The Drip Drip Drip...

[Lord Jim]

Okay rube, now put on your Thinking Cap...(be sure to scrape all the mold and cob webs off of it first; I know it's been a very long time since you've used it...)

And see if you can tell, Which Of These Is Not Like The Others:

1. Two emails now being determined to contain material that should be classified that were not officially deemed classified previously...

2. 10 emails sent to an aide determined to contain material that should be classified that were not officially deemed classified previously...

3. Over 1700 emails, (the latest State Department count; we still don't have the full FBI count including the emails that an effort was made to erase) sent not just to a private account but also saved on an unauthorized, insecure private server, some of which contain material that has been deemed classified after the fact, (like the other two cases) some of which contain information that was classified and has subsequently been raised to a higher level of classification, (22 that have been raised from their original classified status now to "top secret") many of which were deemed under law (because of the nature of the communication) to be considered classified automatically whether they were marked classified or not, and still others that weren't marked classified because the person in charge ordered the classified markings removed...

Take your time; I know you don't have a lot of experience at this thinking thing...

[Fafhrd]

About 99 per cent of the emails sent to me are erased as soon as I see them.

[BoSoxGal]

Erased emails are never really erased.

[rubato]

Okay rube, now put on your Thinking Cap...(be sure to scrape all the mold and cob webs off of it first; I know it's been a very long time since you've used it...)

And see if you can tell, Which Of These Is Not Like The Others:

1. Two emails now being determined to contain material that should be classified that were not officially deemed classified previously...

2. 10 emails sent to an aide determined to contain material that should be classified that were not officially deemed classified previously...

3. Over 1700 emails, (the latest State Department count; we still don't have the full FBI count including the emails that an effort was made to erase) sent not just to a private account but also saved on an unauthorized, insecure private server, some of which contain material that has been deemed classified after the fact, (like the other two cases) some of which contain information that was classified and has subsequently been raised to a higher level of classification, (22 that have been raised from their original classified status now to "top secret") many of which were deemed under law (because of the nature of the communication) to be considered classified automatically whether they were marked classified or not, and still others that weren't marked classified because the person in charge ordered the classified markings removed...

Take your time; I know you don't have a lot of experience at this thinking thing...

Classified "After the fact" is meaningless in any of the cases. The law cannot require that you treat as classified things which are not. Nor can it require that you predict the future.

Bullshit, weak ass nothing bullshit.

Why don't you have another Army-McCarthy hearing?

yrs,
rubato

[Lord Jim]

Oh dear me...

Rube, I said take all the time you needed, but apparently you didn't take enough time...

Either that or years of disuse has left your Thinking Cap completely nonfunctional...

Try reading again, this time for comprehension...

[rubato]

The Trump voters believe you. No one else does.


yrs,
rubato

[Lord Jim]

So the reading for comprehension thing...

That just ain't gonna happen...

The Trump voters believe you. No one else does.


yrs,
rubato

Wow, somebody alert the media...

The FBI has been overrun by Trump voters!

[Econoline]

147? 12? Aaaaayehhhh...whatever. Who cares, same difference, right?

Sources close to the FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton's email are knocking down suggestions that 147 federal agents are working on the case, a figure first reported — and now revised — by the Washington Post, citing a lawmaker.

The Post updated the figure on Tuesday, stating that while the "FBI will not provide an exact figure," there are "fewer than 50" FBI personnel involved in the case.

But a former federal law enforcement official with direct knowledge of the Clinton investigation tells MSNBC an estimate anywhere near 50 agents is also off base.

"There are currently about 12 FBI agents working full-time on the case," says the source, who would only speak anonymously about an open investigation.

A former FBI official, also speaking anonymously, says many in the law enforcement community view the large estimates of people assigned to the case as completely improbable.

"147 was such a ridiculous number," said the source, adding that 50 also sounded unrealistic for this kind of inquiry. "You need an act of terrorism to get 50 agents working on something," said the former FBI official.

