U.S. Said to Probe How Classified Data Got on Hillary Clinton’s Server

[candelista]

Source: Bloomberg

U.S. law enforcement officials are investigating how classified material found its way into messages that members of Hillary Clinton’s State Department staff sent to her private e-mail address, according to a U.S. official with knowledge of the inquiry.

The official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss an investigation still in its early stages, said there is some indication that Clinton aides drew upon a variety of messages in classified information systems to produce summaries and updates of events in Libya and elsewhere and then sent them to Clinton or her aides using a private server.

The official didn’t identify the aides.

This transfer of classified information onto a server not approved to handle sensitive material is a focus of the investigation and could form the basis for a criminal probe to determine just how much classified material was sent - and who prepared and sent it.
*
Anybody who knowingly e-mailed classified material to Clinton or her top aides when she was secretary of state could face criminal prosecution, according to current and former U.S. national security officials. Clinton, the leading Democratic presidential candidate, isn’t the target of the investigation.

“There’s a responsibility to safeguard classified information,” Michael Hayden, former director of the National Security Agency and CIA, said in a phone interview. Failing to protect such data “could get to a level of negligence that criminal penalties would kick in.”

Read more: http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-08-20/u-s-said-to-probe-how-classified-data-got-on-clinton-s-server

---

Are Huma and Cheryl going to take the rap?

[liberal N proud]

1. Classified data that wasn't classified before it was classified

So when was it classified?

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

13. Apparently it was already classified when it hit her server.

When you produce a very sensitive document, it is classified immediately. If someone took excerpts or summaries and put them in the email, makes the email classified as well.

Get it? Got it? Good!

[liberal N proud]

25. What does retroactively mean?

[AnPak]

53. Scenario...

Person X reads classified statement Y on a secure government computer system with all markings and classifications clearly labeled.

Person X then uses statement Y or a summary of it on another non government service and sends it on with no markings or classification.

All of this comes to light at a later time and it is revealed that statement Y was indeed classified but unmarked and thus the document should, in theory, gain the classification of the original source document.

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

58. Darn, I wish I was as smart and articulate as you are.

You pretty much said what I would have liked to have said. Thank you!

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

56. From the dictionary

ret·ro·ac·tive
ˌretrōˈaktiv/
adjective
adjective: retroactive

(especially of legislation) taking effect from a date in the past.
"a big retroactive tax increase"

[magical thyme]

16. says the Clinton team, versus the Inspector General

Different departments do their own classifying and de-classifying.

It appears that somebody from Hillary's staff lifted classified information from other departments -- which department would decide what info from their dept. is classified -- summarized it and passed it along.

That is why her spokespeople have been careful to say "It wasn't marked as classified." The documents the data originated from were marked classified, but they didn't add the classification markings to their emailed summaries.

There are also questions around the security on her server. That the emails from the time period in question weren't encrypted already shows a giant security hole.

Hillary will walk away more or less unscathed. Her IT staff in charge of security and whoever emailed the high security satellite data re: troop positions and movement, will not.

[24601]

23. That only works when you deal with information originated exclusively from with your own

department. As soon as you incorporate anything external, for example from the intelligence community, Intelligence Community Directives (ICDs) on access & dissemination apply throughout he Executive Branch.

[liberal N proud]

24. What was the word that the justice depth used? Oh yeah RETROACTIVELY

But believe what you will because you have already made up your mind.

[magical thyme]

79. because the State Dept retroactively stamped them 'classified' does not mean they didn't

start out classified. It's a "definition of the word is" moment. Look closely at how they structure responses. "Nothing was marked as classified" doesn't mean it wasn't classified info. Only that somebody left off the classification when they took data from sources that were marked classified.

Likewise, the State Dept going back and covering tracks after the fact doesn't change the fact tht Hillary's staff pulled classified data and sent it to her without labeling it as such.


Exclusive: Dozens of Clinton emails were classified from the start, U.S. rules suggest
http://www.aol.com/article/2015/08/21/exclusive-dozens-of-clinton-emails-were-classified-from-the-sta/21225607/

The new stamps indicate that some of Clinton's emails from her time as the nation's most senior diplomat are filled with a type of information the U.S. government and the department's own regulations automatically deems classified from the get-go — regardless of whether it is already marked that way or not.

