State Dept. Releases 5,500 Hillary Clinton Emails, 275 Retroactively Classified (nbcnews.com)

An anonymous reader sends this report from NBC News: The State Department on Thursday released 5,500 more pages of Hillary Clinton's emails, but fell short of meeting a court-ordered target of making 82 percent of the former secretary of state's messages public by the end of 2015. The email dump is the latest release from the private server Clinton used during her time as America's top diplomat. The State Department said it failed to meet the court's goal because of "the large number of documents involved and the holiday schedule." Portions of 275 documents in the batch were upgraded to classified, though they were not classified at the time they were sent to Clinton's personal email, according to the State Department. In total, 1,274 of her emails were retroactively classified by the government before their release.

Comments

State doing the CYA thing

[mveloso]

"though they were not classified at the time they were sent to Clinton's personal email"

Legally, it doesn't matter that the emails weren't classified at the time they were sent. Classification doesn't depend on markings, classification depends on content. If you strip the classified markings from an item that doesn't mean it isn't classified anymore.

These sort of things are too complicated for the public and press to understand, which is why the State Department and Clintons keep saying them. As the Secretary of State, Clinton should be aware of, say, the rules behind classified information.

If she was anyone else she'd be nailed to the wall already.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[tsqr]

Exactly. I've held a Secret clearance for 38 years, and the rules covering this sort of thing are very clear. The penalties include a huge fine and very serious federal prison time.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

She get any emails from that Ben Gozzi guy?!

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[techno-vampire]

If she was anyone else she'd be nailed to the wall already.

Agreed. However, if the information in those messages wasn't classified when it was sent or when she read them, she wasn't breaking any laws by leaving them on her server. And, to be fair, she wouldn't have had any reason to clear them off the server unless she learned later that somebody had decided that the information should be classified. I'm no fan of hers, and can't imagine any circumstances that would make me want to vote for her but I'm not going to blame her for this. If you want a scapegoat, look at whoever sent those emails and didn't bother to let her know about the change in status.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Who sent them to Clinton's email server? Are they not the ones who violated handling requirements?

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Nkwe]

Legally, it doesn't matter that the emails weren't classified at the time they were sent. Classification doesn't depend on markings, classification depends on content. If you strip the classified markings from an item that doesn't mean it isn't classified anymore.

So was the content classified when the emails were originally sent, or was the content later re-categorized as classified? By "content" I mean the information conveyed by the text, not the specific text itself.

I have not idea what the answer is, but I believe it is the question that should be asked and reported on.

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

No circumstance? What if Trump is her opponent? No vote, I guess. sigh

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

However, if the information in those messages wasn't classified when it was sent or when she read them, she wasn't breaking any laws by leaving them on her server. And, to be fair, she wouldn't have had any reason to clear them off the server unless she learned later that somebody had decided that the information should be classified. I'm no fan of hers, and can't imagine any circumstances that would make me want to vote for her but I'm not going to blame her for this. If you want a scapegoat, look at whoever sent those emails and didn't bother to let her know about the change in status.

Of course she was breaking the laws. Who do you think classifies information? She was not some Joe off the street she was the Secretary of State. She was in a position to know how to classify information and she should have known better AND she should have classified them herself. So 1,274 retroactively classified emails tells me 1,274 times the country was put at risk.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[ScentCone]

That is a good question. But it's irrelevant, in that we've already seen examples of email she kept on her server that DID have born-classified payloads at the time she received it. Never mind that she let her personally employed foundation subordinates sift through it later, or that she put copies of it on thumb drives for her not-cleared lawyer to also keep in his own offices. Truly, any other person would be out of a job and looking for an easy-going thing to confess to, months or years ago.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[MDMurphy]

Had the messages been contained on a secure server, subsequent classification could occur while the entire cache of message was still contained. Residing on a hard drive makes the that a bit difficult.

Classifying something retroactively seems a bit odd though. If they were on her personal server, not the "official" one, then the messages were already "out in the wild" with no chain of custody. Then again, a previously non-classified message could have been printed and distributed to someone who wouldn't meet the current qualifications for access, so the horse could be well out of the barn already.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Story about a guy named David Petraeus who mishandled classified information and got into a lot of trouble.

Looks like you lied to try and cover up for the Hillary. And the name calling once again shows the "tolerance" of the left-wing. How many times can you call people wackos and racists and hateful before everyone realizes you are all that?

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[techno-vampire]

Who do you think classifies information?

Well, going by what I learned back when I was in the Navy, the original classification (if any) is assigned by the person creating the document. Yes, if memory serves, she could have classified it herself, but it's rather rare for somebody at her level to do so; either you trust your subordinates' judgment or you replace them because you've got too much to do every day to have time for that kind of micromanagement.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Trailer Trash]

Exactly. I've held a Secret clearance for 38 years, and the rules covering this sort of thing are very clear. The penalties include a huge fine and very serious federal prison time.

Yeah, for you. Too bad your last name isn't "Clinton", eh?

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

I assume her server stored both incoming and outgoing emails.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Trailer Trash]

That is a good question. But it's irrelevant, in that we've already seen examples of email she kept on her server that DID have born-classified payloads at the time she received it. Never mind that she let her personally employed foundation subordinates sift through it later, or that she put copies of it on thumb drives for her not-cleared lawyer to also keep in his own offices. Truly, any other person would be out of a job and looking for an easy-going thing to confess to, months or years ago.

Technically, she is out of a job, but that doesn't matter when foreign governments and rich people give you millions of dollars.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[silas_moeckel]

You do not understand how classified etc works. It's not about the markings it's about the content. If you can legitimately mark it as classified later it always was classified and she was instructed how to understand this. The corner case is something that seems entirely unrelated to anything and then turns out to be part of a state secret, as in you need other knowledge to know that this is classified. All the markings do it make it entirely unambiguous.

It realy does not matter if they were or were not classified, 2009 Federal Records Act requires all emails that are part of official business be preserved by the federal government. The Classified not classified bit is political spin to keep the discussion on that not the much broader law she violated.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[ClickOnThis]

If you strip the classified markings from an item that doesn't mean it isn't classified anymore.

Unless the item has been, you know, de-classified.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Unless the State Department gives you explicit permission to do as she did. Which they did. Until they didn't.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[fustakrakich]

Truly, any other person would be out of a job and looking for an easy-going thing to confess to, months or years ago.

Except, maybe, Colin Powell, but, well, you know... that's different

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

So much stupidity in one post.

1. Sometimes data are not immediately classified.
2. Just because it is classified, it doesn't mean that if it got out it would harm America or Americans.

I held a secret clearance and most of the crap that was classified could be easily guessed or was not sensitive in any manner.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[PolygamousRanchKid]

"though they were not classified at the time they were sent to Clinton's personal email"

My company's policy on email is crystal clear: Company business is done on company systems. It doesn't matter if I am just ordering pencils . . . everything work related has to be able to audit. Same for government stuff . . . if Hilary claims she didn't know that, she lies like a rug. She purposely used a private server, so no one could ever really see what hanky panky she was really up to.

If she was anyone else she'd be nailed to the wall already.

I would be nailed by my scrotum on the wall. And a Roman soldier would come by to rub vinegar on my lips and poke me in the ribs with a spear.

However, as in the words of the Pledge to the Flag: "One Nation, under God, with Freedom and Justice for the rich . . .

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Over and over and over again, we see she was receiving documents on her personal email. How is that breaking the law?

Do you agree that if someone emails you some child porno, you have broken the law and should go to prison? Or is it the sender who has broken the law?

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[PPH]

If you strip the classified markings from an item that doesn't mean it isn't classified anymore.

But there were no classified markings to strip originally.

The whole retroactive classification thing is tricky and can lead to some major problems. People with clearances are prohibited from accessing classified information. Technically, even if they pick up the New York Times and read some of Edward Snowden's data dump, they can be violating rules. Even though the presence of that information is already in a public forum and its presence isn't their doing. Now, retroactively classify something and expect cleared people to 'unsee' the data, or take it back if they sent it on? Nope. Not going to happen.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[vilanye]

Not if it wasn't classified at the time.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Dragon Bait]

Unless the State Department gives you explicit permission to do as she did. Which they did. Until they didn't.

I'm sorry. You're either being a partisan shell or you don't understand the issue. No one can give you permission to hold classified information on an unclassified server.

Frankly, I think the problem runs deeper. How does an unsecured server end up on the same network as classified information?

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Unless the State Department gives you explicit permission to do as she did. Which they did. Until they didn't.

Citation needed.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

When I was in the coast guard, lots of times we went out on a call and only days later we were told they were classifying it and to not discuss it.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[philip456]

You say, "Classification depends on content". However, we don't know if the content was of a classified nature when it was sent. It could have been innocent information at that time but became problematic later. Or not. It is not possible to tell at the moment.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[techno-vampire]

Classifying something retroactively seems a bit odd though.

Yes indeed. My best guess is that whoever went through that email looking for classified stuff ran across things that should have been classified all along and did the retroactive classification bit to keep them from getting out.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[PPH]

Until someone scrubs the hard drive.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[StevenMaurer]

General Patraeus knowingly gave top secret information away. Secretary Clinton unknowingly received it on her unclassified email system. If you can't understand the difference, you're either a moron or a hyperpartisan loon.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Dragon Bait]

Truly, any other person would be out of a job and looking for an easy-going thing to confess to, months or years ago.

Except, maybe, Colin Powell, but, well, you know... that's different

If Powell had classified information on his private e-mail server, he too should be prosecuted.

Were you hoping for if they break they law, I get to break the law?

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

How does an unsecured server end up on the same network as classified information?

Ask Jeff Yin.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is a random fucks shit even classified is a much better question.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[techno-vampire]

You do not understand how classified etc works. It's not about the markings it's about the content.

I beg to differ. Back when I was in the USN, I had a Secret clearance, and if it's been pulled, I've never been notified. (It certainly should have been by now, as I got out in early '73.) I never had access to the type of classified information we're talking about here, but I do know that for most people, if a document isn't marked as Classified, the default assumption is that it isn't.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. I've held a Secret clearance for 38 years, and the rules covering this sort of thing are very clear. The penalties include a huge fine and very serious federal prison time.

You are lying, clueless, or an idiot. Classifications of things is not always that simple. Sure perhaps you are in a job with a security classification guide that is easy to remember and completely non confusing or non contradicting, but real life is usually more complex. I really doubt things are that simple in her line of work. Things are commonly and routinely over classified because it is the safer option. No one gets in trouble for marking something classified, if there is even a hint that it might be, due to being linked to other classified things. Hell, certain collections of information that are unclassified can in themselves be marked classified when they are aggregated. A quick google search turns up about 5 million security clearances in the united states. Do you think none of those people screw up? Sadly we are human. We do our best, but we are still human. Data spills do happen and must be cleaned up. Sure some might even be prosecuted, but those rules are focused not on the person that screws up, particularly if that person is otherwise executing due diligence, but on the person who deliberately leaks classified information, such as Snowden. In general a security clearance means that you give up quite a few rights to get and keep a job in return for protecting that information till you die, even if your job lasts only a day. It doesn't even generally mean better pay. People with a clearance generally do their best. They are not thrown in federal prison on a regular basis, though we know if we screw up, particularly with intent, we could easily be, and even without intent we can quickly lose our clearance and our job and then find it very difficult to get another. Still, if you were regularly throwing the subset of 5 million people that provably screw up in jail, you couldn't get people to do those jobs, particularly when, as I said, it doesn't even necessary result in a higher salary in exchange for the rights you surrender. Hell, it doesn't even guarantee you a long term job. If your level (salary) gets too high, where the company can replace you with someone cheaper, you can bet that they have done it before and likely will at some time in the future.

Did she screw up? You bet she did. Was she a traitor to the country and someone that is apt to be locked up for her screw up? Probably not. The one thing that is fair here is if she was anyone else, other than a mainstream politician, she would be very likely to have her clearance yanked and never be able to get one again. That is the unfair thing about her position.

What will this cause? Well no one will use home servers any more. It was stupid, though even without using the home server, it is not as if the government unclassified server has an exception on it for misclassified emails. It would be the same issue either way, save the government one might have better policies and security in place to deal with screw ups, but I wouldn't bet on it. What will really happen? Government officials will start to use their classified account for everything, they possibly can. It is safer, and likely to protect from those pesky freedom of information requests, for a time at least.

Don't like it? Get elected and change it, and while your at it, eliminate the golden rule, that is the one that says the one with the most gold makes the rules and generally gets away with things that the rest of us mere mortals couldn't dream of. For that matter, I suppose you could vote for Bernie if you feel that way. He would probably be too weak to be able to really change anything, but I have little doubt he would at least try. More importantly, he might be able to get some new supreme court justices that will eventually help to turn this tide. Move to amend, which says money is not speech

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[cirby]

You do not understand how classified etc works. It's not about the markings it's about the content.

I beg to differ. Back when I was in the USN, I had a Secret clearance, and if it's been pulled, I've never been notified. (It certainly should have been by now, as I got out in early '73.) I never had access to the type of classified information we're talking about here, but I do know that for most people, if a document isn't marked as Classified, the default assumption is that it isn't.

If you had a Secret clearance back then, it was changed to "inactive" when you left the service. There's almost certainly a piece of paper that you signed when you got out. It's possible to reinstate that clearance within 24 months, but after that time lapses without an active clearance, you have to be re-cleared.

Most people may believe that part about "if it wasn't marked, it's not classified," but it's a false assumption, and when they gave you the initial briefings for that clearance way back when, they certainly told you.

More to the point, a lot of the information in the Clinton emails was initially classified and marked as such - but someone took the markings off when they sent it. For that matter, if you know something classified and merely re-type it into an email, it's still classified. In a position like Secretary of State, a LOT of things are "classified by nature."

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[fustakrakich]

No, of course not. Lawbreaking has been reduced to a mere talking point, with little effect on the vote. I just figure that instead of whining about it, we should be looking for somebody else to vote for. We still have a few months, but it seems like that's not gonna happen, so, *whaddya gonna do?* People have to change their own minds, I can't do it for them.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Tinsoldier314]

"though they were not classified at the time they were sent to Clinton's personal email"

Legally, it doesn't matter that the emails weren't classified at the time they were sent. Classification doesn't depend on markings, classification depends on content. If you strip the classified markings from an item that doesn't mean it isn't classified anymore.