[Lord Jim]

Thanks for bumping this thread Econo; I had been planning to update it...

Clinton email probe enters new phase as FBI interviews loom

Federal prosecutors investigating the possible mishandling of classified materials on Hillary Clinton’s private email server have begun the process of setting up formal interviews with some of her longtime and closest aides, according to two people familiar with the probe, an indication that the inquiry is moving into its final phases.

Those interviews and the final review of the case, however, could still take many weeks, all but guaranteeing that the investigation will continue to dog Clinton’s presidential campaign through most, if not all, of the remaining presidential primaries.

No dates have been set for questioning the advisors, but a federal prosecutor in recent weeks has called their lawyers to alert them that he would soon be doing so, the sources said. Prosecutors also are expected to seek an interview with Clinton herself, though the timing remains unclear.

The interviews by FBI agents and prosecutors will play a significant role in helping them better understand whether Clinton or her aides knowingly or negligently discussed classified government secrets over a non-secure email system when she served as secretary of State.

The meetings also are an indication that much of the investigators' background work – recovering deleted emails, understanding how the server operated and determining whether it was breached – is nearing completion.

“The interviews are critical to understand the volume of information they have accumulated,” said James McJunkin, former head of the FBI's Washington field office. “They are likely nearing the end of the investigation and the agents need to interview these people to put the information in context. They will then spend time aligning these statements with other information, emails, classified documents, etc., to determine whether there is a prosecutable case."

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-cli ... story.html

[Burning Petard]

All right. I admit it. I have not been interested enuff to read all of this thread. But could somebody please tell me what 'classified' means?

When I was wearing a uniform and handling 'classified' documents, there were three categories of 'classified' : Confidential, Secret, Top Secret. In addition there was another category, 'no foreign' This was more than 60 years ago. Any body authorized to wear the US Army uniform could see Confidential, but no civilians. This was most of our field manuals which were sitting around on shelves and in vehicles every where. Secret and Top Secret required more careful handling and a tighter list of who could see them. I was in Europe and French, German, British uniformed people were around alot--even some remnants of the Free Polish Army from WWII. The 'no foreign' category was for them.

I sort of hear now that the are more categories above Top Secret. So just what is the 'classification' of the material that is under discussion? Who was authorized to remove such classification? Please remember that Cabinet members of Bush 43 were able to reveal the name and area of operation of an individual CIA agent and barely get a hand slap. Condi Rice has stated that she too regularly used a personal email system similar to that of Sec'State Clinton.

snailgate

[RayThom]

I repeat -- nothing will be clarified until after January 20, 2017. By then the Republicans will only have to bother with confirming Hillary's choice of a Supreme Court nominee. She'll probably stick with Merrick Garland.

And let the presidential race for 2020 begin.

[rubato]

Yawn, poor dears getting their hopes all up like that and then it turns out the Easter bunny isn't real after all.

Legal Experts on Clinton Indictment in Email Case: Not Likely
Mar. 22, 2016 3:27pm Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — Asked earlier this month whether she’d be indicted over her use of a private email server as secretary of state, Hillary Clinton responded: “It’s not going to happen.”

Though Republicans characterized her response as hubris, several legal experts interviewed by the Associated Press agreed with the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination.

The relatively few laws that govern the handling of classified materials were generally written to cover spies, leakers and those who illegally retain such information, such as at home. Though the view is not unanimous, several lawyers who specialize in this area said it’s a stretch to apply existing statutes to a former cabinet secretary whose communication of sensitive materials was with aides — not a national enemy.

Or were they going to charge Condoleeza and Colin for the same thing?


yrs,
rubato

[Lord Jim]

Or were they going to charge Condoleeza and Colin for the same thing?

~sigh~

Another one of rube's lamprey ideas...

I see you're still having trouble with that rusty old Thinking Cap..

