We have been closely following the Clinton email scandal and this morning additional information was leaked on the 22 “top secret” emails withheld by the States Department An official is quoted as saying that some of those emails contained “operational intelligence” and jeopardized “sources, methods and lives.” While I agree with the Clinton campaign that these leaks are themselves problematic (both in terms of their timing and their disclosures from an ongoing investigation), I have long maintained that this was a serious scandal and that Clinton’s evolving defense does not track with national security rules or procedures. I consider the decision to use exclusively an unsecure server for “convenience” to be a breathtakingly reckless act for one of the top officials in our government. I am also deeply concerned about the level of “spin” coming from the campaign that is misrepresenting the governing standards and practices in the field. Much of what has been said in defense of Clinton’s use of the email system is knowingly misleading in my view.
In addition, Rep. Mike Pompeo, R-Kan., who sits on the House intelligence committee, “suggested the military and intelligence communities have had to change operations” due to the presumption that Clinton’s emails were compromised.
Since this is in a long-standing field of practice, I have been watching the scandal unfold with particular interest. I have previously noted that the decision of Clinton to use a personal server showed incredibly bad judgment that put classified information at risk. The defense that the information was not marked, which the campaign has been using recently, does not address the fundamental issues in the scandal.
Clinton has insisted that “I never sent classified material on my email, and I never received any that was marked classified.” The key of this spin is again the word “marked.” 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. Indeed that understanding was formally agreed to by Clinton when she signed the “Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement,” or SF-312, which states that “classified information is marked or unmarked classified information, including oral communications.” 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. Classified oral communications are not “marked” nor would classified information removed from secure systems and sent via a personal server. Likewise, classified oral communications that are followed up with emails would not be “marked.” 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.
What is equally curious is the decision by Clinton to double down in the last town hall and reject the claim that she used “poor judgment” in using an unsecure system. To say that you decided to risk confidential and classified communications for “convenience” is hardly a compelling case for someone who is running on her national security and foreign affairs experience.
In re. the Clinton regency
Sir Walter Scott, Marmion, Canto vi. Stanza 17.
It’s like a case of the clap; it keeps on giving.
Renegade – there are reports that her health is not what it should be. We might need a regent if she is elected.
Joseph Jones-
If you had read some of my more recent posts, you would note that I’m no fan of Hillary. While she’s better than Trump or Cruz, that’s like saying I like cat droppings better than dog droppings..While some droppings are in fact better than others, I’d rather have something other than droppings to choose from when I vote.
That being said, Hillary is entitled to the same presumption of innocence as the “undercover journalists” who were indicted in Texas. There’s a big difference between Hillary being untrustworthy,. and her being a felon.
More to the point of my first comment above, when Prof. Turley has three posts on this topic in the week leading up to the Iowa primary, it looks like Prof. Turley is gunning for her. I know it’s his blog; he can post what he wants. But at some point I’m going to report him to the SPCA for beating a dead horse.
Don de Drain – I cannot speak for JT, however it seems that he takes his security clearance seriously and Hillary thinks it’s a joke. I would be p**sed too if I had been a Boy Scout since the Reagan years and then someone came along and pi**ed in my sandbox.
She and her buddies at the State Dept (did you know there was no IG at the State Dept during the Clinton years) are trying to wait out the election cycle.
Joseph Jones: ‘General Petraeus was convicted of sharing top secret files with his girl friend…..but there was no known breach.’ Hello? Who was his girl friend, Hillary Clinton?
Tin Foil Hat – oddly enough Petraeus gf had a high security clearance, too.
The latest reports are that at least a couple of the emails were “born classified.” By that, they contained such sensitive information that just looking at them let you know that the classification was. Now, since Hillary was having her minions strip the headers off or cut-and-paste to get them on her home brew, we do not know if the minions clearance level was high enough to even read it. And somehow she sent a Top Secret email to Sidney Blumenthal.
If I were a minion of Hillary’s I would be lawyered up because the Clintons, like the Obamas, throw people under the train.
Did Clinton and staff do a “copy and paste” sinkhole email stunt?
Just what a sinkhole of secrets the Secretary of State’s office was during President Obama’s first term, when Ms. Clinton occupied that chair, is frighteningly apparent.
Allegations are swirling that her staff systematically copied Top Secret Codeword information off separate, just-for-intelligence computer systems and cut-and-pasted it into “unclassified” emails.
This, if true, is an unambiguous felony. There is reason to be cautious about this claim, which is unsubstantiated so far, and would indicate a complex degree of intent:
moving Top Secret Codeword information into unclassified emails is not simple, rather a multi-step process, and would leave an audit trail.
