That was bull he only got a misdemeanor.
And here is more bull from the White House:
""The President was aware of Secretary Clinton's email address, the two did exchange emails but the President I think, not surprisingly, was not aware of the existence of Secretary Clinton's private server," White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest told reporters Monday during the daily briefing."
“I can only repeat what happens to be the case — that I did not send nor receive information that was marked classified at the time that it was sent or received,” Clinton said in September.
The State Department did announce on Friday, however, that it will withhold in full 22 emails that contain “top secret” information. The agency also acknowledged that the information was classified at the time the emails were created.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/30/fo...#ixzz3zAIqVAI1
"22 emails that contain “top secret” information"
to repeat, what is "top secret" now and for some is/was not "top secret" then and for all?
there are huge controversies within govt about what should be classified or not.
so the crux is: Hillary KNEW she was violating a rule that didn't exist then and she kept doing it?
and was trying to overthrow the US govt? was giving secrets to foreign countries?
It's ALL REPUG FABRICATED BULL and decades-long Clinton witch hunting.
Benghazi!
and you rightwingnuts get suckered every time
Do you not see the words "The State Department did announce"? What about that leads you to believe it's a repub witch hunt? It's an FBI investigation."22 emails that contain “top secret” information"
to repeat, what is "top secret" now and for some is/was not "top secret" then and for all?
there are huge controversies within govt about what should be classified or not.
so the crux is: Hillary KNEW she was violating a rule that didn't exist then and she kept doing it?
and was trying to overthrow the US govt? was giving secrets to foreign countries?
It's ALL REPUG FABRICATED BULL and decades-long Clinton witch hunting.
Benghazi!
and you rightwingnuts get suckered every time
yes, the State Dept won't publish those emails because they are "considered" top secret NOW, and esp with the current Repug witch hunting and the different security/political environment of today.
Your defense of her is laughable at this point.No, Hillary KNEW she was violating a rule that did exist and kept doing it.so the crux is: Hillary KNEW she was violating a rule that didn't exist then and she kept doing it?
As secretary of state, Hillary Clinton signed a nondisclosure agreement in which she acknowledged that classified information is classified regardless of whether it is “marked or unmarked” — a distinction which undermines one of the Democratic presidential candidate’s main defenses of her use of a home-brew email system.
Signers of the do ent, the existence of which the Washington Free Beacon reported on Friday, also agree that all information that they have access to “is now and will remain the property of, or under the control of the United States government unless and until otherwise determined by an authorized official or final ruling of a court of law.”
The “Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement,” or SF-312, also makes clear that “classified information is marked or unmarked classified information, including oral communications.”
That poses two problems for Clinton, who signed the do ent on Jan. 22, 2009, a day after taking office.
Not only does nullify her claim that none of her emails contained information that was “marked” classified, it also calls into question her failure to turn over her work-related State Department emails to the agency in December, nearly two years after leaving office.
“I can only repeat what happens to be the case — that I did not send nor receive information that was marked classified at the time that it was sent or received,” Clinton said in September.
Many of the now-classified do ents contain a type of information called foreign government information. As Reuters reported in August, the federal government considers such information, which comes from foreign officials, to be “born classified.”
By signing the “Sensitive Compartmented Information Nondisclosure Agreement,” Clinton agreed that she had been advised “that the unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of SCI by me could cause irreparable injury to the United States or be used to advantage by a foreign nation.”
That agreement pertains to the Clinton email scandal because of two emails she received on her personal email account that the intelligence community’s inspector general has determined contained “top secret/sensitive compartmented information,” or TS/CSI.
The discovery of those emails prompted the Justice Department to open an investigation. The FBI also seized Clinton’s server, which was being maintained at a data center in New Jersey.
Two of Clinton’s top State Department aides, Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin, also signed that nondisclosure agreements. As with Clinton, both used off-the-books email accounts on which they sent and received classified information.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2015/11/06/do...#ixzz3zDtkVaUk
I'll even bold it for you since you are having trouble comprehending.
The State Department did announce on Friday, however, that it will withhold in full 22 emails that contain “top secret” information. The agency also acknowledged that the information was classified at the time the emails were created.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/30/fo...#ixzz3zAIqVAI1
did Hillary and people know they were classified then?
did the persons sending her the emails know they were sending classified emails? what was the objective? treason?
If the info was classified at the time of receipt, Obamas going to have to step in.
What part of the non disclosure agreement are you having trouble understanding?
MSNBC’s Joe Scarborough said that there are more “explosive revelations” to come out of the Hillary Clinton email saga on top of the announcement that there were 22 top secret emails on Clinton’s server Friday.
Monday on “Morning Joe,” panelist and Bloomberg Politics managing editor Mark Halperin said that even if Bernie Sanders loses today’s Iowa caucus he “can go forward with lots of money, with debates on the schedule and see are there are developments in the legal front that allow him to start to win even after tonight if he doesn’t win.”
By the end of the day Friday, the State Department announced that they were unable to release 22 of Clinton’s emails because they would compromise national security if they were released, even in part
“Everybody in the government, everybody in the media, everybody that runs anything is talking about how advanced this investigation is, and nobody’s telling the American people about it,” Scarborough argued. “So I had an executive in another network ask, ‘Is it safe to talk about it now?’ So we talked about it. And then that afternoon, explosive revelations came out, and there are more.”
Panelist John Heilemann added, “And I’ll tell you, to me the most interesting thing about that is that in the last 48 hours when Bernie Sanders has been asked about the Hillary Clinton email thing, having famously in the debate a few months ago said, ‘Don’t worry about it. No one wants to hear about your emails.’ Asked about it a couple of days ago, he said, ‘Oh, I don’t think it’s irrelevant at all, there’s a process playing out here.’ Bernie Sanders now edging towards kind of retracting his ‘Nobody cares about your dam emails thing.’ You can easily imagine Sanders not attacking her personally on this but him now saying, ‘Hey look, this is something we have to think about and bring into a discussion in a more active way.'”“When Bernie Sanders is hearing from top leaders in the Obama administration that this is further along than expected, he doesn’t want to be caught saying it’s not a big deal and then having the FBI suggest it is,” Scarborough said.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/02/01/ms...#ixzz3zE4hOn00
This newly discovered email demonstrates that there is at least a “reasonable su ion” that the State Department and Mrs. Clinton deliberately thwarted FOIA by creating, using, and concealing the “clintonemail.com” record system for six years.(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that it recently received records from the Department of State disclosing plans by senior State Department officials to set up a “stand-alone PC” so that Clinton could check her emails in an office “across the hall” through a separate, non-State Department computer network system. Referencing the special Clinton computer system, Under Secretary for Management Patrick F. Kennedy, writes Clinton Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills, “The stand-alone separate network PC is a great idea.” The emails are from January 23-24, 2009, a few days after Clinton was sworn in as Secretary of State.
‘We should … set up a stand-alone PC in the Secretary’s office, connected to the internet (but not through our system) to enable her to check her emails from her desk’
The new emails were obtained by Judicial Watch in response a court order in a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit for State Department records about Hillary Clinton’s separate email system (Judicial Watch, Inc. v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:15-cv-00689)).
In the email chain, Lewis Lukens, former deputy assistant secretary of state and executive director of the secretariat, responds to a request from Mills by informing her, top Clinton aide Huma Abedin, and Kennedy that the new personal computer “in the secretary’s office” would be “connected to the internet (but not through our system).” Abedin responds, “We are hoping for that if possible.”
