After months of refusing demands to turn over her personal email server, Hillary Clinton has agreed to do so. The server will be turned over to the Justice Department as part of the investigation into her use of a private email account as Secretary of State. It was also disclosed that at least two emails on the unsecured server were classified “Top Secret, Sensitive Compartmented Information” — one of the government’s highest classifications. Some of the information is reportedly linked to NSA/satellite intelligence and the Inspector General says that there was material that was classified at the time it was sent over the unsecured server.
We have been following the story as it has transformed from a purely political to a potentially criminal matter. While Clinton has insisted that there was nothing classified on her email system and that any dispute is just a bureaucratic squabble “between agencies” the classification of many of these emails is no surprise to many of us who regularly deal with classified material. The classification of these emails will likely reignite demands for Clinton to turn over the server and raise the question of those thousands of emails that Clinton’s aides unilaterally deleted before turning over emails to the government. The classification level however of most of these messages are at the lowest level of such designations.
Clinton continues to stress that she did not send or receive any material marked classified. I have previously discussed why that explanation is less than compelling, particularly for anyone who has handled sensitive or classified material. As I discussed earlier, virtually anything coming out of the office of the Secretary of State would be considered classified as a matter of course. 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 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. You do not generate material as the Secretary of State and assume that it is unclassified. You are supposed to assume and treat it as presumptively classified. Otherwise, there would be massive exposure of classified material and willful blindness as to the implications of the actions of persons disregarding precautions. 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.
Clinton portrayed the dispute as entirely removed from her controversial decision to use a personal server — a move that gave her total control of the server and ultimately allowed her staff to delete thousands of emails before turning over emails to the State Department: “They can fight over it or argue over it. That’s up to them. I can tell you what the facts are.”
Dozens of emails have now been declared classified. Clinton’s refusal to turn over the server has become more and more problematic, even for some of her supporters on the Hill. The FBI recently contacted her counsel, David Kendall, regarding three thumb drives believed to contain classified material. What is particularly interesting is the statement from Senator Grassley this week that the inspector general of the nation’s intelligence community had reported that at least four emails were classified when they were sent and two were TS/SCI classified. That would directly contradict Clinton’s position and would fuel questions about the tens of thousands of emails that Clinton reportedly ordered deleted rather than turn over to the State Department.
The inspector general for the intelligence community reportedly told Congress that potentially hundreds of classified emails are among the cache that Clinton provided to the State Department.
In the meantime, Judge Emmet G. Sullivan has issued an order to the State Department to ask Clinton, Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills not to destroy any emails. Neither Abedin nor Mills provided a certification under penalty of perjury as Sullivan had requested in an earlier order. Some sites have reported that attorneys for Mills had indicated that she was going to delete copies of emails. A letter from her counsel quoted in the filing stated “Ms. Mills does not believe that she has paper copies of potential records in her possession. Following our production on August 10, 2015 [of the defense counsel’s version of the electronic records], we have instructed her to delete any and all electronic records in her possession.” Presumably, the State Department will convey the request of the Court to Mills’ counsel and no deletions or further deletions will occur.
With these developments, it is not a surprise to see the two leading contenders for the Democratic nomination objecting the delay in any debates with Clinton and the limitation of the number of those debates. Supporters for Martin O’Malley and fellow candidate Bernie Sanders have objected to what they see as a process shaped by Clinton supporters in the highest ranks of the party. The thought of Clinton being pulled into a debate in the midst of this scandal is clearly not something that the campaign would want. There is also a clear desire to limit the number and exposure of the debates.
It is interesting to see the different approaches of the parties. The GOP has more debates expected and a far larger and more diverse pool of candidates. Many democrats and independents seem to be chaffing at the limited choices in the Democratic race and the view of Clinton (and Bush on the GOP side) as favorites in another Clinton-Bush contest. With all of these political and legal elements, this campaign is proving a bit less predictable than forecasted by political commentators.
USN420, very good post! I second your comment regarding Sanders.
issac…
Have we become so jaded that expecting the leader of our nation to be an honest, forthright person is impossible? You would rather elect a known and demonstrably proven liar to the office of President rather than an honest man or woman? How can that be good for America?
It wasn’t Nixon’s ordered “break in” of the competition that caused him to have to resign. It was his lying about it afterwards. It wasn’t Bill Clinton’s affair with the then young Miss Lewinsky that got him impeached… It was his lying about it afterwards that did. (While under oath no less!) Progressives like to spout the line, “It was only a sexual affair… wasn’t about his job.” It wasn’t about the sex… It was about expecting honesty and not getting it. He was impeached for a lack of personal integrity!
