The e-mail scandal involving former secretary of state Hillary Clinton has continued to unfold, as we have been discussing. The number of classified emails have now grown to 1340. While the vast majority have low level classification, a few contained information classified at the secret level. This is not the first such allegation of someone stripping classification headers in scandal. The mishandling of classified information is a crime and the level of gross negligence in the use of the private server by Clinton is staggering. However, there has long been a good-faith debate over whether Clinton is being given a pass on a criminal investigation by the Obama Administration or whether her actions (while negligent) were not criminal in nature. A recent story could change that debate considerably if critics are proven correct. One of the emails released recently reportedly shows Clinton instructing an aide to strip off classification markings from a document and to send by unsecure means. Such an act could be charged as a criminal offense under federal classification laws. However, it is not clear that any email was sent and the Clinton staff could claim that she was referring to clearly unclassified material contained in a document. There has been a suggestion that the material in question were “talking points” that were meant to be public or were clearly unclassified. [Update: Clinton says that the email was never sent and that she trusted her aide to make the right choices on what could be sent.]
The 2011 email could add significant pressure for the Obama Administration, even though the House Select Committee on Benghazi said that it is not investigating Clinton’s potential mishandling of classified data through her private, home-based email server.
The email from Jacob Sullivan tells Clinton that “They say they’ve had issues sending secure fax. They’re working on it.” Clinton responds by ordering “If they can’t, turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure.” To remove classification headings from a classified document is usually treated as a very serious matter, though the level of the classification is not known.
Here is one of the pertinent provisions:
such as 18 USC 793:
d) Whoever, lawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or
(e) Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or
(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense,
(1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or
(2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
It is important to note that we do not know if the document was in fact classified or, if so, at what level. We also do not know if the aide followed the instructions, stripped the headers, and sent the information on the unprotected server. The concern raised about the transmission and reference to the headers would support the view of some classification level. Notably, this law covers any information “relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation.”
At a minimum, the instructions raise a serious question of judgment in overriding such concerns about unsecure transmissions and circumventing protections for sensitive material. Having worked since the Reagan Administration with classified information, I remained floored by all of these allegations from the exclusive use of an unsecure personal server to this latest controversy of stripping headings and overriding security objections. I remain confused as to why this is even necessary for a high-ranking official who has a host of security officers who can supply classified material in proper form and under proper controls. I can understand (even if I strongly disagree with) the effect to retain control over communications by relying exclusively on a private server. However, stripping headers of classification markings (assuming that is what happened) would appear a case where simple convenience trumped national security protections for these officials.
Again, however, we will still need to see the classification level of the information to judge the gravity of the act. Telephone books can be classified as “confidential” even though information within the documents are public. What is surprising however is that such a high-ranking officials would send an email to strip markings rather than instruct aides to find an unclassified source.
What is equally perplexing is the expression of shock by Clinton that an aide was using a private email account despite her virtual exclusive use of a personal unsecure server. In another involving Jacob Sullivan, Clinton sends an email dated Feb. 27, 2011, expressing surprise that a State Department staffer was using a personal email account. The diplomatic officer named John Godfrey wrote a detailed summary of information about Libyan dictator Muammar Qaddafi that was forwarded to Clinton. Clinton responds by asking for whom Godfrey works. “Us,” Sullivan writes back. Clinton replies: “Is he in NEA [Near Eastern Affairs] currently? Or was he in Embassy? I was surprised that he used personal email account if he is at State.”
In addition to the Sullivan emails, there is a rising controversy over a Sidney Blumenthal email that many believe was derived from classified sources, including the highly sensitive intelligence generated from the National Security Agency. At the time, Blumenthal held no government position even though he was actively advising Clinton on a host of issues.
Koch Brothers to JT: Keep up the good work on Hillary. Dont tell anybody we said this.
–sent by personal email.
Hillary to Staff: I ate at the Saudi Embassy last night in NYC. The food was awful. Don’t tell anybody.
–by email.
The have craftsman working on XXX size cankle bracelets.
The 14th Amendment of the “supreme law of the land” requires “equal protection” of the laws. Meaning you can’t cherry-pick enforcement for anyone.
Violating the “supreme law of the land” is considered a high crime in the United States. First let’s prosecute torture, false imprisonment, warrantless spying and cruel & unusual punishment by Bush, Cheney and friends.
Once we prosecute the Bush suspects for high crimes (that they have admitted to publicly) then we can consider the lesser crimes that Clinton is suspected of.
My guess is Obama’s justice department will indict her the moment Joe Biden “decides” to jump into the race. He’s been missing in action for quite some time prepping and this will allow him to have avoided some debates.
“My guess is Obama’s justice department will indict her the moment Joe Biden “decides” to jump into the race. ”
Only if they have a video of her handing the emails over to Putin and counting $100 bills out of bushel baskets. Even then her followers will argue that as SOS she had discretion to keep heads of state informed on matters of mutual interest.
http://buenavistamall.com/HillaryPrison.jpg
dlet60 “Is there a chance the wicked witch may be indicted”? Wow! What a fascinating reference to witch-hunting! Do you live in Salem Massachusetts?
