It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Hillary’s team copied intel off top-secret server to email

page: 7
31
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 25 2016 @ 07:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: burntheships

Little birdies are telling of a "poison pill" plan by the Democrat Party.

Word is that Obama and the White House were involved in some emails !!!!


Hmmm well it is election season, nothing would be shocking at this point,
The different scenarios, all crazy enough.
And yeah, I just cant see Biden wanting Hillary to smear his legacy either.



Both The Obama's and The Biden's ...forever at Hillary's "disposal" !!?
I just cant see them letting that happen, no matter what.




posted on Jan, 25 2016 @ 11:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
Every day I log into ATS to see yet another "Hillary's goose is cooked for sure now!" thread.

They either have what they need to indict and charge her, or they don't. We do have computing capability to sift through her entire email server in days to find keywords. The NSA has records of any and all emails sent in/out of that server as well.

Hillary sure doesn't seem worried, and that's pretty telling.

I get the feeling that this email thing is going to be Hillary's birth certificate scandal. Several years down the road there will be "Emailers" instead of "Birthers" screaming for more investigations into her emails.


I am sorry but I have to disagree yet once again... the evidence is already there:

www.redstate.com...

The email from the IG clearly states that at least one email was classified up to TS//SI//TK//NOFORN.

TK (Talent Keyhole) is satellite imagery that is classified TS/SCI from the instant that it is snapped... before it is beamed back to earth, it was already TS/SCI... any information derived from that imagery was classified TS/SCI as well... long before it ever hit her server... that is 1 out of 1,000+ classified emails.

TK has nothing to do with drones or any "forwarded" NY Times news articles about drone programs... it only comes from one place.

There are so many people involved in this, it is no surprise it is taking some time to sort out who did what.

Hillary is in some seriously deep doo doo
edit on R042016-01-25T23:04:18-06:00k041Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R042016-01-25T23:04:56-06:00k041Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 09:08 AM
link   

originally posted by: queenofswords
From your article, OP. This is crazy brazen!


Cut 'n pasted!!!?



In one e-mail, Clinton pressured Sullivan to declassify cabled remarks by a foreign leader.

“Just e-mail it,” Clinton snapped, to which Sullivan replied: “Trust me, I share your exasperation. But until ops converts it to the unclassified e-mail system, there is no physical way for me to e-mail it.”

In another recently released e-mail, Clinton instructed Sullivan to convert a classified document into an unclassified e-mail attachment by scanning it into an unsecured computer and sending it to her without any classified markings. “Turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure,” she ordered.




Scan and remove classified markings?!!!

Somebody is going to get thrown under the bus or take the fall for her in exchange for ________________!



WOW...That looks pretty damning! Enough so that I looked to find context...

It seems the OP article left out some parts?



When Deputy Chief of Staff Jake Sullivan told her in February 2010 he couldn’t send her a Mideast peace-related statement former British Prime Minister Tony Blair had issued, Clinton seemed irritated. “It's a public statement! Just email it,” she wrote. Sullivan replied that it was impossible to do that because the only information was in State’s classified system. “Trust me, I share your exasperation. But until ops converts it to the unclassified email system, there is no physical way for me to email it. I can't even access it,” Sullivan wrote.


www.politico.com...

So, Prime Minister Tony Blair makes a public statement on the middle east..And as long as that stement lingers in the classified system, they can not discuss it.

This is similar to the IC Inspector General claiming that a New York Times article on the US Drone Program was classified as TS.

And the author source of this OP's last big article was about Pres. Obama creating a "Secret Race Database" in order to execute upon a secret race-based political agenda.

Listen closely....I don't "like" Hillary Clinton...But I don't understand people that allow their emotions to over-ride their objective thinking centers. Apart from being unhealthy, in encourages propagandist campaigns where political forces exploit emotions for political agenda's.