The email exchange discussing plans to provide Clinton a separate computer to skirt the internal State Department computer network begins with a message from Mills to Lukens in which she requests Clinton being able to access her emails through “a non-DOS computer.” The email discusses how the stand-alone computer can be set up and why it is “a great idea’ and “the best solution:”
From: Cheryl Mills
Sent: Friday, January 23, 2009 6:45 AM
To: Lukens, Lewis A
Subject: Re: Series of questions
Lew – who can I talk to about:
- Can our email be accessed remotely through the web using a non-DOS computer like my laptop?
- I am traveling to the M-E – will my DOS bb work there and is there a cell phone attached?
- Spoke to Dan [Daniel B. Smith, former DOS executive secretary] re: bb for HRC (and reports that POTUS is able to use a super encrypted one which)
- Spoke to Dan re: setting up Counselor office for HRC so she can go across hall regularly to check her email
***From: Lukens, Lewis A
To: cmills [REDACTED]
Cc: Habedin [REDACTED]; Kennedy, Patrick F; Smith, Daniel B
Sent: Saturday, Jan. 24, 19:10:33 2009
Subject: Re: series of questions
We have already started checking into the NSA bb. Will set up the office across the hall as requested. Also, I think we should go ahead (but will await your green light) and set up a stand-alone PC in the Secretary’s office, connect to the internet (but not through our system) to enable her to check her emails from her desk. Lew.
From: Kennedy, Patrick F [email protected]
To: Lukens, Lewis A <[email protected]>; Cheryl Mills
Cc: Huma Abedin; Smith, Daniel B <[email protected]>
Sent: Sat, Jan 24 19:48:25 2009
Subject: Re: Series of questions
Cheryl
The stand-alone separate network PC is [a] great idea
Regards
Pat
From: Huma Abedin
To: Kennedy, Patrick F; Lukens, Lewis A; Cheryl Mills
Cc: Huma Abedin; Smith, Daniel B
Sent: Sat Jan 24 19:48:27 2009
Subject: Re: Series of questions
Yes we were hoping for that if possible so she can check her email in her office.***From: Lukens, Lewis AIn separate litigation, the State Department told Judicial Watch and federal courts that Hillary Clinton was never issued secure State Department computing devices.
Sent: Saturday, January 24, 2009 8:26 PM
To: Kennedy, Patrick F
Subject: Re: Series of questions
I talked to Cheryl about this. She says a problem is hrc does not know how to use a computer to do email – only bb [Blackberry]. But, I said would not take much training to get her up to speed.
“These emails are shocking. They show the Obama State Department’s plan to set up non-government computers and a computer network for Hillary Clinton to bypass the State Department network,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “That these records were withheld from the American people until now is scandalous and shows the criminal probe of Hillary Clinton’s email system should include current and former officials of the Obama administration.”
Judicial Watch filed these new emails with U.S. District Court Judge Emmett Sullivan, who is now considering whether to grant discovery in a lawsuit seeking information on the “special government employee” status of Abedin. In its filing, Judicial Watch states:
[Judicial Watch] just recently received additional evidence that demonstrates that senior management at the State Department was well aware that Mrs. Clinton was using a “non-state.gov” system to conduct official government business. This evidence also shows that the senior management at the State Department knowingly aided Mrs. Clinton in establishing and using a “non-state.gov” system.
***[T]his newly discovered email demonstrates that there is at least a “reasonable su ion” that the State Department and Mrs. Clinton deliberately thwarted FOIA by creating, using, and concealing the “clintonemail.com” record system for six years.
https://www.judicialwatch.org/press-...access-emails/
A Republican member of the House Intelligence Committee said Wednesday that the State Department has classified seven more of Hillary Clinton's private emails as "top secret."
"There are more than 22, and it's not just one or two more," Rep. Chris Stewart told the Washington Examiner, referring to the 22 emails deemed top secret by the State Department last week. "It's a more meaningful number than that."
Stewart said the State Department has classified seven additional emails as "top secret." The agency will now withhold 29 emails from the public due to their sensitive content.
"These were classified at the top secret level, and in some cases, above that," he said.