The article says that the classification was upgraded later, not that it was stripped from the version she received in her email? Your comments regarding classification and markings are interesting but are they really relevant in this case? Maybe I'm missing something but if the information was not classified, and was subsequently released into a public domain, then the information is retroactively upgraded... it's too late, all originator controls are gone? How could someone be held accountable for something like that?

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

First stop screaming "Right Wing Conspiracy"! There is about as much of a Right Wing Conspiracy as a Left Wing Conspiracy. Take that as you will. Second, as another security clearance, it isn't what you think. You handle a lot of information and you don't let any of it, even the " unclassified" stuff out. You don't know everything and some stuff could be critical and you don't know it. You shouldn't use a private email at all, because any data important enough for you to see might be secret or at least not good to be known. Frankly she has committed a federal crime and if it weren't for her connections she would be in prison. Finally just saying, even though it doesn't apply as much here:
https://xkcd.com/1019/

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[DougDot]

True.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[LaurenCates]

Unknowingly receiving is one thing. Not doing anything to correct the problem (as the Secretary of State should be MORE than well-versed in what constitutes classified information) is the thing that's really irking people.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[g01d4]

If she was anyone else she'd be nailed to the wall already.

Not really. The whole issue revolves around incompetent IT management in government that enabled Mrs.Clinton's setup in the first place. While her competence can also be clearly called into question it's certain that she's not alone getting outed in the casual treatment of this type of information - Petreus comes to mind - and that her position, rather than her person, is what provides the most immunity.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Livius]

The "issue" has nothing to do with the law, or security, or anything of meaning or substance. The issue is political theatre.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Lt.Hawkins]

Someone gets it. Also, as an Original Classification Authority (In fact, the first Department head mentioned in the Executive Order that defines who OCAs are (https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-original-classification-authority) ), she should have had specific training and a very good understanding of this stuff. ( https://www.whitehouse.gov/the... )

Fron the second link:
"((d) All original classification authorities must receive training in proper classification (including the avoidance of over-classification) and declassification as provided in this order and its implementing directives at least once a calendar year. Such training must include instruction on the proper safeguarding of classified information and on the sanctions in section 5.5 of this order that may be brought against an individual who fails to classify information properly or protect classified information from unauthorized disclosure. Original classification authorities who do not receive such mandatory training at least once within a calendar year shall have their classification authority suspended by the agency head or the senior agency official designated under section 5.4(d) of this order until such training has taken place. "

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[PolygamousRanchKid]

Exactly. I've held a Secret clearance for 38 years, and the rules covering this sort of thing are very clear. The penalties include a huge fine and very serious federal prison time.

When my father got his Top Secret Squirrel clearance, he was a Canadian citizen. Part of the deal was that he needed to become an American citizen. The spooks told him that this was necessary, because if he gave any secrets to the Ruskies, they wanted to be able to hang him. As a Canadian citizen, this would not be possible . . . but as an American citizen, they could.

He never told me his whole life what he worked on. Only after he died recently, my mother told me, that he helped create the DEW line . . . if anyone is old enough to know what that was.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[PopeRatzo]

Who do you think classifies information?

Who do YOU think classifies information?

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[penguinoid]

Who do you think classifies information?

Usually some asshole who did something to embarrass himself and doesn't want anyone to know about it.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

the rules covering this sort of thing are very clear.

Bullshit. I challenge you to write an algorithm for it if it's so clear. Put your code where your mouth is.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Lt.Hawkins]

I posted this link elsewhere but:
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the...

The whole thing is interesting and relevent, but in particular:

"(d) All original classification authorities must receive training in proper classification (including the avoidance of over-classification) and declassification as provided in this order and its implementing directives at least once a calendar year. Such training must include instruction on the proper safeguarding of classified information and on the sanctions in section 5.5 of this order that may be brought against an individual who fails to classify information properly or protect classified information from unauthorized disclosure. Original classification authorities who do not receive such mandatory training at least once within a calendar year shall have their classification authority suspended by the agency head or the senior agency official designated under section 5.4(d) of this order until such training has taken place. A waiver may be granted by the agency head, the deputy agency head, or the senior agency official if an individual is unable to receive such training due to unavoidable circumstances. Whenever a waiver is granted, the individual shall receive such training as soon as practicable."

Rarely or not, she should have had annual training, and to dodge this is to say that a person who reaches that level of government has no responsibility to uphold the more "mundane" things of their job.

A person who dodges this responsibility is not fit to lead others who are held to the same responsibility (the entire Executive branch)

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[techno-vampire]

If you had a Secret clearance back then, it was changed to "inactive" when you left the service.

Good. I may have known that back then, but I recycled those neurons decades ago. And, some of that Secret material was automatically declassified after (I think.) seven years, meaning long enough for everybody who knew it to have forgotten the details.

More to the point, a lot of the information in the Clinton emails was initially classified and marked as such - but someone took the markings off when they sent it.

I wouldn't be surprised, and I do hope that they're going after the irresponsible clowns who did that. If nothing else, any clearances they still hold should be pulled and they should be declared ineligible to hold any position in the US government ever again. Yes, that's going to be hard to explain in a job interview, but it sucks to be stupid, doesn't it?

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Silly Clinton shill, you think knowingly doing so is required for her to be convicted?

You may want to read up on 18 U.S.C. 793 : US Code - Section 793: Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information

Which says in part:

(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (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,

Gross negligence is a far lower charge, one the DoJ will not bring due to their own hyper-partisanship.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[PopeRatzo]

"though they were not classified at the time they were sent to Clinton's personal email"

Legally, it doesn't matter that the emails weren't classified at the time they were sent. Classification doesn't depend on markings, classification depends on content. If you strip the classified markings from an item that doesn't mean it isn't classified anymore.

These sort of things are too complicated for the public and press to understand, which is why the State Department and Clintons keep saying them. As the Secretary of State, Clinton should be aware of, say, the rules behind classified information.

If she was anyone else she'd be nailed to the wall already.

Classification doesn't depend on markings, classification depends on content.

There are over 50 million documents classified every year. And who classifies documents? Unelected bureaucrats with absolutely zero accountability.

I would say most classification doesn't depend on markings or content. It depends on horseshit.

If cablegate and Wikileaks have taught us anything, it's that there is too goddamn much being kept secret for absolutely no good reason. Classified documents are the government's way of protecting their privacy while violating ours.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

2009 Federal Records Act requires all emails that are part of official business be preserved by the federal government.

The law does NOT say "by the federal government".

   

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[sumdumass]

You mean like with a towel or something?

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

But there were no classified markings to strip originally.

Except there are claims the markings were removed prior to them getting to Clinton.

The whole retroactive classification thing is tricky and can lead to some major problems.

True, however that ignores the existence of materials which were considered 'born classified' or so content from other agencies which was obviously classified but unmarked.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[sumdumass]

If you save the kiddie porn for your personal use, Yes you should go to prison too.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

The whole thing is preposterous.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

"though they were not classified at the time they were sent to Clinton's personal email"

...

And that's a lie anyway:

The number of emails now considered classified total more than 400, with three of the 215 newly classified documents marked as SECRET

Don't tell me the woman who claimed to be named for Sir Edmund Hillary seven years before before he conquered Everest lied?

Again.

Jesus H. Fucking Christ, if Hillary! told me water is wet, I'd have to figure out some way to independently confirm it.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. I've held a Secret clearance for 38 years, and the rules covering this sort of thing are very clear. The penalties include a huge fine and very serious federal prison time.

You are lying, clueless, or an idiot. Classifications of things is not always that simple. [redacted Hillary! brown nosing]

Oh yes it is:

The number of emails now considered classified total more than 400, with three of the 215 newly classified documents marked as SECRET

Oopsie poopsie!

Hillary! LIED and you got a nose full of shit.

I can't wait to see your justification now. "But it was ONLY THREE emails!!!!"

And that will make me wonder just how big a felony Hillary! would have to commit before you wouldn't attempt to run interference.

Because make no mistake about it - those emails being marked SECRET is proof that Hillary! not only committed a felony in running her private email server, they PROVE she lied about it.

And you're now going to defend her, right?

You're not even slimy enough to rate "partisan hack" for a label.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

2. Just because it is classified, it doesn't mean that if it got out it would harm America or Americans.

That is irrelevant. Each individual who has access to classified information is not allowed to make such decisions without going through the process of declassifying the information.

It appears that you believe a crime that doesn't actually harm anyone should not be prosecuted. If someone that dislikes you shoots at you every time you leave your home to go to work or the market, as long as they miss (and the bullet doesn't harm property or someone else), is it your position that there's no crime (no one is hurt) that should be prosecuted until such time as they manage to put a bullet in your brain stem?

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

That's not what was asked.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[ShanghaiBill]

I've held a Secret clearance for 38 years, and the rules covering this sort of thing are very clear. The penalties include a huge fine and very serious federal prison time.

I held a secret clearance for 20 years, as a military officer, and while working on defense contracts. The spooks would hold security sweeps about once a month, checking desk drawers, file cabinets, computer drives. The ALWAYS found violations, and the worst consequences were verbal reprimands and mandatory remedial training. No one was ever fired or demoted or paid a fine. Certainly no one went to federal prison.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[mveloso]

Clinton knowingly had classified information on a server that was not secured. If you can't understand that, you're either a moron or a hyperpartisan loon.

As SecState, she should be highly aware of what was classified and what wasn't...markings notwithstanding.

Just because you don't understand the rules doesn't make what she did OK.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Solandri]

Secretary Clinton unknowingly received it on her unclassified email system.

Which would be fine if someone else had set up the unclassified email system, and she happened to use it because she didn't know better. That would make her the innocent victim you're trying to cast her as.

But she directed the (illegal) unclassified email system to be made. She was in charge of making sure that even though it was skirting the law, it would be set up in such a way that at least the spirit of the law was fulfilled if not the letter. She did not. That makes her culpable for having received classified emails on the system she ordered be created. Basically, she wanted the ability to CYA by withholding her government emails from the public record, and willfully scarified the security of state secrets to obtain that ability.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

General Patraeus knowingly gave top secret information away. Secretary Clinton unknowingly received it on her unclassified email system. If you can't understand the difference, you're either a moron or a hyperpartisan loon.

Nice try, shill. Not.

Clinton’s email woes deepen as classified messages pile up

The number of emails now considered classified total more than 400, with three of the 215 newly classified documents marked as SECRET

Gee, and gullible you thought none of the emails were marked on her server.

I guess Hillary!'s wiping towel missed a few spots.

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

First stop screaming "Right Wing Conspiracy"! There is about as much of a Right Wing Conspiracy as a Left Wing Conspiracy. Take that as you will. Second, as another security clearance, it isn't what you think. You handle a lot of information and you don't let any of it, even the " unclassified" stuff out. You don't know everything and some stuff could be critical and you don't know it. You shouldn't use a private email at all, because any data important enough for you to see might be secret or at least not good to be known. Frankly she has committed a federal crime and if it weren't for her connections she would be in prison. Finally just saying, even though it doesn't apply as much here:
https://xkcd.com/1019/

Conspiracy, well the Koch network is apparently rivals the one the official republican one. It is not as if the Koch are the only ones involved in politics. Spend money carefully and you can get low information voters to vote against their best interest. Nothing new there. Hell, spend money carefully and you can create a firewall against the wrong kind of attention. Do you think the major defence contractors advertise their jets on major news network because they expect joe sixpack to buy an F-35?

Your argument about private email is arguable, but again, the official state department system had the exact same security classification level of her personal server, that is none. If you want to say, don't risk it, just classify everything, well they probably will. Good luck ever getting a FOIA requests on emails that are sent with that network, so say goodbye to what transparency was left, because it is about to go out the window. Oh also say goodbye to people getting a lot of their work done, or at least of them interacting with real people. They will have to stay in their security container from 9 to 5 so they could get their job done. Normal people can't go in there.

Running a private email server was stupid. Stupid is not a federal crime. If she deliberately and with forethought sent or replied to an email that she new at the time was classified, than that is a federal crime. If that could be proven, well that would be another matter. She was dealing with sensitive information. Some of it was classified after the fact. Such is the nature of her work. Snowden, without a doubt committed a federal crime. Hillary was just careless, which admittedly may not be the best recommendation for a commander in chief, but unless someone can prove that she deliberately sent information that she knew was classified at the time, careless is all you have, which, likely would only result in the removal of her clearance. The fact that she used a private unclassified server rather than a work unclassified server means exactly jack to the conversation.

Here is another thought. If you examined every email that all 5 million cleared workers sent and received, do you think they would all be ruled unclassified? That no one ever made even a small mistake? I really doubt it. Those examining them are going to lean towards if in doubt classify, which is more the norm than the exception. So, I'm guessing they are spending at least a million to check her emails in this kind of level, but to be fair lets say the bureaucracy is really really efficient and it only cost say 50 thousand or so to manually read every email and check each and every sentence against the current security classification guide for one of those 5 million people. That is probably not unreasonable, given that those 5 million workers are likely to have 10 years or so of email histories, that all have to be painstakingly gone through. Are you going to vote for that quarter billion tax increase? After all, the only way to be sure is to check every email every one of those 5 million people sent. We have to check their private emails too, then just to be sure we better check the private emails of everyone they know, or might have talked with. What that is more money? Well we have to be fair.

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

[pro-Clinton ranting redacted] the official state department system had the exact same security classification level of her personal server, that is none.[shilling removed]

Well, that shows that you don't know what the hell you're talking about, now doesn't it?

"the official state department system"?

WHICH ONE, YOU FUCKING CLOWN?!?!?

Because State has more than one. And some of those are highly classified and connected to, say, CIA and NGA, the sources of several of the TOP SECRET emails found on Clinton's illegal basement server.

Whoever copied the email to the outside committed a felony.

And if Hillary! didn't recognize that intelligence data as TOP SECRET, she's not qualified to be President.

Let me repeat that: If Hillary! didn't recognize intel data from CIA or NGA as TOP SECRET, she's not qualified to be President.

Answer THAT one, clown.

Tell us how Hillary! can see intelligence data from CIA or NGA, not recognize it as TOP SECRET (and more because it's probably SCI also) and still be qualified to be President.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[rfengr]

Only after he died recently, my mother told me, that he helped create the DEW line . . . if anyone is old enough to know what that was.