You can "hate" Clinton, but you shouldn't let propagandists use you or your emotions either...Think...and then think some more...You might be surprised to find that valid, solid critiques/attacks on Hillary Clinton carry more impact than BS. The American public is more intelligent than DC gives them credit for and truthful and accurate attacks are more easily defended...and frankly more honest and credible...and healthier for all concerned.

Other notes...The IG and FBI have had multiple opportunities to open a "Criminal" investigation, but have clarified repeatedly that this is not a Criminal Investigation, only an inquiry.

I do believe that the "inquiry" is being well used for anti-Hillary purposes and that the IC is no fan of hers, but there is insufficient substance there that would suffice to scuttle her bid for the WH. The best they can do is steady drip of headlines until the election, but this does not culminate with any charges, let alone convictions.

And before the emotional Hillary-Hate responses kick in...I say the above from a pure objective place...Hillary ranks third on my personal list for Potus, and the #2 spot is GOP..

Just encouraging a critical eye toward headlines that are fed with the purpose of pushing emotional buttons...Reality always wins in those scenarios...so best to start from a hard-core, objective, place of reality.
edit on 26-1-2016 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 09:28 AM
link   




In another recently released e-mail, Clinton instructed Sullivan to convert a classified document into an unclassified e-mail attachment by scanning it into an unsecured computer and sending it to her without any classified markings. “Turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure,” she ordered.



And the above?...

After digging..this was a "talking points memo"...

A summary of what talking points she should include for public statements/press.

Not everything that is transmitted on a "classified network" is in fact classified.

The slight of hand for spin purposes here is inferring that since it was on the classified communications network...it was "Top Secret"...It was a PR/Press doc that happened to be sent via the network.

Again, just encouraging accurate discussions here, cuz the political media (in this case right-wing media) is not helping anyone figure out what the facts are...anything but..



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 09:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: vethumanbeing

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: projectvxn

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: projectvxn

originally posted by: Annee
I think you all pretty much made my points.

BTW - I have not said I support Hillary for president.

I have said before -- I think she's the most qualified.

That does not necessarily make her the best or right choice.


I suppose if we were hiring her based on only her resume for positions held she would be qualified.

But criminal activity also counts against you when seeking a job in the federal government.


Provide proven facts of criminal activity.


The FBI and IG has been doing that for some time. Now they are releasing information. Copying information from SIPR and above networks is illegal if you: Transfer that information to unsecured computers, removing classified data tags and insignia, sending information via unsecured networks, storing same data on unsecured computers, if they used external media(thumb drives, CD/DVDr discs), I could go on, but as someone who has used NIPR/SIPR networks, held a secret clearance, and attended the mandatory-government wide IA briefings, I can tell you that everything listed above, as evidenced by the FBI/IG investigation, are criminal acts.


I'm asking for actual confirmed government proof, documentation, facts of illegal activity.
Do you have that info?

She is under Federal Investigation on two fronts; Benghazi and illegal handling of classified information. How can she run for POTUS (what is going on here?).


Being under investigation, is being under investigation.

It's not tried and convicted.

It's not "convicted on speculation" either. Perhaps something in the middle.

Or even "incredibly damning" evidence for all to see, which has happened a million times over time. Not exactly something new for Hillary.



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 10:00 AM
link   
lol. there......is......no......right......wing........media.

There is talk radio and the blogosphere, which the leftist traditional media can't control, which has been making leftists apoplectic for 15 years. The whole reason for the "fairness doctrine" concept.

There is one outlet, FOX, which happens to support about as many conservative people and ideas as liberal.....which also makes every other radio, TV, newspaper, magazine, and hollywood outlet livid.



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 11:24 AM
link   
Some Hillary defenders will go to the ends of the earth to claim "vast right wing conspiracy". Hillary herself uses this phrase quite a bit. They will usually follow up the "vast right wing conspiracy" with.."I don't like Hillary either and hope she is guilty" This gives them the option of claiming "Hey look I knew I was right" if no charges are brought,,,and the "I knew she was guilty all along" when things go south. Just playing the old game of being on both sides of the same fence.

I call it like I see it....

The leaks are nothing more than the Intel Community letting the Whitehouse and the American public know that they have some very damning information on Ms. Clinton and they want to see her face severe punishment, and rightly so. They do not want the Whitehouse to interfere with the investigation or the eventual prosecution phase.

People forget, the FBI and the Intel Community already know everything that was in her emails and have for some time.

To try and claim nobody knows what is going on besides the FBI is a huge huge stretch of the imagination of someone trying to rationalize away the accusations put forth so far.

The last 7900 pages haven't been released to the public, those contain the most sensitive data so far and there are several agencies still trying to figure out the severity of the damage done... it is not a lightning fast process.

When an email is sent to an agency for review, it goes straight to the top... that Director then assigns his top people to review it, determine if it should have been classified, why it wasn't classified, was it taken off a secure network and stripped of classification headers, etc. In addition to the FBI, there has to be at least 25-50 people in the Intel Community who are also aware of the evidence against Hillary.

To claim that because it is taking so long is proof that they are having difficulties on finding any damning information on Hillary is actually the exact opposite of reality. They have so much on her, it is taking them a long time to sort through everything. The longer the investigation takes, the worse it gets for Hillary.

The FBI is not going to rush an investigation simply because of a presidential race or political influence... this is a huge huge case for them and they want to make sure that they have all the evidence correctly documented to make sure charges will stick when the indictments go out.
edit on R342016-01-26T11:34:08-06:00k341Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R382016-01-26T11:38:04-06:00k381Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R472016-01-26T11:47:55-06:00k471Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 12:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: stevieray
lol. there......is......no......right......wing........media.



As long as there are advertisers paying for the news...and News Outlets are significantly financially rewarded for targeting those demographics and increasing viewership by those specific demographics = Sales = Profit for the News Outlet....

There will ALWAYS be Right Wing Media...Left Wing Media...and everything in between...A defined demographic and increased viewers in that narrow demographic equals cash to the networks.

And you increase viewership in a specific demographic (Advertisers paying more money) by telling people what they want to hear.

If you think there is "......no......right......wing........media."...then you might be the perfectly ideal target audience....frankly I didn't think people of that extreme existed.
edit on 26-1-2016 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-1-2016 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 12:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa
Some Hillary defenders will go to the ends of the earth to claim "vast right wing conspiracy". Hillary herself uses this phrase quite a bit. They will usually follow up the "vast right wing conspiracy" with.."I don't like Hillary either and hope she is guilty" This gives them the option of claiming "Hey look I knew I was right" if no charges are brought,,,and the "I knew she was guilty all along" when things go south. Just playing the old game of being on both sides of the same fence.


You are seriously are over-thinking it.

"Vast Conspiracy"??? Implies some complicated intelligent machinery...

This is anything but...It is run of the mill BS...Some people manufacture BS and some people consume it.

Not mysterious...not conspiratorial...just people BSing and spinning. Same as it ever was.

Reality matters.
edit on 26-1-2016 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 02:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: stevieray
lol. there......is......no......right......wing........media.



As long as there are advertisers paying for the news...and News Outlets are significantly financially rewarded for targeting those demographics and increasing viewership by those specific demographics = Sales = Profit for the News Outlet....

There will ALWAYS be Right Wing Media...Left Wing Media...and everything in between...A defined demographic and increased viewers in that narrow demographic equals cash to the networks.

And you increase viewership in a specific demographic (Advertisers paying more money) by telling people what they want to hear.

If you think there is "......no......right......wing........media."...then you might be the perfectly ideal target audience....frankly I didn't think people of that extreme existed.

Many if not most of the leftist-flavored news outlets are losing money, and are owned by larger leftist concerns who don't mind this cost-of-doing-business, in the form of owning a leftist propaganda vehicle. Paying for a hemorrhaging newspaper or TV news outlet is just a toy for some of these guys who have billions. MSNBC, Al Jazeera, CNN, Air America....all crap, but operated and paid for long beyond their big loss days.