Stewart said his years of experience handling highly classified material allowed him to recognize immediately the sensitive nature of Clinton's emails. The Utah Republican said he had never seen anything more sensitive than the information contained within the emails.
"They do reveal classified methods, they do reveal classified sources, and they do reveal human assets," he said during an appearance on Fox's "America's Newsroom" earlier in the day.
The State Department's decision on Friday to withhold 22 emails entirely, rather than redact only the sensitive portions, marked a departure from the agency's approach to the more than 1,300 emails that have been classified over the past eight months.
Clinton has attempted to downplay the move as a result of bureaucratic infighting. But the discovery of the highly classified messages has fueled speculation that the former secretary of state may be facing more serious legal trouble than previously thought.
John Kirby, spokesman for the State Department, declined to address questions about the additional top secret emails Wednesday
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/7-...rticle/2582306
Feds fight disclosure of Hillary Clinton Whitewater indictment drafts
By Josh Gerstein
02/03/16 05:33 PM EST
The National Archives is fighting a lawsuit trying to force disclosure of several draft indictments of Hillary Clinton prepared by a Whitewater prosecutor in the 1990s.
In a brief filed late Tuesday, Justice Department lawyers and the Archives argue that disclosure of the draft indictments would lead to an unwarranted invasion of Clinton's privacy and violate a court rule protecting grand jury secrecy.
"Despite the role that Mrs. Clinton occupied as the First Lady during President Clinton's administration, Mrs. Clinton maintains a strong privacy interest in not having information about her from the files of the Independent Counsel disclosed," wrote Martha Wagner Murphy, chief of the Archives "special access" branch that stores records of former independent counsels. "As an uncharged person, Hillary Rodham Clinton retains a significant interest in her personal privacy despite any status as a public figure."
The conservative group Judicial Watch, which filed suit for the records in October under the Freedom of Information Act, is arguing that Clinton's ongoing bid for the presidency reinforces the public interest in records about her alleged misconduct.
"She's one of the most well-known women in the world, seeking the office of the presidency and her privacy interests outweigh the public interest in knowing what's in that indictment? It's absurd and it's shameful that the administration is proposing this," Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said in an interview. "This is a political decision to protect her candidacy—because it is laughable, legally."
The Archives and Justice Department were dismissive about the impact of Clinton's presidential bid on public access to the records.
"While there may be a scintilla of public interest in these do ents since Mrs. Clinton is presently a Democratic presidential candidate, that fact alone is not a cognizable public interest alone under FOIA, as disclosure of the draft indictments would not shed light on what the government is up to," Murphy wrote.
"Her interest in avoiding disclosure of the drafts is not diminished by the fact that she is a former public official who is running for President," Justice Department lawyers added in their brief.
Law enforcement records about living people who did not face charges in criminal investigations normally are not released under FOIA, or the names are sanitized from the records before they're published. However, sometimes judges have ordered the release of such records in cases involving public officials.
Despite the usual practice, though, the Archives has released fairly detailed information about the independent counsel's focus on Hillary Clinton. Just last week, Judicial Watch announced it had received 246 pages of records describing the crimes some prosecutors believed were committed in connection with the Whitewater land deal and related matters. Some of the memos are from the "HRC Team" in the counsel's office—apparently a team focused on Clinton. One discusses the jury appeal or lack thereof of a case based solely on cir stantial evidence. One prosecutor put the chance of a conviction for Clinton at 10 percent.
It's not clear from the government's court filings why the draft indictments would be more sensitive than that kind of analysis, but the new submissions do argue that the drafts are covered by grand jury secrecy. In its initial response to Judicial Watch, the Archives relied solely on Clinton's privacy (and that of others) and did not mention the grand jury secrecy issue. But the brief filed Tuesday contends the drafts would provide insight into the grand jury's activities by revealing the iden ies of witnesses and that they quote from grand jury testimony.
