Exactly When Did Chelsea Clinton Become Entitled to Receive Sensitive Information

a reply to: Flavian

I dont agree.

If you cant keep your mouth shut, then you dont deserve the job.

I wouldnt even tell family and friends of an imminent attack if I had no right.

Maybe I would say, hey wifey, why dont you do that thing we talked about...quietly. (Bug out.)

Thats about it. All else, pfft. That is supposed to go to your grave.

This is just absurd.

Hillary knew and she lied.

They all knew and lied.

So, why lie if it wasn't classified info?

Right?

Chelsea needed to know the truth? Really? Why?

It's not like hillary told her the truth after they came out with the video BS, she told her that night.

My guess is she was involved with the gun running too. lol, I guess to tell her the payment won't be showing up at the foundation.

Will they look into her emails? Nope but I think they do have probable cause, just by being in that loop.

Are there links to the research that shows this email address being tied to access by Chelsea?

a reply to: roadgravel

Do you mean whether or not Chelsea used this pseudonym?

Wikileaks found 67 emails between Hillary Clinton and daughter Chelsea under her fake name–
–At least one was during a foreign policy meeting
— Another was on September 11, 2012 during the Benghazi terror attack!

Wikileaks: 67 Emails Between Hillary and Chelsea Clinton under HER FAKE NAME “Diane Reynolds”

She's used that name for a long time.

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Saying and it being true might be different. I don't doubt it's probably true but level of proof on the net is at an all time low. I guess I could read the 67 emails and see if any point to a mother daughter discussion, but I suspect it's a waste of time.

Since someone must have found the actual link of the two, I thought the information may have been published.

originally posted by: Maxatoria

originally posted by: [post=21214737]FurvusRexCaeli]
What "Official Secrets Act?" Reference to US Code or Statutes at Large, please.

Its the British version of whatever passes in the USA, once you sign it you can't even officially reveal you've signed it, which can make things a bit messy if you need to pass on information.

In other words, it doesn't exist in the US, and there's absolutely no reason to bring it up when discussing Hillary Clinton's mishandling of classified national security information. Got it.

I'd of imagined she'd of been vetted when Bill was in the job as living in/around all the paperwork that the president would of been required to read would of meant at some point there was a risk she could read/hear something by accident so better to give her a security clearance and a very boring speech by someone from the FBI/NSA etc.

Even if she was "vetted" when she was First Lady, that was 20+ years ago. It would not have been current when she was appointed Secretary of State. Nor would a "very boring speech" in the 90s have satisfied the annual training requirement for original classification authorities, something else she claims she doesn't remember.

a reply to: roadgravel

I guess I could read the 67 emails and see if any point to a mother daughter discussion, but I suspect it's a waste of time.

How this one?

From: Dorothea
Sent: Thursday, January 03, 2013 12:03 PM
To: Diane Reynolds
Subject: Your Mom
Dear Chelsea, Jon and I have been thinking about your family since we heard about your Mom's health issues. We hope she is doing well and that she recovers fully. We are sending you all a big hug. Sincerely, Dorothea I-Phone

leakyplace (dot) org/clinton-emails/emailid/17388

State department .pdf link

a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Yeah, that looks as though she had access to the mail box. Probably just her also. Pretty solid. tks

Hillary didn't know the information was classified. She said so in her FBI deposition. Give the old girl a pass. After all, it's not like she's running for high public office, or anything. geeesh!

originally posted by: roadgravel
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Yeah, that looks as though she had access to the mail box. Probably just her also. Pretty solid. tks

Anyone that had access to a connected terminal and knew Hillary's email address had access to it all for quite a while. There was no password required for the first four months of her being Secretary of State.

There were mentions in the emails of her aides about how difficult it was trying to teach her how to log in, once password protection was enacted.

