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

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "Drip, drip, drip.... the Clinton email saga continues"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Not blaming Bush, but an "alternative" private account email system was well used in the Bush White House.[/quote]

“Alternative” is the operative word here.  OTOH, Clinton used ONLY her private server.  There is your difference.  [/quote]

Huh?  "Alternative" is not the operative word, "private" is, which plenty of others have done.  [/quote]

Guess you need it spelled out. 
If they used a private account as an alternative, that means they were using a government account for classified information. 
Hillary wasn’t.  She had only her private account.  [/quote]

She used only a private account because she was not sending or receiving classified information by email. As has been stated many times, there are separate systems for classified and nonclassified email. Any information that is classified must be sent on a completely separate email system. [/quote]

BS.  If you take INFORMATION that is classified from a classified server and summarize it and send it on an unclassified server, you are breaking the law.  There is nothing preventing someone from doing this, other than the threat that they may be prosecuted for doing so.  Guess these folks thought they were above the law.  [/quote]

At this point, there is no evidence at this point that she did this. [b]The information in question was not classified at the time it was shared[/b]. The FBI/DoJ are classifying it now. See the difference?[/quote]

That is what the Clinton campaign is saying.  However, the intelligence agencies from which the information originated are saying it was classified from the start.

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

[quote]"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."[/quote]

In addition, Hillary Clinton herself instructed an aid to send classified information through nonsecure channels.

[quote]The State Department released more than 3,000 of Clinton’s emails from her time as secretary of State on Friday. One of the emails has drawn scrutiny because in it, Clinton, who was awaiting a secure fax detailing talking points, instructed an adviser to turn the talking points into “nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure” because the fax wasn’t coming through.[/quote]

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/265367-clinton-defends-telling-aid-to-send-data-through-nonsecure-channel[/quote]

Her answer sounds reasonable:

“This is another instance where what is common practice — I need information, I had some points I had to make and I was waiting for a secure fax that could give me the whole picture, but oftentimes there is a lot of information that isn’t at all classified,” Clinton said Sunday on "Face the Nation." “So whatever information can be appropriately transmitted unclassified often was. That’s true for every agency in the government and everybody that does business with the government.”
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics