Latest Breaking News

awake

(3,226 posts)

36. I Remember hearing that in a earlier email Hillary was giving instructions on

Fri Jan 29, 2016, 05:10 PM

Jan 2016

How to send info from a restrictive server by changing the heading does anyone hear have a link to that story. The question that will soon be asked is how did "Top Secret " info get into 22 emails if this info came from the same employe who "changed" the other headers on Hillary's instructions then her goose is cooked and we can not risk having her as our candidate.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

248 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Clinton's emails labeled 'top secret' [View all] hoosierlib Jan 2016 OP

sigh* nt retrowire Jan 2016 #1

Just got an AP bulletin on my phone about the same thing. It's definitely informing/infecting villager Jan 2016 #2

I bet it will be "mum's the word" on the major networks. Elmer S. E. Dump Jan 2016 #19

SHE SHOULD NOT be the nominee. Too risky with this, John Poet Jan 2016 #172

If she's the nominee Trump will crush her ram2008 Jan 2016 #3

She should step aside and let Biden take her place Angel Martin Jan 2016 #22

Nonsense. Based on what? cali Jan 2016 #55

She broke the law buy sending highly classified information over unsecured servers IamTheNoodle Jan 2016 #67

You realize that Colin Powell and Condi Rice did the same thing LynneSin Jan 2016 #73

then prosecute them too. just because others do it doesn't change a thing roguevalley Jan 2016 #76

If the precedent has been set (of not doing anything)then it should be seen as political targeting . IamTheNoodle Jan 2016 #84

Jail her for what? LynneSin Jan 2016 #85

FBI is not right wing. 840high Jan 2016 #194

FBI also said the emails were not classified when they were sent LynneSin Jan 2016 #236

There were 16-18 emails between 840high Jan 2016 #237

Thank you 7962 Jan 2016 #113

It's called "what-abouttery" and is a poor logical fallacy. AngryOldDem Jan 2016 #229

Facts be damned some folks here just hate Hillary...if you close your eyes you might randys1 Jan 2016 #79

No, just worried IamTheNoodle Jan 2016 #100

No shit, comrade. Ed Suspicious Jan 2016 #101

Neither had a personal server and neither are said to have sent classified info karynnj Jan 2016 #121

Last that I know, Colin Powell and Condi Rice are not running for president n/t AZ Progressive Jan 2016 #155

Powell and Rice had aides transcribe top secret memo info to... grasswire Jan 2016 #213

+1000 nt Mojorabbit Jan 2016 #215

NOT the same backtomn Feb 2016 #244

She didn't do the sending. LiberalFighter Jan 2016 #116

Doesn't matter if she didn't do the sending. jeff47 Jan 2016 #177

According to my sources ... GeorgeGist Jan 2016 #157

Maybe she shouldn't have set up a private email server for work emails Travis_0004 Jan 2016 #169

Let's get the story straight. BlueStreak Jan 2016 #210

Not Classifed LeFleur1 Jan 2016 #235

I could see myself voting for Hillary but Biden would be very reasonable... TipTok Jan 2016 #120

They said almost the same thing about Obama. notadmblnd Jan 2016 #126

No. Just no. SusanCalvin Jan 2016 #114

Bull. Secretaries Powell and Rice before her did the same thing. cheapdate Jan 2016 #129

Secretary Powell had a private server? nt ram2008 Jan 2016 #130

Well, he said he used his personal email for Department business, cheapdate Jan 2016 #135

No, they didn't. frylock Jan 2016 #132

Give you Rice. Powell said he used private email for State Department business. cheapdate Jan 2016 #133

No, he didn't. frylock Jan 2016 #136

I'm being told something different. cheapdate Jan 2016 #137

I was mistaken when I said that Powell had one system for private email, and one for govt business.. frylock Jan 2016 #150

Bottom line for me - I'm not concerned over cheapdate Jan 2016 #154

I think it speaks to her incredible lack of judgment and absolute hubris.. frylock Jan 2016 #158

A Republican White House cheapdate Jan 2016 #160

Then vote for Sanders. frylock Jan 2016 #161

Plan to. cheapdate Jan 2016 #165

It's not going to be easy, but I feel more confident with every passing day frylock Jan 2016 #168

I hafta agree Hillary should step aside... but only to let President Sanders assume his rightful place as leader of the progressive movement in this country. InAbLuEsTaTe Jan 2016 #227

sad that this, instead of her support of the Iraq War, is what might be her downfall uhnope Jan 2016 #4

In both cases it is her bad judgment. Wisdom and good judgment are extremely serious TryLogic Jan 2016 #102

she knew what she was doing was illegal but figured she's a clinton, she can do as she pleases bowens43 Jan 2016 #5

It's also bad staffing. OrwellwasRight Jan 2016 #65

She surrounded herself with sycophants and yes men.. frylock Jan 2016 #131

Really? None of the emails were classified or marked top secret at the time. LiberalFighter Jan 2016 #118

+100 AZ Progressive Jan 2016 #156

.^that 840high Jan 2016 #198

This morning on one of the news shows I heard a commentator musing about whether the FBI Vinca Jan 2016 #6

She can't defend against this and be focused on running an effective campaign at the same time. JudyM Jan 2016 #10

HRC (7/25/15) - "I did not send or get classified emails in private account" leveymg Jan 2016 #7

The second statement makes no sense whatsoever. OrwellwasRight Jan 2016 #72

I can't remember which crazy repub rep said they will impeach her the moment she roguevalley Jan 2016 #78

I don't think any of this is impeachable. OrwellwasRight Jan 2016 #87

They impeached her husband for lying Le Taz Hot Jan 2016 #144

Anything is impeachable. All it takes is a majority vote in the House. Expecting the Senate to 24601 Jan 2016 #171

Everything is impeachable. Doesn't even have to be a crime. jeff47 Jan 2016 #178

Meaning Hillary is going to be too mired in congressional inquiry for the next year or more to JudyM Jan 2016 #8

The good of the party should be her first concern. Angel Martin Jan 2016 #9

It was part wishful thinking and part tongue-in-cheek. We shall see. JudyM Jan 2016 #11

That is pretty comical, murielm99 Jan 2016 #43

It's about progressive values, which used to be the heart of the party. JudyM Jan 2016 #46

Some people care about policy. Others care about the level of respect being shown to the Party. frylock Jan 2016 #134

I was thinking "LOLOLOL" before I clicked your post!! Good one. 7962 Jan 2016 #115

Hillary's concern is Hillary. 840high Jan 2016 #199

Mais oiu, la parti c'est moi. n/t 24601 Jan 2016 #217

This isn't ever going to go away Arazi Jan 2016 #12

It would be worse if the lid popped off right before the general. Elmer S. E. Dump Jan 2016 #28

Why do you think the Republicans aren't talking much about it? jeff47 Jan 2016 #179

I like how her spokesman "adamently opposes the complete blocking of the release of these emails" GummyBearz Jan 2016 #13

Not only that, but if it's questionable how can disclosure be good for national security? JudyM Jan 2016 #48

Yep 840high Jan 2016 #200

Question is pscot Jan 2016 #14

I just wrote in post #16 OKNancy Jan 2016 #18

Even if it was classified after the fact... Hangingon Jan 2016 #53

Good judgment is not one of her strong points. Quite the opposite. TryLogic Jan 2016 #107

Huh? dlwickham Jan 2016 #138

So, all the. Years of experience she tells us she has and she cannot recognize sensitive subject mat Hangingon Jan 2016 #170

What's considered sensitive today dlwickham Jan 2016 #173

News organizations do not determine classification. Hangingon Jan 2016 #176

But they can publish information that might be considered sensitive dlwickham Jan 2016 #219

Wrong! Hangingon Jan 2016 #223

The Pentagon papers were eventually declared unclassified dlwickham Jan 2016 #224

You seemingly took my poor example as an unfortunate ray of hope. Hangingon Jan 2016 #231

Ray of hope? dlwickham Jan 2016 #233

Late at night to read turgid EOs but I did see this at first glance. Hangingon Jan 2016 #238

Nope. jeff47 Jan 2016 #181

Would leaked information be reclassified dlwickham Jan 2016 #220

This message was self-deleted by its author 840high Jan 2016 #201

Does it matter? Erich Bloodaxe BSN Jan 2016 #97

You're trained to recognize sensitive material whether marked or not. 7962 Jan 2016 #117

Same ol bullshit.. asuhornets Jan 2016 #15

I was just thinking the same exact thing LynneSin Jan 2016 #68

Unbelievable n/t asuhornets Jan 2016 #88

Exactly... TipTok Jan 2016 #142

The Hill doesn't state it specifically, but other more reputable sites point out that OKNancy Jan 2016 #16

Kirby said the emails were not MARKED classified karynnj Jan 2016 #29

do you realize that discussing a news story about a drone strike makes an email geek tragedy Jan 2016 #37

Sure - it would be the information included in the discussion that would be more or less significant karynnj Jan 2016 #52

depends on what they say. geek tragedy Jan 2016 #59

Thats exactly right. Yet everyone says "nothing to see here...." 7962 Jan 2016 #119

That doesn't matter, or it shouldn't. As Sec of State she should know the info is top secret. JudyM Jan 2016 #32

They were not MARKED classified when they were sent. That's a far cry Akicita Jan 2016 #47

Classified information appears in the press on a regular basis. geek tragedy Jan 2016 #63

Ok. That may explain one. What about the other 1,300? Akicita Jan 2016 #74

every discussion of the drone program would be considered classified. geek tragedy Jan 2016 #77

Its been widely reported that there are over 1,300 classified emails found so far. Akicita Jan 2016 #90

to be precise, FOIA bureaucrats have labeled 1300 documents 'classified' geek tragedy Jan 2016 #92

1600 now. Akicita Jan 2016 #148

And it's still classified. jeff47 Jan 2016 #184

I'm not sure that gmail OrwellwasRight Jan 2016 #75

DIRTY TRICKS WEEKENDS HAVE BEGUN!!! Pathwalker Jan 2016 #91

"Not marked" is not the same as "Not classified". jeff47 Jan 2016 #182

Overclassification? daybranch Jan 2016 #17

no, it's that the government doesn't like to provide the public access to how it does business geek tragedy Jan 2016 #21

It's obvious the CIA classfied Hilliary's secret yoga moves and some top secret Akicita Jan 2016 #149

When will she be indicted? Reter Jan 2016 #20

Stop watching Fox News. nt geek tragedy Jan 2016 #23

It's on every news channel Reter Jan 2016 #58

Stop watching Fox News. geek tragedy Jan 2016 #60

Thank you, geek tragedy. You represent your candidate well. Metric System Jan 2016 #104

Don't watch Fox Reter Jan 2016 #152

"Massive federal crime" lol sure you don't watch Fox nt geek tragedy Jan 2016 #159

Yes - federal crime. I don't even have cable TV. 840high Jan 2016 #202

no-hillary-did-not-commit-a-crime- Ana Hauhet Jan 2016 #239

No, she wont. You forget who we're talking about. Someone else will take the fall. 7962 Jan 2016 #122

And then the minions will get jobs Yupster Jan 2016 #140

There you have it. 7962 Jan 2016 #143

Who do you know who's been indicted for documents retroactively classified? pnwmom Jan 2016 #25

It is completely unlikely that these top secret threads were discussing things in the public domain karynnj Jan 2016 #33

it's actually highly unlikely the top secret designation has anything to do with national security geek tragedy Jan 2016 #39

Disingenuous estimate - even accepting the premise karynnj Jan 2016 #49

do you consider the existence of the CIA's drone program to be "top secret?" geek tragedy Jan 2016 #51

I agree there is over classification - but these are not confidential, but top secret nt karynnj Jan 2016 #54

they certainly do overclassify stuff as top secret too. nt geek tragedy Jan 2016 #71

TS/SCI and SAPs require tons of paperwork to justify. jeff47 Jan 2016 #186

Are you serious? This isn't a procedural issue. The *content* is top secret regardless. JudyM Jan 2016 #35

Same question regarding her IWR vote: Criminal or Incompetent? Either way, she should be AzDar Jan 2016 #24

so you believe the Fox News spin on this. geek tragedy Jan 2016 #27

After two decades of villifying Hillary Clinton we have plenty of right-wing kool-aid drinkers here LynneSin Jan 2016 #80

seriously, embracing the security state's hatred of transparency in an effort to score geek tragedy Jan 2016 #86

If all the news reports are talking about this, why keep insisting its just Fox? 7962 Jan 2016 #123

every news story has stated as a factual matter geek tragedy Jan 2016 #124

Many reporters have said as much, yes. Especially incompetent. 7962 Jan 2016 #127

which beacons of journalistic credibility have stated geek tragedy Jan 2016 #139

I saw it on Chris Cuomo's show; one of his reporters, 7962 Jan 2016 #145

That the email server was a mistake has already been conceded. geek tragedy Jan 2016 #222

Except that it wasnt just a "mistake". There's also this: 7962 Jan 2016 #240

Lol, Murdoch Post. Very revealing. nt geek tragedy Jan 2016 #241

Shooting the messenger again. 7962 Feb 2016 #242

Yes, it's there, in the NY Post. nt geek tragedy Feb 2016 #243

Its not an op-ed, its an interview. There's a difference 7962 Feb 2016 #245

ABC opened with this tonight. 840high Jan 2016 #204

You must watch Fox. You seem 840high Jan 2016 #203

I know the "throw Hillary in jail" cries come from the bowels geek tragedy Jan 2016 #221

perfect summation left lowrider Jan 2016 #40

Why is the administration doing this? mvd Jan 2016 #26

it's career bureaucrats doing it. geek tragedy Jan 2016 #31

This is correctly being done by career professionals in the state department karynnj Jan 2016 #42

Ok thanks for the explanation mvd Jan 2016 #45

See post #47 for the answer to your question. Akicita Jan 2016 #56

Hillary's campaign wants them 840high Jan 2016 #205

This is standard with Freedom of Information Act releases. yallerdawg Jan 2016 #30

Wow rtracey Jan 2016 #34

I Remember hearing that in a earlier email Hillary was giving instructions on awake Jan 2016 #36

Bug-man said an indictment was coming Roland99 Jan 2016 #38

All they have is 22 retroactively Re-classified emails out of 30,000 total..?? lobodons Jan 2016 #41

The only time Hillary tells the truth is if she tells a double lie (nt) nyabingi Jan 2016 #44

What's the problem with classified emails anyway? yallerdawg Jan 2016 #50

The problem is electability. OrwellwasRight Jan 2016 #82

You understand this is all more Benghazi Republican mischief? yallerdawg Jan 2016 #103

No, I don't understand it that way. OrwellwasRight Jan 2016 #108

That's your interpretation. yallerdawg Jan 2016 #110

Yes I am. OrwellwasRight Jan 2016 #112

The "covered eyes & ears" syndrome IS amazing isnt it? nt 7962 Jan 2016 #125

No I don't. 840high Jan 2016 #206

Was it classified when it was received/sent? Molusko Jan 2016 #57

All we've been told is that they were not "marked Classified" which means nothing because no secret Akicita Jan 2016 #66

What happens if Huma sends classified info to Hillary Yupster Jan 2016 #141

Exactly Akicita Jan 2016 #147

Message auto-removed Name removed Jan 2016 #216

All the emails are being reviewed for release to the public. yallerdawg Jan 2016 #70

I don't know about over-classification, but for sure there's some over exceptionalism HereSince1628 Jan 2016 #61

As with all the Clinton email stories--this will be debunked quickly. Kingofalldems Jan 2016 #62