Fitton said that "if Mrs. Clinton was being truly transparent," she would provide a privacy waiver that could ease release of the records.
Spokesmen for the Clinton campaign did not respond to a request for comment on the legal filings.
Read more: http://www.politico.com/blogs/under-...#ixzz3zE8ETx85
What makes your wiener harder TSA, this Hillary investigation or your guns?
Clinton Chief of Staff lost her personal Blackberry which contained classified emails
While working as Hillary Clinton’s chief of staff at the State Department, Cheryl Mills lost her personal Blackberry, on which she sent emails that the State Department has determined contain classified information.
Records obtained by The Daily Caller through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit show Mills revealed that she lost her Blackberry in a March 20, 2010 email she sent to Bryan Pagliano, the State Department IT staffer who managed Clinton’s private email server.
“Somewhere b/w my house and the plane to nyc yesterday my personal bb got misplaced; no on [sic] is answering it thought [sic] I have called,” Mills wrote from her personal email account to the address Pagliano used when he worked on Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign.
Other State Department records indicate that Mills’ personal Blackberry appears to have been synced with her Gmail account. Many of the emails she sent from the personal account include footers which show they were sent from a Blackberry powered by AT&T.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/26/cl...#ixzz3zEDFX1UE
what part of Repug decades of witch hunting are you having cretinous trouble understanding?
WASHINGTON — The White House will try to block the release of a handful of emails between President Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, citing longstanding precedent invoked by presidents of both parties to keep presidential communications confidential, officials said Friday.
The State Department discovered the emails between Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton as part of its effort to release the former secretary’s emails, several thousand more of which were made public on Friday. A review of those emails showed Mrs. Clinton engaged in conversations with various aides about security in Libya, discussing talking points after the 2012 attack on the American compound in Benghazi, Libya, and — on a lighter note — complaining about the lack of emoticons on her phone.
Mr. Obama’s direct correspondence with Mrs. Clinton was forwarded by the State Department to the White House, which has decided against release, a move likely to intensify the struggle between Mrs. Clinton and congressional Republicans, who have pressed for disclosure of her emails as part of an investigation into the administration’s handling of the Benghazi events.
The contents of the emails between Mrs. Clinton, who is running for president, and Mr. Obama have not been disclosed, but their presumed existence has not been a secret. The White House press secretary, Josh Earnest, acknowledged in March that the two “did have the occasion to email one another” when Mrs. Clinton was secretary of state.
Mr. Obama told CBS News in March that he learned about Mrs. Clinton’s use of a private email server “the same time everybody else learned it — through news reports.” Mr. Earnest later clarified that the president was aware that she sometimes used a private email address but did not know the details about how the server was set up.
White House officials said Friday that their refusal to release the emails between the two officials is not based on their content, but rather is intended to defend the principle that presidents must be free to receive advice from their top aides without fear that the conversations will be made public during their time in office. They noted the emails between Mr. Obama and Mrs. Clinton will eventually become public many years after the Obama presidency ends, under the terms of federal records laws.
“There is a long history of presidential records being kept confidential while the president is in office,” a White House official said. “It is a principle that previous White Houses have vigorously defended as it goes to the core of the president’s ability to receive unvarnished advice and counsel.”
White House officials said they were not asserting executive privilege, a specific legal authority that Mr. Obama has used only once, in the case of congressional inquiries into the “Fast and Furious” gunrunning operation, in which weapons ended up in the possession of Mexican gun cartels. Presidents often seek to avoid formally invoking executive privilege, which carries political overtones dating to President Richard M. Nixon’s assertion of the authority to block congressional investigations of the Watergate scandal in the early 1970s.
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
Advertisement
Continue reading the main story
But by refusing to release the emails, Mr. Obama is following a well-worn precedent that he and his predecessors have established. Mr. Obama has repeatedly resisted efforts by Congress to turn over the president’s private communications, which by law are exempt from Freedom of Information laws that are often used to pry information out of other parts of an administration.
