Drip, drip, drip.... the Clinton email saga continues

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Too many of you do not understand the different email systems. The State Department, like the Department of Defense and other agencies, has an internal email system for unclassified communications that often has sensitive or proprietary information in emails, but is not supposed to have secret or top secret classified information. Classified documents use an entirely different system and cannot be emailed to the unclassified email system.

The issue here, as I see it, is the Secretary had daily meetings, speeches, phone calls, and other events and tasks needs background briefings, talking points, daily news updates, and the other basic staff-supplied materials that every significant government, corporate. or other official requires. The expectation was that the unclassified emails and documents that are shared in the unclassified State Department email system could be sent to the Secretary's private server for her official use.

It appears that the people preparing her talking points and briefs included some information that the classifiers now believe came from top secret sources. Some of this is subject to interpretation because there are things published in the media and discussed fairly openly - drone strikes, for example - that the intelligence community nevertheless considers to be top secret information. This is an issue not only for the Secretary's private server, top secret information is not supposed to be on the internal State Department email system either. In fact, the issue would be much the same even if she had used a State Department account, because top secret information is not supposed to be in those emails either.

I would bet that if you dug this deep into Defense, Homeland Security, CIA, or other email systems, you would find similar examples in which information is shared in the unclassified email systems that the users think is not secret but that the classification community would consider to be secret or top secret.

Since you understand how the system works...can you explain why a private server would be needed or necessary? What are the practical advantages?

I assume it's bad because if this hadn't been discovered then the emails would not have been able to be entered in the public record? I am assuming that no classified information was knowingly sent or received except in the scenario you described.

Like, I haven't really been objectively determine if what was done was really bad or just politically bad.

Not the pp. The bolded is not true.

Care to elaborate?

Emails are government records. They do not belong to the sender, or the receiver for that matter.
Also, her emails were subpoenaed by the Benghazi Select committee. It took them months, if not years to find them because - Surprise - she didn’t use a government email.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Guessing there isn't much in those emails since Clinton's campaign has urged State to release them all, immediately. Or maybe it's a bluff and we will learn she was being blackmailed by the Russians!

If she had really wanted her emails to be released, she would have left them with the State Dept, when she left office, as she was required to do.
But, she didn’t.
In fact, it took months for the Benghazi Select committee to get any of her emails related to Benghazi, despite the fact that they had been subpoenaed because the State Dept. kept coming back and saying they didn’t have anything. Of course they didn’t since she did not use their official email system.

What Hillary has never explained is why, when she knew that a subpoena had been issued - why she didn’t provide the State Dept with her emails then? Why did it take this whole thing going public for her to cooperate with an investigation. What exactly was she hiding????

So, it is so convenient for her to now say - “Release them all!!!” She knows they can’t when they have been classified as Top Secret.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She is dishonest and untrustworthy.
SHe's trying to deflect and avoid responsibility - typical liberal.
1,300 classified emails found on her unsecured server
13 highly classified and sensitive
emails for SAP - a secure program - found unsecured
.
.
.
.
.
.
.and on....

Negligence on her part that I do not wish as a quality in our next president.

I think you wouldn't have voted for her no matter where she kept her emails.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She is dishonest and untrustworthy.
SHe's trying to deflect and avoid responsibility - typical liberal.
1,300 classified emails found on her unsecured server
13 highly classified and sensitive
emails for SAP - a secure program - found unsecured
.
.
.
.
.
.
.and on....

Negligence on her part that I do not wish as a quality in our next president.

I think you wouldn't have voted for her no matter where she kept her emails.

Wrong - SHe had potential but considering how the Clintons have set her up to be next in line because of the mutual agreement between her and Bill, I won't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She is dishonest and untrustworthy.
SHe's trying to deflect and avoid responsibility - typical liberal.
1,300 classified emails found on her unsecured server
13 highly classified and sensitive
emails for SAP - a secure program - found unsecured
.
.
.
.
.
.
.and on....

Negligence on her part that I do not wish as a quality in our next president.

I think you wouldn't have voted for her no matter where she kept her emails.

Wrong - SHe had potential but considering how the Clintons have set her up to be next in line because of the mutual agreement between her and Bill, I won't.

No one who is remotely Democrat uses the phrase "typical liberal"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She is dishonest and untrustworthy.
SHe's trying to deflect and avoid responsibility - typical liberal.
1,300 classified emails found on her unsecured server
13 highly classified and sensitive
emails for SAP - a secure program - found unsecured
.
.
.
.
.
.
.and on....

