Did Clinton tell an aide to remove classified markings from a document & email it?

[peacebird]

On edit - here is a link to the State Dept copy of this email exchange:

https://foia.state.gov/searchapp/DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_Jan7thWeb/08635C6-8/DOC_0C05787519/C05787519.pdf

Original OP follows :
"On the June 17, 2011, email chain with senior State Department adviser Jake Sullivan, Clinton apparently asked Sullivan to change the marking on classified information so that it is no longer flagged as classified.

Clinton, using her private email server, asks for “the TPs,” apparently a reference to talking points being prepared for her. Sullivan, who is using his official State Department email, responds, “They say they’ve had issues sending secure fax. They’re working on it.” Clinton responds, “If they can’t, turn into nonpaper w[ith] no identifying heading and send nonsecure.”

It’s not clear if Sullivan actually followed through on Clinton’s orders. But if he did, it may expose Clinton to serious legal jeopardy."

http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/smoking-gun-email-suggests-hillary-committed-a-crime/

Fwiw: i have never heard of lifezette.com before... Anyone know if it's legit?

[Glamrock]

1. Depends on who you happen to be supporting

I'm sure.

[thereismore]

13. Haha that's funny. Is there even such a thing as truth anymore?

Objective truth that is, not partisan truthiness.

[Motown_Johnny]

67. I support Bernie and have no idea if this is true or not.

We don't have enough information to reach a reasonable conclusion.

[winter is coming]

2. I've never heard of this source before, either. If this report is credible, it will turn up

elsewhere soon enough. Let's wait and see.

[NCTraveler]

3. Laura Ingram is one of their writers.

http://www.lifezette.com/author/lauraingraham/

Seems to be an absolutely awful place.

I don't suggest sending them clicks.

Title of this one is:

She Changed Her Mind on Abortion. Here’s Why.

A radical feminist finally saw the light on killing babies

http://www.lifezette.com/faithzette/she-changed-her-mind-on-abortion-heres-why/

Please don't give them traffic.

[peacebird]

8. Ah... Well that would explain it then. I will delete- update- no delete cuz its on CNN

Thanks!

[Bobbie Jo]

35. Ah, well there's a deal breaker

Why does this RW garbage always seem find its way here?

[peacebird]

46. The OP is updated to include a link to the State Dept pdf of the messages in question

[zappaman]

4. Since your google seems to be broken...

Laura Ingraham's new site: LifeZette.com

Laura Ingraham's new website will be called LifeZette and will brand itself as "a cultural and political web destination for conservatives and independents," the On Media blog has learned.

Ingraham, a radio host and Fox News contributor, launched her political career as a speechwriter in the Reagan administration. She has been an influential conservative pundit since the mid-'90s and last year was named a contributor to "This Week," ABC's Sunday morning public affairs program.


http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/04/laura-ingrahams-new-site-lifezettecom-204849

[Sheepshank]

25. Its very, very important to post anti_Hillary articles first

....and THEN ask about the site.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

31. Is LI the only one reporting this?

[peacebird]

47. CNN,CBS also have it

[bunnies]

5. State Department has the actual email:

https://foia.state.gov/searchapp/DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_Jan7thWeb/08635C6-8/DOC_0C05787519/C05787519.pdf

[winter is coming]

14. Shit. That is not good. n/t

[1StrongBlackMan]

18. For some reason the link won't open for me ...

can you copy and paste the relevant part into the thread?

[1StrongBlackMan]

28. Maybe I don't speak diplomat speak; but ...

This email string doesn't seem to say what some are saying it says.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

32. Sorry, but, to me, it looks like Hillary's goose is cooked. At least we all still have Bernie! to fall back on.

Bernie & Elizabeth 2016!!!

[Uncle Joe]

6. I haven't heard of them but CNN has it on their website.

Washington (CNN)The chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee released a scathing statement Friday, calling on Hillary Clinton to "come clean" after the State Department released an email in which she asked an aide to send information on a non-secure system after attempts to send the document securely failed.

