WOW: Former NSA Director Michael Hayden Comments On The Clinton Email Controversy...

[AzDar]

"Going To A Dark Place", Indeed...

[ebayfool]

1. K & R! TY for the link, AzDar. Damning and he's right.

Hacking, FOIA evasion, screw-ups, and on. And not a single valid reason for her to have done it. That's a fact that no one can get around. Piss poor judgement or avarice. Either is as damning as the other.

[Samantha]

48. Well we know Russia has a copy, as well as China, and there is a third one as well

How do we know this? In one of his interviews early on, Guccifer said he shared the emails with three other countries. The third one might have been Iran or South Korea (I cannot remember). The first two were definitely mentioned by him.

Sam

[CorporatistNation]

55. I Am No BIG Fan Of Hayden, BUT... HE IS AS RIGHT AS RAIN IN HIS APPRAISAL OF THIS EPIC...

decision well considered I am sure but THOUGHTLESSLY made by the "experienced" one... Hillary Clinton! This ONE decision demonstrates carelessness, laziness and monumental poor judgement on the part of the former Secretary of State now would be President... The arrogance of this decision reveals a mindset by Hillary that reflects a pattern of consciousness that communicates to the rest of US...

"That I am BULLETPROOF... IMMUNE to Consequences irrespective of what choices I make."

[All in it together]

2. Wow lets get out of this dark place

We don't need this in the General Election.

[AzDar]

5. Hard to believe she could be so incredibly irresponsible! And WHY??

[CoffeeCat]

3. Hayden states the obvious--what many have been saying for so long

Hillary has a problem with FOIA--which is the law of the land. Her server allowed her to break those laws. Her emails, as SOS were required, by FOIA laws, to be backed up/copied. Using a .gov email address allows you to do that.

That's one problem that she has.

Hayden discusses how the server was vulnerable and most likely hacked by foreign countries.

The FBI has been so good about not leaking. But that has also been a problem for people who want to understand what is happening--because this affects the Democratic party!

There is no doubt in my mind that Hillary broke laws and deserves to be indicted. You start reading about what she did and the laws governing classified information--and there is no other conclusion that you can draw. It's very complex and the media has done a terrible job of reporting on this in ways that people can understand.

That leaves so much room for spin and for Brocking Points (all lies) to drown out other voices. But as we are learning, those Brocking Points, are bunk--namely the "This is only a security review" talking point that Hillary uses to justify the downplaying of her private server. Today, Comey took that talking point away from Hillary.

People are starting to discuss this and more information is becoming available (like with Comey today). None of it signals anything positive for Clinton.

[AzDar]

6. Was this ONLY to subvert the FOIA laws? All of this RECKLESSNESS? Is she that Nixonian?

[BillZBubb]

4. Holy Cow! I think we know what he thinks the FBI should do.

I don't know how much stroke the intelligence agencies have in the investigation, but if they have any, it's not good for Hillary.

Even if the FBI gives her a pass, this guy will be witness number one on the republican special committee investigating president Clinton's email "mistake".

[CentralCoaster]

7. Clinton ran the business of this country on personally owned equipment in the basement of her home.

That alone should shock anyone.

As he said, the problem(s) are inherent the moment those actions are taken.

Good grief.

[Autumn]

8. Why the need to subvert the FOIA laws?

I don't get it.

[mooseprime]

10. Republicans being who they are

I'm sure she knew they were going to foia every last message...just to keep in practice. Of course she wanted to shield the dangerous ones from scrutiny. Which so far she has been able to do. She just needs to drag it out into November. I am hard pressed to imagine 30k emails about yoga and grandchildren.

[Bob41213]

12. She got worse than she hoped to avoid...

If you knows your emails are subject to FOIA you know what you write is out there and you don't write anything that can be used against you.

If you think you've covered your behind and have full control of all you're emails you get sloppy. She thought she covered her behind, she was only going to give them what she wanted to give them, then suddenly they missed the classified angle. Then you're dealing with the fine toothed FBI comb and recovering things she thought were gone.

[TimPlo]

31. Actaully the Email thing was only sparked by a fluke

She proably would been free and clear of this whole thing if it was just the emails server based around the Benghazi shit hunt. But the Romanian hacker getting and publishing some of her SoS email to Sidney Blumenthal is what forced the White House to asked for security review that has not lead to a investigation.

[amborin]

9. wow, those are damning statements

[Bob41213]

11. Right there at the end, he basically guaranteed foreign govts got in.

I've said similar things. It's guaranteed the Chinese got in there, guaranteed the Russians did. Probably on a lot of others. If/when that comes out... Good times...

[highprincipleswork]

13. As said, "Let's talk in the real world." Setting up private server is the biggest, original problem!

[bbgrunt]

14. kick

[DURHAM D]

15. LOL Michael Hayden is the idiot who

rejects the concept of probably cause.