In the small fraction of emails made public so far, Reuters has found at least 30 email threads from 2009, representing scores of individual emails, that include what the State Department's own "Classified" stamps now identify as so-called 'foreign government information.' The U.S. government defines this as any information, written or spoken, provided in confidence to U.S. officials by their foreign counterparts.

"It's born classified," said J. William Leonard, a former director of the U.S. government's Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO). Leonard was director of ISOO, part of the White House's National Archives and Records Administration, from 2002 until 2008, and worked for both the Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations.

Clinton and her senior staff routinely sent foreign government information among themselves on unsecured networks several times a month, if the State Department's markings are correct. Within the 30 email threads reviewed by Reuters, Clinton herself sent at least 17 emails that contained this sort of information. In at least one case it was to a friend, Sidney Blumenthal, not in government.

[liberal N proud]

80. How do you know they will be rectroactively classified at the time they were not classified?

Total and utter nonsense bullshit with no apparent reason except to slander someone!

[magical thyme]

82. Huh? that makes no sense and is not what I (or the linked article) said

Try reading the linked article.

[TwilightGardener]

17. One of the emails was forwarded to her private server containing info on current troop movements

in Libya and possible movement of Ambassador Stevens away from Benghazi--that would be classified WHEN it was sent.

[TwilightGardener]

2. Of course they're going to take the rap. I said a while back that it appears her aides

combed through classified channels, lifted the pertinent info, transmitted it without marking or noting its classified origins. They most likely figured that if none of it was marked secret or classified, and the sources of the info were never identified or mentioned, they'd never get in trouble. Did Hillary Clinton ask them to do it this way, for her own convenience? Because I don't know how she received most of her info when not at her office and with NO government-provided device of her own.

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

14. Now you're starting to talk nonsense...

[RKP5637]

51. I often wonder how much of this has gone on with other individuals, not to HRC, but

other correspondence/servers conducted privately for convenience.. She has a lot of eyes on her, others not so much. I also wonder how well educated many were that this is a no no.

[TwilightGardener]

60. I'll bet many top officials are loose with classified info, but they're generally

protected by their staffs and agencies who will cover up mistakes. Leon Panetta as head of the CIA revealed the identities of Seal Team Six in a room that included movie producers. He said he didn't know they were there, but they were INVITED to attend the ceremony. That sort of shit probably happens all the time, but it's just mistakes. Setting up your own server and refusing to use anything but that for all your official business is very deliberate. Of course classified information will somehow find its way there at some point, eventually. Someone will slip up, or get lazy.

[RKP5637]

63. It was certainly pretty brazen IMO. In my corporate life I would have been fired if I had put

company confidential information onto my personal server at home and used it for email exchanges. We had special procedures for the exchange of such email, etc. via encryption and secured servers.

[hrmjustin]

3. This is not really breaking news.

We knew they were looking into it.

[candelista]

5. What's new is the material suggesting her aides were responsible.

This is a new theory about the nuts and bolts of how the classified material got on her server. The WSJ says that Huma forwarded at least one of the above-top-secret emails to Hillary. This is all new. WSJ article here:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/hillary-clinton-says-classified-emails-were-on-server-1440030491

[hrmjustin]

12. Fair enough but to me it is all a big nothing.

[JoePhilly]

28. Why would the person sending the email be ...

... responsible for its contents??

That's just crazy talk.

[awoke_in_2003]

81. It's always an aide

Their job is to take the fall when their principal does something stupid.

[still_one]

26. This is only the second LBN on this subject I have seen today. Of course I saw a few earlier this

week on LBN concerning the same subject. It is amazing what goes for LBN now a days

[snooper2]

4. Her having her own fucking mail server shows what a control freak she is

Yo Hill, step out of the way so Bernie and Martin can go at it during the debates...

Go retire and hang out with Laura at the beach or something LOL



NO BUSH NO CLINTON!

[candelista]

6. Would she use a private server as President?

Maybe she's learned her lesson, but maybe not. Maybe the lesson was just "be more careful."

[7962]

7. Precisely. "I've gotta do a better job covering my shit next time"! nt

[candelista]

10. That reminds me: When they asked Nixon what he learned from Watergate...

....he said, "I should have burned the tapes."

[7962]

15. Thats right! Forgot about that.

[restorefreedom]

8. setting up the sacrificial staff members

what a shock.

except this time, I don't think the public is in the mood for any more of this game playing.

[AnPak]

57. Don't count on it...

[restorefreedom]

59. what do you think will become of this? nt

[AnPak]

67. I think they will hold fast and wait for it to pass...

Scandal and some aides will fall on their swords...

Hillary is still going to be the nominee...

[restorefreedom]

69. i agree with you on the first part

someone will fall on the sword

I don't think she ultimately will be the nominee though.

[7962]

9. Here's the biggest problem I have with her nonsense:

When I was in the military, we ALL took a class on classified materials. How to recognize if something SHOULD be considered classified regardless of whether or not it was marked as such. The whole point was to be able to recognize what you were looking at.
To me, there's 2 options. Either Hillary was lying or she was incompetent. In her position, she should have known instantly that she was looking at material that SHOULD have been marked as some sort of classification.

[MBS]

19. " " "

The maddening thing is that most of these issues , and all of the intrusion into her personal email, could have been avoided had she had the common sense (and, sorry, also integrity) to keep her personal and professional correspondence entirely separate, with separate email accounts on separate servers, and to use the government email systems (only) for all of her governmental business. (why, oh why, did she decide to use a private server, against standard policy? how could she or her aides or legal counsel have possibly thought at any time that this was an appropriate way to go for a cabinet position of such sensitivity and importance? Just mind-boggling.)

[karynnj]

55. +10000

As the investigation will target the senders, I would bet, in addition to Clinton people, there will be some dedicated career professionals who completely missed that sending the SoS a report they were asked to prepare could be a problem. It would not have been unreasonable for them to assume that the SoS had taken all needed security precautions. If there are people like them, it is they who I feel any sympathy for. Clinton, not so much.

[MBS]

70. yes, really good point.

It would be grossly unfair if those career professionals took the fall for her inappropriate email system.
Really, the ultimate problem, the original problem, is her decision to use (insistence on using?) a private server for her official SoS correspondence. As the DC judge said yesterday, "we wouldn't be here today if the employee" (that is, Sec. Clinton) "had followed government policy".

[jeff47]

21. Yep. I could understand screwing up with SECRET

because a lot of seemingly trivial things are technically SECRET. But TS/SCI is an entirely different ballgame.

[daybranch]

33. Yep we know

Maybe more damning is the spin she is giving to make it look like it was her idea to come forward with the emails. It is an awful lot like the sniper fire she lied about years ago, oh did I bring that up? Was that not a self serving lie?
Defense of Hillary in all cases seem to be based on woman as victim and also best on women's issues. Her support of the oligarchy in her positions never seem to be discussed. I think women and men deserve someone on our side and wearing a pantsuit is not enough to earn my trust.

[Elmer S. E. Dump]

11. That's right folks! Hillary is innocent! It's all (fill in the blank) fault!

[JDPriestly]

18. It's outrageous to blame employees for following the boss's instructions in something like this.

[jeff47]

22. Well, legally it is their fault.

Kinda like if your boss orders you to kill someone, you're still in trouble if you do it.

[PoliticAverse]

30. But in such a case the boss would be in trouble as well and might face the harshest penalty. n/t

[tammywammy]

32. As someone that's dealt with classified data

If I sent classified data on an unclassified server, I would get in trouble no doubt. It would be my fault, not the receivers fault regardless of who they are. I would be the one that violated security.

[PoliticAverse]

34. What if the receiver was your boss and you were following their instructions in the sending?

Would your boss also face some penalty?

[tammywammy]

35. It's a hypothetical that'll never happen.

My boss would never ask for classified data on an unclassified network. And I'd never do it either.

But let's says he asks me to write a memo about the classified Project X. I could write an unclassified memo/report sure. But if I accidentally included too much information or classified information and sent the report to my boss thinking it was unclassified and he realized it was too much, again I would be the one in trouble. My boss could say tell me the status of whatever and it's up to me to maintain security levels.

[candelista]

36. What if your boss explicitly told you to forward classified info to him?

Then your boss would be responsible too, no?

[jeff47]

37. Then actually doing it is still your fault.

You were supposed to say "no" and report the incident.