Distant Early Warning, a line of radars above the arctic circle to look for Soviet bombers.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuck you, you Hillary sycophant. At this point, you don't know what this issue is because you simply don't want to know. Sticking your fingers in your ears and going "la la la" really loud doesn't make the truth go away.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, you're the idiot. Read up on "original classification authority". Of course, the concepts of rules and punishments for breaking them is something that Liberals cannot stand, being the perverse morons they are now.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Unless the item has been, you know, de-classified.

At which point it is marked as such, not stripped of all markings.

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Partisan Hack. You can keep trying to defend defend Hillary's use of a private server to circumvent oversight, and claim that it was a vast right wing conspiracy that is driving this, instead of Clinton's illegal actions.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[silas_moeckel]

Not sure about the early 70's but in the mid 90's when I no longer had a need for clearance I no longer had it and had to sign a bunch of paperwork to that effect.

That clown would be her.

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Wall of text from apologists is, of course, blatantly wrong in many, many ways, from the first statement which is a) a lie and b) suggesting that we blatantly allow criminal behavior.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Sticking your fingers in front of your face and going "Commie, Commie, Commie" doesn't make your red scare any less preposterous Mr. McCartney.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Dragon Bait]

*whaddya gonna do?*

In the primary, vote for Sanders. In the general, who knows. I voted for Hillary in 2008. I won't vote for her again.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

You realize the Clintons took over $1 million in "speaking fees/bribes" from Oracle and Microsoft and had Hillary petition the Obama administration to remove caps on H1-B visas.

I'm not sure why anyone defends Clinton. She takes bribes and lies about it. Its not even questionable at this point. Check out the story on her $1 million in bribes to get a visa precheck program started in Abu Dhabi as well, something the State department under her approved just after they got the money.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Dragon Bait]

Over and over and over again, we see she was receiving documents on her personal email. How is that breaking the law?

Once you receive classified information on an unclassified system, you have minimal amount of time to respond. Your response is to immediately contact the facility security officer. Failure to do so is a crime punishable by large fines and prison -- just as if you sent the e-mail to an unclassified server.

With security, as soon as you know something is amiss, if you immediately reported it to your facility security officer, there are minimal repercussions. Just like Watergate, the real issue is the cover up.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Dragon Bait]

That's not what was asked.

What was asked was ignorant deflection.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[judoguy]

However, as in the words of the Pledge to the Flag: "One Nation, under God, with Freedom and Justice for the rich . . .

However, as in the words of the Pledge to the Flag: "One Nation, under God, with Freedom and Mercy for the rich . . .

Fixed it for you. Justice would be great. I'm all for justice for the rich.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Trachman]

Did Clinton unknowingly had a private server? If that could be proved, then someone can claim that all emails are received unknowingly, dear Clinton philes.

For most people, but not all, this is a clear cut question. For those who think it is debatable, there is one way to classify: their love for Clinton is to large to have a clear thinking.

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Bullshit. It's explicitly spelled out. In fact, we have guards that do it automatically.

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

I think we can all agree that it really is a right wing conspiracy provided that you accept that about half of the conspirators are left of center.

You should face that fact that the Democrats are running out of time to get rid of Clinton. If they fail to get rid of her, they aren't going to have a serious candidate in the presidential election. If that happens, then the president is either a cointoss (if the Republicans also fail to provide a serious candidate) or a solid loss (if the Republicans pick someone serious).

It is URGENT that the left does not have itself viewed as being represented by Clinton. Any leftist who doesn't join the conspiracy, is either lazy or stupid.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[khallow]

The State department already had one such. Handle anything that could be classified on its own network with its own secured machines with specialized parties doing any desired declassification of information from the network. By that algorithm, deliberately putting classified information on a unauthorized private server is a huge no no.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Dragon Bait]

Sure some might even be prosecuted, but those rules are focused not on the person that screws up, particularly if that person is otherwise executing due diligence

Ah, there's the rub. She wasn't performing due diligence. As soon as you know that you have classified information on your unclassified system, you are required to immediately disconnect it from the network and contact the facility security officer. You are not supposed to make additional copies. You are not to give them to your uncleared lawyer. You are not to have uncleared personnel peruse it looking for personal information to delete.

I voted for Hillary in 2008. I won't be voting for her again.

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh look, a well paid shill. I have hardly held Hillary blameless. I have stated that she, if treated like everyone else, should probably lose her clearance. I have also stated that if the other 5 million with security clearance were examined with the microscope used for her, then there would be a lot of people in jail.

You failed to disprove either argument.

You pretend that stuff involving politics is cut and dry, as if oh look it is part X connected to part Y so it must be classified. Yah, politics isn't that simple. Sure the state department has multiple email systems, likely some unclass, some secret, some higher than secret in various ways. So seeing as you are resorting to calling me a fucking clown, I ask you what exactly is your argument oh erudite one? that she should have used the unclassified state department for day to day work?, that she should have stayed in the security container and used a secret or better account for day to day work?

The second may be a valid argument, but then you Mr. clown would be ranting about how she never comes down off her high horse and talks with regular people. Oh and travel would be a problem. Maybe that have a mobile security container that can be shipped everywhere. I have no idea how it works at that level, but I'm fairly sure she is not carrying around a classified laptop with her, since at best she would have to have hold of it the entire time it was outside of a security container, and yes, for the Trump fans, that would definitely include when she went to the bathroom. Oh and you certainly couldn't actually use it outside of a security container, well unless the rules are different at that level, and I doubt it. So ya, while people in government will almost certainly move ever more work to the classified systems, it probably isn't realistic to expect it all to be. Now, if you want to classify the government unclass server as something between unclassified and secret, then maybe you would have a legal case for the difference between it and the home server, but you don't. The only case you have is that her server might have been less secure, and to be fair that is a valid consideration. I don't defend it. Anyone who runs their own email server in today's threat environment is likely insane. Of course, assuming that government techs won't screw up their own security is probably not a safe assumption. Most likely they are using the same configuration a whole bunch of places, because that one is certified, so if a foreign government knows what that configuration is, then they can likely break into everywhere at once. Such are the dangers of software monoculture. Security is hard. The solution to security is not to just say, it is secure because it was run by the government. That is laughable, as those of us who had all their information hacked related to security clearance well know. For that matter, why are none of those people in jail. Hell I could support that. It was like a how to compromise everyone with a security clearance guide that was hacked. It makes hillary's email look like a tempest in a teapot by comparison.

At any rate, it is the same old thing, over and over and over again. Find something someone did, if it is true, better, but not required, then shout with all the voices of hell about how your opponent must be punished in some fashion, and ignore all the real issues.

Who will be the better president on civil liberties?

Who will be the better president with realistic and implementable foreign policy?

Who will be the better president that is actually will to compromise and get work done on national policy, rather than saying my way or the highway?

Oh well, I tire of this thread. I tire of attempting to argue with someone who results to names and such. Perhaps I will be called Low Energy next.

If clinton screwed up, she screwed up. Once again, the location of the unclass server remains irrelevant. Intent is relevant. If it was intentional and obviously classified at the tim

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Dragon Bait]

No one was ever fired or demoted or paid a fine.

I have seen people fired for simple mistakes that did not result in disclosure. Perhaps where the spooks would hold security sweeps was an open secret container -- and therefore not as sever.

I voted for Hillary in 2008. I won't be voting for her again.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[beakerMeep]

Were any of the violations you saw as serious as setting up a personal server for all email? (Thank you for adding some perspective to this regardless)

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[khallow]

The ALWAYS found violations

How serious were these violations again? What again would have been a punishment for setting up your own private email server out of the office, bypassing a huge amount of security in the process, and funneling classified information to that server? Would it have been a reprimand or something a bit more serious like huge fines and serious prison time.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[AaronW]

After my company switched to Microsoft Office 365 I had to use an outside email server to access my email because Office365 was so broken. IMAP didn't work at all. 99% of the time I got authentication failures due to problems on their end both for sending and receiving email. This problem lasted for almost a year. I ended up setting up Office365 to forward my email because otherwise I just couldn't access it at all. Eventually my work set me up with a Google account in addition to the Office 365 one.

Office365 is better now, though I still frequently have problems with it and it is slow, though not as bad as it used to be. Running Outlook was not an option since it doesn't run on Linux and the web interface sucks to put it mildly and is incredibly slow (it takes several minutes just to log in to the web interface).

I understand that the State Department's email system was very antiquated and had a lot of problems since congress refused to give them a budget to upgrade their IT infrastructure. I wouldn't be surprised either if Clinton's email server was more secure than the State Department's server which has been known to be hacked.

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey, leave the Beatles out of this.

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[jmac_the_man]

Tell us how Hillary! can see intelligence data from CIA or NGA, not recognize it as TOP SECRET (and more because it's probably SCI also) and still be qualified to be President.

There's no "probably" involved. Hillary sent at least two emails which were redacted as Talent Keyhole. Talent Keyhole is an SCI program involving a specific imaging satellite or set of imaging satellites. All Talent Keyhole images are SCI because we don't want the enemy to know the capabilities of the satellite. (On the other hand, the fact that "NGA has a super cool spy satellite named Talent Keyhole" isn't classified and shows up in the press. Just the images are classified.)
TLDR: The State Department has admitted that Hillary's server was used to send spy satellite images that are more classified than TOP SECRET.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[jmac_the_man]

but it's rather rare for somebody at her level to do so; either you trust your subordinates' judgment or you replace them because you've got too much to do every day to have time for that kind of micromanagement.

Well, since her subordinates were apparently untrustworthy (because they kept emailing classified information through her private server that she used for graft) and she didn't replace them, perhaps Hillary Clinton's managerial skills are suspect. It might not be the wisest choice to put her in charge of people if shes's a bad judge of her subordinates' abilities to prevent themselves from committing felonies.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[jmac_the_man]

Most of the emails that Clinton herself received on her private server was sent to her by her top aides, most of whom worked with her before she was Secretary of State, and then got jobs at State when she was Secretary. Today, most of them work on either her campaign or at the Clinton Foundation. The ones who worked at State used both official State email addresses and addresses on her private server.

Most of the people who violated handling requirements were (and are) top-level aides to Hillary Clinton.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Jack9]

> Exactly. I've held a Secret clearance for 38 years, and the rules covering this sort of thing are very clear. The penalties include a huge fine and very serious federal prison time.

> You are lying, clueless, or an idiot.

You are clearly projecting.

The entire 2 sentences he posted were succinct, accurate, and reasonable. You throw around generalities and vitrol as if you're making some kind of point beyond "I'm a frothing nutjob". How is this kind of mental vomit modded up?

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[jmac_the_man]

If your subordinate keeps sending you child pornography, you should fire them and report them to the appropriate authorities. Did Hillary fire her subordinates who were sending classified information over the nonclassified email system? And report them to the FBI?

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[jmac_the_man]

Her email server had SCI satellite imagery on it. Those photos are classified (at a level higher than Top Secret) from the moment they're taken. They were 100% SCI when they arrived on her sever.

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Tell us how Hillary! can see intelligence data from CIA or NGA, not recognize it as TOP SECRET (and more because it's probably SCI also) and still be qualified to be President.

There's no "probably" involved. Hillary sent at least two emails which were redacted as Talent Keyhole. Talent Keyhole is an SCI program involving a specific imaging satellite or set of imaging satellites. All Talent Keyhole images are SCI because we don't want the enemy to know the capabilities of the satellite. (On the other hand, the fact that "NGA has a super cool spy satellite named Talent Keyhole" isn't classified and shows up in the press. Just the images are classified.)

I haven't checked all this, but assuming this is all correct, then at minimum it is a clear screw up and a reason to seriously consider removing her clearance. Deliberately ignoring those rules is likely even be enough to justify having a trial or at least a public hearing where she could defend herself, much as she did on Benghazi. Actually that partly involved email, so presumably we can skip the bits already covered. Failure to handle classified information appropriately is certainly a consideration that should be used when considering a presidential candidate, and not a positive one.

All in all, you have to look at presidential candidates in their totality, not just in one area. You also have to consider proportionality. She was in a very important position and apparently screwed up, apparently multiple times with insuring appropriate methods of communication involving sensitive and possibly classified material. The worst case for that is federal time. Is that the appropriate punishment? I'm fairly sure that no official judgement can be found in the court of public opinion, though we can vote. I, however, would be very cautious on voting only considering this issue. There is a lot more to the job than a job that can be subbed out to someone else to make sure future screw ups do not occur.

Do I think that Hillary is a better choice than any of the republicans? Yes.
Do I think that Bernie is clearly a better person than Hillary? Yes.
Do I think that Bernie would be a better president than Hillary? The juries out. Like it or not, Hillary does have more of the requisite experience. If I had to chose, I'd vote Bernie. If I knew the next four years were going to be a true mess, I might hedge my bets and vote Hillary.

Personally I'd like to see some better choices all around, and maybe an end to this primary nonsense that distorts and leads to extremes. There are no political parties in the constitution, yet we pay for all of these primaries via public polls and such. Put everyone running on the ballot with enough signatures, perhaps using an electronic system that randomizes the list. Include a short statement from each and notes from a neutral fact checking organisation. Don't include any political party on the ballot. See how that goes. If some kind of well studied instant run off method doesn't cut it, then do a round 2.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

One reason that Clinton's emails are a significant topic now is that she is seeking the job of POTUS. As such, her judgement (and, of course, adherence to the law) is something voters should be considering. If Powell were running for POTUS, his actions and judgement should, and would, also be subject to similar scrutiny.

I don't know that Clinton did anything illegal, but she showed incredibly poor judgement in using a private email server for any government related communication when she was Secretary of State. In my experience, even the fresh out of the university developers at most significant tech companies are made aware that personal and business information should not be mixed during orientation or documents received during that time.

The two most likely explanations I have for her actions are:

1. Ignorance (she is an old lady who didn't probably touch a computer until she was fairly mature and probably really doesn't understand much about them) and (MUCH more alarmingly) the inability to pick advisers whose judgement can be trusted.
2. Second, arrogance. Rules are for little people.

BOTH of these conclusions would make me very hesitant to vote for her (although, I live in a state in which most voters will vote for the Democrat on the ticket unless, maybe, they had, within the 36 hours of casting their vote, personally witnessed that candidate rape, torture, and murder all of their children, their spouse, their elderly parents, and burn down their house -- so who I cast a vote for for POTUS is pretty irrelevant). Of course, given who is likely to end up on the ticket against her in the general election is almost certain to be at least equally alarming.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

if Hilary claims she didn't know that, she lies like a rug.

