Feds Release More Clinton Emails On Eve Of South Carolina Primary

[Purveyor]

Source: The Hill

By Julian Hattem - 02/26/16 05:56 PM EST

The State Department on Friday released 881 new emails from Hillary Clinton’s personal server, a day before Democrats in South Carolina head to the polls.

The new release brings the total number of classified emails on the former secretary of State’s machine up to more than 1,800.

The vast majority of those classified emails were listed at the lowest level, that of “confidential,” but nearly two dozen were classified as “secret” and another 22 were deemed “top secret” — the highest level of classification.

Those top secret emails were deemed too dangerous to release to the public, even in a redacted form.

Read more: http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/271005-feds-release-more-clinton-emails-on-eve-of-sc-primary

[peacebird]

1. 22 top secret ? If it was any normal cleared person, they would be in jail.

[randys1]

2. Nonsense

[TM99]

31. Indeed yes they would.

In your zeal to defend Clinton, you are lacking in objectivity and factual evidence to support your positions.

[vdogg]

35. No they wouldn't

From the article that people CLEARLY didn't read.

None of the 88 classified emails in Friday’s dump were classified at the time they were sent, a State Department official said.

[TM99]

40. Indeed yes they would.

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-clinton-emails-idUSKCN0QQ0BW20150821

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.

This sort of information, which the department says Clinton both sent and received in her emails, is the only kind that must be "presumed" classified, in part to protect national security and the integrity of diplomatic interactions, according to U.S. regulations examined by Reuters.

"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 National Archives and Records Administration, from 2002 until 2008, and worked for both the Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations.

"If a foreign minister just told the secretary of state something in confidence, by U.S. rules that is classified at the moment it's in U.S. channels and U.S. possession," he said in a telephone interview, adding that for the State Department to say otherwise was "blowing smoke."

And in previous batches, there were indeed classified at the time emails as well as ones that she had her staff purposefully remove the classified headers from.

So yes, if anyone else had done this type of behavior they would be arrested and tried on charges.

[7962]

45. And ANY govt employee would know it. They're trained.

Everyone is trained on handling and recognizing classified info.
She has NO excuse.
Yet nothing will happen to her. Someone may take a fall, but not her.

[TM99]

48. Yup.

My sibling who works at State would be canned and arrested if they had done this kind of thing.

Of course nothing will happen to her. We live in a Banana Republic. My only consolation is that she will lose the GE if she makes it through the primary.

[7962]

50. Well, the GOP front runner is the only other candidate with higher negatives,

so who knows?

[TM99]

52. Trump?

Negatives or not, he will take her easily. That's the problem. He can run to the right or the left. He can call her out on every lie. He can attack her with impunity. She's toast.

[7962]

58. You REALLY think so? Cant she hit him with all the bad issues HE has?

I mean, Trump University, his bankruptcies, etc.
I just dont think he can overcome all of HIS negatives.
And I certainly do NOT support her, i just think the gop is picking their worst candidate available!

[TM99]

60. He is already being hit by these from the right.

Nothing is sticking. In fact, he is becoming more and more popular it seems.

There is a populist revolution occuring in 2016. It remains to be seen if we will be on the winning side of history with it coming from the left or go down in defeat with Clinton as it comes at us from the right.

[7962]

62. Yes, that is a good point. Choice between 2 slow horses.

Remains to be seen if these things on Trump WOULD stick with the general electorate; independents & lazy Dems

[7962]

64. Found this JUST now; interesting:

http://theresurgent.com/the-importance-of-disclosing-this-immediately/

[TM99]

65. He is in the minority.

And Erik Erickson is a nutjob too, so that ain't saying much!

[fbc]

68. He's the bizarro Bill Clinton

Slick Donny

[Major Hogwash]

70. Exactly right -- nothing is sticking to Trump.

People that are leaning Republican, or who are totally Tea Party/Republican fanatics, are being mesmerized by Trump's "so what about it?" attitude when he makes his flippant comments, and they admire his ability to flip-flop both ways within just hours of taking a stance on an issue!!

Trump has lied so much, that people have come to expect it, but they don't care if what he says isn't true, they just like the fact that he said it!

[TM99]

79. And lies are not coming across as lies

because he is so in your face blunt.

So if someone says, hey you lied and said this five years ago, he responds, so the fuck what, I am saying this today plus let's make America great again! And damned that just fires them up even more

[Babel_17]

81. Not on trustworthiness/honesty, according to Quinnipiac polling

35. Would you say that - Hillary Clinton is honest and trustworthy or not?

36. Would you say that - Donald Trump is honest and trustworthy or not?

http://www.quinnipiac.edu/news-and-events/quinnipiac-university-poll/national/release-detail?ReleaseID=2324

Trump leads by 7% overall, and 10% with Independents, who are critical in the swing states.