Can you actually tell us of one outlet that's conservative ? Besides the talkers, which is conservative by and large. FOX is the only one that's even 50-50 lib / con.



posted on Jan, 26 2016 @ 02:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: RickinVa
Some Hillary defenders will go to the ends of the earth to claim "vast right wing conspiracy". Hillary herself uses this phrase quite a bit. They will usually follow up the "vast right wing conspiracy" with.."I don't like Hillary either and hope she is guilty" This gives them the option of claiming "Hey look I knew I was right" if no charges are brought,,,and the "I knew she was guilty all along" when things go south. Just playing the old game of being on both sides of the same fence.


You are seriously are over-thinking it.

"Vast Conspiracy"??? Implies some complicated intelligent machinery...

This is anything but...It is run of the mill BS...Some people manufacture BS and some people consume it.

Not mysterious...not conspiratorial...just people BSing and spinning. Same as it ever was.

Reality matters.

"Some people" can not account for the sheer depth and breadth of Hillary's little problem. It would take a massive conspiracy to create what she's got going, if it's not true.



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 10:33 AM
link   
And suddenly, the Hillary supporters have very little to say anymore.

Like rats fleeing a sinking ship.

Hillary 2016 is just like the Titanic.. except:

There is only one lifeboat, the Captain, Hillary refuses to go down with the ship,,, she has launched that single lifeboat and she is the only person in it....everyone else at the State Department is stuck on the Titanic.

Only thing is, she just can't see the fact that even the lifeboat is rapidly taking on water and she forgot her life jacket.
edit on R232016-01-30T11:23:52-06:00k231Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 31 2016 @ 06:31 AM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

And suddenly, the Hillary supporters have very little to say anymore.

When the best they can come up with is that 'this is boring', what do you expect?

What I find really boring is Hillary's team dreaming up some 'right wing conspiracy' as an excuse for her being, at best, criminally inept.



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 09:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: stevieray
It's not tried and convicted.

It's not "convicted on speculation" either. Perhaps something in the middle.
"The MIX". She sold her soul to the dark side 25 years ago and now the Devil is reneging on promises made (no wonder she seems so angry in her speeches) as is not going to skate to the finish line as the Devil promised she would (keep a democratic power base as long as she full filled the idea form she sold her soul for).

stevieray: Or even "incredibly damning" evidence for all to see, which has happened a million times over time. Not exactly something new for Hillary.

She backed the wrong horses is all (all 4 of the Apocalypse).

edit on 2-2-2016 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 10:20 PM
link   
U.S. declares 22 Clinton emails 'top secret'

in case anybody missed the connections



posted on Feb, 2 2016 @ 10:49 PM
link   
Being charged with anything to do with the mishandling classified information, is truly a departure from a normal criminal charge.

You are basically guilty until proven innocent, and it is virtually impossible to prove innocence.

The laws are written very specifically, and extremely difficult to get out of.

In Hillary's case for instance, the mere fact of having any classified information on a private email server is indefensible... there is absolutely nothing she can do to prove her innocence, and trying a to cop ignorance is the last desperate attempt to avoid criminal charges, but that will fail miserably.

There is no possible way around a charge of gross negligence of handling classified information if you are caught with classified information on an unclassified network...... the very term "gross negligence" can be applied to the fact the you were too stupid to even know what you were doing, which in Hillary's case is not even in the realm of possibilities due to the nature of her position.

There are a couple of things to consider:

1. As SoS, she was able to classify her own work and should have been able to easily recognize any unmarked classified information that she came across in her emails.

2. All government employees are required to receive a security briefing and attest to that fact by signing a SF- 312 prior to being granted access to any classified materials.

The state department so far, has refused to acknowledge whether Hillary ever signed a SF-312....it puts her in a very precarious position....if she signed one, then she attested to the fact that she was fully aware that classified material may be marked or unmarked. Doesn't do her any good when claiming ignorance about classified material because it wasn't marked as classified.