Well, I wouldn't completely dismiss the possibility that she's just a senior citizen who hasn't kept up on technology for the past few decades and is a poor judge of advisers.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

judge doesnt care if you unknowingly received a kilo of coke - top secert e-mails etc whole idea she went out-side normal channels...shes better then the law i guess special elite

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[ShanghaiBill]

What if Trump is her opponent?

Then I think the Libertarians and the Greens will get a lot of votes.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[kenh]

General Patraeus knowingly gave top secret information away. Secretary Clinton unknowingly received it on her unclassified email system. If you can't understand the difference, you're either a moron or a hyperpartisan loon.

She was trained to identify classified information by it's very nature - like, as the most glaring example, satellite recon photos - which were among the "unclassified" emails she kept on her server. Satellite recon photos are *always* Top Secret, not only is the image in the photos secret, the resolution and capabilities of the satellites is also Top Secret.

There is at least one instance recorded in her own email records that shows her instructing an underling to *remove* the security marking so they could forward her classified information on her unsecure email server.

Is it truly your argument that she never expected anyone to ever send her classified information via email while she was Secretary of State?

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[ShanghaiBill]

So 1,274 retroactively classified emails tells me 1,274 times the country was put at risk.

Have you ever had a clearance? 99% of classified material is stuff that was in the newspapers two weeks earlier or other silly nonsense. I remember getting a document once a week that was an English translation done by the CIA of a Ukrainian newspaper. Despite being openly published information, it was always classified "secret". The only reason that I can see, was to make the translator feel like he was doing something important.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[StevenMaurer]

Clinton knowingly had classified information on a server that was not secured. If you can't understand that, you're either a moron or a hyperpartisan loon.

Clinton's private email server was set up to receive mail from the State Department's UNCLASSIFIED email system. That State Department network was: 1) Not encrypted, 2) Had been hacked multiple times (including during the 1990s when Bush was in office), and 3) Not supposed to have classified information on it in any way.

There actually is a scandal here, but it's not the one morons like you think it is. The scandal is how so much classified information was being put onto the unclassified State Department servers in the first place, long before it got copied to clintonemail.com, and the lax attitude that many State Department employees had in regards to handling such classified information.

So in short, if you want to bash Secretary Clinton for failing to recognize that the Department of State had a serious cultural attitude problem in properly handling classified information, and failing to fix it by directing her staff to find the people who were putting classified information onto the unclassified State Department server system - well, be my guest. That's a fair critique. (Though one, Secretary Powell would also have to cop to, and he was a general, so my assumption is that he should have been more aware of this than Clinton.)

If, on the other hand, you want to act like some sort of typical hyperpartisan loon and try to accuse her of some sort of crime, by making up complete bullshit about the system or her private server, well then I can't exactly stop you - I can only laugh at your idiocy, as common as it is. I understand that we're fully into silly season by now, with basically half the country acting sounding like the Cobert Report's Steven Colbert, except actually being serious about it.

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

It didn't run on the same network, she ran it out of her bathroom to exempt it from freedom of information act requests.

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[Bartles]

How can you not know this? Where have you been getting your information that left out the fact that her server contained highly classified satellite imagery?

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

I've held a Secret clearance for 38 years, and the rules covering this sort of thing are very clear. The penalties include a huge fine and very serious federal prison time.

I held a secret clearance for 20 years, as a military officer, and while working on defense contracts. The spooks would hold security sweeps about once a month, checking desk drawers, file cabinets, computer drives. The ALWAYS found violations, and the worst consequences were verbal reprimands and mandatory remedial training. No one was ever fired or demoted or paid a fine. Certainly no one went to federal prison.

No consequences?

That's because a SECRET clearance ain't shit. I'm pretty sure the "background investigation" done for a SECRET clearance is to go to the local post office and see if your picture is on the wall.

Things only get real when you get into TOP SECRET and SCI.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Bartles]

What would have happened if you emailed satellite imagery to your personal gmail account?

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Bartles]

It was classified. It just wasn't marked classified, which was the responsibility of the creators who had security clearance. ie. Clinton and staff. To think that you can do whatever you want with sensitive information until some bureaucrat marks it classified is ridiculous, and reeks of willful ignorance.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Bartles]

Tell that to David Petraeus.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Lt.Hawkins]

I'm not accusing her of a crime. I'm accusing her of either incompetence or horrible judgement, given her position as one of the few Original Classification Authorities in the executive branch ( https://www.whitehouse.gov/the... SecState is the first Department mentioned. ). She should have known better. Maybe she did know better, but chose not to do better - that'd be worse.

Further, she was expected (one could even say "ordered by the President") to take Classification Training annually: https://www.whitehouse.gov/the... section 1.3d:
"All original classification authorities must receive training in proper classification (including the avoidance of over-classification) and declassification as provided in this order and its implementing directives at least once a calendar year. Such training must include instruction on the proper safeguarding of classified information and on the sanctions in section 5.5 of this order that may be brought against an individual who fails to classify information properly or protect classified information from unauthorized disclosure. Original classification authorities who do not receive such mandatory training at least once within a calendar year shall have their classification authority suspended by the agency head or the senior agency official designated under section 5.4(d) of this order until such training has taken place. " You can't argue that she was unfamiliar with this issue.

Even more, as a former FLOTUS, as a former Senator, and ESPECIALLY as Secretary of State (analogous to a Foreign Minister in other countries), she should CERTAINLY expected that her communications would be a primary target by foreign adversaries. She had high-level conversations with advisers, communications with/about other foreign leaders and diplomats, national policy issues, internal State Department policy issues. We already know the NSA is interested in this kind of stuff for other countries (most recently the shit with Israel) ; pretty much everyone else would love to have this information on the US as well. We're all self-important geeks here who think the NSA is watching all of us as we play video games and post on Slashdot and Reddit. How can anyone give a pass to a Secretary of State, who has real, LEGIT reasons to suspect she'd be targeted?

And then there were the political games she's been playing in the aftermath, instead of handing shit over, lawyering up and taking her lumps if necessary, and moving on. If it cost her an opportunity at the Presidency, oh well, that's what accountability at that level means; its not as if she didn't have POTUS aspirations back then. The world knew it. (More of a reason to suspect she'd be targetted by other intel services, actualy). Instead, she avoided having to turn stuff over as long as possible, tried deleting stuff, hand-selected things to turn over, plays this stupid shrugging game, insults our intelligence by saying "“It was on property guarded by the Secret Service and there were no security breaches. So I think that the use of that server certainly proved to be effective and secure.”". (Yes, she said that. http://www.wired.com/2015/03/h... )

Even if every single email she had on there was born and legitimately unclassified, they were at very least sensitive. And a bunch of unclassified things can be considered classified in aggregate. "(e) Compilations of items of information that are individually unclassified may be classified if the compiled information reveals an additional association or relationship that: (1) meets the standards for classification under this order; and (2) is not otherwise revealed in the individual items of information." (from one of the Executive Order links above as well)

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Bartles]

Tell you what. Let's get someone to email you highly classified information, documents, and satellite imagery and see what happens.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Bartles]

Yes. She unknowingly sent and received classified information for 5 FUCKING YEARS. She could kill your mother and you'd find some twisted logic to explain it away.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Bartles]

Right. So putting a 10 year old personal email server in the bathroom of unguarded walk up apartment, and using it for all communication of the SoS and close staff is the obvious solution. Idiot.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Bartles]

Yes, it has been know to be hacked. I'm sure analysis has been done to find out what was compromised, by whom, and measures were put in place to limit the damage. Hillary's server was located in a walk up apartment bathroom. How do we know if her network was compromised? WE DON'T. By whom? NO ONE KNOWS. And what measures were taken to limit the damage? NONE. She was emailing foreign governments with a personal email address you idiot. Every foreign recipient of one of her emails would have known that it was all coming from a private, insecure network.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

General Patraeus knowingly gave top secret information away. Secretary Clinton unknowingly received it on her unclassified email system. If you can't understand the difference, you're either a moron or a hyperpartisan loon.

If Hillary! didn't know intelligence data directly from CIA, NSA, NGA, et al was classified data, she's not qualified to be President, now is she?

Your defense of Hillary! is that she's too stupid to know what she was reading and sending on her unclassified private email system?!?!?!

And you fancy you a supporter? And even you think she's not smart enough to know what she was doing?

Saying "That dog won't hunt!" is already the favorite to win the understatement of the year award as your "defense" of Hillary! is as lame as a Thalidomide dachshund.

Either she's stupid or malicious - either one should disqualify her from elected office. And you say she's stupid.

And either way, she's a demonstrated liar.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[NoMoreFood]

An "original" classifier is someone who deems a new type of information as a certain classification level. For instance, if we invented a new technology to address a new threat -- information associated with that technology and threat will need to be assessed for classification. An original classifier would be responsible for assessing, at a high-level, whether the release of that information would constitute damage to the government and, depending on severity of damage it would cause, would deem it unclassified, confidential, secret, or top secret. Original classification tends to be more categorical than specific. Once an original classifier makes that determination for a type of information, a "derivative" classifier would use that information to officially classy a specific document. As such, derivative classification is much more common. Unfortunately, my guess is Hillary was neither and was just depending on the information being classified (and marked accordingly as it came in). As an information generator, however, my opinion is that she should have reached out to a classifier to determine the proper classification if there was any chance at all the information was classified.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

He worked on that awesome Rush song?! I always loved that tune.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[mrego]

Even with an active secret clearance, you don't just have authorization to look at or access any thing that is SECRET. It is all based on need to know. So the moment you did not have a need to know, you did not have that clearance. So stop bragging to all your buddies since 1973 that you have a secret clearance (but don't really know if it is 'active'). You haven't had ANY clearance since 1973 and maybe did not have much need to know and hence much clearance even before then. I always laugh when someone asks me if my clearance is 'active' or 'inactive' and thus supposedly renewable. If I do not have a need to know some secret or top secret, etc. then I am not cleared for it regardless of any "active" status.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Open secrets... Another great Rush tune!

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[mrego]

One thing she did do is allow two to hold outside jobs while also on the government payroll. I believe the term is 'ghost employee'.

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

I am a total left wing commie and I think if she wasnt such a key figure in the established political power she would be running for her life to escape prison. Instead she is laughing it off on the way to the presidential run off with another political media clown named Trump. Things keep getting worse.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[xrobertcmx]

Exactly! I just went through that blasted classification training. If a is not classified and b is not classified than a document comprised of a+b is not classified, except in cases when it is. The rules are a mess, every single thing requires checking a fact sheet to see if something suddenly changed status. I could care less about Hillary, she had a private server, shouldn't have. But as for the emails, and the millions we have spent wasting our time, it is stupid. We have a Ruplican shouting classified information from the window of the clown car.

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[sycodon]

All through out your rants, pretty much all you say is, "Yes, Hillary is an idiot and did stupid things, but she's my idiot, so I don't care".

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[funwithBSD]

It is even more mundane than that.

ANY report on communication with a foreign agent, i.e. minister, diplomat, government worker, is considered classified. Not like Keyhole, but still classified.

So if anything like "The Canadian Ambassador expressed his concern about the Keystone pipeline..." is born classified.

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[funwithBSD]

So... Yellow Dog Democrat?

In case you are unfamiliar with the term:

Yellow Dog Democrats was a political term applied to voters in the Southern United States who voted solely for candidates who represented the Democratic Party. The term originated in the late 19th century. These voters would allegedly "vote for a yellow dog before they would vote for any Republican".

Not derogatory, unless you consider having a closed mind politically to be derogatory.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[rtb61]

So in this world of modern politics is negotiating a bribe, personal communications or public communications. After all there were a whole raft of donations to a particular politicians foundation from corrupt foreign governments who have actively supported Daesh, a mass terrorist movement, supported also in part by the US and Israeli governments. Secretary of State or Secretary of her own pocket book, because the cash really flowed, millions upon millions of dollars.

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, receiving any official email on a private server while acting as an agent of the federal government is breaking the law. It's doing official business from a private server bit that is against the law. The classified/unclassified bits are just more charges to be added.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[techno-vampire]

So stop bragging to all your buddies since 1973 that you have a secret clearance...

I've never seen it something to brag about. I certainly didn't talk about it back then, and once I got out, I had even less reason to mention it. In fact, I only mentioned it here to show that I'd had personal experience with how classified material is handled.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

> If you can legitimately mark it as classified later it always was classified

oh my god you actually 1) believe in this 2) are oblivious to how, if true, it could EASILY be used as a political landmine tool?

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

> or that she put copies of it on thumb drives for her not-cleared lawyer to also keep in his own offices

lawyers don't need clearance to see classified information, fyi. attorney-client privilege.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Tell you what. Let's get someone to email you highly classified information, documents, and satellite imagery and see what happens.

Why would they? I'm not the secretary of state, or anyone else that the sending party would expect to set up to correctly handle secure information.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[pedestrian crossing]

I voted for Hillary in 2008. I won't vote for her again.

Yeah, you've said that about a hundred times in this thread already. We've got it. Give it a rest.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

These things do not apply to the president or the secretary of state. People keep complaining about how things would be different if she were a rank-and-file foreign service officer, but that's exactly it: SHE WASN'T.

It's absolutely true that she got treated differently because of her position, but that's hardly a flaw in the system. The president of the United States cannot have his classification authority suspended, just like there's no background check, no drug test, no KSAs, or a thousand other things that apply to the "little people". The head of the State Department is the second-most powerful office in the executive branch. Pretending that it should be treated like a back office analyst is either foolishly or intentionally ignorant of reality.

SoS isn't subject to the same rules in a number of cases--never has been, never will be. So let's just stop feigning surprise that it's designed that way.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

I know you think you're being clever, but section 1.3d applies to DELEGATED original classification authorities as established under 1.3c.

It does not apply to the position of secretary of state. The SoS *IS* the applicable agency head and the person who designated the senior official under 5.4(d) to revoke the classification authority of OCAs.

And then there were the political games she's been playing in the aftermath

The whole thing is a political game and nothing more. No SoS before her operated any differently, and the ideas that any one person should recognize a classified piece of information without marking or that RECEIVING a message containing classified information is somehow evidence of bad judgment are utterly ludicrous.