[Calista241]

57. In addition, other people were given access to her emails

She gave them to her lawyer to turn over to the government. Unless that lawyer had the appropriate security clearance, she's in big trouble. It doesn't matter if he didn't read them, or even know what was on the drive / memory stick / server. His possession of the material is a violation of US Code.

Additionally, when she finally turned over her emails, she turned them over as hard copies to the Department of State. Someone was provided access to the server, and then sat down and printed off those emails. Who did that? Did they have the appropriate security clearance?

These are the questions the FBI is going to be asking Huma and her other aides. And the Repubs are going to be bringing this up ad-nauseum.

[Yo_Mama]

80. The "Email" wasn't classified, but in many, the information within was classified at the time.

According to the CIA, some of the emails closely paraphrased top secret documents. This story has been international for some time:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3462774/Spy-agencies-say-Clinton-emails-closely-matched-secret-documents-sources.html


http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-clinton-emails-idUSMTZSAPEC2O2MGLXL

However, the agency reports found some emails included passages that closely tracked or mirrored communications marked "top secret," according to the sources, who all requested anonymity. In some cases, additional classification markings meant access was supposed to be limited to small groups of specially cleared officials.

Under the law and government rules, U.S. officials and contractors may not transmit any classified information - not only documents - outside secure, government-controlled channels. Such information should not be sent even through the government's .gov email network.

Sadly, this Observer column is right:
http://observer.com/2016/02/breaking-hillary-clinton-put-spies-lives-at-risk/

[thereismore]

3. A Joe Shmo would be in custody now without bail. Or prosecuted already. nt

[SansACause]

6. For what?

Just because they're "Top Secret" now doesn't mean they were when she sent them. Things are sometimes classified after the fact.

[magical thyme]

8. these were Top Secret at birth. nt

[trueblue2007]

14. and how would you know that for a fact? YOU KNOW NOTHING. You didn't work for the agency,.

and you are not in the loop to be allowed privileged information.

[magical thyme]

17. because a general description of the type of content is right in the article.

That campaign has been widely reported by Reuters and other media outlets, but it officially is classified as a "Top Secret/Special Access Program" (SAP), meaning only a limited number of people whose names are on a special list are allowed to learn details about it.

One source said the reports identified some information in messages on Clinton's server that came from human sources, such as confidential CIA informants, and some from technical systems, such as spy satellites or electronic eavesdropping.

[mindwalker_i]

22. If Hillary is the nominee, Republicans will have a field day with this

I've been of the opinion that probably a lot of people in govt. have used private servers. The RNC used them in the 2000 and 2004 elections, I believe. However, putting top secret info on a private server is a whole different level and one that Repubs will point to and say Hillary doesn't care about national security. To some extent, they will be right. It's will be damn hard to argue against them convincingly. The preferred method of Hillary supporters here to ignore anything bad about their chosen one will not work on the rest of the people, so Hillary will have a very hard time being elected in the GE.

It's becoming painfully clear that nominating Hillary for the dem side is just asking for trouble.

[Calista241]

54. They're going to be talking about prosecuting Hillary for the entire campaign.

She won't even get the opportunity to talk about her platform. Obama, Clinton, and Lynch will be asked incessantly and constantly defending themselves and the decision not to prosecute Hillary.

[mindwalker_i]

59. Yeah, that's exactly what will happen

There's been a lot of shit flung at the Clintons, a lot of it very much not deserved. This, however, is deserved and indefensible. So now we'll end up where democrats often end up saying vote for us cuz that the other guy sucks. It doesn't work worth shit and will lead to prez Trump.

[24601]

72. If so many people here are having a field day with it, why wouldn't the Republicans? People don't

wage campaigns with the intent to lose and (on both sides) are perfectly willing to "do what it takes" to win.

[vdogg]

36. From the Article!

RTFA people!

None of the 88 classified emails in Friday’s dump were classified at the time they were sent, a State Department official said.

[840high]

20. Of course.

[Historic NY]

33. You mean like Snowey.........

[SansACause]

4. Another "coincidence"?

Funny how these emails seem to be released a day before a primary election.

[magical thyme]

18. Friday evening drop to bury it.

It was either tonight or this Monday, with the last batch.

Monday would be in time to influence March 1; Friday night will be lost in the primary news. State still providing her as much cover as possible.