[RufusTFirefly]

26. I'm no Hillary fan, but I agree with you

Hayden's insistence that the Fourth Amendment doesn't mention "probable cause" was jaw-dropping and more than a little creepy.

He has zero credibility in my book.
Besides, I don't need an additional reason not to vote for Hillary.
My cup runneth over.

[peace13]

32. Probably cause?

You might want to fix that. Your rolly on the floor laughing thing will be funnier.

[leveymg]

35. Whatever we might think of Gen. Hayden, he knows of what he speaks here.

"I would lose respect for scores of foreign intelligence services if they were not already thumbing

through all the emails on that server. . . Once you set up the unsecure system you are headed for a very dark place."

[JackRiddler]

16. Bush official, architect of new surveillance state, natsec fetishist.

He's committed worse crimes than setting up an insecure server. Like setting up servers to surveill everyone's communications!

My problem with this scandal although it's real enough is that many who treat it as though it's such a terrible crime are deep-state criminals, war architects, torture supporters and attackers of whistleblowers.

[paulthompson]

19. I hear what you're saying

Some people criticizing Clinton for this are some of the most awful people in politics, like Tom DeLay. But of course for any major Clinton scandal those right wing types are going to come out of the woodwork and jump all over her. So all that really says to me is that politics makes strange bedfellows. One has to look at the underlying facts and not just say "I hate Hayden (or whomever) so the opposite of whatever he says must be true."

Plus, in this case Hayden actually has some credibility in that it was Bill Clinton who nominated him to be the head of the CIA.

[JackRiddler]

38. It's not just the awfulness.

It's the specific focus within the national security milieu and in the context of the last 20 years of war crimes under multiple administrations (which form a kind of coherent set preceded by the prior 20 years of war crimes under multiple administrations, etc.).

Here's one of the chief lawbreakers, at least on an administrative level, once again complaining about... secret-spilling as the highest crime! Clinton to me is the lead butcher of Libya, the backer of the Honduras coup, the one who probably got the Iran deal delayed and may want to return to confrontation, the one who's rushed ahead of the pack to support every damn intervention of the last 25 years and whose rhetoric now suggests much more in the works that we've seen under Obama.

I get that what she's done with the servers is a violation with an actionable history to it, but it is still being highlighted within a world of incredibly selective priorities on whom and what to investigate and prosecute, which in fact seem designed to reinforce the legitimacy or at least exculpability of far worse things (as well as likely do have a partisan background).

In other words, I'm all for her and all other politicians and officials involved in wrongdoing to have to face justice for their serious traffic violations, but it's a bit of a farce when they're not being charged for the drive-by murders they were careening their cars to and from. And it's also not excusable as "Caponing," since in this case it's Capones going after Capones.

[Jitter65]

42. they are just angry because they couldn't breach it. nt

[Samantha]

49. But the larger point is that national security trumps politics every time

and it really doesn't matter what others think of those of us who are pursuing learning the truth about this, because ultimately only the truth matters.

Sam

[grasswire]

17. the risk and what Hayden's words mean

1. She risked it because the potential rewards were riches and power beyond the imagination. She ran a rogue foreign policy out of sight of Obama and used it for personal riches laundered through the Clinton Foundation. Three billion bucks? Isn't that the estimated revenue through the Foundation? Plus the military capability to reshape the globe at will? She (they) thought the risk was worth the potential reward.

2. Hayden. I am slightly surprised to learn that the Intel elite are not backing Clinton. We do not know if this is a good thing.

[Peace Patriot]

18. Well, it's pretty interesting who is saying this. Michael Hayden.

Check him out:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Hayden_(general)

Here's part of it:

On May 8, 2006, Hayden was nominated for the position of CIA Director following the May 5 resignation of Porter J. Goss, and on May 23 the Senate Intelligence Committee voted 12–3 to send the nomination to the Senate floor. His nomination was confirmed by the United States Senate on May 26 by a vote of 78–15. On May 30, 2006 and again the following day at the CIA lobby with President George W. Bush in attendance, Hayden was sworn in as the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency.

He was CIA director from May 2006 to February 2009, during one of the periods of the Bush junta that is most interesting to me: During this period, the DoJ special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald was going after Cheney (but only got Libby, who fell on his sword) for outing the CIA's WMD counter-proliferation program worldwide, including its head Valerie Plame. Also, Daddy Bush was composing his "Iraq Study Group" report (really, Iran Study Group), which included Leon Panetta (who would replace Hayden in 2009), and, by the end of the 2006, Rumsfeld resigned at the Pentagon (forced out, in my opinion).

I won't give you my full theory of these events. (Summary: Daddy Bush's "Iraq Study Group" had two purposes: To stop Cheney and Rumsfeld from nuking Iran, and to save Jr.'s ass from CIA retaliation for the outing of their spies, or at least to save Jr's administration from Cheney and/or Rumsfeld falling into disgrace.)

