[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Freepers Still Love war

Parody ... Jump / Trump --- van Halen jump

"The Democrat Meltdown Continues"

"Yes, We Need Deportations Without Due Process"

"Trump's Tariff Play Smart, Strategic, Working"

"Leftists Make Desperate Attempt to Discredit Photo of Abrego Garcia's MS-13 Tattoos. Here Are Receipts"

"Trump Administration Freezes $2 Billion After Harvard Refuses to Meet Demands"on After Harvard Refuses to Meet Demands

"Doctors Committing Insurance Fraud to Conceal Trans Procedures, Texas Children’s Whistleblower Testifies"

"Left Using '8647' Symbol for Violence Against Trump, Musk"

KawasakiÂ’s new rideable robohorse is straight out of a sci-fi novel

"Trade should work for America, not rule it"

"The Stakes Couldn’t Be Higher in Wisconsin’s Supreme Court Race – What’s at Risk for the GOP"

"How Trump caught big-government fans in their own trap"

‘Are You Prepared for Violence?’

Greek Orthodox Archbishop gives President Trump a Cross, tells him "Make America Invincible"

"Trump signs executive order eliminating the Department of Education!!!"

"If AOC Is the Democratic Future, the Party Is Even Worse Off Than We Think"

"Ending EPA Overreach"

Closest Look Ever at How Pyramids Were Built

Moment the SpaceX crew Meets Stranded ISS Crew

The Exodus Pharaoh EXPLAINED!

Did the Israelites Really Cross the Red Sea? Stunning Evidence of the Location of Red Sea Crossing!

Are we experiencing a Triumph of Orthodoxy?

Judge Napolitano with Konstantin Malofeev (Moscow, Russia)

"Trump Administration Cancels Most USAID Programs, Folds Others into State Department"

Introducing Manus: The General AI Agent

"Chinese Spies in Our Military? Straight to Jail"

Any suggestion that the USA and NATO are "Helping" or have ever helped Ukraine needs to be shot down instantly

"Real problem with the Palestinians: Nobody wants them"

ACDC & The Rolling Stones - Rock Me Baby

Magnus Carlsen gives a London System lesson!

"The Democrats Are Suffering Through a Drought of Generational Talent"

7 Tactics Of The Enemy To Weaken Your Faith

Strange And Biblical Events Are Happening

Every year ... BusiesT casino gambling day -- in Las Vegas

Trump’s DOGE Plan Is Legally Untouchable—Elon Musk Holds the Scalpel

Palestinians: What do you think of the Trump plan for Gaza?

What Happens Inside Gaza’s Secret Tunnels? | Unpacked

Hamas Torture Bodycam Footage: "These Monsters Filmed it All" | IDF Warfighter Doron Keidar, Ep. 225

EXPOSED: The Dark Truth About the Hostages in Gaza

New Task Force Ready To Expose Dark Secrets

Egypt Amasses Forces on Israel’s Southern Border | World War 3 About to Start?

"Trump wants to dismantle the Education Department. Here’s how it would work"

test

"Federal Workers Concerned That Returning To Office Will Interfere With Them Not Working"

"Yes, the Democrats Have a Governing Problem – They Blame America First, Then Govern Accordingly"

"Trump and His New Frenemies, Abroad and at Home"

"The Left’s Sin Is of Omission and Lost Opportunity"

"How Trump’s team will break down the woke bureaucracy"

Pete Hegseth will be confirmed in a few minutes


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

United States News
See other United States News Articles

Title: Criminal Inquiry Is Sought in Clinton Email Account
Source: CNBC
URL Source: http://www.cnbc.com/2015/07/23/crim ... ary-clintons-use-of-email.html
Published: Jul 24, 2015
Author: Michael S. Schmidt and Matt Apuzzo
Post Date: 2015-07-24 13:54:29 by redleghunter
Ping List: *2016 The Likely Suspects*     Subscribe to *2016 The Likely Suspects*
Keywords: None
Views: 13435
Comments: 111

WASHINGTON — Two inspectors general have asked the Justice Department to open a criminal investigation into whether sensitive government information was mishandled in connection with the personal email account Hillary Rodham Clinton used as secretary of state, senior government officials said Thursday.

The request follows an assessment in a June 29 memo by the inspectors general for the State Department and the intelligence agencies that Mrs. Clinton's private account contained "hundreds of potentially classified emails." The memo was written to Patrick F. Kennedy, the under secretary of state for management.

It is not clear if any of the information in the emails was marked as classified by the State Department when Mrs. Clinton sent or received them.

But since her use of a private email account for official State Department business was revealed in March, she has repeatedly said that she had no classified information on the account.

The initial revelation has been an issue in the early stages of her presidential campaign.

Click for Full Text!


Poster Comment:

(1 image)

Subscribe to *2016 The Likely Suspects*

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 106.

#3. To: redleghunter (#0)

It is not clear if any of the information in the emails was marked as classified by the State Department when Mrs. Clinton sent or received them.

Right. The sender sent information which was not yet officially classified. Hillary Clinton received information which had not yet been officially classified. As head of the State Department, did she have a duty to recognize the intelligence reports as highly classified and classify them, and give them the required protection?