Email communication at the State Department is unsecured. No classified information of any kind is supposed to go through it, even had she been using an agency account. If you think there is failure of competence or judgment relating to that, please point to a position at that level that doesn't fall victim to this supposed flaw. The fact of the matter is that there is none, and no one would even be talking about this if it weren't about Hillary Clinton, just for the sake of pretending that she's getting away with something. I don't agree with her politics, but I agree even less with this colossal waste of resources and outrage.

It's no surprise whatsoever that there are some mistakes in the email dump. It'd be far more suspicious if it really showed perfect compliance at that volume.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

The first part of having a clearance, is not talking about a clearance.
As for Clinton, even a fair number of unclassified/noforn emails grouped together to be able to infer classified information is a breach.
She broke the law, it's plain as day to see from anyone with a clearance.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

It will be attached to your DD-214 as I recall. (On phone - KGIII)

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it was classified. It just was improperly marked - if it was not marked as classified. The marking is an indicator, it's still classified even if it doesn't have the label. Your training will tell you this. It will also tell you that if you come across information that is not classified, and it should be, that you need to take it to an OCA (original classification something or other - it has been years) and get it marked or, if you have the correct permissions, you are to mark it as classified yourself.

KGIII - on phone

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

I am pretty sure that this is incorrect. Not only have I had clearance but I have had to go through the process a second time as a civilian. No, clearance does not extend to lawyers as a general rule. It may apply to FOUO documents but I'm damned near positive that this doesn't apply to TS or greater documents. It *may* apply, with some sort of oversight, for plain classified documents but even that's a bit unlikely.

However, it may apply to a judge who may rule on if such privileges are extended and if such material is salient and will be used evidence or will be needed to build a case - judges have some pretty impressive powers and I'm not entirely sure what will happen there.

However, I'm pretty damned sure that it isn't extended to lawyers by default - I could be mistaken but I don't think so. I've gone through the training twice now but not for quite a few years.

KGIII - On phone and too lazy to log in securely.

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[khallow]

Who will be the better president on civil liberties?

Who will be the better president with realistic and implementable foreign policy?

Who will be the better president that is actually will to compromise and get work done on national policy, rather than saying my way or the highway?

I can tell you who it won't be. It won't be the person who casually commits felonies or compromises national security for political convenience.

Oh well, I tire of this thread. I tire of attempting to argue with someone who results to names and such. Perhaps I will be called Low Energy next.

Well, here's hoping some day that you get tired enough of this sort of thing to stop being gullible. Maybe even think a little bit.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[jmac_the_man]

BUT BUT BUT... Hillary didn't hold other jobs while also being on the government payroll. Her top aides were the ones actually doing the other jobs.
How did she break the law? It's like Obama's red lines. There's no depth past which some people won't sink defending her. Look at the comments from six months ago about "there's no proof that there was classified information on the server, so Hillary should get off clean for running the illegal server in the first place."

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

That is fine. If the system was broken then she, as head of the department, had both the responsibility and power to delegate the authority to have it fixed and then the obligation to follow through with that and ensure it was fixed - not to work around and it to leave a broken system in place and thereby break the law by having classified documents on an unauthorized server. Data spillage, if intentional, is a crime. If negligent, it may be a crime. Failure to report it, in all instances, is a crime. Continuing to maintain that policy is certainly criminal.

*sighs* I suppose you'll be thinking I'm a Republican now. :/

I'm not. I'm supporting Bernie.

KGIII - Still on phone and still not logged in.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Ha! That's it - thanks. It has been years since I went through the process. As a chaser/escort I had to handle classified documents, detainee records. As a civilian I did some work for the DoD and, again, had to work with classified data and that necessitated myself and another employee of mine getting cleared. Both processes entailed some training on procedure, law, handling, mishandling, and one of the most stressed things was how to handle data/documents that weren't classified but we thought should probably have been classified or how to properly classify and mark documents/data that we'd created.

Up above I call 'em the OCA and then call that the "Original Classification something or other" as I was unable to remember what the A stood for and I'm on my phone so I didn't open a new tab to look it up. So, if anyone's following along or playing the home game, the A that I was unable to remember has been brought to light by the fine Lt. Hawkins and it stands for Authority! Thanks.

As an aside; I had my neighbors box up and mail my mail to me, I'm in Florida. Inside was one of those funny envelopes with the black and white blurred pattern on the back and tear strips on the side. I have been informed that my data was, in fact, included in the OPM hack. I am not impressed. Fortunately, I already have the "do not issue credit" flag set at the ratings agencies and they're in "locked" status (I think that's what they call it). I don't have much to worry about there but, once again, my data is out in the wild and it contains a hell of a lot of information about me, who my friends and family are, my drug and alcohol use/abuse history, various relationships that I've had, and all that sort of crap.

I'm sure you, Lt. Hawkins, are familiar with the data that is included in that. I am *not* impressed, not impressed at all.

KGIII

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

I might have ingested some stimulants but I'll try to keep this brief. I figure you might find it amusing. This is KGIII - I'm on my phone and I don't log in when I'm on my phone. It just doesn't seem like a secure platform, so I avoid it. I treat it as if it is all in the open - if I'm doing it on my phone.

So, my company did traffic modeling - vehicular and pedestrian. We consulted on traffic patterns, highway projects, expansions, that sort of thing. We also did things like design emergency plans for stadiums, model their existing plans, consult on optimizing those plans, and even sometimes modeled the flow of traffic for outdoor events. We did things like model pedestrian traffic, plan for said traffic, in things like stores and malls.

I can not be specific but I ended up with a contract with the DoD (it had a public RFP/RFQ). Take the above statement about what we did and add to that, the data that we used, to fulfill that contract, was classified. Yes, classified. Not something like FOUO but classified. This meant that they had to buy special hardware, lots of it, and that we had to work on their hardware, with our software, in a closed room, with no network connectivity, no cell phones, no cameras, no visitors, armed staff, behind two locked doors, and could not consult (on some things) with our peers back at the office.

Look at what my company did. Look at who I was working for. Draw the obvious conclusions. In fact, it was really damned obvious what we were doing there. That data should not have been classified.

How can I say this? Hmm... Okay - when the base goes to lunch, how it is staggered, where people are coming from, what are the most frequently used paths, and where the points of congestion are - should NOT be classified data! Hmm... I think I can say that? I'm pretty sure that I can. I'm pretty sure I just can't say what the end results were, specifically, with our work. I can't say what information we gave them, what we recommended, what they implemented, and how they implemented it. I also can't say how they collected the data and things of that nature - I'm pretty sure. So yeah, I can say that... I hope.

I've pondered this before. I have no idea why the data is classified. I guess I can understand a bit of why it might be and, yeah... At any rate, that the data is classified, instead of FOUO or the likes, is absurd. The level of security needed to access and work with that data is even more absurd. Your tax dollars spent about three times more than what it would normally cost just on our services. A rough guess might be that they spent another $150-200k on hardware because we weren't allowed to use our own hardware. However, that's actually the least of their expenses and, presumably, they re-purposed that hardware when we were through with it. I don't honestly know - for all I know, they did the whole destructive thing on the HDDs and RAM! (I hope not - the data wasn't *that* secret.)

But, yeah, I figured you might be interested in seeing that you're very much correct. With some severe logic twisting, I think one of the reasons it was classified was because there's the obvious question of how did they manage to get such accurate data. That's the only thing I can think of and if I did know how it was collected I'd probably not be able to tell you.

So, you're very much correct - from what I've seen. The data should have been something like FOUO and that's it but, alas, they don't let me make said judgment calls. Your tax dollars paid a hell of a lot more than they needed to and the service was provided much slower than it could have been. I'd estimate that we spent, even paid a per-diem as Cost +, about three months of doing absolutely nothing while awaiting requisition order processing, final testing, and then cleanup.

*sighs*

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[budgenator]

I was once reprimanded by my Plt Sgt for not finding any security violations. He made me read AR 380-5 cover to cover because there is always something wrong, always. Running a private Email server as SOS is just insane, even if Clinton never sent anything Classified, you had no control over what others send you. Clinton's response to this situation shows her first priority is to place or avoid blame, not the National Security.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[budgenator]

She get any emails from that Ben Gozzi guy?!

She got 600 emails that last night from "Ben Gozzi"; she never replied to them.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

I have seen an NCO get 6-6 and a kick (suspended, no brig time) for leaving a folder in an unattended vehicle. The folder contained nothing more than a detainee's records. Scuttlebutt said that there was no TS information in the dossier. However, the NCO was bringing documents back from the court house, that specific folder, and stopped along the way - at either the PX or the chow hall, and a passing occifer (or someone) happened to notice. The NCO had been tasked with retrieving the documents as they'd been altered/updated/changed, perhaps reviewed by the defense, or for whatever reason.

I seem to recall that nobody else had been available and he was already heading across base. So, he took a staff car and retrieved the documents. The folder, it's a bit obvious and should have actually been inside of a case but was not, was sitting on the passenger seat in an unattended vehicle while he was attending business elsewhere. He should have, strictly speaking, probably even have had another person with him - though that's not entirely required (I don't think) as it can, optionally, go into something that looks a bit like a mail bag and is cut resistant. Those usually have a tamper evident seal and a lock.

These are just detainees, not convicts, court records. They are not top secret, secret, or anything other than just plain "classified" which means on a need-to-know basis and that specific handling protocols must be met. I imagine some of those protocols have changed over the years and this was a *very* long time ago. It was mid-late 1980s.

At any rate, the NCO got a 6-6 and a kick with the 6 suspended so he didn't actually end up in the brig. 6 - six months in the brig (suspended in this case). 6 - $600 fine (which was a month's wages when the phase was coined - I'm given to understand). Kick - Discharge other than Honorable. Had anything else been brought to light or had he faced a court martial for any other reason (unlikely - he was now discharged) or had he gotten into any trouble before the discharge was processed then he'd have had the suspended sentence invoked.

That was just for court documents (things like statements, photographs, rulings, sentencing, pre-sentencing findings, etc) being left unattended on the seat of a locked staff car while the NCO ran in to the PX or chow hall. (I'm thinking it was the PX. I recall him saying something along the lines of, "I was only going to be gone for a few minutes. I knew better and I admit the mistake.")

Interesting enough, had he not admitted the mistake and acknowledged it, he probably would have been sentenced to a much longer sentence and it would not have been suspended.

So, that was pretty trivial and that was the impact it had on that one Marine's life. It ruined him. It took away his benefits. It took away his retirement. It took away his kid's and wife's benefits. It cost him his career. It damned near put him behind bars.

Make of that what you will but that's one such example that I know of and was personally there for. I do not know the specific details beyond what I've shared. This was in Lejeune, North Carolina and I'm guessing right around 1986.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[budgenator]

Rarely or not, she should have had annual training, and to dodge this is to say that a person who reaches that level of government has no responsibility to uphold the more "mundane" things of their job

Bwahahaha, She had the training, see where the instructor signed off on it; The only way you get people like these to physically attend training is for their Boss to be there and insist on attendance.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[LetterRip]

The content wasn't stripped of classification markings. The content was not classified at the time that they were emailed and were not sourced from classified documents.

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[LetterRip]

"ANY report on communication with a foreign agent, i.e. minister, diplomat, government worker, is considered classified. Not like Keyhole, but still classified."

No they are not. Only if the individual SENDING THE COMMUNICATION considers them sensitive are they automatically classified. I realize that many reporters have reading comprehension issues and so have misreported this, but if you read the actual regulations it is quite clear.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[budgenator]

Whether some is or should have been classified is a completely separate issue from whether it was "out in the wild" or not. The classification is based on whether the release would harm the National Interest and how much. Sometime it's classified retroactively because an analyst recognised how several seemingly unrelated events were related and the relationship was damaging.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[budgenator]

That's no longer a safe assumption, especially when your Secratary of State.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[budgenator]

I've come to the realization after following current events for a while, that no federal agency, department or employee should be entrusted with the management of their own email systems, nor should they be entrusted with complying with their own FOIA requests. Conducting Official Business through a private email service should be a Felony.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[jandersen]

Honestly; when do people - other than the pathologically obsessive - stop banging on about this nonsense? I mean, should we start finding dirt about the Republican candidates and their reacklessness? At that level of detail, everybody looks grubby; the only people who've never done anything wrong, are the ones who've never done anything. So grow up and get real.

I don't think it matters - I would much rather hear about the proposed policies of the differenct candidates; and not the silly posturing we see in the so-called debates, but what they would actually do, where they want to take the Nation, what they think the foreign policy should be, etc. So far, Jeb Bush seems to be the only one who has attempted to talk about real things on the Reublican side. I'm kind of chocked for saying that a Bush looks like the most sensible Republican, but that''s where it stands atm.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[budgenator]

Over and over and over again, we see she was receiving documents on her personal email. How is that breaking the law?

Do you agree that if someone emails you some child porno, you have broken the law and should go to prison? Or is it the sender who has broken the law?

At the least after swearing an oath to uphold the Constitution of the United States and to uphold the laws of the United States without mental reservations, she had knowledge of the senders having committed a serious felony of failing to protect classified information by sending it through unprotected channels and failing to report it. She further exacerbated the situation by improperly storing the classified information.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[budgenator]

A Defense Attorney has no need to see the content of classified document, even if they are contesting whether the contents are classified, the government will be glad to provide that information. If that is insufficient the government will provide you with an attorney.

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[uninformedLuddite]

Well, here's hoping some day that you get tired enough of this sort of thing to stop being gullible. Maybe even think a little bit.

It's not gullible. It has an agenda. Sticking your own personal web server for government communications in your bathroom is enough to demonstrate to me that something dodgy is going on. Anyone refusing to see that has a bias.

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[uninformedLuddite]

should have been mail server (just woke up)

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[uninformedLuddite]

Are you getting paid by post?

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

You do realize that the 'red scare' and 'McCarthyism' was done by both the Dems and Repubs...Right? I mean you are not that ignorant of history and at the very least know that the 'red menace' witch hunt was carried out by McCarthy and Kennedy.... right?

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

"What was asked was ignorant deflection."

Was that you deflecting?