Sen. Chuck Grassley said the email, released at about 1:30 am Friday morning along with about 3,000 other emails from Clinton's State Department tenure, is "disturbing," and "appears to show the former Secretary of State instructing a subordinate to remove the headings from a classified document and send it to her in an unsecure manner."

On June 16, 2011, top Clinton aide Jake Sullivan wrote to Clinton to say she would get "tps" -- presumably short for "talking points" that evening. The subject of the email is redacted so it's not clear what topic these points covered.

The next morning, Clinton wrote back to say she hadn't received them yet, and after a few minutes Sullivan responded that staff were having issues sending the document in a secure fax but that they were "working on it."

"If they can't," Clinton replies, "turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure."


http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/08/politics/hillary-clinton-emails-2016/index.html

Thanks for the thread, peacebird.

[peacebird]

10. Since its on CNN, i will leave the thread.

[winter is coming]

33. I suggest you edit the OP to add a direct link to the State Dept pdf. n/t

[peacebird]

43. Done just now, thanks!

[millbrooky]

45. You mean "CNN says that a Republican says it's disturbing"

When Sanders said we should stop discussing the "damn emails", I didn't expect Sanders supporters to listen.

[Uncle Joe]

49. The New York Times states that this was released from the State Dept. and a PDF

to the email in on the link.

WASHINGTON — On a Friday morning in June 2011, after Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had waited more than 12 hours for a set of talking points to be sent to her, a top aide told her the delay was because staff members were having problems sending faxes that would be secure from probing eyes.

“If they can’t, turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure,” Mrs. Clinton responded in an email released early Friday by the State Department, one of about 3,000 newly released pages of Mrs. Clinton’s emails during her time as secretary of state. Of those, 66 documents contained classified information.

The note she sent to the top aide, Jacob J. Sullivan, instructing him how to strip sensitive material of official markings and send it in a “nonsecure” way is heavily redacted, so it is unknown what the talking points were about.

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/09/us/hillary-clinton-email-state-department.html

[TwilightGardener]

50. Best, most unself-aware Hillary Clinton quote from article:

"I was surprised he used personal email account if he is at State."

[emulatorloo]

51. Well if that Koch-head Chuck Grassley (R-liar) said it is "disturbing" I must take this seriously

[TwilightGardener]

7. CBS has the story on their website.

[4139]

9. Wingnut sites have the copy of the email, BUT not the contents

Of the talking points.

Sen. GrASSley will leak it later

[bunnies]

12. The State Department is a "wingnut site"?

oh rly?

https://foia.state.gov/searchapp/DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_Jan7thWeb/08635C6-8/DOC_0C05787519/C05787519.pdf

[4139]

16. I didn't mean them... Hadn't seen the direct link to State when I wrote it.

[leveymg]

11. She never thought THIS would become public.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/hillary-clinton-emails-state-department-denies-mess-217461

Yah, I know. Politico. But, it's not just a blog post.

As more comes out, the interest level seems to go down here. But, in reality, she's in deep shit, legally. I know she's not stupid, but arrogant - off the scale. She never dreamed this would ever be made public because she thought the whole email pile would be wiped.

[peacebird]

19. She is assuming that her status makes her untouchable.

Sadly that could be correct.

[leveymg]

20. That is what really scares me about the prospect of her becoming President and CIC.

Nothing scares her, or she pretends to believe that, and acts accordingly. Gambler's syndrome - most likely to double-down when she runs out of chips.

She's going to hock the wedding ring and the family home just to prove something to herself.

[peacebird]

21. She'll hock our futures, but never put her own wealth at risk.

[leveymg]

22. That's another reason to hope she fails again.

[peacebird]

23. Hope she fails to secure the nomination, because she is unelectable in the general

[polly7]

15. Rec'd because I just served on a jury for an alert to censor and hide.

Dear alerter, if you can't bother to respond to the article itself, you have no right to decide if others are able or unable to do the same (and censorship makes my skin crawl).

Sorry OP'er .......... back to your topic.

[peacebird]

17. sigh. Apparently it is already on CNN and CBS....

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

48. The media will chew Hillary up with these kind of controversial stories being raised every day... why not go with a safer choice? Bernie!

Bernie & Elizabeth 2016!!!

