tried and punished appropriately. Since she's one of the elite it will likely get swept under the rug instead.
It is muckraking.
The information was not deemed classified until long after the emails were sent. This happens a lot in government emails as situations evolve and when it does, recommended procedure is to clean up what you can and not discuss the issue any further on the low side. This is a dangerous game that the Republicans are playing because politicians on both sides likely have (retroactively) classified information that was once emailed as unclassified. (You wouldn't, for example, post new releases saying that her emails had classified email... like is currently happening!) What server is was stored on is irrelevant if it was emailed over an open network. It's not like government servers are specially protected in a magical way anyway... look at the recent Office of Personnel Management breech.
Frankly, if you want to be mad at the Democrats, be mad at Obama instead. He likely disclosed a spectacular amount of classified information on the Bin Laden raid, both in terms of the actual raid specifics, seal team operation protocols, and CIA surveillance capabilities. Then he used presidential discretion to justify and declassify it.
It's interesting that all of the well-publicized national security breeches seem happen just before presidential elections!
Everybody seems to be ignoring the most important questions:
1. What kind of server was it?
2. What OS?
3. Which MTA?
I mean, if she rescued some old Sun pizza box from the dumpster, installed Gentoo and a heavily patched Qmail, then she gets my vote for sure! If it was a Dell running Windows Server and Exchange ... well ... that bitch can go straight to hell.