Slashdot Mirror
US Gov't Confirms Clinton Emails Contained Top-Secret Information (thenextweb.com)
An anonymous reader writes: Just days before candidates begin primary season with caucuses in Iowa and New Hampshire, the Obama administration confirmed for the first time that Hillary Clinton's emails did contain sensitive information. The Associated Press reports that seven of these email chains, are being withheld from the press because they contain information deemed to be "top secret" and that 37 pages included messages described by intelligence officials as "special access programs" — meaning, highly restricted and closely guarded government secrets.
She already confirmed they didn't.
If you actually bothered to look into the DETAILS, usually it's right-wing spin. Often it's gray areas where if you don't like her, you won't give her the benefit of the doubt and vice-versa. Politics biases people.
As far as the "Bosnian sniper" issue, it's possible she mixed up two different events in her mind. I've done it also. Human memory is an odd thing. Fortunately I'm a nobody such that my mistakes don't mean much on the world stage.
Table-ized A.I.
I'm not voting for her in the primaries, and she probably did fuck up w/operational security big-time. I don't think it was with malice
Doesn't matter. Carelessness with Secret information is a federal felony. These "Special Access" documents are "above Top Secret", and likely contained names of covert sources - that is, when this server was hacked by foreign intelligence services, this carelessness caused deaths. That's why it's a felony.
But there is evidence of malice - there is an email instructing a subordinate to strip off the classified header from a document and "send it insecure".
There are important issues like who does and doesn't get massive financial support from wall street to complain about.
Off topic, but Hillary's top lifetime donors have been investment banks and our friends the cable companies. That is the legal donors. The FBI is also investigating Hillary for illegal contributions to the Clinton fund.
We'll know the truth of all of this when it goes to trial, or we'll know we're in a banana republic if it doesn't. In either case, this isn't some trivial issue - people likely died behind this.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Unfortunately it's not how it works - if the evidence is classified it's hard to release it.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
To me the problem isn't so much the legality - regulations can be a huge pain and how can you remember them all while trying to conduct diplomacy in a complex world? What bothers me is the lack of judgement. Even if she tried to keep classified stuff off the server and did a pretty good job - she's the Secreatary of State. Nearly everything that is emailed to her is something an enemy might be interested in. She agrees to go to lunch with Joe from accounting again? Joe seems to have her ear he would be a great guy to gain influence over to get him to influence her policies and gain information.
I often don't like the choices people make, but I like the fact that people make choices. That's why I'm a conservative.
You do realize that she had to have known, right? Any program she had access to, she would have had to have been briefed on. The information is classified even if it's not marked as such...everyone who's ever worked with classified will tell you that. So, for example, if you create a document, email, etc., that has classified information, you're supposed to mark it properly.
So, for the sake of discussion, let's say she didn't know, even though she's said...
“I did not e-mail any classified material to anyone on my e-mail. There is no classified material. I’m certainly well-aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material.”
Then that could only mean a few things...1) she slept through the program briefing, 2) she didn't read the emails, 3) she read the mail, and didn't understand that it was classified...meaning her above statement shows clear lack of understanding, or 4) she's lying about the whole thing to cover her ass. Are there really any other possibilities beyond it being "a vast right wing conspiracy"?
One other detail...even if she never sent, and only received these items, as soon as she became aware that she had classified material, she would have been required to report it, and turn it over...immediately.
Just another day in Paradise
Until the details come out of who sent them, when they were classified, and who should have known it was problem material, there is not much use in speculating at this point.
Also note that the "regular" office server she allegedly should have been using was NOT designed for classified info either. The same issue would still exist: classified stuff winding up on the wrong equipment. Whether anybody would then still know or care in that case is another matter.
Table-ized A.I.
I wish news organizations would press her harder with followup questions. I was listening to a NPR (my main source of news) doing a question and answer with Hillary.
NPR: Did you send or receive classified e-mails?
Hillary: I did not receive or send e-mails marked classified.
NPR should have followed up with: Did you discuss with anyone over your private unsecured e-mails system anything that should have been classified? (To have done that would would have been illegal)
During this Q&A with Hillary, she laughed and said that one of the e-mails that is now being classified was of someone sending her a New York Times article. How could it be classified if it was in the newspaper?
(I spent a year in Iraq supporting the US Army. At one point, a co-worker gave a google earth picture to me (by hand) of area around us. He pointed out that the picture originally was not classified because it came from google earth. But then he pointed out that he had made some markings on the picture and now it was classified.)
NPR should have followed up with Hillary: In this e-mail did the person have classified knowledge about the subject of the newspaper article, and did he make comments about the article. (As in my example above, if someone with classified knowledge made any comments about the article and sent it over a non secure e-mail system, it would be illegal)
(disclaimer: I am a Bernie Sanders supporter)
Unfortunately it's not how it works - if the evidence is classified it's hard to release it.
So we're just supposed to trust these Republicans when they claim she did something wrong? That isn't how things work in the US. You are innocent until proven guilty. There is no evidence against her, or the Repubicans would have already released it.
It's her old office (you know, the Obama State Dept.) that is slow rolling out the emails. But only because they were forced to. Otherwise we probably wouldn't have seen any of this for decades.
Just another day in Paradise
Treason has specific legal meaning...What she did was criminal, but doesn't come close to treason.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/us...
Just another day in Paradise
Well, it's not the Republicans investigating, it's the FBI, and Director Comey is one of the most non-partisan guys around (he threatened to resign if Bush continued his domestic spying program).
... what evidence of malice?
The e-mail from Clinton telling a subordinate to strip off classified headers and "send it insecure".
That malice.
Who got killed as a direct result of these emails being sent?
No one has to die for it to be an offense that sends you to prison.
Hilary clinton and most of the politicians in the USA, democrat or Republican they are all crooked.
I don't get the sense that either Bernie Sanders nor Donald Trump are crooked politicians. Trump isn't one (even if he is a walking ego trip) and Sanders strikes me as different.
Ron Paul is probably the same, but he has no chance so it doesn't matter.
Correct. She "did not receive or send e-mails marked classified" because she directed her aides to strip all the markings and send it via non-secure means.
There's at least three different networks: "NIPR" for unclassified, general internet usage; "SIPR" for stuff classified up to Secret, and "JWICS" for some (but not all) TS/SCI. It is very difficult to electronically (e.g. send email) from one network to another and usually requires a second reader (who is outside the organization) to scour and approve/deny the shift. However, there is very little that can be done to prevent someone from manually typing information to circumvent the system.
Saying that women have always been the primary victims of war is pretty damn insulting to those men and boys maimed and killed in wars they were forced to fight in.
The impeachment (and subsequent acquittal) of her husband was clearly part of a smear campaign. It is of no interest to anyone but Bill's wife into whose mouth he puts his cock. The e-mail scandal, on the other hand, is a big problem.
I don't know what is " turbo-liberal" about Planned Parenthood: it's an organization that provides health services. Some people disagree with some of those services on religious grounds. The resulting debate is given far too much importance on the National political stage. In reality, the issue is used as a tool to divide the electorate and everyone seems to fall for it.
I don't much like Hilary, but I like less silly ad hominem like saying "incontrovertible proof of mental illness", which just lower the standard of discourse and contribute nothing.
soylentnews.org
Nope. The US population will pay for it. Dearly. In ways you couldn't imagine possible yet.
But it would sure be hilarious to watch this from across the pond. It's like our very own reality TV show, with over 200 million participants and a show host we already know from a few other reality shows.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.