As the information was clearly compromised, should it have been so reported?

It would not seem to help if Sidney Blumenthal were to be considered to have acted in some official State Department capacity and to have sufficient clearance and access authorization. It would only make him responsible to have protected it in the first place.

Hillary's server clearly contained intelligence reports with Top Secret information. The Agency head is responsible for the protection of classified information within her agency.

nolu chan  posted on  2015-07-24   15:50:27 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: nolu chan (#3)

The Agency head is responsible for the protection of classified information within her agency.

True,and BY DEFINITION anything she did not classify was not classified information.

Remember when that shithead Jim-mah Carter exposed Top Secret Code Word intelligence about the Stealth fighters and bombers ready to come online in order to try to pump up is re-election chances and absolutely nothing happened to him for doing so despite the FACT that anyone below him doing that would have received life in prison?

It wasn't classified if the president says it wasn't classified.

Same thing is going to happen here. She didn't classify it so it wasn't classified.

Can't we just MOVE ON?

sneakypete  posted on  2015-07-26   10:01:44 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#101. To: sneakypete (#20)

The Agency head is responsible for the protection of classified information within her agency.

True,and BY DEFINITION anything she did not classify was not classified information.

Remember when that shithead Jim-mah Carter exposed Top Secret Code Word intelligence about the Stealth fighters and bombers ready to come online in order to try to pump up is re-election chances and absolutely nothing happened to him for doing so despite the FACT that anyone below him doing that would have received life in prison?

It wasn't classified if the president says it wasn't classified.

Same thing is going to happen here. She didn't classify it so it wasn't classified.

Can't we just MOVE ON?

Anything not yet officially classified is not officially classified. That does not change the responsibility to classify national security information, or the culpability for failing one's responsibility to properly classify it.

For any qualifying national security information which came across her non-secure email system:

HILLARY CLINTON was RESPONSIBLE to properly classify the document, and every paragraph of the document, upon her initial review of the document.

A document is not unclassified because Hillary Clinton did not classify it. See the IG statement below. If information within falls under derived classification, it is classified whether it is marked or not.

HILLARY CLINTON was RESPONSIBLE to NOT keep the national security information on her non-secure server.

HILLARY CLINTON was RESPONSIBLE to file a compromise report for each such document. Information does not automatically become unclassified or delcassified because it has been compromised, even if published in newspapers or hacked off a non-secure server.

HILLARY CLINTON was RESPONSIBLE to take immediate measures to prevent further transmission of national security information to her non-secure email system.

Instead, HILLARY CLINTON maintained an unlawful non-secure back channel intelligence system, compromising all national security information she permitted and enabled to be handled on her non-secure system.

The President did not declare any of the national security information held on the non-secure system of HILLARY CLINTON to be unclassified or declassified.

Jimmy Carter or other presidents may declassify and release whatever they choose. What the president may do today (but has not done) is not relevant to a determination of what HILLARY CLINTON wrongfully did, or failed to do.

National Security Information, wrongfully present on HILLARY CLINTON's email server, was not properly classified, AS REQUIRED. She could not ignore information that qualified for SECRET or TOP SECRET classification and treat it as unclassified until one of her subordinates told her different.

www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-01-05/pdf/E9-31418.pdf

Title 3—The President, Executive Order 13526 of December 29, 2009 Classified National Security Information

Federal Register, Vol. 75, No. 2, Tuesday, January 5, 2010, pp. 707-708

Sec. 1.3. Classification Authority.

(d) All original classification authorities must receive training in proper classification (including the avoidance of over-classification) and declassification as provided in this order and its implementing directives at least once a calendar year. Such training must include instruction on the proper safeguarding of classified information and on the sanctions in section 5.5 of this order that may be brought against an individual who fails to classify information properly or protect classified information from unauthorized disclosure.

[snip]

https://oig.state.gov/system/files/statement_of_the_icig_and_oig_regarding_review_of_clintons_emails_july_24_2015.pdf

July 24, 2015

Statement from the Inspectors General of the Intelligence Community and the Department of State Regarding the Review of Former Secretary Clinton's Emails Yesterday the Office ofthe Inspector General ofthe Intelligence Community (IC IG} sent a congressional notification to intelligence oversight committees updating them of the IC IG support to the State Department IG (attached).

The IC IG found four emails containing classified IC-derived information in a limited sample of 40 emails of the 30,000 emails provided by former Secretary Clinton. The four emails, which have not been released through the State FOIA process, did not contain classification markings and/or dissemination controls. These emails were not retroactively classified by the State Department; rather these emails contained classified information when they were generated and, according to IC classification officials, that information remains classified today. This classified information should never have been transmitted via an unclassified personal system. IC IG made a referral detailing the potential compromise of classified information to security officials within the Executive Branch. The main purpose of the referral was to notify security officials that classified information may exist on at least one private server and thumb drive that are not in the government's possession. An important distinction is that the IC IG did not make a criminal referral – it was a security referral made for counterintelligence purposes. The IC IG is statutorily required to refer potential compromises of national security information to the appropriate IC security officials.