[ghurley]

24. peacebird - please edit post to link to direct source. Found on dept of state foia site

https://foia.state.gov/searchapp/DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_Jan7thWeb/08635C6-8/DOC_0C05787519/C05787519.pdf

[peacebird]

41. Ok, thanks. Have editted OP to include State Dept link

[bowens43]

26. The woman is a disaster.

[razorman]

27. If the accusation is true; i.e., that Secretary Clinton ordered the change

in classification, I am not sure that whether or not the aide actually carried it out is relevant. The fact that she gave the order (if she did) may be enough for prosecution. This is not looking good. On another tangent, I also now wonder if the administration may have already gotten wind of this. That might explain Joe Biden's remark a couple of days ago about "regretting not running". Maybe he is preparing to be drafted by people within the party who do not want Bernie as the nominee. Lot of conspiracy theories available for the discerning connoisseur.

[newblewtoo]

30. You may

have a good point. If she has legal problems preventing her serving her delegates would be able to vote for someone else. No reason that person had to participate in the primary process. It could get interesting.

[restorefreedom]

36. ok i'll bite...

as much as biden tends to go off at the mouth, i hold suspicious any purported "randomness" of his regret. and if this is gonna go bad for clinton, of course someone tipped off biden. the ptb do NOT want bernie as the nom, so they will try and draft biden at the convention and all hell will break loose

[razorman]

59. That's kind of what I was thinking, although I do not generally subscribe

to conspiracy theories at all, since they tend to give politicians and officials far too much credit for intelligence.

[restorefreedom]

66. lol....it does attribute some planning abilities to them

but i think the corporogarchy is so invested in bernie NOT being pres that they are putting their 1% heads together

[morningfog]

37. This is why you have to carefully parse her statements.

She said before that she send anything "marked" classified over her email account.

[razorman]

61. Apparently it does not really matter whether

they were marked. It doesn't look like she can really use that as an excuse.

[Yupster]

64. A political excuse, not a legal one

For instance, let's say she sends classified material to Huma. It wasn't marked classified. Well who would have marked it?

It's only Hillary and Huma talking. Is she saying that since I didn't mark it classified, then it must not be. Legally, it's nonsense, but it sounds good politicallly.

[Agnosticsherbet]

29. A very conservative source for propagands.

Google is your friend.

[peacebird]

44. Updated OP to include link to State Dept pdf showing the exchange.

CNN and CBS are also running the story

[Godhumor]

34. There is no indication, none, that the contents of the email were classified

Marking a fax for tps (talking points) secure is a control measure. When the fax didn't work, switching it to non-secure is a viable option.

Sending something secure does not mean classified. Don't buy into the hysteria.

[1StrongBlackMan]

38. That's what I was thinking. eom.

[morningfog]

39. The why the instruction to remove indentifying heading?

Why the need to remove that identifying heading BEFORE it could be sent non secure?

[Godhumor]

40. The header is where it indicates to send Secure

It would say something similar to:

Classification level: None
Communication level : Secure

Deleting that and resending would remove it from the secure queue.

[Lee-Lee]

57. No- the headings indicate classification level not how to send

It will have the classification level- that's all.

You don't put instructions how to send because everyone who works with classified information knows how to treat info classified to every level.

Here is a good overview:

http://www.itsi-inc.com/opsec/S1class/Marking.htm

Instructions to strip the header from classier information and send it via no secure means are a blatant violation of both the law and sound judgement.

[Godhumor]

60. No, the heading also indicated security of communication level

It is part of my daily job, and I have filled those kind of headers out many, many times.

[tammywammy]

42. If I'm instructed to change markings on documents

The documents themselves are update. I read this as remove the classified info and send non-secure.

[BlueStateLib]

52. Clinton-Cardin call recalled no classified elements to the conversation.

On June 17, 2011, Clinton repeatedly sought “talking points” for a phone conversation she had scheduled later in the day with Democratic Sen. Ben Cardin of Maryland. The subject was the late Russian accountant Sergei Magnitsky, who exposed massive corruption before dying in his prison cell after alleged mistreatment.