On the flip side, if she or the state department can not cough up a copy of her SF-312, then the government can take the position, and rightly so, that she was never cleared to have any access what so ever to classified material while serving as SoS. That actually opens her up to way more charges than she would face with a signed SF-312.

Hillary is in a no win situation and I can't wait to see how it plays out.

SOURCE: me
QUALIFICATION: Retired after 25+ years as a GS-13 0391 Telecommunications Specialist. Served on an advisory board for security matters to the Director, FBI as a subject matter expert in communications security.

Hillary is in some very deep doo doo. She is already guilty of numerous felony charges in the handling of classified information by virtue of the fact that emails containing classified information have been found on her private server.




edit on R222016-02-02T23:22:25-06:00k222Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 03:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa
Being charged with anything to do with the mishandling classified information, is truly a departure from a normal criminal charge.

You are basically guilty until proven innocent, and it is virtually impossible to prove innocence.

The laws are written very specifically, and extremely difficult to get out of.

In Hillary's case for instance, the mere fact of having any classified information on a private email server is indefensible... there is absolutely nothing she can do to prove her innocence, and trying a to cop ignorance is the last desperate attempt to avoid criminal charges, but that will fail miserably.

There is no possible way around a charge of gross negligence of handling classified information if you are caught with classified information on an unclassified network...... the very term "gross negligence" can be applied to the fact the you were too stupid to even know what you were doing, which in Hillary's case is not even in the realm of possibilities due to the nature of her position.

There are a couple of things to consider:

1. As SoS, she was able to classify her own work and should have been able to easily recognize any unmarked classified information that she came across in her emails.

2. All government employees are required to receive a security briefing and attest to that fact by signing a SF- 312 prior to being granted access to any classified materials.

The state department so far, has refused to acknowledge whether Hillary ever signed a SF-312....it puts her in a very precarious position....if she signed one, then she attested to the fact that she was fully aware that classified material may be marked or unmarked. Doesn't do her any good when claiming ignorance about classified material because it wasn't marked as classified.

On the flip side, if she or the state department can not cough up a copy of her SF-312, then the government can take the position, and rightly so, that she was never cleared to have any access what so ever to classified material while serving as SoS. That actually opens her up to way more charges than she would face with a signed SF-312.

Hillary is in a no win situation and I can't wait to see how it plays out.

SOURCE: me
QUALIFICATION: Retired after 25+ years as a GS-13 0391 Telecommunications Specialist. Served on an advisory board for security matters to the Director, FBI as a subject matter expert in communications security.

Hillary is in some very deep doo doo. She is already guilty of numerous felony charges in the handling of classified information by virtue of the fact that emails containing classified information have been found on her private server.





Found a copy of her signed SF 312:

freebeacon.com...

Blows her whole defense of "I didn't know it was classified because it wasn't marked" right out of the water. She is totally screwed and a proven liar.
edit on R172016-02-03T03:17:43-06:00k172Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R182016-02-03T03:18:09-06:00k182Vam by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 03:27 AM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

Maybe she misremembered? She could use an insanity defense. After all she has memories of being fired at by snipers when no such event occurred.



posted on Feb, 3 2016 @ 12:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: RickinVa

Maybe she misremembered? She could use an insanity defense. After all she has memories of being fired at by snipers when no such event occurred.

You know this will be coming. If needed, she will claim illness, handicap, PTSD, something's wrong with Chelsea or her kid....there is no low for this nasty old battleaxe.

Yet.....she will still be up for the presidency. That you can absolutely believe, as well.

She'll be in a psycho ward one day as a dodge and sympathy ploy......and magically cured the next day to stay in the race.

And millions will gobble it up, believe every word of it, and defend it to their deaths.



posted on Feb, 4 2016 @ 07:20 PM
link   
a reply to: stevieray

The Devil may have traded (underhandedly) *never trust this being* her 'soul contract' to another for a better price; (hint; not Daniel Webster).
edit on 4-2-2016 by vethumanbeing because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
31
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join