Former presidents of both parties have done the same, often insisting that to do otherwise would open the president’s most sensitive deliberations to congressional and public inspection.
“Direct communications by the president and his senior advisers are really at the very center of what is trying to be protected by executive privilege and the separation of powers,” said William Burck, a deputy counsel for President George W. Bush. He called the decision by Mr. Obama’s administration “very reasonable” and praised the president for following Mr. Bush’s practice.
The emails released on Friday show Mrs. Clinton received at least some indication that J. Christopher Stevens, the United States ambassador to Libya, was concerned about security in Benghazi more than a year before he was killed in the attack there.
An email sent to Mrs. Clinton in April 2011 said Mr. Stevens would meet with Libyan officials to “make a written request for better security at the hotel and for better security-related coordination.” How much Mrs. Clinton knew about the deteriorating situation in Benghazi was a focus of Republican questions at a congressional hearing this month.
One email a few days after the Benghazi attack shows Jake Sullivan, a top aide, telling Mrs. Clinton that Susan E. Rice, the United Nations ambassador, went on the Sunday talk shows and “did make clear our view that this started spontaneously and then evolved.” But a week later, after Ms. Rice spoke about a video prompting the attack, Mr. Sullivan wrote Mrs. Clinton that “you never said spontaneous or characterized the motives.”
The emails also highlighted how much advice Mrs. Clinton received from Sidney Blumenthal, a family friend who had been barred by the White House from working at the State Department. In one, Mr. Blumenthal suggests that Seymour Hersh, an investigative journalist, had discovered that Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, the leader of Libya, was in Chad.
“This sounds credible,” Mrs. Clinton wrote to one of her top aides. “Can we verify.”
Other emails suggest tensions between Mr. Obama’s top aides. Cheryl Mills, one of Mrs. Clinton’s top advisers, forwarded an email suggesting that White House officials were thinking of appointing a protocol chief of their own, superseding the State Department’s protocol chief. “I really dislike them,” she wrote to Mrs. Clinton.
In one email, an aide to Mrs. Clinton offers a lengthy and detailed description of a book about former President Bill Clinton, taking note of passages that mentioned Monica Lewinsky, the White House intern with whom Mr. Clinton had an affair.
And in more than one email, Mrs. Clinton complained that her BlackBerry did not allow her to send emoticons. Emailing under the code name “Evergreen” in February 2012, she wrote that she was “quite bereft” at the lack of the tiny pictures. “Any way I can add them?” she asked. Two months later, she again sent a note to Philippe Reines, a top communications aide.
“On this new berry can I get smiley faces?” she wrote. Mr. Reines responded: “For email, no, I don’t think so — you need to type them out manually likefor happy, or :-I I if you want to express anger at my iness.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/31/us...cret.html?_r=1
What part of Obama's DOJ and FBI are running the investigation are you having trouble understanding?
Hardon and Hillary will never be in the same sentence for me, inanimate objects don't arouse me either.
Repugs Powell, Rice received sensitive info through private emails BUT NO REPUG OUTRAGE
When the political world’s interest in Hillary Clinton’s State Department emails was near its peak, theWashington Post’s Chris Cillizza defended the media’s fascination with the story. “Democrats, ask yourself this,” Cillizza wrote in August. “If this was a former [Republican Secretary of State] and his/her private e-mail server, would it be a ‘non-story’?”
As a rule, I continue to believe that’s a smart way for political observers to look at every story. If the situations were reversed, how would you react to a controversy? If the accusations targeted someone you detest, as opposed to someone you like, would see the story as legitimate?
The problem in this case, however, is that Cillizza’s question wasn’t really a hypothetical. We learned nearly a year ago from a Politico article that former Secretary of State Colin Powell “also used a personal email account” during his State Department tenure. Several months later, MSNBC found that Powell conducted official business from his personal email account managed through his personal laptop.