[Kittycat]

27. They were preset to release like this.

There is another batch or two set to release on other nights backing primaries.

[Rafale]

5. FYI

There no such thing as retroactively classifying classified information. The info is always classified and even if you quote in an unclassified venue information that is classified as in compromised information available in the public realm like a newspaper. For example, quoting classified leaks on the Internet by a State Dept official is a security violation if that info is repeated by that official on the Internet because that info remains classified even after being compromised. Anyone with a government security clearance knows it no matter how high or low ranking. When you are talking around SAPs and/or top secret info on the Internet that too is a violation.

The Secretary makes the claim that the information was retroactivity classified and so she didn't do anything wrong. Total BS! Someone with as much "experience" in government as her absolutely knows that is a flat out huge lie.

Normally want happens after top secret info is compromised on the Internet or anywhere else, a damage assessment is done and the FBI investigates, while the person is suspended from further assess to classified info. If the allegations are true, the person is prosecuted and if found guilt, goes to jail well unless you are a high ranking Army general or something like that.

The time bomb continues to tick. Running for office under those conditions if so f'ing self centered.

[yallerdawg]

10. Explain why almost every FOIA releases from any source...

contain "classified" and redacted material, even decades later?

Why newspaper articles are classified in the emails?

We can't have this one standard and expectation of just one person in the history of our government!

[Rafale]

12. Can do friend

FOIA does not involve releasing classified info. Classified info is redacted. If any classified info is DECLASSIFIED, it must be done by the proper declassification authority, who has the appropriate training, and before that info is released it must also undergo policy review to ensure that any government actions underway are not affected.

THE EMAILS BEING DISCUSSED DID NOT GO THROUGH ANY LEGAL PROCESS FOR DECLASSIFICATION AND ARE IN FACT UNDER INVESTIGATION BECAUSE 1800 EMAILS MUST BE KEPT CLASSIFIED AND LIKELY UNDERMINE US GOVERNMENT POLICY WITH REGARD TO FOREIGN AFFAIRS.

The emails were written willy nilly on a Blackberry out in the clear on the Internet. Hope this helps.

[840high]

21. .^that

[grasswire]

32. some think she is running precisely to avoid indictment

Harder to indict a nominee than a former SoS.

If she wins the WH, the impeachment proceedings will be filed the very next day.

[vdogg]

38. False

From the article.


None of the 88 classified emails in Friday’s dump were classified at the time they were sent, a State Department official said.

[Rafale]

41. Not trying to be difficult but

What I'm trying to explain to you is that under policy you cannot take classified info, copy it to an unclassified email system without proper classification markings and claim that suddenly your Intenret email with unmarked classified email is now not classified info. Even though to wrote an unclassified Intenret email that you composed from classified sources, no matter how much you wish it that Internet email still contains classified info, for which you could go to jail for and endanger national security at the same time. I know most people don't understand that but may I suggest googling some of the recent cases prosecuted by Eric Holder.

[metroins]

76. Willingly and knowingly

To be a violation, you have to willingly and knowingly handle classified information.

You have to argue what H knew at the time she received.

[jillan]

7. What difference does it make? You won't hear a word about this on CNN or Msnbc & definitely nowhere

in SC.

And besides, Hillary said there is no there there. And she said she would never lie.

So what if she runs for President while being under an FBI investigation? It's time to elect a woman president and it is her turn!

[Rafale]

9. I would love to have a woman President

Women are smarter and more mature than men. I respect that, but I regret that Sec Clinton is a train wreck. Trump will eat her alive for her subservience to multinational banks.

[Kingofalldems]

11. So you support Bernie?

[Rafale]

13. Fair Question

Yes--for a variety of reasons without reservation. I started as a Clinton supporter. Later I felt betrayed by her on many issues. Also voted for her husband twice. I now view that as a mistake on my part as well.

[trueblue2007]

15. train wreck ??? good job with the name calling there. takes one to know one.

and you are soooooooooooooooo busy calling our democratic candidates names. TOS says no to that.

[Rafale]

16. Yes

I meant policies are a train wreck. Better?

You should report me anyway. Never mind the original argument. Never mind the facts about national security. Let's just not deal with it. Go Hillary. Discussion is a dead art is America. Shoot the messenger, yes.

A POLICY OF NOT PROTECTING CLASSIFIED INFO IS A TRAIN WRECK AND A RISK TO NATIONAL SECURITY. PEOPLE RISK LIVES TO PROTECT IT. (Corrected my friend.)

