Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were “up-classified” to make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the e-mails were sent.
Quote:
The FBI also discovered several thousand work-related e-mails that were not in the group of 30,000 that were returned by Secretary Clinton to State in 2014.
*Several thousand actually turns out to be 14,900
Quote:
For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation.T In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).
None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.
Quote:
We also assess that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal e-mail extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account.
I hope a search warrant is obtained and that the laws change where congress is concerned. They should also be held to the same. We pay their salaries.
You can make that law but making the communications of elected officials public record would be counter productive.
Quote:
That's a lie.
Take it up with Comey, the statements he has made about the investigation contradict numerous things Clinton has said. Most importantly....
Quote:
From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification.
The email chains, again, were forwards that she may have responded to. As shown in the vids I linked Comey found her to be careless. He found that she made a mistake. He did not find her to be criminal. Those are the facts. You can say otherwise all day, but it doesn't change the facts.
The email chains, again, were forwards that she may have responded to.
She both sent and received these emails. Part of her job and the job of her staff is to identify, classify and use the proper protocols for handling classified information. The mundane stuff arguably could be considered a mistake but the Top Secret/SAP is no mistake. Furthermore not only did she continue to use her Blackberry after being warned about it but did so in hostile environments overseas.
You could only draw to conclusions from this. Either Clinton and her staff are all complete morons or they did it for their own selfish reasons. Which is it?
Cassy, read your own article. Here's a quote from it: Clinton was sworn in as secretary the prior month, and had become "hooked" on reading and answering emails on a BlackBerry she used during the 2008 presidential race.
She wanted a Blackberry. They declined it. After some thrashing around about what she could have, she went with her own unsecured Blackberry.
They asked for a smartphone. They also asked for alternatives. With that said, sure she was used to her blackberry. She's an older person and got used to one OS. It's not a shocker.
Quote:
It's ironic that you don't find the fox article credible, but freely use Politicus.
Polticus directly linked to the DCAT who filed the report. Their link opened more easily on my browser, so I thought it was better to use. Fox didn't link to anyone. They cite an unknown insider.
Quote:
Nevertheless, if you don't like the fox new article about the 81 email chains with classified information, how about the actual FBI report? Just scroll to the 2nd page, 7th line:
I did watch the Comey hearings. Gowdy did a wonderful job. I understand Clinton's arguments. She got a pass.
Gowdy intentionally spun. He prefaced his questions with the word scheme. That was his assumption, not a fact with evidence. It was him prefacing with bias and that's not appropriate IMO.
Quote:
Chaffetz was conducting an investigation into the use of private emails and the FOIA. He doesn't even have security clearance, so this whole story by "Politicus" is nuts.
He doesn't have security clearance to review Hillary's emails, but he has security clearance. Again, he sits on sensitive committees (e.g., subcommittee for homeland security).
Quote:
Here's an article as to why Congress feels it should be exempt (that's Dems and Pubs alike) that might help in your discussion with Cummings:
The link only opens to an advertisement for me, but I've come across justifications before. I don't believe that congress should be allowed to legislate themselves.
Quote:
And here's a bipartisan piece of legislation that might help you in your discussion with Cummings:
You can make that law but making the communications of elected officials public record would be counter productive.
It's not about having their communications as public record. Hillary's certainly aren't. It's about accountability. And really, he should not be using a private email. And neither should she have. I work for a major pharma and am privy to proprietary information. I do not use a private email for my work business at all to avoid potential issues. Government shouldn't either IMO. But, I'm more inclined to assume innocent mistakes. It's easier to have a private email. VPN's are a pain in the but. I'm sure government systems are the worst. I don't think any of them are (right or left) are evil conspirators.
Quote:
Take it up with Comey, the statements he has made about the investigation contradict numerous things Clinton has said. Most importantly....
'
My objections are rooted in Comey's testimony. Not just his. Everybody's testimony in those hearings. The hearings are all that I'm going by. And to reiterate, it's not that I don't think she should have not used a private server/or email, it's the bull spin and the politics between agencies, between parties that are played out. Upclassification and then declassificiation and then back again/wash repeat. It's bureaucratic bull. That's exactly why Comey was only concerned about the 7 (now 8 I guess) TSC content chains and rightly so. Then these politicians spin and people take clips and sound bites and it's morphed. And everyone buys into either side without considering the entire picture.
The thread title was actually changed by someone other than me. My title was more fitting for the election forum.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
