We have previously discussed the series of scandals in Washington where powerful individuals have been spared serious sanctions for acts where ordinary people have faced long and unrelenting prosecution. (here) It is part of America’s Animal Farm system where some individuals are more equal than others. That concern is even greater this week with the combination of the disclosure that Hillary Clinton did use a personal email system for classified communications and most media outlets appear to be ignoring the obvious import of that fact.
From the outset of this scandal, I have noted that the suggestion that such a system could be used without risking the release of classified information is facially absurd. I have had a TS/SCI clearance since Reagan due to my national security work and have lived under the restrictions imposed on email and other systems. The system is so stringent that just last month I had to personally deliver a routine motion in a national security case that was clearly unclassified because there was a concern about sending it by email for a review of the security officer. It dealt with changing a scheduling date. Violations of such rules are treated harshly and can easily result in criminal prosecution.
For the Secretary of State, a great percentage of material passing through her office is treated as presumptively classified. The idea of using a personal email system for such a high official in such a highly classified office is otherworldly. Moreover, few people buy the argument that this was not done to control information but to avoid carrying multiple phones, as suggested by Clinton. This would seem one area where the Clintons (often criticized for making their own rules) would seem bound to follow security protocols. Clinton insisted that no material was classified and that this was not an effort on her part to insulate her communications from outside review.
Now the State Department has marked at least a couple dozen emails as classified. We will likely never know how many of the thousands of deleted emails were classified and possibly subject to foreign surveillance. A State Department official has admitted that 25 emails were deemed classified. This would seem to contradict Clinton’s assurance to the public that she “did not email any classified material to anyone” on her personal account and “There is no classified material. So I’m certainly well aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material.”
The best defense is that this material was not technically classified at the time that it was sent. Thus it was not “classified” information. The problem is that it was not reviewed and classified because it was kept out of the State Department system. Moreover, most high-level communications are treated as classified and only individually marked as classified when there is a request for disclosure. For example, there is not a person standing next to the President with a classification stamp in the Oval Office. However, those communications are deemed as presumptively classified and are not disclosed absent review. Under the same logic, the President could use a personal email system because his text messages by definition are not marked as classified. This is the whole reason that Clinton and others were told to use the protected email system run by the State Department. We have spent hundreds of millions of dollars to secure such systems.
The State Department appears intent to avoid a conflict with Clinton over this circumvention of their secure system. Indeed, there appears to be a general and concerted effort to avoid the obvious in this scandal: clearly some of this material was classified and Clinton intentionally used a system to be under her control and not the government. I view that as quite serious — as I do the relative avoidance of the implications by many in the media. At best this shows appalling judgment while at worse it shows a knowing risk or exposure of presumptively classified material to foreign interception. The public can judge for itself if Clinton is being truthful in saying that she never sought to create a system that would be under her control and simply did not want to carry two phones or devices. That is a political question. The active circumvention of a secure system and possible exposure of classified information is a legal question . . . and a rather important one.
Mike A – Greece tried socialist leaders, and things didn’t work out so well for them. I think that it is unwise to keep repeating an experiment and expect a different result.
The socialist experiment has been tried at several levels, from Nanny State to government ownership of industry, all with similar results. We’re having a hard enough time with our economy with our spending addiction.
The kids like the idea of socialism – get paid for twiddling your fingers or for working hard. And everyone has the same standard of living no matter their talent, work ethic, education, or luck. And then they start working and begin to resent when people don’t pull their weight at the office. All of a sudden, a meritocracy gives them some influence over their own lives. Modern capitalism lets the young entrepreneur invent a new product or start a new company. Unless they work for government, and then they can just twiddle their fingers all day and get paid the same as the guy working hard in the cubicle next door.
And in today’s installment of “Only the little people go to prison”:
IT Manager at IRS “Blown Away” that backup tapes were erased.
It is Shocking, SHOCKING, that this nixonian protocol of data retention resurrected itself in today’s political climate.
Tom Nash:
It’s very true that there can be extremists in any political party.
Jill:
Don’t listen to Annie. She’s just getting personal again. I used to vote across party lines, and I have refused to vote when I thought all the candidates were bananas. I know of at last one fiscal conservative Democrat at the local level whom I like very much. I’ve criticized Republicans and Libertarians for behaving badly, like the guy who abused his authority to go after a paper that criticized him, or Republicans who baked Monsanto’s (damn their eyes) fight against GMO labelling.
It was only after Obamacare hit that I developed a real antipathy to the Liberal Democrats that took away my financial security, and then disdainfully dismissed the complaints of people like me. I’d like to see rent/mortgages raised 1100% “for the poor” and then call people who say they can’t afford that “whiners” or people who don’t care about the poor. Or repeat that lovely suggestion that they just get rid of their pets and stop complaining. This was a financial hit that the middle class can’t weather in these tough economic times, but since the employer mandate hasn’t hit yet, not everyone knows what it’s like.
What I care about is fiscal responsibility, and results. If a program doesn’t work, I want it changed and try something new. But tell that to a politician who just wants a talking point!