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[mrclevesque]

Nah, I'd be surprised if that's what's getting into people's bonnet. Probably not that many people too.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[mrclevesque]

"Idiot"

No, you! :)

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[mrclevesque]

"Except there are claims the markings were removed prior to them getting to Clinton"

But the claims don't seem to have reasonable support. And claims can be a dime a dozen.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[mrclevesque]

"They were 100% SCI when they arrived on her sever."

Yeah, at some point before she received them the SCI designation was removed.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

Liar. That which is not KNOWN by the user to be classified, and that is not a diplomat's job, is not classified UNLESS SO MARKED.
If this were anyone else, nothing more would be said.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[jmac_the_man]

Right, Clinton aides stripped the markings that indicated that the material was SCI before sending it through the server. That doesn't change the fact that the material was still SCI, even without the markings, and that the server was still illegal because it was set up in the first place to evade FOIA and make it easier for her to illicitly fund her political operation through the Clinton Foundation.

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[jmac_the_man]

Deliberately ignoring those rules is likely even be enough to justify having a trial or at least a public hearing where she could defend herself, much as she did on Benghazi. Actually that partly involved email, so presumably we can skip the bits already covered.

I'm not sure what you think happened at the Benghazi hearings. What actually happened was that Hillary admitted sending emails within a few hours of the attack calling the attack the work of al Qaeda and not a peaceful protest over a YouTube video. "Peaceful Protest over a YouTube video" was the State Department's official story for two weeks following the attack, but Hillary knew it to be false within a few hours of it happening.

Do I think that Hillary is a better choice than any of the republicans? Yes.

Then you're a crazy person.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

You think there's money available for posting to an irrelevant cesspool like Slashdot?

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

In the first e-mail, Clinton curtly instructs Sullivan, “It’s a public statement. Just email it.” Minutes later, Sullivan responds, “Trust me, I share your exasperation. But until ops converts it to the unclassified email system, there is no physical way for me to email it. I can’t even access it.”

she knew and why would she froward email from one server to a untrusted server? when 99% of phones tablets and toasters can handle multi accounts using 20 different login and auth

99% of problem is she ordered aides and others to transmit data to her and she didnt keep the gov log of e-mails per-law
her lawyer had 20 thumb drives off emails also before this all broke out

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[mOzone]

if you bypass normal channels it cant be classified at all

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

If the Democrats are paying the bill then the Slashdot shill budget could be millions of dollars

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[techno-vampire]

I just had a reason to look at my DD-215 for something unrelated, and neither my clearance nor its status were mentioned.

Re: State doing the CYA thing

[danbert8]

I hope so too, but I doubt it.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[Anonymous Coward]

And even this distracts from the main point of WHY she used a private server. It's clear when you see that countries that could not buy arms from the US were cleared to do so after donating to the Clinton Foundation.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[mrclevesque]

"Clinton aides stripped the markings that indicated that the material was SCI before sending it through the server"

Can you give me a link on who did the stripping, how they know, and what kind of marking was it that made it 'strippable'

"That doesn't change the fact that the material was still SCI, even without the markings"

Well obviously

"the server was still illegal because it was set up in the first place to evade FOIA"

Really? Illegal as in a court ruling? Any link?

"make it easier for her to illicitly fund her political operation through the Clinton Foundation"

Speculation on your part?

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[jmac_the_man]

AR 25-2 has all the info you need on how digital classified material is supposed to be handled, including what markings are necessary. Once you know that "how to strip the markings" is obvious. (It's an Army document, but the rules are the same throughout the Federal government.) Educate yourself a little, and then come back with questions. Right now you're just braying nonsense designed to confuse people.

"That doesn't change the fact that the material was still SCI, even without the markings"

Well obviously

This is a defense that Hillary's people are using.

The Clinton Foundation exists to give jobs to Clinton machine operatives in between formal election campaigns. (If the operatives got real jobs, they'd have to quit them to work on the campaign.) The Clinton Foundation accepts money from foreign donors. You're not supposed to use foreign money to fund a political campaign. Hence, her paying people she wants to keep available for her campaign using Foundation money is illicit.

Illegal as in a court ruling?

You've got to be kidding me. I know liberals are confused about the proper role of the court system, but this takes the cake. "Illegal" means it violates A LAW that was passed by Congress and acted on (signed OR vetoed, but with the veto overridden) by the President.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[mrclevesque]

"Clinton aides stripped the markings that indicated that the material was SCI before sending it through the server"

Can you backup your claim?

"That doesn't change the fact that the material was still SCI, even without the markings"

Well obviously that's not a defense

"illegal because it was set up in the first place to evade FOIA"

Speculation on your part?

"make it easier for her to illicitly fund her political operation through the Clinton Foundation"

Speculation on your part?

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[jmac_the_man]

Can you backup your claim?

Yes

Speculation on your part?

No

Speculation on your part?

No

Do you see how obnoxious that is? Please use the freaking quote button, unless you want me to think that you are omitting the context on purpose..

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[jmac_the_man]

To actually respond:

Clinton aides were the only ones who had accounts on the server. Anyone who introduced information to the server was either Clinton or one of her aides.
Are you prepared to tell me that all 1,000 redacted emails consisted entirely of material that was improperly marked BEFORE it was sent in emails through the secret, illegal server. (Keep in mind, some of this stuff is supposed to get you fired if you handle it improperly.) Any difference is the responsibility of whichever Clinton aide put it in an email in the first place. Right?

It's not my speculation that using non-official email servers makes FOIA evasion easier. It's Congress's speculation, which is why the practice is illegal. Look into the Federal Records Retention Act.

In my last post, the one you replied to without giving any indication that you read it, I explained to you EXACTLY how the Clinton Foundation was used to illicitly fund Clinton's campaign. Please make some reference to those facts in your next post.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[mrclevesque]

You said "Clinton aides stripped the markings that indicated that the material was SCI before sending it through the server"

I said "Can you backup your claim?"

You responded "Clinton aides were the only ones who had accounts on the server. Anyone who introduced information to the server was either Clinton or one of her aides"

But that's besides the point, in other words it doesn't backup your claim or answer why you think the markings weren't removed before Clinton's aides got their hands on the information.

---

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[jmac_the_man]

I said "Can you backup your claim?"

You responded "Clinton aides were the only ones who had accounts on the server. Anyone who introduced information to the server was either Clinton or one of her aides"

But that's besides the point, in other words it doesn't backup your claim or answer why you think the markings weren't removed before Clinton's aides got their hands on the information.

There were two paragraphs in my response, champ.

Re:State doing the CYA thing

[mrclevesque]

Ok, I answered the first paragraph, I didn't answer the second paragraph because it just seemed thrown in to divert attention (and well done at that), but if you want me too answer it I will, so here goes

"Are you prepared to tell me that all 1,000 redacted emails consisted entirely of material that was improperly marked BEFORE it was sent in emails through the secret"

No, why would I, who's claiming that all of the redacted emails were originally marked as classified.

---

Trump to the rescue!

[fustakrakich]

He's there to scare people into voting for her anyway. *Think of the alternative!* is working out to be a neat trick.

Re:Trump to the rescue!

[PolygamousRanchKid]

I think we should make the election like an SAT multiple choice test. There should be an choice "none of the above" . . . no Clinton, no Trump.

This could toss back both mainstream political parties to come up with some better, more palatable candidates. Hell, maybe even a fringe party might get a chance to squeeze someone reasonable in . . .

Re:Trump to the rescue!

[Dragon Bait]

He's there to scare people into voting for her anyway. *Think of the alternative!* is working out to be a neat trick.

Trump is running the most successful false-flag operation in the history of American politics.

Re:Trump to the rescue!

[Okian Warrior]

Trump is running the most successful false-flag operation in the history of American politics.

He's also running one of the most successful campaigns this season.

I just read an article where the polls show that Bernie would have a better chance of beating Trump than Hillary.

The Republicans don't want Trump as their candidate, and the Democrats don't want Bernie.

We could very easily have an election where no one wants *either* candidate!

This is turning out to be a most hilarious election season.

Re:Trump to the rescue!

[Anonymous Coward]

As an european, the fact that Trump leads the polls is hilarious.He is mostly known for his reality shows, not his business here.
We thought you guys were funny when actor Reagan was elected
We thought you were kind of retarded when Arnold became governor of Cali

You can bet you burgerfat asses that we will be bringing out the popcorn this time.

Re:Trump to the rescue!

[NicknameUnavailable]

I think we should make the election like an SAT multiple choice test. There should be an choice "none of the above" . . . no Clinton, no Trump.

They would just take advantage of that to make Obama a king that never gets moved out of office.

Re:Trump to the rescue!

[Anonymous Coward]

Who cares what you think? No one does really. You should be more concerned with your vanishing cultures.

Re:Trump to the rescue!

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, and we'll watch you get overrun by the right wing nationalists (again) and the Turks. That unprecedented 70 years of peace the US gave you was nice while it lasted, eh? You were savages when the Romans conquered you, and you are savages today. It took American burgerfat asses to get Hitler off your lawn. And soon we'll doing it again. Ya arrogant fuck! Where's the fucking gratitude?! James Brown and Chuck Berry give you the Who, the Stones, the Bee'les, and this is the thanks we get?

Re:Trump to the rescue!

[Opportunist]

Elections have been for the longest time not choosing the better candidate but the lesser evil.

But why does the lesser evil have to be so huge?

Re:Trump to the rescue!

[fustakrakich]

But why does the lesser evil have to be so huge?

Because it gets so many votes. The lesser evil is just the more scenic, meandering route to hell.

Re:Trump to the rescue!

[Opportunist]

Yeah. We should crack out the bratwurst instead of the popcorn.

But seriously, the last elections were already awesome. Like some super hero confrontation. 2008, the magical negro against the mummy. Then 2012 another round of the colorful saviour, this time against the religious nut.

Well, to be honest, 2012 was a bit of a letdown. We hoped that the nut wins and turn the US into a religious madhouse. Kinda like a Bizarro-Iran. To watch Obama win another term was kinda sad 'cause we knew it would be boring. He doesn't even come close to his predecessor, with Bush you never knew what's gonna come next. That guy was a walking drinking game. Obama was too smooth to be fun.

But this time we'll get compensated tenfold for those boring 4 years. No matter whether it's gonna be the bitch or the hairpiece, either of them is on par with monkey boy when it comes to pure comedy.

Re:Trump to the rescue!

[Opportunist]

I honestly don't see a lesser evil this time. They're both equally horrible and unfit as leaders. Seriously. Put Donald Duck in command, it can't be worse.

Re:Trump to the rescue!

[fustakrakich]

There never was a 'lesser evil'. It's a democrat guilt trip that grew legs in 2000 to keep independents out of the race.

Re:Trump to the rescue!

[Anonymous Coward]

You do, I hope, know that Reagan had been governor of California (the most populous state) for two terms. Hence, he was no more 'a movie star' when elected President than Hillary Clinton would be 'a cookie baking housewife' if she is elected President.

Governorships are executive positions with 'buck stops here' accountability (level varying by state). Senators (Obama and Hillary, for example) are just posturing positions with no signficant power (each Senator has only 1% the power of the full Senate). The only remotely credible (?) Democrat in the race with executive experience is Martin O'Malley.

Many of us in the United States are amused by 'coalition' governments that regularly fall apart in many European countries. Seems like an unwillingness of the populace to commit to anything even mid/short term. Many of us are also shocked by the lack of fundamental rights in most European countries that the United States Constitution enumerates as protected rights in the United States.

Re:Trump to the rescue!

[Anonymous Coward]

Someone reasonable is squeezing in...for the first time since George Washington we might have a shot at an independent candidate. Bernie Sanders is running a close second behind Hillary in the Democratic primary polling, despite being an independent.

He and Rand Paul also seem to be the only candidates that oppose warantless wiretapping. http://feelthebern.org/bernie-...

Re:Trump to the rescue!

[Anonymous Coward]

You mean like how we bring out the popcorn as we watch your neutered politicians cave into every demand of their Brussels Eurocrat overlords? Or when they so obviously work against their own citizens like Merkel and Lofgen do with the invasions they're sponsoring? Or when they promise freedom from the bankers to their people and then turn around and stick the knife in them like Tspiras did?

I'd be funny if it weren't so goddamned tragic.

Re: Trump to the rescue!

[Anonymous Coward]

Lmao

Re:Trump to the rescue!

[Anonymous Coward]

Is he really an Independent if he's running as the Dem candidate? Bernie has my support - I've even sent him some money. However, I'd *much* prefer he be honest and run as either a true Independent (and not as a Dem) or as the American Socialist Party candidate. I'd appreciate the honesty and I'm not sure if it would actually impact his ballot numbers at all.

I'm a Libertarian but not a fan of Rand Paul - he is not a Libertarian. He's a Republican and a borderline Randian. Whilst it could be said that Randians are interested in Liberty, they are more interested in Liberty at a price and with exclusions based on chance. I'd prefer a more moderate approach where more people are able to use those liberties to enjoy their freedoms, as opposed to such enjoyment being strictly for those who are haves vs those who have-not. To be honest, I'd rather the Randians have their own party as opposed to co-opting the Libertarian party but that's a subject for another day.

At any rate, I'm not sure if we can call Bernie an Independent. Oh, he is - he very much is. But, nominally, he seems pretty tied to the Democrats at this point in time. I'd love to see him run as a third party candidate but, I guess, I can understand why he might not. We really do need to start working on getting more parties into office. This default of a two-party system is just not healthy and, sad to say, we should be in a very different place then we are now, politically. We're capable of being the best country on the planet, we have both the material and human resources to do so. We're capable of doing great things but we've been resting on our laurels for too long.

We do not need zealotry and hard party lines. We need objectivity, reasoning, and moderation. We don't need to go full blown capitalist, some socialism is fine. We don't need to go full blown authoritarian, some risks are fine. We don't need to go full isolationist, some involvement on the world stage is a good thing. We don't need to be the world's police, some stepping back and offering support is a good idea. We don't need to strive for the least expensive, some protectionism is a good thing. The key is, in all those areas and more, to avoid zealotry and extremes. Moderation is a good thing. It's okay to err, back up, and try again. That's fine, even on a national governance level. Use appropriate checks and balances (they're already in place - if not used to their greatest potential) and allow for some experimentation.

Ah well... Err... Still KGIII and still on my phone so I'm not logged in.

Re:Trump to the rescue!

