Source: Key Clinton emails did not contain highly classified secrets

[Gloria]

Source: Key Clinton emails did not contain highly classified secrets

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/hillary-clinton-email-no-highly-classified-215599#ixzz3qmHN3fPW

The U.S. intelligence community has retreated from claims that two emails in Hillary Clinton’s private account contained top-secret information, a source familiar with the situation told POLITICO.

After a review, intelligence agencies concluded that the two emails did not include highly classified intelligence secrets, the source said. Concerns about the emails' classification helped trigger an ongoing FBI inquiry into Clinton's private email setup.

Intelligence Community Inspector General I. Charles McCullough III made the claim that two of the emails contained top-secret information; the State Department publicly stated its disagreement and asked Director of National Intelligence James Clapper’s office to referee the dispute. Now, that disagreement has been resolved in State’s favor, said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

A spokesman for Clapper said the review of the emails has not been completed. "ODNI has made no such determination and the review is ongoing," Clapper spokesman Brian Hale said.

However, the source said State Department officials had already received instructions from intelligence officials that they need not use the strictest standards for handling the two emails in dispute – meaning that they aren’t classified.

snip

FBI Director James Comey has since confirmed his agency is conducting a review of the matter. An FBI spokeswoman declined to comment when asked what impact the classification developments would have on the agency's ongoing probe.

While disclosures of information classified at the "Secret" level can trigger an investigation, Aftergood said the conclusion that the two emails were not "Top Secret" could have some impact on how the FBI proceeds.

"That would tend to reduce the urgency of the initial referral," he said.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/hillary-clinton-email-no-highly-classified-215599#ixzz3qmI2G6mi


Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/11/hillary-clinton-email-no-highly-classified-215599#ixzz3qmHfDz8H

[whereisjustice]

1. Better NSA spend their time sifting through her email than ours. Karma is a bitch from the golden

girl who thinks its OK for the Government to track everything we say and do.

[SusanaMontana41]

13. That, too. eom

[SusanaMontana41]

2. The content in the emails matters less to me

than her use of a nongovernment server to conduct government business.

I'm very happy she didn't share classified information, but that doesn't mean what she did was OK.

Why the secrecy?

[former9thward]

3. Notice they said "highly classified" not "classified".

[6chars]

4. = Innocent!

There is no smoking gun.

[SusanaMontana41]

10. She used a private server to conduct government business.

What's more, her staff might have deleted some of those emails, which belong to you and me.

That bothers me a lot.

[kelliekat44]

5. Did she really use her private server to "conduct government business?" nt

[Lee-Lee]

6. That's never been disputed since the public became aware of the server

I don't think there is any dispute as to that, since she willingly turned over tens of thousands of "work related" emails to State that were all sent from the private account.

[SusanaMontana41]

8. Yeah, she did. Do a Google search.

The New York Times March 2, 2015:

WASHINGTON — "Hillary Rodham Clinton exclusively used a personal email account to conduct government business as secretary of state, State Department officials said, and may have violated federal requirements that officials’ correspondence be retained as part of the agency’s record.

"Her expansive use of the private account was alarming to current and former National Archives and Records Administration officials and government watchdogs, who called it a serious breach.

“It is very difficult to conceive of a scenario — short of nuclear winter — where an agency would be justified in allowing its cabinet-level head officer to solely use a private email communications channel for the conduct of government business,” said Jason R. Baron, a lawyer at Drinker Biddle & Reath who is a former director of litigation at the National Archives and Records Administration."

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/03/us/politics/hillary-clintons-use-of-private-email-at-state-department-raises-flags.html?ref=topics&_r=1

That she used a private server to conduct government business is not in dispute.

[Lee-Lee]

7. They seem to be carefully parsing words here

Trying to make it sound as if it's no big deal if stuff that would be classified "secret" is found as long as it's not "top secret".

It's still a big deal if stuff that was or should have been classified at the "secret" level is there.

The other thing they have parsed words on is to say it wasn't "marked" secret when received or sent- but that isn't a defense. I was in a position where I generated reports that were marked "secret". Had I generated those reports, not marked them secret, and emailed them on an unsecure system I would have been just as guilty of mishandling classified information as I would if I had send something marked secret- as a person with a security clearance I was expected to know and properly judge what information should be classified when I generated it. Likewise if someone emailed me info that should have been marked secret and was not I had a responsibility to report that security violation, and saying "it wasn't marked classified" wasn't a defense.

The careful legal parsing of words probably works for most people, but anyone who has or does hold a security clearance sees what they are doing. And while most of that crowd trends conservative, it isn't helping her with those of us who are liberals in that crowd.

[Fumesucker]

9. It depends on what the meaning of "is" is...

[SusanaMontana41]

12. Ah, yes.

A chestnut from the past. Perfectly applicable here.

[SusanaMontana41]

11. TOTALLY.

Her use of a private server to conduct government business is enough for me.

Those emails belong to We the People, regardless of what was in them. Federal law says so.