There was a time when a person’s word mattered, when their actions mattered. It should still. A person who will lie to you, will steal from you. Our governmental system relies on trust, honesty, and integrity to function properly. It is truly a travesty that the electorate in this country has allowed the decline of integrity in our elected leaders.
In your personal life, do you knowingly associate yourself with and support known liars? If not, why is it acceptable to support them to the highest elected positions of our country? If we don’t have integrity, ideology means nothing!
There are several people in this race who appear to be honest and forthright people. They don’t dodge questions, they don’t tap dance around issues. They give honest, forthright answers to every inquiry. One is Bernie Sanders. I don’t agree with his politics, but at least he has been consistent and open about his ideals every day of his career.
The same I think, can be said of Ben Carson, Carly Fiorina, Ted Cruz, and Scott Walker. All of those four seem to be honest, respect the Constitution, and would do their best for all the American people.
I guess in the end it still simply boggles my mind that anyone could still seriously be considering casting a vote for Hillary Clinton. If there ever were an example of a person’s behavior while in public service disqualifying them from consideration for higher office… it would be her. Yet here we are…
everyone loses…meanwhlie braddly manning is doing 35 yrs
for state departmt emails….as chelsea. ‘chelsea’ manning is in jail for the same emails…..
Paul
Technical mumbo jumbo aside, Clinton got caught fooling around. Nixon got caught having his thugs break and enter the opposition’s offices. There is a difference that even you should see.
issac – Clinton committed perjury, he wasn’t charged with fooling around. Remember, she kept the dress with the fatal stain on it? Perjury is a high crime, a felony. Nixon covered up a break-in, did not do the job himself.
“Name one President who has not crapped all over the ‘oath’ of office. Nixon, Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton, the little cowboy, and Obama.”
Washington. Next question. By the way, it’s quite telling that you have no regard for the oath. a
“Carson’s a joke.” To a progressive I’m sure he is. You know he wouldn’t continue the regressive policies that have kept the poor, middle class, elderly and minority in this country stuck in their respective misery for the last 50 years. You know it would terminate progressivism in this country once those constituents discovered how destructive their policies have been.
This is too easy.
“Walker is the Koch brothers’ lap dog. He crashed Wisconsin.” Prove it. While you’re at it, what “crashed”? A Republican governor in that state having survived how many elections? Seems the majority of people in that state don’t seem to be concerned with whatever you believe crashed.
Paul
Naw, he wasn’t. It didn’t stick. He finished out his term. Now compare for a moment Nixon’s impeachable crimes and Clinton’s impeachable crimes. If you still think they’re comparable then, well, vote for Trump.
issac – Clinton was impeached, he was just not found guilty, same as Johnson. Nixon was never impeached. Obama should be impeached but there are not enough votes to convict him, so it is a lost cause.
Vote for me for President. I can crap on things with the best of them!
old nurse
1, August 12, 2015 at 4:53 pm
All things considered, I am voting for Ed Snowden.
No doubt.
Snowden and Manning 2016.
Olly
Carson’s a joke. Honoring the oath of the office as is perceived in specific or general terms is impossible. Name one President who has not crapped all over the ‘oath’ of office. Nixon, Reagan, Bush Sr., Clinton, the little cowboy, and Obama. The question is the size of the dump and the smell. I’ll take Clinton giving in to his libido any day over Nixon, Reagan, Bush Sr., and the little runt. Nixon who came as close to impeachment as any President, Reagan-Irangate-cocaine for missiles, Clinton-F*#^ing around, that’s about all, the little cowboy-well enough said, Obama-arrogance but too many good things.
Walker is the Koch brothers’ lap dog. He crashed Wisconsin. The oligarchy/duopoly would morph into a pure oligarchy with him. He is a corporate tool. You have got to be kidding.
issac – Clinton WAS impeached.
Barkin, I LOVE your eclectic choices for President. You are one of the genuine free thinkers here.
“So what and BFD. Let it go folks and get a life. … As for use of her own server for certain emails, it sounds like a smart idea given what we now know about security of government data bases, political spying, government surveillance and law enforcement.”
I do think withholding emails is a BFD. It took court cases in the 1990’s to determine that emails are in fact agency documents that have to be maintained and controlled by the agency. If Clinton can withhold work product and produce what she chooses what prevents any other high government official from doing the same thing. If we allow that, then we allow the possibility that government officials will withhold and possibly destroy any document that might be embarrassing or incriminating – that can’t be good for good government of an open democratic society.
The idea that we gain better security by letting officials set up their own servers is nonsense. We don’t get better security when individual strike out on their own, setting their own standards and choosing their own IT staff. We get much worse security.