So they are spinning it as overclassification. Clever, but not good enough. Now they are impugning thereismore Jan 2016 #64

so you've reviewed these documents and can verify that the Fox News spin on this geek tragedy Jan 2016 #81

Don't drag Fox into this. It's Obama's people saying this. nt thereismore Jan 2016 #83

really? Which Obama people are saying Clinton broke the law and is going to get geek tragedy Jan 2016 #89

Obama's people are saying her emails contained information of the highest sensitivity. thereismore Jan 2016 #93

state department FOIA bureaucrats are saying that, not Obama's inner circle geek tragedy Jan 2016 #94

It's the Obama administration. He is the top executive and they are his people. Got it? nt thereismore Jan 2016 #95

career civil servants are not Obama's people any more than they were geek tragedy Jan 2016 #96

Don't insult me and take your bone somewhere else. nt thereismore Jan 2016 #98

that post was not insulting and none of my bones are out of place nt geek tragedy Jan 2016 #109

Either way, they are not 'Fox News' John Poet Jan 2016 #174

Not Fox. 840high Jan 2016 #196

yeah, it's "overclassification"... Angel Martin Jan 2016 #214

facebook MondoCane Jan 2016 #69

Thank god it's Friday, where stories go to die. Ed Suspicious Jan 2016 #99

You forgot /Sarc tag IamTheNoodle Jan 2016 #106

Just reported on NPR Arazi Jan 2016 #105

I just find these accusations very sexist. AngryAmish Jan 2016 #111

Sarcasm? JudyM Jan 2016 #146

Groan. 840high Jan 2016 #207

No...More...Clintons. SoapBox Jan 2016 #128

.... 840high Jan 2016 #208

Thanks again, Sanders supporters! 6000eliot Jan 2016 #151

The FBI cares Reter Jan 2016 #153

According to liars like Issa and Delay, 6000eliot Jan 2016 #162

The FBI doesn't serve under Issa or Delay. frylock Jan 2016 #167

Whatever. Ho hum. 6000eliot Jan 2016 #191

We're a year into this shit, but.. frylock Jan 2016 #163

True, if by "shit" you mean "right-wing smears against Hillary Clinton." 6000eliot Jan 2016 #164

No, I mean Hillary's shit show.. frylock Jan 2016 #166

This "colassal fuck up" is evidence of Hillary's superior John Poet Jan 2016 #175

How boring. 6000eliot Jan 2016 #190

Utterly droll frylock Jan 2016 #197

You bet she does. 840high Jan 2016 #211

None of Those 22 New Hillary Emails Were Classified When They Were Sent still_one Jan 2016 #183

They were all stripped out of other agency classified documents leveymg Jan 2016 #226

The Administration cares. 840high Jan 2016 #209

why leave out that NONE of those emails were classified when they were sent? still_one Jan 2016 #180

Hey! MrWendel Jan 2016 #185

In fact here is the real story that Sanders' supporters want to ignore still_one Jan 2016 #188

Because that isn't true. jeff47 Jan 2016 #187

The state department John Kirby came out and said they were NOT classified at the time still_one Jan 2016 #189

Once again, not marked is different than not being classified. jeff47 Jan 2016 #192

Nothing is going to happen. The only ones who are making this an issue are republicans and Sanders still_one Jan 2016 #193

Just rock back and forth, telling yourself that. jeff47 Jan 2016 #195

You're living in De Nile. 840high Jan 2016 #212

Easy way to settle it. Even if classified, the President has authority to declassify material 24601 Jan 2016 #218

Worst case senario is if she defeats Bernie in the primary Calista241 Jan 2016 #225

Worst case scenario... AngryOldDem Jan 2016 #228

No, if she wins and has to vacate, her VP would take over. Calista241 Jan 2016 #234

Patreus gave secrets to his mistress, who was a reporter, Darb Feb 2016 #247

Hillary is a fucking anvil that will sink the Democratic Party... Odin2005 Jan 2016 #230

+1 CharlotteVale Jan 2016 #232

More than slightly hyperbolic. Darb Feb 2016 #246

legally not guilty creon Mar 2016 #248