[Anonymous Coward]

It might be funny, for a while, but if we elect a full blown moron (and such seems likely) there's a reasonable chance that they'll do something so stupid that it has long-reaching impacts on you, your country, and the rest of the globe. America, my country, is a bit like a herd beast - but a big one. Once it gets into stampede mode, something's getting fucked up.

I'd like to point out that, in no case, did I actually vote for the winners of the elections. I vote third party, exclusively, in hopes that the bean counters will notice that others, and myself, are throwing our votes away in increasing numbers and that there's a realistic chance of floating a third party candidate in the presidential election. I can hope...

So, before it happens, let me just say that I'm sorry and I hope you don't get hurt. My country is not the brightest and is a bit prone to causing damage when bothered. We have an awful lot of expensive military toys and not a whole lot of brains, foresight, or patience. We also carry a lot of political weight, still, though I'm not exactly sure why - I presume it's because we buy a lot and have expensive military toys. It sure as hell can't be because we're the paragons of freedom and leadership.

Ah well... I hope, for your sake, we elect Bernie. It'd kind of be nice to be on our way to being a first world nation again. - KGIII (Still on phone and not logged in.)

Re:Trump to the rescue!

[Anonymous Coward]

Too bad that the Electoral College system is set up in such a way that serious independent presidential candidates merely suck votes away from the party that they most closely represent. There is only absolute majority, there is no run-off election, there is no second-choice candidate for the voters. If Bernie were to receive significant votes as an independent, he would likely drain votes from the Democrat candidate (presumably Hillary) and ensure a Republican win. Only Teddy Roosevelt ever got that far, and his Bull Moose Party run did indeed help ensure that his former party lost. And Bernie has nowhere near the charisma of TR, unlike a certain candidate from the other party who has promised to not run as an independent.

And if there is no absolute majority of electoral votes, then you have a few hundred people making the decision for the entire country. In my opinion, this is specifically why the US naturally has only two major parties: a third party of sufficient power to be viable would cause the Electoral College to become too important by preventing any presidential candidate from receiving an absolute electoral majority. It's a weird idea, and I don't really understand why they did it, other than the lack of telecommunications and high-speed transportation in the 18th century.

Re:Trump to the rescue!

[Anonymous Coward]

"But why does the lesser evil have to be so huge?"

Hm, maybe it really IS time to run Cthulhu as a third party candidate ?

Re:Trump to the rescue!

[Anonymous Coward]

German Brats were the most disappointing thing about the place.

Sure, there were some good brats, if you bought in stores, some as good as Johnsonvilles. But the common street Bratwust are full tilt Oscar-Meyer hotdog awful.

And Currywurst...shudders.

Dorner? The Germans think a German Turk invented Gyro sandwiches 20 years ago.

McDonalds is the best food available in many German cities.

Re:Trump to the rescue!

[Anonymous Coward]

i would vote for a dead possum before i would vote for hillary

Re:Trump to the rescue!

[Anonymous Coward]

It might be funny, for a while, but if we elect a full blown moron (and such seems likely) there's a reasonable chance that they'll do something so stupid that it has long-reaching impacts on you, your country, and the rest of the globe

Luckily, the president has no power to do anything like that. He can only enforce the will of the legislative branch. Executives cannot create their own orders, you see...

What's that you say?

1+1=3

[Anonymous Coward]

Math is hard.

Link Broken

[ArchieBunker]

Talk about a lame troll. The domain expired long ago.

Re:WHY WAS SHE USING HER PERSONAL MAIL SERVER?

[meadow]

Probably for some really grubby reason such as making it easier for her to accept bribes, etc.

On a side note, its really interesting when the oligarchic-controlled news media and political "pundits" crap their pants over they way Donald Trump has verbally thrashed her recently.
What they fail to understand is that Big Media and "pundits" crapping their pants over his statements only increases his popularity with people, who see through the years and decades of lies and BS.

If the oligarchic-controlled Big Media and all the "pundits" were such great guardians and watchers of our democracy, how the hell did it become this effed up and broken?

And now we're supposed to be concerned when they crap their pants because someone insults one of the foremost, lying hypocrites?

Make government public.

[Dutchmaan]

You know how to make government work for the people... ALL meetings are public. every correspondence is public, ALL of it.. there would be no "covert" "back-room" "national security" anything... meetings with foreign leaders.. PUBLIC, ALL of it.. and if people want to keep things hush hush then they just won't deal with a public government and it would expose all those who are doing things for nefarious reasons. You want world peace, this is the way to do it.. The more people realize that they can't just work a deal for their own benefit the better this world will be... let issues stand on their own merits, not part of some "I'll vote for yours if you vote for mine" BS...

Re:Make government public.

[Anonymous Coward]

So, you would propose that every nuclear secret would then be published? Details of every ongoing investigation into terrorism or other crimes would be published? The location and detailed nature of every military asset would be published?

Which country will go first?

Seriously?

Re:Make government public.

[ikedasquid]

I've been thinking this for years!

I think all new politicians should be issued a body camera the day they swear in, and the camera also functions as an RSA-token like authentication mechanism for email, access to state offices, official phone use, etc. No camera, no access for official dealings. Additionally, the camera has no power switch.

This way everything they do is "on the record", and the camera is downloaded daily to some webserver for the citizenry to access.

Re:Make government public.

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, if nuclear secrets are part of a government meeting then yeah. No one said it would be popular with you, but it would work... why because OTHER countries secrets would be known too if they are to deal with us....

It would be slow going at first, but you know what.. your way doesn't bring peace.. never has... and spare me your Pax Romana stance.

info is classified at creation. Marked on discover

[raymorris]

The headline is misleading. Obviously, reading a document aloud or taking a picture of it doesn't make the information no longer classified. Why? Because it's the INFORMATION that's classified, not the document in it is in. The document may be MARKED "contains classified information ", but it's the information that's secret.

Most (but not all) classified information is classified based on its source. For example, all photos from spy satellites are classified, so the classification is decided before a particular image is even taken. Clinton did two things. She sent out classified via an unsecured system, and she failed to properly mark those emails as containing classified information. Because she didn't mark the classification of the information in the emails when she sent them, State is doing that now. They are "retroactively" MARKING them to indicate which classification the information is - and always has been.

So it's not that the classification changed, they simply weren't properly marked before. State is going back and adding the markings that the emails should have had from the beginning, because they contain information which has always been classified.

What kind of punishment is she facing?

[Anonymous Coward]

I really think she's doomed.

Flowchart for who rides with Hillary

[Tablizer]

Finally something IT related instead of political bickering over whose fault the server is:

https://foia.state.gov/searcha...

The classification was not "retroactive"

[Anonymous Coward]

The information was classified from the beginning and was never declassified.

The fact that almost every one of the emails had the classification markings removed does not mean the classification was done "retroactively".

Except Hillary!'s "wipers" missed a few

The number of emails now considered classified total more than 400, with three of the 215 newly classified documents marked as SECRET

Ooops. So there were emails clearly marked as classified on Hillary!'s illegal server.

Hillary! lied.

Imagine that.

Re:WHY WAS SHE USING HER PERSONAL MAIL SERVER?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why did she INSIST on using her own personal email address for official correspondence? That's like George Bush emailing Tony Blair from his AOL address.

Probably because it allowed her to use unapproved devices to read them on. I suspect there wasn't anything nefarious here...other than Clinton being a bit of an idiot.

What about the IRS bitch? Anyone get her emails?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why didn't we ever see those e-mails targeting Ron Paul supporters last election? Should have been prison time for that.

Not true, re retro classification

[Anonymous Coward]

Not quite..
There are plenty of instances where something unclass becomes classified later, because of a connection with something else. Unless you're the "original classification authority" it's not all that cut and dried. Sure, with respect to specific programs and projects, there may be a classification guide, telling you what is and isn't classified, but once you get out of such narrow areas, it's pretty wide open.

For some things its fairly easy.. ship position yesterday is Confidential, ship position today is Secret, ship position tomorrow is Top Secret.

But for others, it's pretty vague.. is that likely to cause "grave damage"?

Jail is for Poor People, Dear.

[Anonymous Coward]

why this Queen Clinton cunt not IMMEDIATELY in jail.

because ... Soviet Amerika!

Happy Coward Nation, Leader O'Bama will take your guns at January 12ieme.

of July 4ieme, celebrate the weak, you are: Home of the Stupid, Land of the Sheep.

new King same as the old King, we Laugh!

Eat More Cake, Bitte.

Re:Jail is for Poor People, Dear.

[Opportunist]

Please, be serious. Do you really think anyone has to take your gun away to oppress you? Do you really think that gun you have keeps you "free"?

Aww. That's adorably cute. He thinks his boom-boom stick means jack shit against the biggest army on the planet.

Re:Jail is for Poor People, Dear.

[Anonymous Coward]

A couple years ago a rancher, Cliven Bundy, had a dispute with the Feds. A lot of "supporters" showed up armed and the feds backed down when it looked like they would have to start shooting civilians to get their way. I hadn't seen any evidence Cliven was in the right, but the rules the feds were using seemed unethical.

So, yea, that boom-boom stick can mean something to the feds. I suspect that kind of thing will happen more if they keep doing crap to the "little people" with boom-boom sticks.

Re:Jail is for Poor People, Dear.

[Anonymous Coward]

A couple years ago a rancher, Cliven Bundy, had a dispute with the Feds. A lot of "supporters" showed up armed and the feds backed down when it looked like they would have to start shooting civilians to get their way. I hadn't seen any evidence Cliven was in the right, but the rules the feds were using seemed unethical.

So, yea, that boom-boom stick can mean something to the feds. I suspect that kind of thing will happen more if they keep doing crap to the "little people" with boom-boom sticks.

Don't forget about Timothy McVeigh and the Oklahoma city bombing. His motivation was the fact that the Feds slaughtered innocent people at Waco and Ruby Ridge for no good reason, and nobody was punished for it. Since then I've seen at least one situation- there's probably been several more- where a Waco-like standoff was peaceably resolved. Federal agents remember that their is a limit to how much wanton violence the citizenry will tolerate.

Do I think McVeigh should have bombed that building and killed all those people? No. But I can't help but notice it was effective in putting the feds in their place.

Re:Jail is for Poor People, Dear.

[Anonymous Coward]

A firearm doesn't keep you free. The willingness to use it and the right to own it are what keep you free. Ideally, you'll never have to use it. Cowardice is no excuse to reduce liberties and risk is inherent in a free society.

Re:WHY WAS SHE USING HER PERSONAL MAIL SERVER?

[jmac_the_man]

Keep in mind, the only reason we know about this is because there's a Congressional investigation that State wasn't complying with correctly because they couldn't turn over Hillary's secret emails. In your formulation, "obstructing the Congressional investigation" is a useful side effect.

Its Bush's Fault

[Anonymous Coward]

Clinton is a square shooter. Clinton for 2016!

Re:What about the IRS bitch? Anyone get her emails

[jmac_the_man]

The Justice Department "decided it wouldn't be worth their time" to prosecute Lois Lerner. Also, the IRS's dragnet was FAR larger than Ron Paul fans and included most of the medium sized players on the Right (i.e. nobody big enough to afford huge legal fees.)

The DoJ has done a lot of "deciding it wouldn't be worth their time" to prosecute Obama cronies though. One of Hillary's top aides, Huma Abdelin, got caught claiming to be at the office (for pay purposes) while she was on vacation and other types of leave, to the tune of a few hundred thousand. Plenty of VA corruption (whistleblower retaliation and bonus fraud) also went unpunished. (Keep in mind, the relevant Inspectors General recommended that the DoJ pursue jail time in the cases on my list.)

State email server got hacked anyway

[Anonymous Coward]

I seem to recall that the State department "unclassified" email server got hacked by the Russians anyway. I suspect what's really needed here is a shed load of user reeducation and the NSA to reprioritise their mission to protect US government data. It might also help if less was classified, people become blasé about secrets when everything is a secret, even data obtained from open sources.

Re:State email server got hacked anyway

[Bartles]

So they would have seen by looking at header information that Hillary was using a personal email service to conduct her duties as SoS. Unfortunately her server was in the bathroom of a walk up apartment in NYC, so no one knows if and when and who hacked her server.

Re:WHY WAS SHE USING HER PERSONAL MAIL SERVER?

[khallow]

Incompetence which had the side effects of

1) Avoiding sabotage by her frenemies elsewhere in the Obama administration.

2) Allowed certain toadies access to information which they otherwise couldn't access (due to it being illegal and all).

3) Allows her to evade FOIA requests, congressional investigations, and destroy evidence.

Punishment is only for us nobodies

[walterbyrd]

Washington insiders slyly wink at each other.

If you, or I, tried to have a server wiped, after it was subpoenaed, we would be charged with obstructing justice.

Hillary will easily walk away, just as she has from multiple other scams.

Ops team "converted" secure emails to insecure

[steveha]

The real problem, which gets far too little discussion, is that Hillary Clinton seems to have set up a system where state department employees (from the "ops" team) would read classified emails on the secure email system, and then type up a summary and send the summary to her personal (non-secure) email system.

In the first e-mail, Clinton curtly instructs Sullivan, "It's a public statement. Just email it." Minutes later, Sullivan responds, "Trust me, I share your exasperation. But until ops converts it to the unclassified email system, there is no physical way for me to email it. I can't even access it."

http://www.nationalreview.com/classified-rules-hillarys-disregard-for-them

Naturally, when ops "converted" the emails, they didn't copy over any classification markings, allowing Hillary Clinton to truthfully say she never received any emails marked as classified.

It is partisan spin to use the word "retroactively" to describe these emails being newly marked with classification markings. If the information in the emails was classified, the emails were classified all along; it doesn't matter whether the emails were marked as classified or not... and Hillary Clinton, who is not dumb and is a lawyer, knows this.

This process of "converting" emails from secure to insecure is go-to-prison stuff. It's truly amazing that Hillary Clinton thought she could get away with doing this.

Unless the information in this article is fabricated or otherwise untrue, she is going to be in very big trouble:

That Hillary and her staff at Foggy Bottom were wittingly involved in a scheme to place classified information into ostensibly unclassified emails to reside on Clinton's personal, private server is the belief of every investigator and counterintelligence official I've spoken with recently, and all were at pains to maintain that this misconduct was felonious.

"The FBI will get someone to talk, we always do."

"This was about a lot more than just some classified emails," a senior Capitol Hill staffer told me, "and we'll get to the bottom of it. But we're happy to let the FBI do the heavy lifting for right now."