Okay rube, now put on your Thinking Cap...(be sure to scrape all the mold and cob webs off of it first; I know it's been a very long time since you've used it...)

And see if you can tell, Which Of These Is Not Like The Others:

1. Two emails now being determined to contain material that should be classified that were not officially deemed classified previously...

2. 10 emails sent to an aide determined to contain material that should be classified that were not officially deemed classified previously...

3. Over 1700 emails, (the latest State Department count; we still don't have the full FBI count including the emails that an effort was made to erase) sent not just to a private account but also saved on an unauthorized, insecure private server, some of which contain material that has been deemed classified after the fact, (like the other two cases) some of which contain information that was classified and has subsequently been raised to a higher level of classification, (22 that have been raised from their original classified status now to "top secret") many of which were deemed under law (because of the nature of the communication) to be considered classified automatically whether they were marked classified or not, and still others that weren't marked classified because the person in charge ordered the classified markings removed...

Take your time; I know you don't have a lot of experience at this thinking thing...

ETA:

not a national enemy.

Which "national enemies" were John Deutsch, David Petraeus and Sandy Berger communicating with?

[rubato]

So you admit they did the same thing but it's only a crime when a Clinton does it?


yrs,
rubato

[Lord Jim]

[wesw]

[Crackpot]

Quit spamming threads shithead

[Lord Jim]

So you admit they did the same thing but it's only a crime when a Clinton does it?


yrs,
rubato

On further reflection, I really can't blame rube for that colossal (and hilarious) misinterpretation of what I posted, (twice)...

Afterall, a fellow who can't sort out the difference between a private jet and a row boat:

viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15430&p=197851&hili ... at#p197851

can't realistically be expected to properly understand much of anything....

[rubato]

Still no charges then? Poor baby. Maybe if its 10 times and then 100 times that 1000 times still isn't a crime? Maybe it needs to be 10,000 times? or is it 1,000,000 ? Or maybe your reasoning is shit?

Whitewater - nothing
Impeach Bill - nothing again
email scandal - nothing at all
Benghazi - still nothing

That's your party, a big nothing.


yrs,
rubato

[Lord Jim]

Now the State Department IG joins the Intelligence Community IG, a federal judge, and the FBI in the Republican obsession over nothing:

State Department report slams Clinton email use

(CNN)A State Department Inspector General report said former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton failed to follow the rules or inform key department staff regarding her use of a private email server, according to a copy of the report obtained by CNN on Wednesday.

The report, which was provided to lawmakers, states, "At a minimum, Secretary Clinton should have surrendered all emails dealing with Department business before leaving government service and, because she did not do so, she did not comply with the Department's policies that were implemented in accordance with the Federal Records Act."

The report examined record keeping laws, policies and practices at the State Department from 1997 to present.

In producing the report, the Inspector General's office interviewed former Secretaries of State Madeleine Albright, Colin Powell, and Condoleezza Rice.

Clinton and several of her staff members during her tenure declined to be interviewed, the report said.
The report draws attention to two staff members in the Office of Information Resources Management, who back in 2010 "discussed their concerns about Secretary Clinton's use of a personal email account in separate meetings with the then-Director" of their office.

The report says, "According to the staff member, the Director stated that the Secretary's personal system had been reviewed and approved by Department legal staff and that the matter was not to be discussed any further." The same director reportedly "instructed the staff never to speak of the Secretary's personal email system again."

But the report notes that interviews with officials from the Under Secretary for Management and the Office of the Legal Adviser found "no knowledge of approval or review by other Department staff" of the server.

Clinton has long maintained that she had permission to use personal email.

She told CNN's Brianna Keilar in July that "the truth is everything I did was permitted and I went above and beyond what anybody could have expected in making sure that if the State Department didn't capture something, I made a real effort to get it to them."

But the report says that the Inspector General's office "found no evidence that the Secretary requested or obtained guidance or approval to conduct official business via a personal email account on her private server."