Clinton f*#ked up. This is a fact. She has to waddle through this mess as politicians do. Another fact is that the whole email communication issue has, hopefully, been tightened. Others in high places in the government and military did this sort of thing and, hopefully, won’t do it again, with all this fuss. Clinton might come out and apologize, again. Then she might just try to weather the storm, as most politicians do. Perhaps it’s time to put this in perspective, good will come of it and Clinton will continue to get smeared by those who have it in for her. This goes with the job.
Now, look at the Presidential race. This country would be better off with a Democrat President than any of the scary options on the Republican side. Sanders is too old and too radical. The Republican house would grind him first to a halt and then to dust. That leaves Clinton, the lesser of all the evils. When you weight it, this email nonsense is not enough to argue against having the lesser of the evils as President.
Perhaps Turley should find something else about which to be ‘deeply concerned’, perhaps the deplorable circus that is the American political system and the jokes that are its ringmasters.
If something is a legitimate secret shouldn’t it be “hand-delivered” by courier, since electronic communications have never been totally secure?
Mike: You portray either arrogant ignorance (“arrogant” because of your tone) or you may be a paid shill working for Her Majesty Clinton.
In case of the former, let me enlighten you: General Petraeus was convicted of secret files being in an unlocked drawer of his office in a home protected by armed guards. Also, for sharing secret files with his girl friend. In neither case was there any known breach. Firing a gun in the air, even if it hurts no one, is illegal for a long list of obvious reasons that apparently evade you, unless of course, you’re the shill I mentioned.
If your point is the multiple millions of dollars spent on classified servers is an unnecessary waste of money, sorry, but upper case letters and the word “balderdash” fail to make your case. Yes, we get you don’t like bad news for your heroine, but “balderdash” and exclamation point only reinforce that you and Clinton have no defense.
If this is a “tempest, teapot” then it requires no attention on your part nor Clinton’s. If true, in the end it only helps Clinton because she shall wear it like a badge of honor, proving her “Right Wing Conspiracy” meme. If this articles are all lies, then you should rejoice, because Clinton will wear it like a Superhero cape. You should thank Turley for writing it.
Unless, of course, you are as full of it as is your hero Clinton…
What RB said.
Plus, perhaps I want my email to be kept confidential. Why do those in power have greater rights to secrecy than everyone else? If they are “protecting” anyone, it is only themselves and their power, certainly not the public.
We need to have open govt. But, anyone who doesn’t think we need secrets, particularly regarding human intelligence assets, is a fool.
“Unconstitutional” activities cannot be legally classified as secret and is disloyal to a government servants oath of office. Proper loyalty is the top requirement for intelligence related activities.
Maybe if Clinton defended the proper loyalty and integrity of Edward Snowden, Kiriakou, Tamm, Drake and Manning in upholding their supreme loyalty oath – it might save Clinton also!
Since the vast majority of secret information appears to be totally bogus and illegitimate under our U.S. Constitution maybe this information was technically secret but entirely bogus.
Democracy itself cannot exist with fraudulent and excessive secrecy, so maybe this is an opportunity to fix this unAmerican system while freeing our brave and loyal whistleblowers! We would steer closer to James Madison instead of following the path of Cold War leader Erik Honaker.
What would Elizabeth McCord do?
Don de Drain
The willingness of the Clintonistas to excuse every violation/piece of evidence is amazing.
Hillary is a liar – every reminder of this fact does the country a service.
Don de Drain: Gee, thanks for letting the world know you’d vote for Clinton if she ate babies on TV.
Other than the article potentially harming your hero’s political aspirations, neutral observers can at least be comforted that even die hard Clinton sycophants like yourself agree with ever single point made in it.
Balderdash! These were SENT TO not from the secretary … and so far no one has identified any breach of security on that server. Tempest. Teapot.
Jonathan.
I have for many years been involved in the prosecution or defense of military personnel accused at court-martial, security clearances, or other adverse administrative actions with all kinds of mishandling-deliberate or negligent-of classified materials and information. The “story” from Mrs. Clinton is not compelling. I would argue that anyone involved with the receipt or possession of classified information-or information that might be classified-has a duty of care beyond merely reading the marking on any document.I also would agree that the absence of a classification marking may be mitigating of the seriousness of the offense.
I would further note-from experience-that classification reviews and reviews where there is the potential for unauthorized release can be cumbersome, time consuming, and result in changes in procedures. This unhelpful burden then distracts people from their other duties-which I would argue is more than an inconvenience.
Cheers.
Reblogged this on Scoop Feed.
The Clintonista’s will be defending Lady Macbeth @ all cost. Human life risked. PFFT! Small potatoes. Lady Macbeth needs to be the first woman prez by any means necessary!!!
How did the Clintons go from broke in 2004 to being worth 58 million in 2015
Gosh, thanks for reminding us about this Prof Turley. It really has been too long since you talked about it previously. Especially with today being the Iowa primary and all.