The federal government with all its funding and power to recruit the very best from business and the universities is having trouble dealing with hackers. What could a secretary from an agency or department possibly do to improve on the best efforts of the rest of the federal government? Can a secretary with her political appointees make better choices for IT talent. Can a secretary with all her responsibilities also act as an effective chief IT officer for her office? Of course not.
Even if Clinton turned over all her work product as Secretary, setting up her own server outside the Department is a serious indictment of her judgement. Her claim that Secrete Service maintained physical security for the server indicates either profound lack of understanding of what constitutes computer security or contempt for the understanding of her supporters. Apparently Clinton things her supporters are so stupid they don’t realize that breaches of computer security usually happen by accessing the server over the net – no physical contact required.
The duopoly blows, but is always directly or indirectly supported on here. That’s always been the American elite… there have never been many flourishing groups involved in politics… only some that have an actual impact.
You reach a particular class in the U.S., lawlessness is the norm…
I believe there is a credible argument to be made that there is a possibility the company hired to work on Hillary Clinton’s mail server did backups on the server. It was reported that the device crashed and needed some form of restoration. That situation might have induced the Clintons to initiate a remote back-up agreement with the company where the device will be mirrored on a remote server maintained by the company.. If that is the case, as Paul suggests, it could easily constitute an unlawful transmission of the classified/secret information since the company’s system is not a government agency and an unauthorized third party.
If this scenario is the case in my view that would be a strong piece of evidence to show probable cause to indict Hillary Clinton for a crime. How far the government will go with this remains to be seen.
“So, Olly, who do you want to be the next President.”
I begin with who I trust will honor the oath of office. That will eliminate any of the Democrats and some of the Republicans. Dr. Carson is as honorable a person as there is in this cycle and I’m not certain if the political machines of either party wouldn’t eat him up. My top 4 are Walker, Fiorina, Cruz and Carson. I need to do further vetting but a Walker/Fiorina ticket would at this time be solid.
If I wanted to complete the transformation (regression) of this country back to the Dark Ages then I would elect Clinton, or any of the Progressives (both R and D) and put the House and Senate in the hands of the Democrats. If that were to happen this election cycle or at least by the midterms then we would completely cease to be a constitutional republic. All rights would be subject to the will of the majority. Case Closed.
All things considered, I am voting for Ed Snowden.
Olly
Lesser of the evils or weevils if you like. It’s an expression. It means she is the best or the least worst there is. She has the most contiguous connection with the highest echelons of government. She is closest to the middle and to the left, my side but closer to the middle of either. She has been there and done that, been next to and involved with someone who has been there and done that. The ACA needs to be evolved into a single payer system. Hillary is the best bet for that. The US has to continue diplomacy and swinging a big stick at the same time. Hillary is the best bet for that. Any Republican would take us backwards and in such chaos it would be even more shameful than the last Republican administration. Bernie is to far left and still a hippie. Biden is too old and if Gore couldn’t get in then he surely won’t. Gore was beaten by Bush when Jeb gave his brother the electoral colleges of Florida. 40,000 black voters were denied their right to vote because they were incorrectly labeled having a criminal record/felons. It was proven they were not but the right wing nut Roberts went along with the scam and Jeb delivered the Presidency to the little cowboy. The rest is history and shameful as well as disastrous. In those 40,000 black voters were twenty times what was needed to beat Bush. So, compare all the crimes of Hillary with that and then get back to me.
So, Hillary squeals and weasels and tries to dodge the barrage. She couldn’t in a million years reach the level of nepotism, disgrace, graft, fraud, and manipulation that the Bush family has accomplished. Her quick fix is not to water the leaves and see what trickles down to the roots or the 95 % of the population. Both Reagan and the little cowboy sewered the economy by lowering taxes. You want that again? What the US needs most, in my opinion, is to stay this course and improve, fine tune, and advance. A GOP President with the present House would sewer the country. We are not yet out of the last recession the GOP formula created. Do we have to repeat this a third time?
So, Olly, who do you want to be the next President. All we have heard from you and your lap dogs are the complaints about Clinton. I agree that Obama has made mistakes and Hillary is a slime ball. All politicians are slime balls Olly. It is not about slime but competence and experience. Do you want Trump? Say, you want Trump. We need a good laugh. How about Paul or Rubio.
issac – I think two candidates are scaring Hillary right now. Bernie and Carly.
Project Merlin – “TimeTraks” shows no activity for Hillary Clinton in 2016.
“Hillary’s First Crime” – Reprise
———-
Article:
Ann Barnhardt – 2013
“I can’t remember if I have ever written this up, or maybe just explained it in a interview at some point, but I have had several people ask, so I’ll explain it.
This is how Hillary Clinton “made” $100,000 off of an initial “investment” of $1000 in cattle futures back in the early 80’s.
It was textbook money laundering.