The Democratic & Republicans certainly have failed in their role to, at this point, provide us with excellent candidates for the presidency. It certainly going to negatively affect our nation for many years as it already has. But, on another note people often times get the politicians they deserve.
“You’re expounding on the principles of the Communist Manifesto.”
The principles of the Communist Manifesto are not to seek more informed voters-what I expound constantly-not to limit the influence of the special interest groups/money-I constantly label this country what it is an oligarchy more in line with a dictatorship or a communist structure-etc. I am for a democracy, informed and untainted with money and special interests, kind of like what has been intended through out history.
“What good are the Preamble, Constitution and Bill of Rights? There is no point to the American founding documents and foundational positions written by the Framers.”
The only good is how the Preamble, Constitution and Bill of Rights are interpreted by the society of the day, or by those who find fault. Granted Clinton, Obama, and pretty much every other politician that gets into power, Republican as well as Democrat steps all over these ‘sacred documents’ and granted they are worth nothing in the face of actions. However as seen with every administration and every Supreme Court it is all in the interpretation of the importance of the words vis a vis the reality of the time. SCOTUS 50 years ago would have ruled against gays, against the ACA, and against a lot of things that they rule in favor of today. The sacred words stay the same. It’s called evolution.
“Your goal is the “fundamentally transform” America to a variant of communism.”
America is to a degree socialist. The word communism you and most others do not understand. Yesterday’s communism is today’s socialism, and tomorrow’s progressivism. The fact of the matter is that in this interwoven world, the world America has chosen to be a part of, a country must be stable and the present political structure, system of government, and ideals of, luckily, a smaller and smaller but still substantial number of Americans stand in the way of a better society for all. You know We the People.
“You contradict, repudiate, void and nullify the Preamble, Constitution and Bill of Rights, as you advocate and support the principles of the Communist Manifesto, as compulsory populace integration, denial of private property, control of the means of production, central planning and redistribution of wealth.
The American thesis is freedom and self-reliance as people adapt to and live with the consequences of freedom. If you’re an American, you accept freedom and self-reliance, which makes all that you promote unconstitutional. The only conclusion one can draw is that you are an anti-American communist.
Does that mean you’re a traitor or an insurrectionist, or both?
This is a funny world. The super patriot, the Paul Revere of his day, Edward Snowden, is in Russia and you, a treasonous and heretical subversive, are in here in America.”
The rest of your spew is only indicative of a shaky mind or someone who has started the July 4th revelries too early. Take a little water in your wine.
issac – Paul Revere never completed the ride. He was arrested by the British. A Dr. Prescott, who was coming back from a ‘hot date’ went back and completed the ride. Prescott did not fit the rhyme scheme.
forgotwhoiam
That is quite the fantasy world you inhabit. Are there libertarian unicorns and dragons inspired by rational self-interest? One hardly knows where to begin with your nonsense.
Not only did you forget who you are, but you clearly forgot where you came from and how you got anywhere.
Ah well…some people are just walking talking….
https://farm4.staticflickr.com/3405/3516603492_127cd12b57_z_d.jpg
Paul, “vagina” vote is truly insulting to women. Women are not body parts, we are fully human.
Jill – I did not make up the term. I am only repeating it. It covers women who are voting for Hillary because they both have vaginas.
SillyT,
Conservatives don’t have welfare in their lexicon – individual or corporate. You may be confusing RINO liberals in conservatives’ clothing. There sure are no conservatives in the Republican party. Bailouts of any business or any individual are illegal and unconstitutional. You need to arrest anyone you find doing that and throw them in jail. Deleterious currency printing and incestuous bond buying by the Ponzi-scheming “moneychangers” at the very criminal “Fed/Treasury Complex” is unconstitutional and antithetical also. Markets take care of the assets of dead businesses with extreme prejudice and efficiency. The bailouts you refer to were for unions such as the UAW at GM, corollary parasitic governmental worker unions, elected liberal politicians and banksters. No market ever needs or engages in bailouts. There are investors who specialize in liquidated assets, restructuring and turnarounds.
The “rich” are the ambitious who work hard. The poor are the lazy. I heard the tale of the guy, out of work, who started washing cars. Next thing he was a mobile car washer. Next thing he had more cars than he could wash. Next thing he hired help. Next thing he hired more help and made large capital purchases. Someone tried to contact this unemployed guy the other day but he was too busy to answer his Apple i-Phone cuz he was managing his business, on his way to the bank with a load of money. Oh yeah, there’s a lot of intellect and proficiency required for a car washing business.
Your mistake is that you think you’re helping people by giving them “free stuff.”
“Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.”
That’s an axiom and your liberal psycho-babbling will never prevail over an axiom.
Take your pick the Preamble, Constitution and Bill of Rights or the Communist Manifesto.
Freedom and Self-Reliance vs. slavery to and sustenance by the state.
Mike A., It was Lloyd!
Mike A. One of the powerful bankers recently said Clinton or Bush would be O.K. with him. That tells me everything I need to know.
Then Annie, you should vote for Sanders.
I believe you are mistaken about him being the least dangerous candidate. He and Warren are Democrats newest saviors. They are Obama 2.0 and they will be just as bad for the planet and our nation and other people of the world as he is.