Negligence on her part that I do not wish as a quality in our next president.

I think you wouldn't have voted for her no matter where she kept her emails.

Wrong - SHe had potential but considering how the Clintons have set her up to be next in line because of the mutual agreement between her and Bill, I won't.

No one who is remotely Democrat uses the phrase "typical liberal"

Moderate Dems certainly do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guessing there isn't much in those emails since Clinton's campaign has urged State to release them all, immediately. Or maybe it's a bluff and we will learn she was being blackmailed by the Russians!

If she had really wanted her emails to be released, she would have left them with the State Dept, when she left office, as she was required to do.
But, she didn’t.
In fact, it took months for the Benghazi Select committee to get any of her emails related to Benghazi, despite the fact that they had been subpoenaed because the State Dept. kept coming back and saying they didn’t have anything. Of course they didn’t since she did not use their official email system.

What Hillary has never explained is why, when she knew that a subpoena had been issued - why she didn’t provide the State Dept with her emails then? Why did it take this whole thing going public for her to cooperate with an investigation. What exactly was she hiding????

So, it is so convenient for her to now say - “Release them all!!!” She knows they can’t when they have been classified as Top Secret.

That's some of them. Many of them she deleted and no one has access to them.

What was she hiding?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She is dishonest and untrustworthy.
SHe's trying to deflect and avoid responsibility - typical liberal.
1,300 classified emails found on her unsecured server
13 highly classified and sensitive
emails for SAP - a secure program - found unsecured
.
.
.
.
.
.
.and on....

Negligence on her part that I do not wish as a quality in our next president.

I think you wouldn't have voted for her no matter where she kept her emails.

Wrong - SHe had potential but considering how the Clintons have set her up to be next in line because of the mutual agreement between her and Bill, I won't.

Exactly, that has nothing to do with emails.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Too many of you do not understand the different email systems. The State Department, like the Department of Defense and other agencies, has an internal email system for unclassified communications that often has sensitive or proprietary information in emails, but is not supposed to have secret or top secret classified information. Classified documents use an entirely different system and cannot be emailed to the unclassified email system.

The issue here, as I see it, is the Secretary had daily meetings, speeches, phone calls, and other events and tasks needs background briefings, talking points, daily news updates, and the other basic staff-supplied materials that every significant government, corporate. or other official requires. The expectation was that the unclassified emails and documents that are shared in the unclassified State Department email system could be sent to the Secretary's private server for her official use.

It appears that the people preparing her talking points and briefs included some information that the classifiers now believe came from top secret sources. Some of this is subject to interpretation because there are things published in the media and discussed fairly openly - drone strikes, for example - that the intelligence community nevertheless considers to be top secret information. This is an issue not only for the Secretary's private server, top secret information is not supposed to be on the internal State Department email system either. In fact, the issue would be much the same even if she had used a State Department account, because top secret information is not supposed to be in those emails either.

I would bet that if you dug this deep into Defense, Homeland Security, CIA, or other email systems, you would find similar examples in which information is shared in the unclassified email systems that the users think is not secret but that the classification community would consider to be secret or top secret.

Doesn't make it right or allowable. Plus that is not a good defense. To our knowledge we don't know if other cases occurring right now that had leaks that were this damaging. She should be held culpable for her actions. As of four hours ago the IG said she never set an official email up on her arrival
http://nypost.com/2016/01/31/this-was-all-planned-former-ig-says-hillary-state-dept-are-lying/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Doesn't make it right or allowable. Plus that is not a good defense. To our knowledge we don't know if other cases occurring right now that had leaks that were this damaging. She should be held culpable for her actions. As of four hours ago the IG said she never set an official email up on her arrival
http://nypost.com/2016/01/31/this-was-all-planned-former-ig-says-hillary-state-dept-are-lying/

By all means, make sure a woman is punished for the sins of all. Better still, make sure that a woman is thoroughly, thoroughly investigated, and pretend that any larger crimes committed by men never even happened. Worked for Martha Stewart, too!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Doesn't make it right or allowable. Plus that is not a good defense. To our knowledge we don't know if other cases occurring right now that had leaks that were this damaging. She should be held culpable for her actions. As of four hours ago the IG said she never set an official email up on her arrival
http://nypost.com/2016/01/31/this-was-all-planned-former-ig-says-hillary-state-dept-are-lying/

By all means, make sure a woman is punished for the sins of all. Better still, make sure that a woman is thoroughly, thoroughly investigated, and pretend that any larger crimes committed by men never even happened. Worked for Martha Stewart, too!