“But wait,” Clinton’s critics in the media and Republican circles protest, “what about emails that were later deemed to include sensitive information?” NBC News reports today that both of the Bush/Cheney-era Secretaries of State fall into the same category.
State Department officials have determined that classified information was sent to the personal email accounts of former Secretary of State Colin Powell and the senior staff of former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, NBC News has learned. […]
In a letter to Undersecretary of State Patrick Kennedy dated Feb. 3, State Department Inspector General Steve Linick said that the State Department has determined that 12 emails examined from State’s archives contained national security information now classified “Secret” or “Confidential.” The letter was read to NBC News.
According to the report, of those 12 emails, two were sent to Powell’s personal account, while the other 10 were sent to personal accounts senior aides of Condoleezza Rice’s senior aides.
None of this is to suggest Powell or Rice’s office is guilty of wrongdoing. In fact, Powell told NBC News the messages in question include information that’s “fairly minor.”
There’s no reason whatsoever to believe otherwise.
The political salience of news like this, however, is that Clinton’s critics would like voters to believe she’s at the center of some damaging “scandal” because of her approach to email management. These new details suggest Clinton’s practices were fairly common, and unless Republicans and the media are prepared to start condemning Powell and Rice with equal vigor – an unlikely scenario – it’s starting to look like this entire line of attack lacks merit.
Or as the NBC News report put it, the new findings “show that past secretaries of state and senior officials used personal accounts to conduct government business and occasionally allowed secrets to spill into the insecure traffic.”
As for Chris Cillizza’s question – if were talking about a former Republican Secretary of State, would it be a “non-story” – it would appear the answer is, “Yep.”
Postscript: Rep. Elijah mings (D-Md.), the ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, said in a statement this morning, “Based on this new revelation, it is clear that the Republican investigations [into Clinton’s emails] are nothing more than a transparent political attempt to use taxpayer funds to target the Democratic candidate for president.”
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-s...d=sm_fb_maddow
TSA!
Flashback: Rove Erases 22 Million White House Emails on Private Server at Height of U.S. Attorney Scandal – Media Yawns
Never mind that former Secretary of State Colin Powell, a Republican, has said he used a system similar to Clinton’s — and never mind that in 2007 Karl Rove deleted 22 million emails from a private server in the Bush White House — a matter about which the Beltway media said little and Republicans in Congress, like Rep. John Boehner, said nothing.
Here is a brief refresher on the White House email scandal:
Not long after George W. Bush assumed the presidency in 2001, Rove, his top political aide, set up a private email server for use in the White House. The stated purpose of the system — the primary domain name on which was gwb43.com — was that it would be used exclusively for the sort of political correspondence that Bush and Rove were not permitted to do on the taxpayer’s dime.
Seven years later, Bush and Rove were embroiled in two competing scandals — the Valerie Plame scandal, in which operatives for Vice Pres. Cheney, including Rove and Scooter Libby, were accused of unmasking Valerie Plame, a CIA specialist in the black market for weapons of mass destruction, for purely partisan reasons, and the U.S. Attorney purge, in which Rove’s political operation in the White House was accused of ordering Attorney General Alberto Gonzales to purge eight U.S. attorneys who were qualified prosecutors and replace them with political hacks with little or no prosecutorial experience.
Rove escaped prosecution in the Libby case, but Libby was convicted (Bush quickly commuted the sentence) on March 6, 2007, at the same time Bush and Rove were under fire for purging the U.S. attorneys. During the investigation, it came to light that Rove’s server had been used to send official, non-political emails — correspondence that was required by law to be preserved under the Presidential Records Act.
