Hilary email

[Jim in CT]

I thought she only had wedding planning and yoga schedules on there?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016...l?intcmp=hpbt1

[JohnR]

The Federal Inspector General for the Intelligence Community (the guy that runs inspections IN the Intelligence Community) did not have high enough clearance to review the emails she had on her personal home email server.

An intelligence official familiar with the matter told NBC News that the special access program in question was so sensitive that McCullough and some of his aides had to receive clearance to be read in on it before viewing the sworn declaration about the Clinton emails.
Clinton's campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/...ret-ig-n499886

[The Dad Fisherman]

But....but......but (insert excuse here)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

But....but......but (insert excuse here)
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'll put on my Spence hat and offer some excuses...

(1) ...they ALL do it.
(2) ... oh, you can't believe anything you read on Fauxnews
(3) ...are we still talking about this? Why can't we look forward, and discuss the issues that people CARE about, like getting free rubbers to first graders.

[Nebe]

4) she hasn't stolen from the 1% yet. But when she does, then and only then will she be held accountable for her actions.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[justplugit]

This on top of the other 1,300 classified e mails found.

#5 "It's just something people try to throw against the wall and hope it sticks."

Like someone said, if she ever got elected she'd be spending her first
100 days between the White House and the Court House.

[JohnR]

Saw this a few minutes ago:

Hillary: There is no classified material on my server

Intel IG: My clearance level isn't high enough to see all the crap on her server

[spence]

Originally Posted by justplugit

This on top of the other 1,300 classified e mails found.

Retroactively mind you. There also seems to be a lot of disagreements as to how different departments believe certain information should be handled. You could have info that considered top secret by one agency and yet published publicly in multiple sources but it's still considered classified.

There's not much new in this latest report, other than Republicans continuing to leak information to hurt Clinton's campaign. Wait that's not really new either.

I'd note Clinton's not under investigation and there's no yet evidence she broke any laws...

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Retroactively mind you. There also seems to be a lot of disagreements as to how different departments believe certain information should be handled. You could have info that considered top secret by one agency and yet published publicly in multiple sources but it's still considered classified.

There's not much new in this latest report, other than Republicans continuing to leak information to hurt Clinton's campaign. Wait that's not really new either.

I'd note Clinton's not under investigation and there's no yet evidence she broke any laws...

"There also seems to be a lot of disagreements as to how different departments believe certain information should be handled"

No, there's not a lot of disagreement there. It's established practice that the agency that develops a piece of intelligence, has sole authority to classify it, and all other agencies are bound to accept that. So if the CIA takes a pic of North Korea missile movements and classifies it as top secret or higher, Hilary doesn't get to decide that it's no more sensitive that her yoga schedule.

"Retroactively mind you"

Absolutely, 100% false. The 2 emails cited in the story I posted, were deemed to have been higher than top secret before they got to Hilary's server. The IG considers that "a closed matter". The State Dept tried to change the classification, but as I said, they don't get to do that unless they developed the information.

When she said her server had nothing but wedding plans and yoga, it was a lie. Then she said it had no emails that were classified at the time. Also b.s.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

No, there's not a lot of disagreement there. It's established practice that the agency that develops a piece of intelligence, has sole authority to classify it, and all other agencies are bound to accept that. So if the CIA takes a pic of North Korea missile movements and classifies it as top secret or higher, Hilary doesn't get to decide that it's no more sensitive that her yoga schedule.

But that's not what's happening. The information being discussed wasn't classified when she was at State. It was either classified after she left or classified as part of the email release process. Given the media scrutiny around there simply could be things they don't want to draw attention to.

Absolutely, 100% false. The 2 emails cited in the story I posted, were deemed to have been higher than top secret before they got to Hilary's server. The IG considers that "a closed matter". The State Dept tried to change the classification, but as I said, they don't get to do that unless they developed the information.

That's also not entirely true.

This is based on off the record information...but what appears to have happened is an aid forwarded Clinton a few emails citing public news reporting about the political fallout from drone strikes. Because the drone strikes weren't supposed to be happening (ssssshhhhhhhhhh) the program was considered top secret/SAP and so any government correspondence on the topic "should" be handled with that designation.

I'm sure some will clamor that Clinton would have known this and should have rang the alarm bell on mishandling information, but that's pretty silly...If the above is true you can toss this right back into the dust bin with all the other accusations.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

Retroactively mind you. There also seems to be a lot of disagreements as to how different departments believe certain information should be handled. You could have info that considered top secret by one agency and yet published publicly in multiple sources but it's still considered classified.

There's not much new in this latest report, other than Republicans continuing to leak information to hurt Clinton's campaign. Wait that's not really new either.

I'd note Clinton's not under investigation and there's no yet evidence she broke any laws...

mutterings of a mind-numbed cultist

Hillary will be fine...I saw a poll a few days ago that indicated an impressive number of democrats were happy to see continue her campaign for president even after and if she finds herself under indictment

[DZ]

The last email report is not good. I work in this field. When you reveal sources and methods your basically stating exactly who our spies are, how they are getting the info, and from who. If these sources are still in country they and their friends, family, etc, are caught, incarcerated, or killed. This is far reaching.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by scottw

mutterings of a mind-numbed cultist

Hillary will be fine...I saw a poll a few days ago that indicated an impressive number of democrats were happy to see continue her campaign for president even after and if she finds herself under indictment

You are correct, I doubt that an indictment keeps her from getting the Democratic nomination (Bill was humiliated, impeached, and disbarred, and no one holds that against him). It will hurt her in the general.

They are an awful lot like the Kennedys. No morals whatsoever, and a firm conviction that the world is better off if they are running it.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I'd note Clinton's not under investigation and there's no yet evidence she broke any laws...

