It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: Vasa Croe
Actually it was pointed out exactly how many were sent and even deemed classified prior to send date on the warrant for Huma's computer by the FBI. It even went as far as to discuss exactly how many were classified as Confidential, Secret and Top Secret prior to send date.
I'm not disputing that. It's this next part:
As such, these files, by default, had to come from SIPRnet and be transferred to her server knowingly skirting the very detailed manner in which classified information is to be transferred according to the government's procedures.
Where are you getting that from?
I don't recall seeing anything about documents being electronically transferred from SIPRnet. I've read through the FBI releases and there was no mention of it. All I've seen is some vague insinuations from commenters in the media that parts of documents might have been retyped into emails sent to Clinton.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not defending the use of a private server let alone transmitting classified information through one or even that Clinton's goal wasn't to skirt oversight — that seems to be the explicit purpose in fact. This is what I've been disputing:
those emails had to be moved from secure govt computers to the private unsecured servers.
If there was information that was deemed Secret prior to her sending it then it HAD to come from SIPRnet by default, unless whomever she got it from was also not following protocol. Either way, the emails containing confidential information prior to her sending them or storing them on her personal server were outside protocol and again, had to come from SIPRnet. The two Top Secret emails they reference were likely from JWICS. The only way to transmit confidentially deemed files from JWICS or SIPRnet to the outside world is through a multi step process with encryption. Thereby even just opening it on the other end you would have knowledge of its confidential nature.
7. In 2009, Clinton emailed classified information (now redacted) to longtime crony Sidney Blumenthal, who did not have a security clearance and who was barred from working in the Obama administration by the president’s first chief of staff.
On May 28, 2013, months after stepping down as secretary of state, Clinton sent an email to a group of diplomats and top aides about the “123 Deal” with the United Arab Emirates.
But the email, which was obtained by the Republican National Committee through a Freedom of Information Act request, was heavily redacted upon its release by the State Department because it contains classified information.
The markings on the email state it will be declassified on May 28, 2033, and that information in the note is being redacted because it contains “information regarding foreign governors” and because it contains “Foreign relations or foreign activities of the United States, including confidential sources.”
The email from Clinton was sent from the email account — email@example.com — associated with her private email server.
My problem is there are so many steps involved in getting classified information from one of these networks and on a personal server that she could not possibly claim ignorance of the classification system of markings nor ignorance of the rules about how to properly communicate information of this nature.
originally posted by: havok
a reply to: Diisenchanted
Charges need to be filed, and criminals prosecuted.
If an army private can go to jail for mishandling classified information, then she needs to spend life in prison for how she handled it. It has nothing to do with party affiliations, or who thinks this is akin to "beating a dead horse". The woman is a criminal, and should be treated as such.
It's pretty bad this has been quiet lately.
I'm glad to hear someone making noise again.
These at least aren't documents from SIPRnet, JWICS, etc. Granted, these are confidential but I haven't seen any evidence that anything was transferred from a secure network in the cases of emails containing secret or top secret information either.
This isn't to say that the information itself didn't originate from a document viewed on a secure network. It's all still improper handling of classified information regardless but clearly since there's no accidental way a document can be transferred from SIPRnet or JWICS, if a document was indeed transferred from either, it would definitively settle any question of intent and blow apart plausible deniability. Which is essentially what you're saying here:
The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee released a scathing statement Friday, calling on Hillary Clinton to "come clean" after the State Department released an email in which she asked an aide to send information on a non-secure system after attempts to send the document securely failed.
On June 16, 2011, top Clinton aide Jake Sullivan wrote to Clinton to say she would get "tps" -- presumably short for "talking points" that evening. The subject of the email is redacted so it's not clear what topic these points covered.
"If they can't," Clinton replies, "turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure."
originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: theantediluvian
Lock her up... in a cell right next to Michael Flynn.
That "lock her up" chant/meme has always humored me.
She would never see the inside of a jail cell even if they did decide to indict her. Either she would plead guilty and get a slap-on-the-wrist misdemeanor, or the court finds her guilty and has a great appeal case based on equal application of the law.
originally posted by: Diisenchanted
In my opinion the above statement is inaccurate. It should read mishandling of government emails.
originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: havok
Then you must also believe that Gen. Petraeus deserved life imprisonment? After all, he revealed classified information to a woman he was having an affair with. How many state secrets have been leaked via pillow talk? I'm pretty sure they cover not divulging classified information to people your screwing on the first day of How Not To Handle Classified Information 101.
How about the new National Security Advisor, Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn? He inappropriately shared classified information with Pakastani military officers (about CIA operations). Shouldn't he spend his life in prison too?
It has nothing to do with party affiliations
The bloodlust in one case and lack of concern in the others by those on the Right is a direct result of partisan politics.
Lock her up... in a cell right next to Michael Flynn.
(U) Part IV of this Guide is a discussion of the application of these classification categories to information in documents created by Department of State personnel. Most State Department documents are classified because they contain foreign government information, discuss foreign relations, or identify confidential sources, and are classified under E.O. 13526 Sections 1.4(b) and 1.4(d). These categories are discussed in considerable detail in Sections IV B and IV D respectively. Some categories of classified information in State-created documents will have been originally classified by another federal agency, e.g., military plans by a DOD component, intelligence by CIA or other intelligence agency, etc. This is particularly true for INR, which produces many all- source documents drawing on material from other agencies. In these cases, the other- agency-derived information should be given a derivative classification in the State document. The discussion of categories of information usually classified derivatively is, therefore shorter in this Guide. Bureaus and offices in the Department that rely extensively on derivative classification may supplement this guide with their own guide.
A large majority of State Department documents are classified underE.O. 12958 Sections 1.4(b) (foreign government information) and 1A(d) (foreign relations)~ These categories are discussed in considerable detail in Sections III B and III D respectively. Most other categories of classified information in State-created documents will generally have been originally classified by another agency of the federal government, e.g., military plans by DOD or the military services, intelligence by CIA or other intelligence agency, etc. This is particularly true for INR, which produces many all-source documents drawing on material from other agencies. In,these cases, the information is to be given a derivative classification in the State document.
Because the FBI director mysteriously reopened the case and just as mysteriously closed it. We all know it was fishy and he was likely bullied or threatened. You can stop with the bloviating about bringing back slavery and segregation. That's just plain ridiculous.
originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: GodEmperor
Ahh right, because any ruling made by a Republican judge is automatically null and void in your mind.
Nope. You're projecting. I'm pointing out that the case was thoroughly investigated and there was no evidence of criminal wrongdoing. Why don't you accept that finding? Because the FBI director was a Democratic appointee, and all Democratic appointees are automatically null and void in your mind?
Maybe just release murderers rapists by the thousands, because Republican judge.
Maybe release Wall Street thieves and fat cat corporate murderers because Democratic judge?
Yep that sounds like perfectly sound logic there. The only proper authority is from some Acitivist liberal judge, that believes in legalizing criminal behavior. That's why Hillary Clinton is innocent, because criminal behavior is part of the liberal culture.
Whereas in your world the only proper authority is some activist Conservative judge that wants to bring back segregation, if not slavery? One that believes in allowing the 1% to continue to exploit the working class? That's why that tax dodging, contract breaking, illegal immigrant exploiting, tiny fingered sexual predator Trump is President: because criminal behavior is at the very heart of so-called "Conservative" culture.
What do you have to say for yourself, Comrade?
Sieg Heil, baby!
So given the above readily available guidelines, how on earth does anyone think a Secretary of State could do their job without ever sending or receiving classified information in emails?