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/09/02/will-hillary-clinton-s-emails-burn-the-white-house.html

Re:Ops team "converted" secure emails to insecure

[Anonymous Coward]

If it's filtered and summarized, how much filtering and summarizing is needed before it's not classified?

Re:Ops team "converted" secure emails to insecure

[Rob Lister]

steveha, I thought about using a mod point to mod you up but your post requires such a caveat that I wanted to reply instead.

That caveat being, at that level of political power, she's pretty much immune to 'common folk' rules unless it can be demonstrated that her intent was also unlawful [re: Sandy Berger]. Given her position at the time, for all practical purposes she was the arbitrator of what was and was not classified; at best it demonstrates her incompetence. I realize the law, as written, doesn't say that but the political system, as practiced, will accommodate that; and Obama demonstrates that perfectly with the 'wasn't classified at the time' excuse.

That is why this this isn't going to go anywhere legally. It may have legs politically but there's no way she's going to be charged and convicted of mishandling classified information.

Speaking of 'common folks', Had Sandy Berger been one of those he'd have died in prison. Instead, he never saw the inside of one.

Re:Ops team "converted" secure emails to insecure

[Dragon Bait]

That is why this this isn't going to go anywhere legally. It may have legs politically but there's no way she's going to be charged and convicted of mishandling classified information.

No. It doesn't have legs politically because if she wins, she won't have herself prosecuted. If she loses, presidents tend not to prosecute the outgoing opposition (with the hope that that those that replace them will give them the same quid pro quo).

Beside, Trump is running a false-flag operation. He wouldn't want one of his wedding guests tossed into prison.

Re:Ops team "converted" secure emails to insecure

[Anonymous Coward]

how much filtering and summarizing is needed before it's not classified?

Frequently? A fuck ton. To the point where, to make it no longer classified, it would be so redacted and diffused that there's no sense in sending it along - at all. In other words, to do that would (frequently) result in either gibberish, nonsensical, data or a missive so devoid of information that it's pointless to even relay it. It would be like that "alternative medicine" stuff where water retains the memory of substances - in other words, so diluted that it would be entirely pointless.

Still not logged in. Can't make me!

Re:Ops team "converted" secure emails to insecure

[Areyoukiddingme]

This process of "converting" emails from secure to insecure is go-to-prison stuff.

No it's not. The process of converting classified data to unclassified data, from any specific classification level to any other specific and lower level is very well defined. FOIA requests are fulfilled using precisely this process. The process is so well defined that there exist automated systems to make it happen, which are certified and in production in military environments, and have been for longer than you've been alive. Lockheed Martin sells Radiant Mercury for precisely this purpose, and it is in use all over the world.

It is entirely possible to legally and actually convert a classified document into an unclassified document that still includes significant amounts of information. Admittedly it's easier to convert data from Top Secret to Secret than it is to convert either of those to Unclassified, but it is possible. In the case of hand-written conversions, it is only possible to determine if each conversion was done correctly by individually analyzing them, which is why only 5500 emails have been released to date. When the process is being followed methodically by trained staffers, the release of classified information is considered accidental, and contrary to your elementary school zero-tolerance mindset, it is recognized and penalized as such. In other words, no prison.

You and all of your ilk have a vastly simplistic worldview. Zero-tolerance does not work, anywhere. It is a massive failure in school systems, and it should not exist in either our government or our schools. "Due diligence" and "best effort" are recognized legal phrases for a reason. Mistakes can happen, and grotesque penalties for people dutifully attempting to follow the rules is not only a gross injustice, it also induces the sort of bureaucratic ass-covering that results in total paralysis. We need our government to work. We need our schools to work. Grow up, and stop advocating a completely unachievable perfection paired with crucifixion for transgressors. It's childish and counterproductive.

For the record, I've never voted for Hillary Clinton and never will, and I'm thoroughly anti-dynasty. I do not want another Clinton presidency, ever. I do not want another Bush presidency, ever. I do not want another Kennedy presidency, ever. No dynasties. No ruling families.

Re:Ops team "converted" secure emails to insecure

[Anonymous Coward]

No it's not. The process of converting classified data to unclassified data, from any specific classification level to any other specific and lower level is very well defined. FOIA requests are fulfilled using precisely this process.

So it is your contention that the "ops team" were duly authorized to take sensitive information and redact it, and all of this was just fine and legal? Why then is the FBI so interested in this?

Also, why did the "ops team" summarize classified information without redacting it? Why are we up to 275 emails and counting that contained classified information? How did trained and authorized redacters somehow not notice the spy satellite information?

The process is so well defined that there exist automated systems to make it happen, which are certified and in production in military environments, and have been for longer than you've been alive. Lockheed Martin sells Radiant Mercury for precisely this purpose, and it is in use all over the world.

Interesting, but irrelevant. The fact that such systems exist does not excuse criminal behavior by the Secretary of State or her employees.

grotesque penalties for people dutifully attempting to follow the rules

Who would that be in this scenario? Hillary Clinton, who chose to keep her emails on a private server instead of using the email system provided for her use by the government? The "ops team" who accessed emails on the secure system and bypassed the security to send the information to an insecure server?

We need our government to work. We need our schools to work.

Interesting, but irrelevant. Keeping classified information classified does not harm the operation of government or schools.

Also: we need our elected officials to not spray classified information onto insecure (Microsoft!) email systems to be 0wned by foreign spy services.

Re:Ops team "converted" secure emails to insecure

[Anonymous Coward]

Well! Now we know exactly what the Hillary Rodham Clinton "process" was for converting from classified to unclassified: just order her underlings to strip off the classified markings and send unsecure.

Are you still going to defend her for this?

Looks like Hillary Clinton and Jake Sullivan both need to do 10 year sentences in federal prison. I hope he rats her out for a reduced sentence. Oh wait, that would require the Obama Department of Justice to actually enforce the law against Hillary Clinton... if they don't then I guess she's just above the law, unlike ordinary men and women.

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/01/08/whoa-hillary-e-mail-instructs-aide-to-transmit-classified-e-mail-without-markings/

CORE LIE:they were not classified at the time

[BenderTheRobot]

CORE LIE:they were not classified at the time they were sent to Clinton's personal email

Either through codependency or conspiracy, news media overlooks perception of wrongdoing up to criminal levels.

SUPPORTING LIE:These sort of things are too complicated for the public and press to understand

the emperor's new clothes are beautiful.

Re:CORE LIE:they were not classified at the time

[mOzone]

In the first e-mail, Clinton curtly instructs Sullivan, “It’s a public statement. Just email it.” Minutes later, Sullivan responds, “Trust me, I share your exasperation. But until ops converts it to the unclassified email system, there is no physical way for me to email it. I can’t even access it.”

she asked aide and others to break the law all over the emails

"retroactive classification" = man-caused disaster

[Anonymous Coward]

These are PR inventions of the Obama administration designed to fool the stupidest subset of the population.

Technically, there is no such thing as a "classified document" in the federal government - it's the information itself that is classified. The information is presumed classified the moment it is created and the people who create and handle it are supposed to know their area of expertise well enough to know which information is "classified" without relying upon some big red ink stamp of "CLASSIFIED".

It is further true that in the federal government, the agencies that generate data are the ones presumed to determine its classification level. Within the State Department, this means it would be Hillary who determined the classification of any information not automatically-presumed classified, and as SecState it was a minimal requirement of her job to know that all communications about conversations with foreign leaders and diplomats are presumed classified automatically. As a result, if Hillary was not a completely incompetent moron she should have known this stuff was classified at the time without anybody having to mark it as such.

What's REALLY happening is that the lawsuit driving the release of the e-mails is causing the state department to panic over all the stuff they are having to release and they are redacting huge percentages as "too sensitive to be seen by the public" and their only legal way to keep this stuff hidden is to claim it is "CLASSIFIED", but that would put Hillary Clinton in extreme legal jeopardy.....so the Obama admin is trying to have it both ways by claiming it was not classified when Hillary mishandled it but is now classified and cannot be seen by the voters.

This administration is more dishonest with language than any before it in history, including Nixon. These people have called terrorism "man-caused disasters" and "workplace violence" and they claim our current struggle is against "extremism" and "Terrorism", as though our fight is against environmental extremists, or extreme amish and as though WWII was a fight against Blitzkrieg and Kamikazee.

*slow clap*

[vel-ex-tech]

What they fail to understand is that Big Media and "pundits" crapping their pants over his statements only increases his popularity with people, who see through the years and decades of lies and BS.

Hum. Look a bit closer. Why do you think Rupert Murdoch is broadcasting said crapping of pants?

I really don't want to play the IRL version of Fallout 4. Hint: it won't be Trump that causes it. Why do you think Jeb! isn't polling so well despite being a well-reasoned man who might have some interesting debates with Sanders?

Clinton. That isn't the candidate you're looking for. Move along.

One more thing. Why... exactly why did Trump switch from being a Democrat, to independent, to Republican once the [Bill] Clinton administration had finished? It couldn't possibly have anything to do with the coronation in progress....

Re:*slow clap*

[phantomfive]

Why do you think Jeb! isn't polling so well despite being a well-reasoned man who might have some interesting debates with Sanders?

That's true, after I got over the fact that he's a Bush, and started listening to what he says, he came across as thoughtful and competent.
I still won't vote for him, because he's a Bush.

Re:*slow clap*

[C0R1D4N]

W sounded pretty reasonable and intelligent during his primary debates too.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4MC9bXPmWvI

Re:*slow clap*

[phantomfive]

Jon Stewart is hilarious as always, but W came across as the frat boy who got Cs even as governor.

lol

[Anonymous Coward]

Do any of you authoritarian cocksuckers listen to yourselves? CLASSIFIED! TOP SECREEEET! It's like listening to preachers giving a sermon with all their stupid rules designed to distract you from the bullshit it all is. And of course the convoluted dance to get CLEARANCE to make you feel it's all so important and you're just so special.

Why was DoState sending mail to Hillary's server?

[billstewart]

It's one thing for Hillary to be using her own mail server; Bush and Cheney made sure that their White House emails were destroyed so the public couldn't get access to them (so all of you Hillary-hating Republican partisans should shut up now, please! :-)

But why was anybody running a classified email server at State or Pentagon setting it up to send mail to an uncleared server like Hillary's?

Chelsea Manning released more Hillary emails

[billstewart]

It's great that the State department is starting to publish some of the things it did in our name, but I've got more respect for Chelsea Manning publishing a lot more of them.

Keeping mail private from turf-warring spooks?

[billstewart]

I worked on a bid for State Department embassy communication back in the 80s. State had a lot of "help" from the NSA*, because the real users of classified embassy email systems aren't the trade negotiators or agriculture department reps. The bid eventually collapsed after about three years, because of turf wars between State's IT department and the various other users who'd prefer to be running their own systems.

(*This was back in the X.25 days, and they wanted commercial off-the-shelf equipment using all kinds of options that nobody in the commercial world bothered supporting, and I was never sure how much of their help needed to be attributed to malice as opposed to bureaucratic incompetence.)

Standard left-wing drivel

[Anonymous Coward]

People on the left ALWAYS attack their opponents as stupid, incompetent, or a joke, no matter how the candidate actually compares to his/her opponent/s. I remember when Reagan was running in 1980 and the left was unified around the message that he was a stupid dangerous B-actor who had been in a movie with a chimp and would start World War III. He was endlessly attacked in the popular culture, and European entertainers sang songs against him and European activists led huge parades against him, accusing him of all sorts of evil intentions. He ended-up working with Margaret Thatcher, the Pope, and others the left despised to free more human beings from political oppression than anybody in history had ever done, while presiding over amazing economic growth. The left was TOTALLY wrong about him. The lefties on the Nobel committee which gave Obama a prize for NOTHING, never recognized Reagan and Thatcher. The left touted Al Gore's Harvard journalism degree and still thinks he's super-smart, and love John Kerry with his Yale polysci degree, but made fun of George W Bush with a Yale history degree AND Harvard business degree. It's a standard tactic to endlessly recycle any dumb thing a right-leaning politician has ever said, or even make up a fake quote (like the one about Sarah Palin seeing Russia from her house - said by an IMPERSONATOR on SNL) while studiously avoiding the dumb things the people on the left say (most of Obama's super-stupid utterances have never aired on ABC,CBS,NBC,CNN) - thus dishonestly helping the "right wingers are dumb" meme.

As an American, I find it amusing to watch the same sort of attacks made on Nicolas Sarkozy when he ran for office in France ("idiot", "dangerous", etc), Nigel Farage in the UK as he tries to convince his nation to remain an independent nation. This attack seems to now be standard fare in Europe for any others in Europe who try to stop the complete meltdown of nationalities and cultures in favor of global bankers and immigrants from the most backward regions of the globe. It's amusing, really, to have left-wingers operating as stooges for globalist bankers in apparent revulsion of any national dignity or independence.

Trump's far from my ideal as a President, but the guy is proving himself far smarter, far more responsible with his campaign spending, and far more clever in getting his opponents to trip themselves than everybody else running so far. He is the only credible candidate in decades who is not in the hip-pocket of Wall St Bankers and crony capitalists. He's not even a cultural conservative (the lefties and libertarians have fewer of their usual arguments with him) so it's ironic that all the jokers who usually scream for some option other than establishment Democrat or establishment Republican and who dream of third parties are so hostile to him. We could do far worse for president than a guy whose campaign is explicitly about rebuilding the country, getting people back to work, and getting rid of all the incompetence of the career-bureaucrats, career politicians, and foreign policy and trade "experts" who seem only to be experts in making themselves richer, while not being bought-and-paid-for by lobbyists. A lot of the people who ridicule and despise Trump were either for Mitt Romney or "Hope and Change" Obama...... if you were for EITHER of those guys, you have no leg to stand on when you ridicule Trump.

As for popcorn, I'd say we Americans could fire-up the poppers and watch the Europeans collapse over the next couple decades.... but there's nothing funny or even mildly amusing about the once-great nations of the west turning their backs on everything they were built upon and committing cultural suicide. The potential for a bloodbath is just too great. Western Europeans who believe in nothing and have long been unable to muster the moral clarity to say that some things are "right" and others are "wrong", will be no match for hoards of homicidial maniacs who fervently believe in SOMETHING and are willing to kill anybody who disagrees.