Wait, what? She's not under investigation? What are those 150 FBI agents doing all day?

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Wait, what? She's not under investigation? What are those 150 FBI agents doing all day?

Yes, Clinton is not a target of the Federal probe. This was falsely reported by the NYT months ago, another Republican leak intended to smear...

[Jim in CT]

Wait, I got it...

"the same vast right-wing conspiracy that framed my devoted husband to make it look like he was unfaithful, planted those emails on my server. It was the Koch brothers."

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Wait, I got it...

"the same vast right-wing conspiracy that framed my devoted husband to make it look like he was unfaithful, planted those emails on my server. It was the Koch brothers."

Some of that is always at play with all sides, there was a spam email about the number of staff Michelle Obama had, claiming 1 staff person for the last X first ladies, something that was shown to be patently false.

She clearly made a huge mistake with this server. Period.
Does that disqualify her? Probably not if the FBI clears her.

This is a #^&#^&#^&#^&ty election for those of us left of center. I am not a Hillary fan, I don't feel the Bern, but Hillary is much closer on my policy perspectives than Trump, Cruz, Rubio etc.

What really troubles me is that Hillary is basically a neocon on foreign policy, and it worries me where we will have troops in 2017...

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

Some of that is always at play with all sides, there was a spam email about the number of staff Michelle Obama had, claiming 1 staff person for the last X first ladies, something that was shown to be patently false.

She clearly made a huge mistake with this server. Period.
Does that disqualify her? Probably not if the FBI clears her.

This is a #^&#^&#^&#^&ty election for those of us left of center. I am not a Hillary fan, I don't feel the Bern, but Hillary is much closer on my policy perspectives than Trump, Cruz, Rubio etc.

What really troubles me is that Hillary is basically a neocon on foreign policy, and it worries me where we will have troops in 2017...

"Some of that is always at play with all sides"

Sadly, these days, that is true. Not enough discussion of the issues, too much energy wasted on digging up dirt. But where the Clintons are concerned, there are legitimate ethical concerns, it's not fabricated. These are truly disgusting people.

Here's what I don't get. She was married to Bill when he was President. The economy did great when he was President (and for years after). So why isn't she endorsing th esame economic policies that Bill enacted (cutting taxes, cutting spending, balancing the budget, kicking millions of lazy bums off welfare who, it turns out, were perfectly capable of working)? She will continue Obama's policies, which are the opposite of what worked for Bill.

"This is a #^&#^&#^&#^&ty election for those of us left of center."

Hey, it's no picnic on my side until Trump goes away so the adults can talk.

"it worries me where we will have troops in 2017"

I would say that's not Hilary's doing, it's the doing of the jihadists. I don't like it either, but we have to deal with it, don't we?

[PaulS]

No matter what is on the server it is stupid for anyone that high up to use their private email. Easy for someone to type in the wrong email address and send something to an unsecured email address.

[DZ]

My prediction: Hillary will blame a staffer for sending or uploading the classified info on her server. But as she should be, Hillary is ultimately responsible because she was head of the department. That said the liberal community has tended to look at those other turncoats like Snowden as "heroes". There is actually a move to free this guy. Knowing that its not surprising that many on the left don't think this is a big deal.

[spence]

Originally Posted by DZ

My prediction: Hillary will blame a staffer for sending or uploading the classified info or her server. But as she should be, Hillary is ultimately responsible because she was head of the department.

I think we'll have to wait for the output of the FBI investigation before anything is really clear. To my knowledge there still has been no evidence that information was sent to Clinton that was classified at the time it was sent, nor is there any evidence that Clinton sent any classified information.

[Jim in CT]

Spence, from my second link...

"The sources, who were not authorized to speak on the record, told Fox News that while the emails were indeed “top secret” when they hit Clinton’s server, one of them remains “top secret” to this day -- and must be handled at the highest security level. The second email is still considered classified but at the lower “secret” level because more information is publicly available about the event."

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Spence, from my second link...

"The sources, who were not authorized to speak on the record, told Fox News that while the emails were indeed “top secret” when they hit Clinton’s server, one of them remains “top secret” to this day -- and must be handled at the highest security level. The second email is still considered classified but at the lower “secret” level because more information is publicly available about the event."

I've read your links and have already responded to this assertion.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I've read your links and have already responded to this assertion.

Right. That she didn't do it. Unless she did do it, in which case the IG is only making hay of it because they are angry...gotcha.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Right. That she didn't do it. Unless she did do it, in which case the IG is only making hay of it because they are angry...gotcha.

What has the IG accused Clinton of?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

What has the IG accused Clinton of?

The way I read it, they have accused her of having emails on her server, that were top secret at the time they were received by her server.

[ecduzitgood]

Step back and look at who you are supporting and forget the party affiliation. Is this really the person you want to hold the highest position in our government? My grandmother isn't a corrupt lying sack of _hit but I still wouldn't have wanted her in charge of the country.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[buckman]

Originally Posted by ecduzitgood

Step back and look at who you are supporting and forget the party affiliation. Is this really the person you want to hold the highest position in our government? My grandmother isn't a corrupt lying sack of _hit but I still wouldn't have wanted her in charge of the country.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Of course Spence wants her , she will continue the policy's he holds dear and can also parden herself so he can say " I was right , no jail time , move along "
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by ecduzitgood

Step back and look at who you are supporting and forget the party affiliation. Is this really the person you want to hold the highest position in our government? My grandmother isn't a corrupt lying sack of _hit but I still wouldn't have wanted her in charge of the country.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

And yet Politifact say that EVERY Reb. candidate has lied more than her.

[Nebe]

I'll just leave this here as a lesson on how a pathological liar operates.

http://youtu.be/fJaic2ek8aY
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device