A legislative aide familiar with the Clinton-Cardin call recalled no classified elements to the conversation.

The aide said the discussion mainly focused on the form of a new “Magnitsky law” being worked on in Congress that would target Russian human rights abusers, and concerns among some Obama administration officials about how sanctions would be applied.

[Lee-Lee]

55. Incorrect. Once it's marked classified it's considered such until officially downgraded

I spent a lot of time working with both classified and unclassified reports in the Army.

If I took data found on a classified report and sent it out as a declassified report I would have at the minimum had my security clearance revoked and been sent packing from the Army because I couldn't hold the job without a clearnace. I likely would have faced legal proceedings of some sort.

Once it's marked classified you can't just strip that off- no matter what it is.

[TwilightGardener]

56. We don't know how it was marked, just that they were trying to send it to Clinton

via secure fax--and then she told her aide to alter various things about it and send it to her nonsecurely. Those are the details that will determine how this goes, if the FBI is looking at it. The OP's title (from the original source) kind of jumps the gun on assuming that it was initially given some sort of classified designation. Might have said "sensitive but unclassified", I would guess. May still be wrong to order that removed, however.

[Lee-Lee]

58. They wouldn't be going to the trouble of using the secure fax

Unless it was classified.

I did this balancing act- you had reports on the secure system and reports on the regular system. You did everything you could on the regular system because it was so much easier to work with and distribute- because you couldn't move data between the two.

To anyone who has worked with classified documents what happened in that exchange is very clear- and troubling.

[TwilightGardener]

62. I assume her aide would have known to send it nonsecure if it was OK to go that route, rather than

incur her wrath by an overnight delay. So not sure why she had to instruct him on how to alter and doctor it to send it. That said, we just don't have enough info right now.

[HereSince1628]

53. Who are the 'they' having trouble with the insecure fax?

What agency had authority to handle the classification of the documents?

Was HRC as SOS a person who would have authority to change a classification?

This looks bad but I don't know what I am looking at. It may look rather much worse than it is,

[TwilightGardener]

54. We don't know how it was officially marked, or exactly what it contained.

Until we know that, can't say for sure if she did something illegal. The "they" might be State Dept. staffers, or it may be the White House, if it involves talking points.

[jeff47]

65. Secure faxes have a device on each end to encrypt the data

before the data is sent over the phone line.

Sometimes, those devices get out of sync or have other problems which cause the fax to not go through. It's one of the examples of why people who work with classified information work very hard to keep unclassified off classified systems - working with classified systems is a major pain in the ass.

What agency had authority to handle the classification of the documents?

Anyone with the appropriate level of security clearance and need-to-know.

Was HRC as SOS a person who would have authority to change a classification?

The SOS is one of the "original classification authorities", and thus does have the power to classify and declassify. However, declassification typically requires a review process. For example, State may not know that some of the information came from a CIA informant, so it needs to stay classified.

[HereSince1628]

68. Yes, if this is all -inside- the state dept, it may be HRC could change a classification

She was the senior official in that department.

It's seems that she wanted the information for a 'talking point'. Talking points are pretty much created to shared. If the information was ok to have as a talking point, talked about openly, it seems to question the necessity of the classification.

BUT. we don't know a lot. Like who was the authority in charge of the classification and who the recipients of the talking points was going to be. Maybe that talking point was for internal use...

I don't know.

I just think HRC has survived so many scandals over such a long period because she's pretty good at not making mistakes handling information.

This sort of 'mistake' would really surprise me.

[jeff47]

69. It does seem odd that talking points would be protected. Perhaps they were FOUO. (nt)

[Prism]

63. I believe this is a felony

Tell me if this was some mid-level bureaucrat they wouldn't already indicted by now.

But, you know, Clintons. Separate rules for them. Only peons get punished. (see: Petraeus' paltry slap on the wrist)

[baldguy]

70. Did Clinton hire Cuban drug smugglers to kill Vince Foster?

As long as we're promoting conspiracy theories from the VRWC network....

[cannabis_flower]

71. Very interesting!

This page has been removed

[peacebird]

72. Lifezette is still up but the FOIA page is gone.... Curiouser & curiouser.....