Just like "kill that guy for me" will still result in murder charges. Theoretically you might be able to plea bargain for your testimony against your boss, but you are still at fault.

[candelista]

39. Still your fault, but not only yours.

There is joint (collective) responsibility, as with murder for hire. Both you and the person who hired you are guilty of murder.

[jeff47]

40. No, two separate crimes.

You are at fault for doing it.

Your boss is at fault for telling you to do it.

[candelista]

42. That's called "straining at a gnat."

Really Dave, you're above that, right?

[jeff47]

43. No, I just don't think "I was just following orders" is an excuse for anything.

So I don't want to diffuse the blame from the people who chose to break the law because their boss says so.

[candelista]

44. Dave, I read with patience your many repetitive posts about TS/SCI.

So stop with the irrelevant objections, OK? My point was that the person who orders a crime is guilty of a crime. Saying that the one who orders is just as guilty as the person who carries out the order is not an objection to that point.

[jeff47]

45. Who's Dave?

My point was that the person who orders a crime is guilty of a crime.

As was mine. Problem is it's a different crime.

[candelista]

61. Jeff, Dave, Cliff...What's the difference?

Sorry. All I notice is your avatar.

[JDPriestly]

49. At some point it is a conspiracy and all are equally responsible.

Sorry. It's part of a boss's job to know the rules and make sure the staff follows them.

Hillary has hired a lawyer. That is what this report confirms to me.

[Eugene Stoner]

20. Possible Felony

Hillary Clinton and two aides appear to have violated two national security laws by sending classified information on a private email server,

The first is 18 USC Sec. 1924, which outlaws the unauthorized removal and storage of classified information. Penalties can include fines and imprisonment for up to one year.

A second federal statute that prosecutors could use to charge Clinton and her aides is 18 USC Sec. 793, a more serious felony statute. That law covers national defense information and people who misuse it to injure the United States or benefit a foreign power.

Those convicted of violating that law face fines and up to 10 years in prison

[still_one]

27. Really, so in your infinite wisdom, your sage legal mind has come to that conclusion. Pray tell

when it doesn't occur, what are you going to say?

[JoePhilly]

29. The person who sends an email is not ...

... responsible for the contents of that email.

Everyone knows that.

If I send you child porn, it's your fault.

[PoliticAverse]

31. "receiving child pornography" is a crime. n/t

[Eugene Stoner]

38. What part of Possible do you not understand?

self evident,,,,,, duh

[Eugene Stoner]

77. I only said POSSIBLE

No prediction implied. So whatever happens it is not on me to respond.

Thanks for your condescending sarcasm though

[Cali_Democrat]

78. Jury Results:

Really, so in your infinite wisdom, your sage legal mind has come to that conclusion. Pray tell
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1183412

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Very sarcastic for no good reason.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Aug 21, 2015, 09:10 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: it's only sarcasm.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: If we hid sarcasm, DU would have stopped existing years ago.
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: What is sarcastic about it?
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Alerter: get thicker skin. Sarcasm is not worthy of being hidden.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Yeah, some people default to sarcasm. It happens.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[candelista]

41. Here are some relevant sections of 18 U.S. Code § 793

18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information

d) Whoever, lawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it;

(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense,

(1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or

(2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793

[JDPriestly]

50. "any person not entitled to receive it"

Hillary was certainly entitled to receive it. It doesn't say anything about an e-mail account that is not secure. We shall see.

[candelista]

74. She sent material that was "born classified" to Sid Blumenthal, among others

Clinton and her senior staff routinely sent foreign government information among themselves on unsecured networks several times a month, if the State Department's markings are correct. Within the 30 email threads reviewed by Reuters, Clinton herself sent at least 17 emails that contained this sort of information. In at least one case it was to a friend, Sidney Blumenthal, not in government.

This sort of information, which the department says Clinton both sent and received in her emails, is the only kind that must be "presumed" classified, in part to protect national security and the integrity of diplomatic interactions, according to U.S. regulations examined by Reute

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/08/21/us-usa-election-clinton-emails-idUSKCN0QQ0BW20150821

[GitRDun]

64. What were HRC's violations of these sections? n/t

[candelista]

73. :)

[Babel_17]

46. Watching to see if the administration official's supposed comment to Bremmer gets walked back

https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/634438304985935872

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/08/20/hillary_email_senior_obama_administration_official_jail_classified_material.html

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Bremmer

Senior Obama Admin official (to me): "If I did what (Hillary) Clinton did, I think I'd be in jail."

