candelista (1,932 posts) http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141183102
U.S. Said to Probe How Classified Data Got on Hillary Clinton’s Server
Here is how it works, kids: Classified e-mails are send on a secured network. In order to get them onto Hillary's private server they would have had to copy the e-mails and then send them on an unclassified server. There's a couple of law violations for each e-mail.
God help her if they find TS/SCI messages transmitted that way. Also if her 'aides' stipped off the classifications from e-mails before sending over unsecured channels. All felonies for every single item.
there is some indication that Clinton aides drew upon a variety of messages in classified information systems to produce summaries and updates of events in Libya and elsewhere and then sent them to Clinton or her aides using a private server.
That too is illegal.
Are Huma and Cheryl going to take the rap?
If there is any Justice left in this administration they'll join Hillary in prison.
magical thyme (11,976 posts)
16. says the Clinton team, versus the Inspector General
Different departments do their own classifying and de-classifying.
It appears that somebody from Hillary's staff lifted classified information from other departments -- which department would decide what info from their dept. is classified -- summarized it and passed it along.
That is why her spokespeople have been careful to say "It wasn't marked as classified." The documents the data originated from were marked classified, but they didn't add the classification markings to their emailed summaries.
There are also questions around the security on her server. That the emails from the time period in question weren't encrypted already shows a giant security hole.
Hillary will walk away more or less unscathed. Her IT staff in charge of security and whoever emailed the high security satellite data re: troop positions and movement, will not.
Of course... if Hillary would have used the secured servers as is required BY LAW none of this would be an issue.
magical thyme (11,976 posts)
79. because the State Dept retroactively stamped them 'classified' does not mean they didn't start out classified. It's a "definition of the word is" moment. Look closely at how they structure responses. "Nothing was marked as classified" doesn't mean it wasn't classified info. Only that somebody left off the classification when they took data from sources that were marked classified.
Likewise, the State Dept going back and covering tracks after the fact doesn't change the fact tht Hillary's staff pulled classified data and sent it to her without labeling it as such.
Exclusive: Dozens of Clinton emails were classified from the start, U.S. rules suggest
http://www.aol.com/article/2015/08/21/exclusive-dozens-of-clinton-emails-were-classified-from-the-sta/21225607/
The new stamps indicate that some of Clinton's emails from her time as the nation's most senior diplomat are filled with a type of information the U.S. government and the department's own regulations automatically deems classified from the get-go — regardless of whether it is already marked that way or not.
In the small fraction of emails made public so far, Reuters has found at least 30 email threads from 2009, representing scores of individual emails, that include what the State Department's own "Classified" stamps now identify as so-called 'foreign government information.' The U.S. government defines this as any information, written or spoken, provided in confidence to U.S. officials by their foreign counterparts.
"It's born classified," said J. William Leonard, a former director of the U.S. government's Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO). Leonard was director of ISOO, part of the White House's National Archives and Records Administration, from 2002 until 2008, and worked for both the Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations.
Clinton and her senior staff routinely sent foreign government information among themselves on unsecured networks several times a month, if the State Department's markings are correct. Within the 30 email threads reviewed by Reuters, Clinton herself sent at least 17 emails that contained this sort of information. In at least one case it was to a friend, Sidney Blumenthal, not in government.
Well well... that's not good at all.
TwilightGardener (45,108 posts)
17. One of the emails was forwarded to her private server containing info on current troop movements in Libya and possible movement of Ambassador Stevens away from Benghazi--that would be classified WHEN it was sent.
How horrible would it be if it turned out Hillary's loose e-mails caused the death of 4 Americans?
hrmjustin (62,340 posts)
12. Fair enough but to me it is all a big nothing.
Typical response from a Hillary low information voter.
candelista (1,932 posts)
6. Would she use a private server as President?
Maybe she's learned her lesson, but maybe not. Maybe the lesson was just "be more careful."
7962 (5,362 posts)
9. Here's the biggest problem I have with her nonsense:
When I was in the military, we ALL took a class on classified materials. How to recognize if something SHOULD be considered classified regardless of whether or not it was marked as such. The whole point was to be able to recognize what you were looking at.
To me, there's 2 options. Either Hillary was lying or she was incompetent. In her position, she should have known instantly that she was looking at material that SHOULD have been marked as some sort of classification.
exactly.
Eugene Stoner (46 posts)
20. Possible Felony
Hillary Clinton and two aides appear to have violated two national security laws by sending classified information on a private email server,
The first is 18 USC Sec. 1924, which outlaws the unauthorized removal and storage of classified information. Penalties can include fines and imprisonment for up to one year.
A second federal statute that prosecutors could use to charge Clinton and her aides is 18 USC Sec. 793, a more serious felony statute. That law covers national defense information and people who misuse it to injure the United States or benefit a foreign power.
Those convicted of violating that law face fines and up to 10 years in prison
Yup. Of course the loons at DU won't stand for that:
still_one (38,177 posts)
27. Really, so in your infinite wisdom, your sage legal mind has come to that conclusion. Pray tell
when it doesn't occur, what are you going to say?
did you miss the word "COULD"?
madokie (44,506 posts)
48. **** the republiCONs and their witch hunt
what a pack of losers they are.
underthematrix (1,212 posts)
54. This is the key part of this article:
there is some indication that Clinton aides drew upon a variety of messages in classified information systems to produce summaries and updates of events in Libya and elsewhere and then sent them to Clinton or her aides using a private server.
Now we have to parse it further to get to the meat of the story:
aides drew upon a variety of messages in classified information systems - this means aides accessed classified computer systems for the purpose of obtaining most current information of events in specific areas of the world
and
to produce summaries and updates of events - this means while reviewing pertinent information in the classified systems, aides created summaries of the information. This means they did not email the classified documents they reviewed within the classified system. They only emailed summaries of that information.
At this point, this seems as HRC said a vicious political attack by GOP. And there is a racist wingnut contingent working within the intelligence community as well as throughout the federal gov't.
Any piece taken out of a classified and put into a new format retains the initial classification regardless of the format it is put into. Thats why you don't do it! If you summarize a series of classified e-mails for a senior officer (which I've done numerous times) that summary is classified at the highest classification of all the information put into it. For God's sake you then don't transmit it over unsecured lines!
underthematrix (1,212 posts)
68. I think you missed my point and focus - content of article
The article said all that was transmitted were SUMMARIES of the information, not the classified documents themselves. But we don't know what the rules are for transmitting summaries of classified information. Yes we do. I've outlines it above. Is the sender required to treat it as if it is classified and if so, what does that mean in practice?
I'm very disturbed by this story because it seems a strange thing for a person to do who has been the subject of so many GOP hate, vitriol and investigation. I just don't understand the decision to use a personal server to do gov't work. HRC's reason "it's more convienent" doesn't make sense because we know most people access their email apps from blackberries or smartphones.
ipfilter (1,276 posts)
75. A summary of classified info would
have the same classification as the highest document from which it was obtained. If one line from the summary came from a document marked Secret then the entire summary would be Secret even if everything else was simply FOUO. This stuff is covered in yearly required training for any gov or DoD employee with the lowest level security clearance.
Sounds like HRC needs to take remedial IP, IA, and FOIA training.
Sound like Hillary may be headed to prison.
