Clinton approved CIA drone assassinations with her cellphone, report says

[tabasco]

The FBI has been conducting a criminal investigation into Hillary Clinton’s handling of classified information for months.

An explosive new report reveals just what it is that the FBI is looking to: emails in which then-Secretary of State Clinton approved CIA drone assassinations in Pakistan with her cellphone.

From 2011 on, the State Department had a secret arrangement with the CIA, giving it a degree of say over whether or not a drone killing would take place.

The U.S. drone program has killed hundreds of civilians in Pakistan and other countries.

http://www.salon.com/2016/06/10/fbi_criminal_investigation_emails_clinton_approved_cia_drone_assassinations_with_her_cellphone_report_says/

[CorkySt.Clair]

1. She's efficient.

[HumanityExperiment]

6. fluffy insulation process in progress...

I see the the insulation bubble echo chamber 2.0 project has begun in earnest... or in this case corkeyed

[CorkySt.Clair]

11. Five more days...

[HumanityExperiment]

12. I'll be well within the parameters of posting rules...

come the 16th, feel free to step up and debate the facts

I'll wait...

[CorkySt.Clair]

13. Yes, I'm sure you believe that.

Tick tock.

[HumanityExperiment]

14. I know that...

have a day!

[roguevalley]

36. she also put a commodity trader on the board that advises on nuclear weapons

though he didn't know slag all about them. He did however give her foundation a million dollars. Oh and somehow this commodity trader became a super delegate too. No corruption here. Nope. Not at all.

[Bob41213]

61. None. And money doesn't buy favor with her. Never has. Never will.

[HumanityExperiment]

90. wow

have a day!

[Demsrule86]

111. No you are not

This is an attack post from a left wing hater ...an attack on our nominee will not be tolerated on a Democratic website in a couple of days. The post would be hidden in a New York minute...not one useful link or any proof. Pres. Obama has used drone strikes to kill thousands of terrorist...very effective. And I fail to see why that is wrong...what you want more troops? I don't.

[HumanityExperiment]

119. FACTS...

By simply using the facts, presenting principles DEMs should be fighting for should be tolerated... that addressing this will show we are BETTER than GOP supporters, that we as DEMs are willing to stand on principle rather than dismiss, or worse, covering up, an issue that will plague a nominee through GE

By attempting to label ANY criticism as 'an attack' weakens DEMs and what DEM party stands for, a nominee should be HELD TO DEM ideology and principle. If we don't we are no better than GOP in this present day and age

BTW, why would you bring Obama into this on your recent reply here? I posted a very specific point that is currently in the news cycle on an issue involving presumptive nominee, either address THAT or don't...

[floriduck]

33. Yes. Then you can just leave your head buried in sand. No more reported facts or possibilities

Of her losing the election or actual nomination for possible criminal activities. Welcome to America, the land of the rich and ignorant.

[CorkySt.Clair]

46. Now now

Those who want to cheer for Drumpf are free to do so can at the Jackpine sewer.

[floriduck]

59. Sorry, I'm not a Trumpster.

[laserhaas]

56. Yup

[annavictorious]

128. The entire WSJ story is available at the following link.

http://cannonfire.blogspot.com/

And the details in the article run counter to your fanciful narrative.

Here's a money quote:

The vaguely worded messages didn’t mention the “CIA,” “drones” or details about the militant targets, officials said.

Here's another:

They (the emails) were written within the often-narrow time frame in which State Department officials had to decide whether or not to object to drone strikes before the CIA pulled the trigger, the officials said.

Do you really think that the SOS can order drone strikes?

[scscholar]

83. She gets stuff done

Seriously, she didn't let glacially-slow government IT hold her up indefinitely.

[Fumesucker]

114. Government is incompetent

Is that a message you think helps the Democrats?

[fasttense]

105. Do you realize that this says the S of S can order up assassinations?

I thought it was a kingly power that only the president was allowed.

Now it seems that any cabinet member can do it. What next? The WH janitor ordering drone strikes?

This is no longer a democracy when cabinet members are allowed to murder people without a trial or jury.

[speaktruthtopower]

113. There's one person here who can see through the fluff to notice what's important...

Thanks

[PoliticAverse]

2. The US Secretary of State is deciding who gets assassinated? n/t

[leveymg]

5. Kissinger did it, too.

But his methods of delivery were analog.

[braddy]

8. She was probably approving, not really deciding who. The experts decided who and then

needed sign off by management.

[leveymg]

16. Reveals USGov classified decision-making process. Violates the Espionage Act tes

Damn cell phone!

[itsrobert]

68. There is probably several people who need to sign off on it

The SecState, SecDef, CIA, etc.

[treestar]

87. my first thought too

was that her job?

[Recursion]

95. No, though they can recommend against a given target

It's more of a veto.

[Agschmid]

3. Sucks huh... US Sanctioned non judicial killing.

Go America.

[msanthrope]

34. It is judicial. nt

[lumberjack_jeff]

62. Because if the SoS says it's legal, it is.

[msanthrope]

72. No....the SCOTUS did. And any Congressperson who disagreed was and is free to submit legislation

that modifies the AUMF allowing it.

[Agschmid]

77. Cool, and that makes it totally acceptable apparently.

[msanthrope]

79. I think a drone at Tora Bora in November of 2001 might have saved a fuck load

of trouble, eh?

I don't have a problem with AlQaeda or the Taliban being targeted. I have a major problem with innocent casualties, and expect that drone programs be used to minimize those losses.

[tabasco]

86. Actually, a U.S. division at the other end of the valley would have helped a lot more.

But those troops never arrived because they were preparing to invade Iraq. Our wise president George AWOL Bush said we would rely on "our Pakistani allies" to apprehend any n'er-do-wells attempting to escape into Pakistan. Our wise president and his honest advisors were supported strongly by some Democrats in their decision to invade Iraq, instead of concentrating on the country where our enemies were located. But most Democrats in Congress had the good sense and integrity to oppose the Iraq invasion.

[okasha]

44. I'm pretty sure the President has to approve tbese strikes

and I also think they're an abomination.

[JonLeibowitz]

50. The President is not a member of the judiciary.

[okasha]

54. Who said he was?

[Hydra]

91. The President does not have the authority to kill people

Without it being part of a judicial process.

[leveymg]

4. The very same Blackberry NSA told her not to use. So she hooked it up to a private server

that also was uncertified. She refused to use a keyboard so they could not install a secure SCIF in her house like other high officials. It was herv willful refusal to follow normal information security laws and procedures that caused this exposure of secrets to happen. Gross negligence, at least

[NWCorona]

19. People continuously bring up her SCIF but when I ask for proof of a

tempest approved terminal installed I get crickets. I think hers was just a hardened room with video telecommunications at the most.

[leveymg]

24. The SCIF would contain terminals for two classified systems.

There's the State Dept Classified SIPR that can be used up to Secret and the Interagency system over which TS/SAP can be sent. She didn't want to bother with touching the keyboards of either, so they never installed a SCIF. Instead, she relied on her old Blackberry to send and receive messages to aides who downloaded hardcopy from the two secure systems.

[Skink]

7. You can do anything with a smart phone

Download the free drone strike app.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

9. Another glorious example of her "foreign policy experience"!

[bobthedrummer]

37. +1, a policy of lies, blood and more blood, how "diplomatic"

[SamKnause]

10. Poor judgement or intentional ???

[leveymg]

15. Both, depends upon which felony statute is applied.

There were other TS/SAP messages passed across her server that by law she had a duty to report to Diplomatic Security. She only encouraged Blumenthal to send more "keep 'em coming." That's a separate chargeable offense.

[SamKnause]

17. Thanks for the input, but that was not the meaning of my post.

Did she do it because she has poor judgement ?

Did she do it intentionally because it benefited her in some way ?

I tend to think the latter is why she did it.

[leveymg]

20. I don't see how criminal is necessarily exvlusion of poor judgement

Another provision of the Espionage Act, Sec. 793 (f)(1) makes it a felony to remove or destroy classified information by "gross negligence". Doesn't have to benefit the defendant to be illegal.

[elehhhhna]

63. Great way to let your sponsors hack in and see everything you do

Then you play stupid and have plausible deniability

[Lars39]

78. I keep asking myself what she could have done to make it any easier.

I bet the U.S. intelligence community is livid.

[HassleCat]

18. Not sure about the point here.

Is the drone program wrong? Are killings approved too easily, too often, with too little information? If that's the point, I would agree.

If it's a problem of secrecy, I'm not so sure. There is a way it could be done by cell phone without compromising security.

[NWCorona]

21. The problem is her BlackBerry is off the shelf and unsecure.

That and the fact that she was giving kill orders. I'm not up on the chain of command on that but it seems a bit odd.

[leveymg]

22. Her cell phone and server were not secure. She refused to use the secure

Systems the State Dept and NSA tried to convince her to use.

[Lord Magus]

29. Except the State Deprt server wasn't actually secure at all.

It was breached many times.

[ljm2002]

115. There are more than one State Dept servers...

...so you can't just say "the" State Dept server was breached. There are secure systems for handling Top Secret information, for example -- Hillary declined to use those for the vast bulk of her communications.

Even the most secure system can be breached if a password or passwords can be guessed, or if there is collaboration from the inside. That does not mean you cannot make a system as secure as possible from unwanted intrusions.