In a statement following the report's release, Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon, wrote that "While political opponents of Hillary Clinton are sure to misrepresent this report for their own partisan purposes, in reality, the Inspector General documents just how consistent her email practices were with those of other Secretaries and senior officials at the State Department who also used personal email."

But while the report acknowledges personal email use by previous secretaries, it also notes that the rules for preserving work emails sent from a personal email account were updated in 2009, the year Clinton took office.

More here:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/25/politics/ ... email-use/

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton did break her department’s rules by setting up her own secret email server, the inspector general concluded in a report sent to Congress on Wednesday that says she failed to report hacking attempts and waved off warnings that she should switch to a more official email account.

Inspector General Steve Linick, appointed by President Obama, said he couldn’t find any evidence that Mrs. Clinton received approval for her odd email arrangement, and when lower-level staffers pressed the issue, saying she was skirting open-records laws, they were ordered “never to speak of the secretary’s personal email system again.”

In one instance in 2011, Mrs. Clinton’s tech guru thought the server was being hacked and shut it down for a few minutes. Months later, Mrs. Clinton feared yet another hack attack was underway — yet never reported the incident to the department, in another breach of department rules.

Mrs. Clinton refused to cooperate with the probe, as did a number of her top aides from her time at the department, leaving investigators with a number of questions they weren’t able to nail down.

Her predecessors as secretary of state — Madeleine K. Albright, Colin L. Powell and Condoleezza Rice — did speak with investigators.

Mr. Powell, in particular, did use personal email for government business, and his records were not properly stored by the State Department, the investigation found. Democrats seized on that information to say it proved Mrs. Clinton was not blazing a trail of illegal behavior, but rather following the lead of her predecessors.

The inspector general, however, rejected that explanation, noting that at the time email was new, policies were “very fluid” and the department wasn’t aware of cybersecurity risks in the early part of the Bush administration. By the time Mrs. Clinton took office in 2009, those policies had been firmed up — and they preached exactly against Mrs. Clinton’s practice.

“Beginning in late 2005 and continuing through 2011, the Department revised the [manual] and issued various memoranda specifically discussing the obligation to use Department systems in most circumstances and identifying the risks of not doing so. Secretary Clinton’s cybersecurity practices accordingly must be evaluated in light of these more comprehensive directives,” the inspector general wrote.

In the two years since the breach, Mrs. Clinton has turned over some 30,000 messages from her server that she said constituted government business. She withheld another 30,000 that she said were purely personal.

The inspector general said returning some of the messages in December 2014 — nearly two years after she left office — “mitigated” her behavior. But investigators said there are still troubling gaps in what she produced.

One email exchange mentioned in the report, which Mrs. Clinton did not turn over in her 30,000 messages, seemed to indicate that she intended for her system to hide communications from the public.

In the 2010 exchange, top personal aide Huma Abedin suggested that it was time to look into getting an official state.gov email address because Mrs. Clinton’s messages from her clintonemail.com account were landing in staffers’ spam folders.

Alternatively, Ms. Abedin said, Mrs. Clinton could release her secret address to the department so she could be designated as a verified account, keeping her messages out of spam folders.

Mrs. Clinton refused, saying she didn’t “want any risk of the personal being accessible.” [I think this is particularly damaging. It shows her primary concern being herself rather than her official responsibilities] being The inspector general at that point in the report notes that Mrs. Clinton refused to cooperate, and Ms. Abedin did not respond to a request to be interviewed.

More here:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... te/?page=2

How many times did Hillary repeat the now proven false claim that her email set up was allowed by the State Department? I've lost count...

ETA:

And this should be the final nail in the coffin for the bogus argument that what Hillary did was no different from previous Secretaries of State, (though the spuriousness of the comparison was already obvious based on the vast difference in volume, and the use of a private server) because the report makes clear that the rules at the time Clinton became SOS were more stringent than the rules the others had operated under. (Precisely because of growing security concerns.)