/s/ I. Charles McCullough, III
Inspector General of the Intelligence Community

Inspector General, Department of State
Steve Linick

Hillary stored INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY (IC) DERIVED INFORMATION on her non-secure server and she transmitted the same. This material held derived classification, as opposed to requiring original classification. Orignal classification of the information already existed. As the IG said, the information was classified when generated and remains classified today. The IG filed the potential compromise report as required by law.

As the IG noted, "This classified information should never have been transmitted via an unclassified personal system."

nolu chan  posted on  2015-07-27   16:24:20 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#102. To: nolu chan (#101)

Anything not yet officially classified is not officially classified. That does not change the responsibility to classify national security information, or the culpability for failing one's responsibility to properly classify it.

For any qualifying national security information which came across her non-secure email system:

HILLARY CLINTON was RESPONSIBLE

Technically you are correct,and that would make a solid case in a court of law.

The problem is this is Bubbette! we are speaking of,and she is never going to be charged with anything in a court of law.

She is a protected species,and only has to worry about the "court of public opinion" and there is nobody better than the Clinton's when it comes to shading the facts and confusing issues. Does the sentence "That all depends on what the meaning of the word "is",is." bring back any memories.

sneakypete  posted on  2015-07-27   17:07:57 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#103. To: sneakypete (#102)

The problem is this is Bubbette! we are speaking of,and she is never going to be charged with anything in a court of law.

She is a protected species,and only has to worry about the "court of public opinion" and there is nobody better than the Clinton's when it comes to shading the facts and confusing issues. Does the sentence "That all depends on what the meaning of the word "is",is." bring back any memories.

Hillary is not in a court of law but is in the court of public opinion and in a very bright spotlight. Escaping criminal prosecution is not the same as getting elected president.

Hillary trying to sound like Bill gives me an impression of Tricky Dick saying "I am not a crook."

nolu chan  posted on  2015-07-27   23:55:34 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#104. To: nolu chan (#103)

Hillary is not in a court of law but is in the court of public opinion and in a very bright spotlight.

Not really. It only seems that way to those of us on the right because we have spent so long waiting for her to be called to accounts.

The truth is the typical Dim voters,and especially the Why-men feminist voters never hear about any of this,and if they do hear about it they never bother to pay attention or do any research because she's "their man!"

IF the mainstream media mentions it all all on local teebee where most dolts get their news,it's just a speaking point mentioning how radical right-wingers and anti-women forces are trying to damage her reputation.

And for the vast amount of voters that get interested in politics for 30 days ever 4 years,they never heard of it and will never hear of it.

sneakypete  posted on  2015-07-28   8:54:21 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#105. To: sneakypete (#104)

Hillary is not in a court of law but is in the court of public opinion and in a very bright spotlight.

Not really. It only seems that way to those of us on the right because we have spent so long waiting for her to be called to accounts.

Hillary is in a spotlight and her inability to to get stories such as her security blunders out of the news cycle are having a toll on her polling numbers.

I still doubt Hillary can stumble all the way to the convention. Only time will tell.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-democrats-wounded-queen/2015/07/27/c7c33808-3478-11e5-8e66-07b4603ec92a_story.html

Hillary Clinton, the Democrats’ wounded queen?

By Michael Gerson
Washington Post
Opinion writer
July 27, 2015

WAPO Source: no text provided.

nolu chan  posted on  2015-07-28   20:42:06 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#106. To: nolu chan (#105)

I still doubt Hillary can stumble all the way to the convention. Only time will tell.

True,but we both know that Bubbette! can absolutely count on the Dim Party People to vote for her because she has a D behind her name,just like the Republican Party People will vote for any sack of shit you put a R on that wins the alleged Republican nomination.

In the end it seems like the people that are really responsible for putting a president into the WH are the dummies that get interested in politics for 30 days every 4 years,and base their vote on who looks the best,has the nicest looking children,whose "turn" it is,or any other factor that has absolutely nothing to do with reason.

Which is why the Founding Fathers set up a system where only property owners were allowed to vote because they had a vested interest in knowing who was running and what they were for and against. Now we let anybody with a drivers license vote,and they always vote for the candidate that promises to give them the most "free stuff".

sneakypete  posted on  2015-07-28   20:50:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 106.

#107. To: sneakypete (#106)

Now we let anybody with a drivers license vote,and they always vote for the candidate that promises to give them the most "free stuff".

That would be Bernie.

Who is one of two people you said you would vote for.

The other is another democrat who gives out free stuff.

You're just hot air.

A K A Stone  posted on  2015-07-28 20:53:58 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#110. To: sneakypete (#106)

In the end it seems like the people that are really responsible for putting a president into the WH are the dummies that get interested in politics for 30 days every 4 years,and base their vote on who looks the best,has the nicest looking children,whose "turn" it is,or any other factor that has absolutely nothing to do with reason.

True enough for the general election but that is not the same folks who turn out for the primaries. The party PTB greatly influence the primaries and the nomination.

nolu chan  posted on  2015-07-29 00:53:25 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 106.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com