From what has been reported in many news stories now, we know that Clinton's homebrew system did not reach even rudimentary levels of security. It was not behind a DMZ with other machines serving as a first line of defense; it did not support encryption / VPN for the first 2 or 3 months after it was set up; it had the Remote Desktop port open throughout its existence.

Sorry but your apologia does not fly.

[leveymg]

116. At which level was this breach? DOS email, SIPR (to Secret), Interagency Intel (to TS/SAP)?

By funneling all levels of communication down to her unsecure Blackberry and uncertified email server, and opening those communications about joint CIA/DOS kill operations to every hacker in the world, two agencies classified information and all levels of communication were potentially compromised. Think about it.

[Lord Magus]

122. Yet there's no evidence her "uncertified" email server was ever breached. -nt-

[TwilightZone]

82. The State Department's server has been hacked multiple times.

That is public information.

[Kentonio]

98. So what? If you use the official government communications and they are breached

Then that's not your personal responsibility. You don't get to just decide to ignore all the rules because you think you know better. That's not how government works.

[leveymg]

117. See #116. What DOS information, exactly, has been hacked, at what level?

[bahrbearian]

23. I made a mistake , Oh well, lets move forward. On to the GE

[Hiraeth]

32. easy, peasy. light and breezy.

[Octafish]

25. That is troubling.

Explains the State Department love for Blackwater and Erik Prince, though.

[dinkytron]

26. A technophobe executing drone strikes via a smartphone? Sounds like a recipe for disaster.

[Dem2]

27. Ahh yes, the assassination...

of Hillary's character will continue long after she's been elected. The bitterness runs deep in some.

[tabasco]

42. How is a report of factual information considered "character assasination?"

Please explain.

[Dem2]

69. Most famous line used in internet history

BUT IT'S TRULY FACTUAL INFORMATION!!



Let's not be coy.

[tabasco]

88. That is not a response.

If you'd like, try again.

[John Poet]

110. In Hillary's case, it's EASY---

The facts reveal her poor character.


Hillary assassinates her own character.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

52. Do you not take character into account when voting?

[Matt_in_STL]

57. Only if by "character" you mean "gender"

Then yes, you would be accurate.

[Dem2]

70. Haha, let's not be coy

This is gonna be my pat response until people stop pretending that the primary isn't over.

It's over.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

71. It's not just about the primary.

It's about what kind of person we're supposed to vote for.

[Dem2]

73. Whatever

Enjoy poking people in the eye with a stick - because you get jollies by bringing up things that you know will annoy Hillary supporters.

It's not even slightly clever.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

74. My heart bleeds for the tribulations of Hillary supporters when confronted by her past.

[Dem2]

75. My heart laughs at the vengefullness

I have always liked both candidates, but many of the supporters on both sides? - eh, it's like some kind of game for them.

Unpalatable.

[Kentonio]

99. A game? Yes I agree, some people do act like that.

Like those people who completely ignore sourced news investigations be again it makes their candidate look bad.

[stonecutter357]

28. tick tock..

[leftofcool]

30. the clock is running. Get it out of your system in a hurry!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

31. FIVE MORE DAYS

[PoliticAverse]

35. Until you get a keyboard with a working caps lock? n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

39. I FeEl LiKe ShOuTiNg It.

[chillfactor]

38. 5 more days...

and this kind of garbage will be blocked.

[Avalux]

41. How draconian of you.

Just exactly what are your expectations? Absolutely no negative posts about Hillary, even from a legit source?

[tabasco]

43. Salon news articles will be blocked?

Interesting.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

55. Will she be no longer accountable for her acts in 5 days?

[gordianot]

40. I wonder if she gets Obama's ultra secure custom made Blackberry?

In 8 months it could be hers or God forbid be in the possession of a racist maniac. That little piece of security with no back doors is a first cousin to the football. Maybe Barack will get to keep it as a nostalgic momento.

[WhiteTara]

45. ...

These are the revelations of a report by The Wall Street Journal, based on information provided by anonymous congressional and law-enforcement officials who were briefed on the FBI’s probe.

[Bayard]

47. The flood of crap

The flood of crap on Hillary just keeps getting deeper. I think we're about up to knee level now.

So, let me see if I got this straight. After the nomination, we are not allowed to say anything, "bad" about Hillary? What happened to the "Underground" part of DU? I thought it was all about getting good information, and giving your opinion. I didn't know when I rejoined that I also had to join The Hillary Club.

[Skink]

58. Were gonna have to go underground

[MyNameGoesHere]

89. Well, Bye..

[ucrdem]

48. When did the FBI become a branch of Wikileaks?

And why are they leaking state secrets to the RW press?

[msongs]

49. bernie sanders approves of/votes to support drones ... civilians, wedding parties, terrorists etc

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/oct/11/bernie-sanders-drones-counter-terror

[JonLeibowitz]

51. I disagree with him on this. He and Clinton are both wrong. Still interesting to discuss it.

[Ash_F]

53. I did not know the SoS had that authority

Wow. Not a good thing.