My only hope is that this time, as soon as you see that he wasn’t on your side the way you thought, you won’t make up a million excuses like Democrats did for Obama. The moment he doesn’t do what you thought he would do, protest. Get moving! Don’t wait for the ship of state to turn around or his 12 dimension chess game to end. Please don’t accuse his critics of being prejudiced against the elderly, or call people who disagree with the president, traitors! No, don’t buy any excuse. Push for what you really thought you were getting and what you really want. Settling for less than this is BS and a danger to our nation.
I would have no difficulty supporting Bernie Sanders, but even though the most recent Gallup Poll reports that 47% of voters would not object to a socialist President, much of that total is skewed toward younger voters, people who do not traditionally show up at the polls in high percentages. Therefore, I have serious doubts that Sanders could win the general election against Jeb Bush, who will be the Republican candidate. Barring unforeseen circumstances, this will be a Clinton-Bush contest, and Clinton will win. That’s not a happy prospect, but it’s far preferable to another Bush in the White House.
Mike – I think the vagina vote is softening so Biden may jump in. And I wouldn’t count Carly out. She is doing well in a large field. Hillary is a almost a solitary candidate. It would be nice to see her get some competition. Obama took her to the cleaners.
Jill, I’m not an apologist for Obama or the Democratic Party. I’m voting my conscience by voting for the least dangerous candidate and for the one that represents my interests and the interests of the country the best. Chafee, IMO, would be even more of a weak sister than Obama. Bernie Sanders is far better choice for President than Chaffee or especially Webb. FAR better.
Inga – I always make my final Presidential decision on whose finger do I want on the bomb. These last two elections I voted for Mickey Mouse.
Bill Clinton, “It depends on what the meaning of the word is is.”
SCOTUS, “state means federal and federal means state, where did you learn English, America?”
“Oh,” the SCOTUS said, “and by the way, the judicial branch has arbitrarily expanded operations into the
legislative branch – law, we don’t need no stinking law – we’re the SCOTUS – KING SCOTUS.”
The SCOTUS concludes, “Love those homosexuals. That’s and ORDER.”
Conservatives want “freedom”? That’s rich.
Speaking of rich, if I could get the kind of welfare and free stuff the so-called conservatives give away to corporations, I would probably switch parties. Red states are almost all takers when it comes to tax contributions and monies returned, and corporate welfare makes food stamp recipients look like, well, poor people because that’s what they are.
Yes indeed. No punishment for Hillary for not following the rules on email.
No trials at the Hague for George W. or Dick Cheney. Or Rumsfeld. Or Ashcroft, Gonzales, Wolfowitz,, Tenet, Libby, Addington…
No punishment for the torturers. No bankers in jail.
Really all kinda sad when you think about it.
Karen S.,
Democrats won’t be voting for Hillary, they’ll be voting for “free stuff.”
The party could run a “ham sandwich.”
Conservatives want “freedom.”
Liberals want “free stuff.”
Those democrats have been voting in Chicago for multiple decades. It’s near bankruptcy.
Greece has been spending on “free stuff” for the lazy for decades also. Check out the Greek news.
*****
“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the people discover they can vote themselves largess out of the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that democracy always collapses over a loose fiscal policy–to be followed by a dictatorship.”
― Alexander Fraser Tytler
Annie, I don’t agree with Karen’s candidates and I don’t expect her to agree with mine. What we do agree on is the importance of voting your conscience.
Right now, the powerful elites in the Republican and Democratic parties can count on most of their constituents being stupid enough to vote for the candidate which was picked for them by the elites. It’s so easy to propagandize people when citizens are refusing to be citizens. There are no ethical values that most people won’t break so they can “win”. With citizens like that, it never matters who wins because the wrong person will never lose. That’s why, for example, Fast Track is for good for 6 years.
You might ask yourself: why did Obama, an angelic Democrat, fight harder in Congress for six years of fast track than he fought for almost anything so far? Wouldn’t it be awful if Fast Track fell into the “wrong” hands after such a fine, wonderful president such as himself leaves office? What if an evil Republican takes office? Oh No! OMG! It’s a disaster right? No, not at all. Obama asked for, lobbied and twisted arms to get six years of Fast Track because there are no wrong hands that Fast Track can fall into. There are no evil Republicans or angelic Democrats in the minds of people who run things. That’s just BS to whip up voters to vote against our own interests.
The only way you can’t be taken for granted as a citizen and a voter is to vote your conscience and to act on your true beliefs. It’s also the way to avoid being a victim of propaganda. It’s a lot harder to pull the wool over someone’s eyes when they have an actual set of ethics, ethics which they will follow even if it’s not popular. Elites hate people with their own values. They can’t count on them to take marching orders and they can’t count on lying to them. We stop being predictable the moment we vote our conscience.
Chaffe is only a joke to people who refuse to take up their own power. If you think he’d make a good president, work on his behalf. The politics of fear keep us in line, obedient to the elites. They are destroying us all. Time to disobey!
Issac,
Not to put too fine a point on it, but that was sheer stupidity.
Please counter, to the best of you ability, the points I’ve made.
And, for your edification, that was none of your description – those are facts.