[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
politics and politicians Title: NYT: Second review of Hillary e-mails confirms Top Secret/compartmented info Despite weeks of denials, a second review by the originating agencies confirms that Hillary Clinton improperly received Top Secret/compartmented information on her unsecured and unauthorized e-mail server. The New York Times’ Michael Schmidt reported late last night that both the CIA and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA) agree on that point, backing up the referral from two Inspectors General a month ago to the Department of Justice: Mrs. Clinton’s presidential campaign and the State Department disputed the inspector general’s finding last month and questioned whether the emails, which are being released to the public, had been overclassified by an arbitrary process. But the special review — by the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency — concluded that the emails were “Top Secret,” the highest classification of government intelligence, when they were sent to Mrs. Clinton in 2009 and 2011. This relates to the original intel-community review of 40 sample e-mails from Hillary’s data, reviewed only after its existence came to light in the Benghazi select committee probe. Hillary received these two e-mails from an unspecified source, but as a cleared member of leadership as well as the originator of the secret system on which it got transmitted and stored, Hillary would have had responsibility to correct this “spillage” when it occurred. If the data came from NGA, which uses satellites to derive intelligence data, then the need to protect the data should have been obvious, especially to a Secretary of State. Team Hillary and State both responded with further obfuscations. Nick Merrill released a statement on behalf of the campaign citing “bureaucratic infighting among the intelligence community,” but that’s precisely the opposite of this finding. The intel community — CIA and NGA — both agree on the classification of this information. State’s John Kirby claimed classification is a partnership decision: This also is nonsense. The State Department doesn’t develop the NGA’s satellite data, and even if it did, it would also be classified at the highest levels for the same reason. Regardless of whether State wants data declassified, that is the purview of the originating agency and its command structure, not the State Department. An Executive Order updated by Barack Obama but which dates back to at least Bill Clinton’s presidency makes that clear. While those agencies consider information classified, State and any other agency would be bound to treat the data with its current classification until an appeal could be completed. Did State ever ask for this data to be declassified to the extent that it could get transmitted on an unsecured, non-governmental e-mail system? If the answer is no, then Kirby’s entire statement is moot. As John Schindler put it last night, State’s opinion on its classification is of no weight: — John Schindler (@20committee) September 8, 2015 The FBI and the Department of Justice will have to take some kind of action at this point. A federal grand jury will get them off the hook politically, at least for a short period of time, and that may be their best option under the weight of a presidential campaign. Poster Comment: Smoking gun confirmed. Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 3.
#1. To: TooConservative (#0)
Information is not classified because it is labelled. It is labelled because it is classified. Hillary is just babbling. A SCIF is only necessary for SCI material. The vast bulk of classified information is not maintained in a SCIF. Hillary's home brewed system did not qualify for any level of classified information.
Hillary, yesterday: "I'll never apologize as I did nothing wrong." Hillary, today: "I'm sorry." There must be some brutal polls at the DNC to prompt that quick a flipflop. They've tried every lie in the book. I guess an insincere apology costs them nothing.
#5. To: TooConservative, Fred Mertz (#3)
They've tried every lie in the book. I guess an insincere apology costs them nothing. As far as polls, Bernie passed her in NH and drew close in IA, and the Pubbies beat her nationally, and Joe is looming. No problem. They can just relaunch her campaign and introduce her to the American people again.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||||
|
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]
|