Wow. Woe is me.
As far as I can remember, there is no evidence that anybody before Hillary used a private server, had classified - TOP Secret information on that server - and was hacked by a foreign entity (something the FBI is checking with HRC’s server).
So, this is a red herring.
Don’t you wonder why her personal server-setter upper - Bryan Pagliano - invoked the fifth when testifying. What secrets is he keeping????

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about who sent the emails? Who the hell was cutting and pasting or entering classified information into an unclassified system and then sending them off to Hillary's home brew email? Huma?

This person was effectively deputizing him/herself to decide what is classified and what is not. WTF?

I would suspect that anyone who sent classified information may be in trouble as well.
Part of the problem, aside from the fact that HRC was not using a State Dept. email but her own server, is that there is an email directing the sender to send the info in a “non paper” format. Seems as if this was SOP in Hillary’s circles.
She knows better. Or should.

I work in government IT. Systems are audited and required to be backed up and records take of transactions. Those agencies with more sensitive information have more stringent requirements. Most follow DoD guidelines though as they're pretty well documented and available. They and NIST set the standards truth be told and they work with vendors like Microsoft to secure their products for our environments. That being said, I can't think of any other reason why one would use their own server other than to skirt the auditing process to leave themselves fre of their actions. My guess is she thought the FBI wouldn't be able to track her actions. The fact she told employees to simply unmark classified information shows she thinks she's above the law

THIS! It is so obvious. It used to be called keeping two sets of books.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about who sent the emails? Who the hell was cutting and pasting or entering classified information into an unclassified system and then sending them off to Hillary's home brew email? Huma?

This person was effectively deputizing him/herself to decide what is classified and what is not. WTF?

I would suspect that anyone who sent classified information may be in trouble as well.
Part of the problem, aside from the fact that HRC was not using a State Dept. email but her own server, is that there is an email directing the sender to send the info in a “non paper” format. Seems as if this was SOP in Hillary’s circles.
She knows better. Or should.

I work in government IT. Systems are audited and required to be backed up and records take of transactions. Those agencies with more sensitive information have more stringent requirements. Most follow DoD guidelines though as they're pretty well documented and available. They and NIST set the standards truth be told and they work with vendors like Microsoft to secure their products for our environments. That being said, I can't think of any other reason why one would use their own server other than to skirt the auditing process to leave themselves fre of their actions. My guess is she thought the FBI wouldn't be able to track her actions. The fact she told employees to simply unmark classified information shows she thinks she's above the law

THIS! It is so obvious. It used to be called keeping two sets of books.

But, but, but.... it was all for “convenience.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Doesn't make it right or allowable. Plus that is not a good defense. To our knowledge we don't know if other cases occurring right now that had leaks that were this damaging. She should be held culpable for her actions. As of four hours ago the IG said she never set an official email up on her arrival
http://nypost.com/2016/01/31/this-was-all-planned-former-ig-says-hillary-state-dept-are-lying/

By all means, make sure a woman is punished for the sins of all. Better still, make sure that a woman is thoroughly, thoroughly investigated, and pretend that any larger crimes committed by men never even happened. Worked for Martha Stewart, too!

I'd argue otherwise. Over 90% of the US prison population is male. Sounds like we are not investigating and jailing woman enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guessing there isn't much in those emails since Clinton's campaign has urged State to release them all, immediately. Or maybe it's a bluff and we will learn she was being blackmailed by the Russians!

If she had really wanted her emails to be released, she would have left them with the State Dept, when she left office, as she was required to do.
But, she didn’t.
In fact, it took months for the Benghazi Select committee to get any of her emails related to Benghazi, despite the fact that they had been subpoenaed because the State Dept. kept coming back and saying they didn’t have anything. Of course they didn’t since she did not use their official email system.

What Hillary has never explained is why, when she knew that a subpoena had been issued - why she didn’t provide the State Dept with her emails then? Why did it take this whole thing going public for her to cooperate with an investigation. What exactly was she hiding????

So, it is so convenient for her to now say - “Release them all!!!” She knows they can’t when they have been classified as Top Secret.

That's some of them. Many of them she deleted and no one has access to them.

What was she hiding?

Please provide evidence that relevant emails were deleted and could not be recovered. Otherwise STFU.