I believe they have been grooming her to continue the Clinton political legacy all along. Let's just call these emails "homework". Interesting that Chelsea gets the truth while some poor film maker gets prison over Hillary and Obama's lies.

a reply to: Asktheanimals





Chelsea is also a member of the CFR. Why?

a reply to: mobiusmale

My husband was not allowed ( when in the military ) to talk with me or friends about classified information or missions. He even signed papers stating that he would not. Now, he is a civilian , still working with a clearance , and still does not talk about the sensitive or classified information . ...that's not saying others brush past that protocol and do what they want, they just hope they don't get caught....but my husband takes that part of his jobs seriously....there have been a few things in the news media that he has heard Hilary say that is classified info ......for example , when introducing her VP Tim Kaine, she mentioned he had a son in the marine Corp who was deploying tomorrow ...that information, troop schedules and movement , is classified . .....especially ,For the safety of the troops . ....I guess it's like the old saying " loose lips ....sink ships ".... On a side note : if Hilary wasn't doing anything wrong with emails to Chelsea....why use a fake name ? Why create a whole fake name for Chelsea , unless your trying to fly under the radar .

a reply to: Flavian

I got my "SECRET"clearances GIVEN to me in the army no vetting or tests what so ever.

a reply to: butcherguy

I was referring to the alias Chelsea was using.

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Grimpachi
Who determined that the info passed was actually classified?

According to ardent Hillary supporters, there was never any classified information in any of her emails.

According to the FBI, that is a lie.

Chelsea Clinton had her own email address on that server.

The server had NO password protection for the first four months of Hillary's term as Secretary of State.
How can you say that Chelsea had no access to classified info?

Off on a tangent?

I am not a Clinton supporter or a Trump supporter. I do support facts.

The accusation here is that Chelsea was sent classified information. Was there actual classified info passed to her daughter.

Yes or no?

a reply to: mobiusmale

Very good question... That wasn't an email Chelsea should have seen yet.

a reply to: Meldionne1

Why create a whole fake name for Chelsea , unless your trying to fly under the radar .

According to the Washington Post:

First, let's talk about why Clinton (or another celebrity) would want to use a fake name. We spoke with two people over email who currently work for companies that manage high-end hotels. Neither wished to be identified, which is very much in the spirit of the discussion, so we'll call them "Carlos" and "Danger," in honor of former representative Anthony Weiner's chosen pen name.

How does the alias-at-a-hotel system work? Fake names are as useful to protect against staff as against the outside world, Danger pointed out, writing: "Staff is trained and required to sign confidentially agreements about guests overall, but when it's really big name sometimes they can get excited and forget." But why does it matter? Paparazzi, for one. "Paps often try to pay line-level hotel employees for inside info (room numbers, etc)," Danger said. "Leaking that info was a fireable offense at our property."

It's not only to shield celebrities from the paparazzi, but from stalkers, those horrible people from the media, and other guests. Or political opponents, according to Carlos. "We have had members of royal families who don’t want anyone to know where they are for political reasons." Clearly it is not the case that Chelsea Clinton is from a royal family and wouldn't want to be seen in Ottumwa, Iowa for political reasons.

Evaluating and explaining Chelsea Clinton’s alias, “Diane Reynolds”

So it is to act as a shield against unintended disclosure of the movements of the person using the alias.

This strikes me as somewhat ironic, especially considering the phrase, "Leaking that info was a fireable offense at our property." Puts me in mind of the notion of who can't be criticized...

originally posted by: Grimpachi

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Grimpachi
Who determined that the info passed was actually classified?

According to ardent Hillary supporters, there was never any classified information in any of her emails.

According to the FBI, that is a lie.

Chelsea Clinton had her own email address on that server.

The server had NO password protection for the first four months of Hillary's term as Secretary of State.
How can you say that Chelsea had no access to classified info?

Off on a tangent?

I am not a Clinton supporter or a Trump supporter. I do support facts.

The accusation here is that Chelsea was sent classified information. Was there actual classified info passed to her daughter.

Yes or no?

I simply stated that she had access to classified material.
She did.
Along with many other people... including Guccifer types.

I am not a Clinton supporter or a Trump supporter.

As far as I know, I didn't blame you for being either one.

Off on a tangent?

Not really.
Just covering the topic in the OP.

a reply to: butcherguy

OK, but I didn't ask that.

Who determined that classified info was actually passed to her? The accusation is that Chelsea was sent classified information.

If that really happened and there is evidence to prove it then there is a serious issue.

Also you said.

How can you say that Chelsea had no access to classified info?

Problem is I never said that. The only thing I said was.

Who determined that the info passed was actually classified?