On April 12, 2007, Rove’s operation admitted that it had deleted at least 5 million emails from the server. In December 2009, technicians who had examined the server reported that the number of emails that had been deleted was far greater — 22 million.
http://www.pensitoreview.com/2015/03...l-media-yawns/
so the crux is: Hillary KNEW she was violating a rule that didn't exist then and she kept doing it?
boutons_deux
(Washington, DC) – Judicial Watch announced today that on January 7, 2016, it obtained a new batch of do ents from the Department of State, including a “Confidential” memo from Clinton advisor Sidney Blumenthal to the former secretary of state suggesting that a grand jury and the Senate Judiciary Committee should investigate whether former Rep. Eric Cantor or his staff violated the Espionage Act by disclosing classified information related to the FBI investigation of former CIA Director David Petraeus.
According to the Blumenthal-to-Clinton email, if classified information was discussed by Cantor, his staff, or anyone “inside or outside the bureau,” it “is a felony” in violation of the Espionage Act. Many legal analysts now believe that if the FBI concludes that Clinton kept classified information on her non-state.gov server, that may be also be a criminal violation of the Espionage Act.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/press-r...d-information/
Powell/Rice 12 total emails at the lowest security level. Clinton 1000+.Repugs Powell, Rice received sensitive info through private emails BUT NO REPUG OUTRAGE
When the political world’s interest in Hillary Clinton’s State Department emails was near its peak, theWashington Post’s Chris Cillizza defended the media’s fascination with the story. “Democrats, ask yourself this,” Cillizza wrote in August. “If this was a former [Republican Secretary of State] and his/her private e-mail server, would it be a ‘non-story’?”
As a rule, I continue to believe that’s a smart way for political observers to look at every story. If the situations were reversed, how would you react to a controversy? If the accusations targeted someone you detest, as opposed to someone you like, would see the story as legitimate?
The problem in this case, however, is that Cillizza’s question wasn’t really a hypothetical. We learned nearly a year ago from a Politico article that former Secretary of State Colin Powell “also used a personal email account” during his State Department tenure. Several months later, MSNBC found that Powell conducted official business from his personal email account managed through his personal laptop.
“But wait,” Clinton’s critics in the media and Republican circles protest, “what about emails that were later deemed to include sensitive information?” NBC News reports today that both of the Bush/Cheney-era Secretaries of State fall into the same category.
State Department officials have determined that classified information was sent to the personal email accounts of former Secretary of State Colin Powell and the senior staff of former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, NBC News has learned. […]
In a letter to Undersecretary of State Patrick Kennedy dated Feb. 3, State Department Inspector General Steve Linick said that the State Department has determined that 12 emails examined from State’s archives contained national security information now classified “Secret” or “Confidential.” The letter was read to NBC News.
According to the report, of those 12 emails, two were sent to Powell’s personal account, while the other 10 were sent to personal accounts senior aides of Condoleezza Rice’s senior aides.
None of this is to suggest Powell or Rice’s office is guilty of wrongdoing. In fact, Powell told NBC News the messages in question include information that’s “fairly minor.”
There’s no reason whatsoever to believe otherwise.
The political salience of news like this, however, is that Clinton’s critics would like voters to believe she’s at the center of some damaging “scandal” because of her approach to email management. These new details suggest Clinton’s practices were fairly common, and unless Republicans and the media are prepared to start condemning Powell and Rice with equal vigor – an unlikely scenario – it’s starting to look like this entire line of attack lacks merit.
Or as the NBC News report put it, the new findings “show that past secretaries of state and senior officials used personal accounts to conduct government business and occasionally allowed secrets to spill into the insecure traffic.”
As for Chris Cillizza’s question – if were talking about a former Republican Secretary of State, would it be a “non-story” – it would appear the answer is, “Yep.”
Postscript: Rep. Elijah mings (D-Md.), the ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, said in a statement this morning, “Based on this new revelation, it is clear that the Republican investigations [into Clinton’s emails] are nothing more than a transparent political attempt to use taxpayer funds to target the Democratic candidate for president.”
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-s...d=sm_fb_maddow
TSA!
And did Powell/Rice set up their own server at home?
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016...l?intcmp=hpbt2
"but everyone else did it" defense
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote