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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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: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: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?

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!

[Anonymous Coward]

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

*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....