I know you’re shocked – SHOCKED to think that a Clinton could be involved in anything untoward, but I’m afraid it is true.
Back in the 80’s in Arkansas, Bill and Hillary were the power couple ascending first to the position of Attorney General and then to the governor’s mansion. Being the psychopathic whores that they both are, they were all about cashing in on their power and accepting de facto bribes and payola.
In Arkansas the Tyson family (as in Tyson chicken) were the big players at the time. Wal-Mart was still getting off the ground. Old Man Tyson wanted to buy off the Clintons, and so a money laundering scheme was hatched. A futures account would be opened with a broker named Red Bone (no joke) in HILLARY’S NAME.
“Red Bone”
cleared through a company called Refco, which would later become MF Global. That company through its entire history and iterations has always been a hive of villainy.
Anyway, the account was opened in Hillary’s name and Hillary made an opening deposit of $1000.
Every day at the opening bell Red Bone, per Old Man Tyson’s instructions, would put in two orders: Buy 50 contracts of live cattle futures AND sell 50 contracts of live cattle futures. (I’m just using 50 as a round number, I don’t know exactly what the quantites were.)
At the close the same thing would be done – buy 50 and sell 50.
On days in which the market was higher from the open to the close, Hillary’s account would be assigned the lower buy from the open and the higher sell from the close. If the close was $0.25 per pound higher than the open, the math would look like this:
$0.25 X 400 = $100 per contract
$100 per contract X 50 contracts = $5000
A live cattle contract is 40,000 pounds, so the coefficient is 400. Trust me on that. The price is actually quoted in “hundredweights”, hence the dropping of two zeroes.
Now here’s the money laundering bit. The “losing” trades, namely the sell executed at the open and the buy executed at the close at the same prices would be assigned to Old Man Tyson’s account.
On days when the market moved lower from the open to the close, Hillary was given the sell from the open and the buy from the close. Sell high, buy back low. Tyson got the opposite side.
Do that every day for a month or so and you can move $100k from Tyson to the Clintons very quickly. I think Red Bone also threw a few “losers” into Hillary’s account just to attempt to cover their tracks – and yes, he made commission on all of it. I didn’t back the commissions out of the calculation above, but of course Red Bone charged a hefty commission on every contract.
Giving the “good” trades to Hillary and the “bad” trades to Tyson is simply a way to move money from Tyson to the Clintons without Tyson writing the Clintons a check. This is called “money laundering”.
This case was actually the reason why the law was changed and brokers HAD to attach an account number to every order UPON ENTERING THE ORDER. I started in the business in 1997, and that change predated me by 15 years. I can’t imagine how it is that they let people assign account numbers at the end of the day – ever. That is just begging for unfair practices with regards to assigning of prices to customers. Favoritism, frontrunning, etc.
Oh, and Hillary claimed complete ignorance about all of this, which is, of course, a complete lie. She and Bill knew exactly what they were doing and why.
Too bad no one cared about the Clintons being psychopathic liars and conartists, because maybe then Hillary wouldn’t have been able to murder Ambassador Chris Stevens and run all of those guns and MANPADS to the Muslim Brotherhood/AlQaeda, amongst all of their many other crimes.
Things like this matter. Give a money laundering psychopath enough power and they will move on to murder, genocide and tyranny. Ignore these indicators at your own peril.”
QUESTION: who wants a lying, arrogant female who has placed herself above the rest of the country to be our President? Nothing Hillary says can be believed. Anyone who thinks she should be president, really ought to check into the doctors office to have their head examined. They may be low on gray matter, or may have had an abortion in the past, or knows someone who has had an abortion or has had a spouse who had his love child aborted. Hmmmmm,……….. makes one wonder if that is why Hillary is so hip on Planned Parenthood? Everyone knows Bill is no angel.
Why wouldn’t everyone vote for her? SHE IS AMERICAN ROYALTY! … She speaks with great authority but (not necessarily the truth). Ex. “THE SERVER STAYS WHERE IT IS” ! She Refuses to answer political questions, unless they are pre-approved by her. ( It just shows she can’t think on her feet.) She certainly can’t stoop to the level of the others who are campaigning against her.. Oh, how I loved the reporters being corralled in ropes! Yes,America finally has royalty, at least Hillary thinks so.
This is a narcissistic person who thinks she should be and DESERVES the position of President and In her mind she is already our QUEEN! …………………………(.Oh, gosh.I’M SO Sorry Hillary, It just isn’t to be.) Seems that now might be the time to seek some badly needed advice from Martha Stewart. It may be needed to help with the adjustment to the new living quarters. I doubt the White House is the Big House she is headed to..
Her followers………….. well, they are called “dumb and dummer.