[Recursion]

94. SoS potentially has a veto on a strike

"don't kill that guy he's needed in the peace talks" or whatever.

[radical noodle]

60. Anonymous people saying this and based on a WSJ report? n/t

[ucrdem]

67. Anonymous "law-enforcement officials" LOL.

These are the revelations of a report by The Wall Street Journal, based on information provided by anonymous congressional and law-enforcement officials who were briefed on the FBI’s probe.

In other words the usual RW rumor mill.

[ismnotwasm]

64. I just read that and every link it referenced

Which included a Twitter discussion and a link calling President Obama a war criminal. One more time, as far as the emails, or even Hillary her using a "cell phone"-should she have used a landline?--there is no 'there" there.

A healthy discussion could be had on drone use in wartime however--that's to me, is a far more important issue.

[Kentonio]

100. Sadly there's a fairly strong case for both of the last 2 presidents having ordered actions

That are directly in contravention of the Geneva Convention and which have caused the avoidable mass deaths of civilians. If it had been done by any other country we'd certainly be pressing for charges to be laid against the perpetrators, but now apparently it's just fine and will carry on for as long as we like because someone attacked America 15 years ago.

[elehhhhna]

65. When she gets in at 3 AM phone call everyone will hear it.

It'll be a very transparent administration.

[elehhhhna]

66. Siri, remind me to blow up some Pakistanis later

[TwilightZone]

80. Ah, more of Ben Norton's bloviating nonsense.

Does anyone really take this guy seriously? He flat-out lies in the very first sentence of the article.

[annavictorious]

81. That's not what it says behind the WSJ pay wall.

Turns out the the WSJ played the bros hoping to sucker them into subscriptions so they could read the "blockbuster" story behind the pay wall. Even Goodman's delusional embellishments can't help this nothing burger.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12512176034

[tonyt53]

84. She used a Blackberry. That device was more secure than traditional computer emails.

Oh, and the drone program that has saved the lives of countless US troops. War isn't clean or pretty, and it sure isn't a video game.

[Kentonio]

101. America isn't at war. It's about time people remembered that.

[Hekate]

92. June 16

[Warren DeMontague]

93. You know how they say "there's an app for that"?

Anyway, if one has a moral objection to the drone strikes, it doesn't really matter what method they are authorized by.

[Major Hogwash]

96. I wonder if she will put the invasion plans for Iran on her Facebook page.

Where is she going to put the nuclear football codes, on her iPhone?

[Ash_F]

97. Good thing they are only bombing agrarian separatists!

It would be bad if our "foes" were people who actually had money and technology, and not backwoods sheep herders. Otherwise they would see it coming.

[apcalc]

102. Good

[KansDem]

103. Well, as long as she didn't text it while driving...

That makes it okay.

[Orsino]

104. Casual death-dealing offends me. n/t

[Amaril]

124. Thank you!

That is the thing that gets me -- ordering the death and suffering of human beings as casually as one might order a pizza.

It reminds me of Gulf War I -- at the moment the first missiles were being launched, Bush Sr. was at Camp David. It struck me as so cold, indifferent & disrespectful. People are dying -- our husbands, sons & brothers are putting their lives on the line for YOUR war -- and you're on fucking vacation?

That rubbed me all kinds of wrong ways, and I've never forgotten it.

[Tarc]

106. "An explosive new report..."

I lol'ed.

[boston bean]

107. Hillary ordered drone strikes?

That claim right there ought to tell you what a bunch of bullshit this is.

[Demsrule86]

108. This is a post that has no truth to it...and is frankly insulting -three more days nt

[leveymg]

112. It's based in Thurs. WSJ article. And frankly, you're a jerk for threatening fellow DUers.

You have nothing to add to the subject but intimidation and distraction.

[Demsrule86]

125. The WSJ editorial page is a bastion of right wing crap

and it references 'reports' with not one link...the article is crap and on June 16th the attacks will end. I fail to understand why you people continue to attack the Democratic nominee...the only one who can defeat Trump. What purpose is served by posting these bogus articles...what do you gain?

[leveymg]

127. That wasn't on the Editorial page.

[Demsrule86]

109. This article contains unsupported facts and not one useful link

Typical Norton.

[JoePhilly]

118. I heard she used Google maps to personally guide the missles to ...

... their targets.

[leftofcool]

120. Why does Hillary hate Yahoo and their maps?

[Blue_Tires]

121. And?? So??

You know Sanders also fully supports drone warfare, right?

[RogueTrooper]

123. Hillary Clinton - Metal as Fuck

[still_one]

126. surprise, salon has written a hit piece on Hillary. I am surprised they are still in business