The speculation is endless. Is there animus to HRC within the administration for having to deal with this issue? Is this senior official acting on what sees as the general mood, acting totally on his own, or is this a shot across the bow saying "keep this mess away from us".

I'm leaning towards this getting dismissed as "a miscommunication", and then the senior official going totally silent. We can then read the resulting soggy mess of tea leaves as we please. Good news for the popcorn emoticon industry though.

[Kingofalldems]

47. Huma and Cheryl taking the rap for what?

It says in the article Clinton is not the target. So why would anyone take the rap?

[madokie]

48. Fuck the republiCONs and their witch hunt

what a pack of losers they are.

[riversedge]

71. best response yet

[Kingofalldems]

52. Oops. Who will take the rap for this?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027096062

[underthematrix]

54. This is the key part of this article:

there is some indication that Clinton aides drew upon a variety of messages in classified information systems to produce summaries and updates of events in Libya and elsewhere and then sent them to Clinton or her aides using a private server.

Now we have to parse it further to get to the meat of the story:

aides drew upon a variety of messages in classified information systems - this means aides accessed classified computer systems for the purpose of obtaining most current information of events in specific areas of the world

and

to produce summaries and updates of events - this means while reviewing pertinent information in the classified systems, aides created summaries of the information. This means they did not email the classified documents they reviewed within the classified system. They only emailed summaries of that information.

At this point, this seems as HRC said a vicious political attack by GOP. And there is a racist wingnut contingent working within the intelligence community as well as throughout the federal gov't.

[TwilightGardener]

62. You understand that you cannot deliberately glean classified info from the proper channels

in order to convey that same info into unauthorized channels, right? If you're leaving off the markings and designations in order to be able to transmit the info outside of secure systems, that's a crime.

[Eugene Stoner]

65. Exactly,,,, Possibly a Felony level Federal crime

This is not insignificant.

[840high]

66. Welcome to DU.

[Eugene Stoner]

76. Welcome to you

I've been here longer than you (twice as long) but thanks for the warm welcome

[underthematrix]

68. I think you missed my point and focus - content of article

The article said all that was transmitted were SUMMARIES of the information, not the classified documents themselves. But we don't know what the rules are for transmitting summaries of classified information. Is the sender required to treat it as if it is classified and if so, what does that mean in practice?

I'm very disturbed by this story because it seems a strange thing for a person to do who has been the subject of so many GOP hate, vitriol and investigation. I just don't understand the decision to use a personal server to do gov't work. HRC's reason "it's more convienent" doesn't make sense because we know most people access their email apps from blackberries or smartphones.

[ipfilter]

75. A summary of classified info would

have the same classification as the highest document from which it was obtained. If one line from the summary came from a document marked Secret then the entire summary would be Secret even if everything else was simply FOUO. This stuff is covered in yearly required training for any gov or DoD employee with the lowest level security clearance.

Sounds like HRC needs to take remedial IP, IA, and FOIA training.

[underthematrix]

83. I agree with you. If the summary

included direct quotes with attribution, specifc timeframes and location of the event, that would be a violation. I have been wondering why HRC would use a private server and I think part of the answer can be found in this NYT article posted August 13, 2013 - http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/14/us/politics/unease-at-clinton-foundation-over-finances-and-ambitions.html?_r=0 The details regarding HRC's involvement with the Clinton's Global Initiative is disturbing since some of it occurred while she was SEeretary of State. When I read the article in 2013, I was so relieved she decided not to stay for the President's second term. But now I imagine hetold her she needs to move on after his re-election.

[forthemiddle]

84. I read medical records every day for my job

If I read, in your official medical chart, that you have cancer I cannot write an email to a colleague "summarizing" that information without breaking HIPAA laws.

It doesn't matter if I don't give the person the actual documentation, I can't even email the "summary and update of events".

It is not necessarily the document that is classified, but the information included within.

[Deadbeat Republicans]

72. She was duped again?