Is there a chance the wicked witch may be indicted? Wow, this will surely excite all the clowns racing around in the clown car.
diet60 – currently all the front running Republicans are out polling Hillary. She is also in a dead heat with Sanders in 3 states.
“Even if she were to set an orphanage on fire, Christmas eve, she would still not be prosecuted and serve any time”
Setting orphanages on fire, bombing Doctors Without Borders Hospitals, shooting Reuters journalists from a Blackhawk helicoptor, torturing innocent defenseless people for over a decade, killing one’s own people under “capitol punishment”, police brutality, toxic waste pollution, and similar abominations are typical US behavior. Why would one single such incident be punished and not the others?
What a bunch of itShay. I suppose I should capitalize all letters of that last sentence and put an exclamation point at the end.
This sentence from the article above: “It is important to note that we do not know if the document was in fact classified or at one level.” I can not divine what is meant at the very end: …” or at one level.”
What is important to know is whether the contents of the email was important– whether the release would in anyway effect national security.
I have not yet seen any contents of any email which was somehow damaging or revealed some secret. If some dork in the muddle east kills somebody and it is all over the news, it is not a violation of national security for some person in government to report the news to some other person in or out of government. Its all the news thats fit to print.
It seems like JT has a mission on this topic. I guess the Koch Brothers have him in mind for some job when Cruz is the next President.
Having read the law that Turley provided, I see NO violation of that law. It said nothing about transmitting something over an unsecured line or reclasifying a document. I guess that folks here consider her grocery list classified material too and that she should be hung for letting that intel out. Get REAL!
Maybe the Russians can provide the missing emails–or perhaps a Script Kiddie living in El Cajon.
It might be worthwhile for the Democrats to start considering cutting their losses with Mrs. Clinton and shoring up other candidates who are not corrupt and do not possess the perennial drama and scandal she causes herself.
It truly chagrins and grieves me to read this expose about one whom I truly counted on as a viable candidate
for president of the United States ( by political background, experience, expertise and government service at highest level). This must be, as they say, the smoking gun, since it destroys the myth of the idea of plausible deniability. A basic principle and tenet of our system of democracy is the idea of the law applies everyone.
A higher magistrate than HRC, the highest of all, RMN, was laid low, and driven from national office before he was allowed to resign in disgrace, gracefully, and go his way. Now, I must of need, follow BS, he whom
I much prefer anyway, but the idea . . .
Truly, I fear for my government and America when the seemingly only viable choices for the American people are HRC, who surely knew better and blatantly and willfully disregarded the law,and, her erstwhile opponent, DT, a demagogue, by any definition.
New generation Teflon coatings are remarkably resilient to staining.
“Even if she were to set an orphanage on fire, Christmas eve, she would still not be prosecuted and serve any time. I don’t know why that is, only that it is.”
What bam bam said.
Having been a top secret control officer, personal reliability program manager, communications material system custodian and other like type duties, not only is Hillary exposed but so is everyone with knowledge of security violations who participated or just had first hand knowledge. While she may be Teflon coated, there are a number of “tainted” people who will be shuffled. It figures, debris left in a Clinton wake. Wonder how many have tried to warn and taken it in the neck?
Yo, Fog, you must be in one. I am an American voter. I & MANY I know are VERY interested in Bill’s husband’s email. AND her family foundation AND that the Russians were able to buy…here, read it for your self from the NY Times…
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html?_r=0
The reason we haven’t heard about this “long ago” is that her super pac media, 0 & many Dems in Congress are running interference for her. The above link is to only ONE of the many ‘problems’ concerning the Clinton foundation.
Get yer head out the fog, dog, & get some honest research going.
Thanks.
SamFox
Even if she were to set an orphanage on fire, Christmas eve, she would still not be prosecuted and serve any time. I don’t know why that is, only that it is. Apparently, nothing seems to stick to her or to her partner in crime, Slick Willy–nothing. Hillary and Willy must have the goods on a whole bunch of influential people which act as some sort of buffer to prevent any real semblance of accountability. That’s what I suspect. Slick Willy has reports of sexual assault and rape that date back decades–DECADES–to his college days, but don’t expect him to be paraded about in front of the media and corralled into court like Cosby. Not gonna happen. Ever. Anyone attempting to cross Hillary and Willy Corleone will turn up missing, dead or asked to take a friendly boat ride with cousin Fredo.
“There is this one and the one where the guy is sending from a home-brew and she complains about it. She is toast.”
If I were to bet it would be that her supporters won’t care. If they think about it at all they will rationalize that the government classifies too much anyway, so this just balances things out.
It is really too bad. A slip of the lips can get someone killed.
The American people are sick and tired of hearing about Mrs. Clinton’s damn emails. Her judgment is just fine. If the email matter here was serious and there was a serious security breach, then we would have heard about this long ago.
There is this one and the one where the guy is sending from a home-brew and she complains about it. She is toast.