[Depaysement]

24. Liz Warren should have run nt

[Purveyor]

26. Can you just imagine what good shape we would be in if she

had.

She would tear Trump a new asshole on the debate stage, indeed.

[Depaysement]

28. I'm further to the left than Senator Warren

But I'd happily contribute to and work for her election

[Nyan]

47. Liz had to get out of the way.

Because coronation.

[Depaysement]

56. Maybe

[Major Hogwash]

71. We would hear about it 24/7 in the fall if she was the Democratic nominee.

You can take that to the bank!

[Fairgo]

19. The violation was in the breach of protocol

The consequence is what was exposed. We are long past the question. The indictment is coming. What's the plan?

[phylny]

23. Would someone kindly explain to me if she was or wasn't

permitted to set up and use a server at the time she was Secretary of State? Thanks

[Rafale]

29. Not the central issue

The central issue is: Was classified info disclosed in violation of US Code? That is a serious charge that has sent several CIA officers to jail. Really get no joy in considering this issue and remain amazed that the issue is twisted into something that appears to be no big deal when it is a big deal.

[phylny]

34. Thank you for your explanation. nt

[Rafale]

42. It is

My honor, friend.

[Ruby the Liberal]

25. Friday Night News dump? Too late to impact SC...

Convenient.

*insert comment about establishment here*

[doc03]

30. That will give Fox something to talk about for the next 20 f---g years n/t

[vdogg]

37. I'll post this one more time because folks in this thread wish to be willfully ignorant.

None of the 88 classified emails in Friday’s dump were classified at the time they were sent, a State Department official said.

[Rafale]

43. Again

Under policy that is a false characterization. Taking classified info and putting it on the Intenret while removing the classification markings is still a crime.

There is the main concern that classified info was compromised on the Intenrt by Clinton. You can't shout down the facts. Most people are buying that approach to politics anymore.

[madville]

66. Plus

The State Department is defending Clinton in these suits regarding the email releases. The defense lawyers (the State Department in this case) are going to say their "client" is innocent no matter what.

The fact that these emails were not appropriately classified when created could potentially be another illegal act on it's own depending where they sourced the information. If they were getting information from secure government systems and then creating emails on Hillary's system using that info, some people are going to be indicted.

[Rafale]

67. If we are talking SAPs

And imagery and agent names it will be straightforward.

[TM99]

49. Read post #40 and take a deep breath.

[mimi85]

69. The main takeaway is not if they were classified or not -

it's her total lack of judgment. Just like with giving the speeches to Wall Streeters knowing she was going to run for POTUS.

[LannyDeVaney]

39. Hmm...

Got it.

[link:?w=640&h=870|

[7962]

44. MOVE along dammit, theres nothing to see here!!!!! We've been told!!!

Remember, the rules are different for some

[KoKo]

46. Yep...that's what we voters are told.

It does get old and stale as we "move along," though...doesn't it. We keep working for the CHANGE. That's what is important.

[MrWendel]

51. I find it interesting...

that e-mails are always released before a primary. I wonder if it will work this time....

[CdnExtraNational]

53. So then what..

If the indictment comes through...

Then what happens?

[TM99]

61. My theory is that the Democratic establishment

is beginning to recognize this very real possibility.

If they can depress the vote or force Sanders out shortly after Super Tuesday then if she doesn't make it to the convention, they can choose someone else like Biden there. As long as Sanders stays in all the way to the convention if anything takes her out of the race, he wins pretty much by default.

[restorefreedom]

73. that has been their plan all along

its why the pressure has been on bernie to drop out becsuse of the "math" even though sfter tuesday there will only have been sbout half the needed delegstes and he will have many of them.

they want him out before the convention so they can stick in their puppet. but he knows this, and that is one reason i believe he keeps saying he is in until the convention.
no way he is going to work this hard and step aside so they can plug in some crony

[Abouttime]

77. Hillary is our nominee

It's going to be wrapped up in the next few weeks. Nothing will come of the emails. Loretta Lynch will appear someday soon and say "no harm, no foul" or in other words, this is all behind us now there will be no charges regarding Hillary. At that point it's game over, end of scandal.
Like it or not that's how it's going to play out.

[TM99]

78. She may well become the nominee

and she will lose the GE.

Enjoy the victory now while I enjoy the schadenfreude later.

[Purveyor]

63. First off a fitting sign of relief...

[Cryptoad]

55. Ohhhh NO,,, EMAILS,,,,, Oh the horror of it all!

[Harcourdt Fenton Mud]

74. Drip, drip, drip... N/T