Hayden was CIA Director during these momentous, behind-the-scenes events. He was also NSA Director from '99 to '05 (that is, when 9/11 happened, and the two wars).

And though he is ex-CIA and ex-NSA now, I am quite sure that he would never, ever, ever involve the CIA/NSA in the FBI's Clinton investigation in this public way, without there being a serious motive or agenda behind it, from within our spy agencies, and likely on high authority. I don't think this man would go rogue, or even want to be perceived as going slightly rogue.

What could the motive or agenda of the spy agencies be? An agenda might be that they don't want Clinton to be president. A motive might be that they want rock-solid guarantees that they can monitor her, if she does get elected, and they will prevent her election if they can't get it. I'm just making guesses--well, maybe educated guesses--on what they may be up to.

What this may also mean (Hayden's candor, esp. his statement that China and others surely got in) is that there is yet another big tug of war going on within the government, where (a guess) the CIA/NSA don't think their concerns are being given enough weight by the FBI? They want prosecution as a lesson to all, or the threat of prosecution (to get their guarantees)?; the DoJ (head is a Clintonite) wants exoneration, and the FBI is caught in between?

And then there's Obama. Don't know what game he's playing. Hard man to read. But last week he called a reporter into the White House and repeated 4 or 5 times that "there has been NO political influence on the FBI investigation. Full stop." Reporter starts a question. Obama repeats it. Reporter tries again. Obama repeats it. Etc.

This did make me wonder what's going on.

So, if I'm right, there was a serious breach of national security, caused by Clinton; the spy agencies are in a dither about it, and they are not happy with what is going on in the FBI investigation or are worried enough about it to go public in this way, through an ex-Director. My suspicion would be that AG Lynch (Clintonite) is blocking the strong action they want to see. This may be why Obama issued his adamant statements about "NO influence." (Tussle going on there, too?)

We, the voters, could simplify all this by California giving Bernie Sanders the nomination and then helping him to demolish Trump in the GE (which he will do handily). Then we won't have to worry about Clinton and her "baggage" any more.

[HereSince1628]

23. The power and prestige of intellcommunity rests on the control of information

Control of classified information gives the intelligence community huge leverage in presidential/national decisions. That's -real- global level power. Leaks threaten that. Leaks are hated and plugged. Leakers are hated and punished.

So yes, I agree with your suspicion, this is a public communication from the CIA to the FBI, that the CIA takes parts of this very seriously and is going to make noise if it's concerns are dismissed.

For all the various laws that HRC skirted, nothing would hold more interest to the intelligence community than a very public crackdown on leaks from the CIA... no matter who is involved. Indeed, the higher profile the person is, the better the public example is for that purpose.

So Hayden has an interest in pushing the FBI to pursue members of what can be described as an network of collusion (yes, implying intent) that leaked classified information from the CIA thru non-government civilians (one now deceased, but including a Clinton Foundation employee) and back into to HRCs email. Apparently with, at minimum, encouragement from her.

[peace13]

29. Yes, the rally attendees that the Clinton people mock.....

will be the feet on the ground for Bernie in the GE. We saw it with Obama. The machine is in motion. Clinton on the other hand, has nothing to work with and this is a fatal flaw.

[Ash_F]

20. This guy had a great comment on Trump too

[Peace Patriot]

22. Thanks! I went there and was looking at that one, too.

I'm curious about why a former NSA and CIA Director chose this venue, Tech Crunch, to make the statements about Clinton, which are damning, and then this about Trump and the dangers of his big fat mouth (for instance, saying that all Muslims hate us).

I don't have TV so I don't know if Hayden goes around being a "talking head" to news shows. Do you know? Or is this a unique appearance?

I was pretty amazed to see such a high upper muck in the spy business, even if an ex, saying the "original sin" of Clinton was setting up the private server in the first place. That makes HER responsible for the security of sensitive documents. She ordered the thing to be set up. And his certainty that China and others hacked it. Dare I use the word "explosive"? Aren't these statements explosive? And why this venue?

The Clinton one is May 11, 2016. Yesterday! Maybe this hasn't gotten around much yet?

[grasswire]

56. He does not go around being a talking head.

In answer to your question.

[Jitter65]

43. women haters all. nt

[NewImproved Deal]

21. Serious stuff. The Clinton Trolls can't just snark it away...

[link:|

[pdsimdars]

24. And this is what is so upsetting about all those vacuous Hillary supporters' comments

EVERY high level intelligence official I have heard, speaks in these dire terms. They are shocked at this.
And the response from Hillary and her supporters is. . . nothing to see here, move on. Ho-hum. . . etc.

NONSENSE. This is real and this is very problematic.

[peace13]

27. And it is nothing that Bernie supporters invented or wished on her.

These actions are of her own doing. They are a portfolio if her ethics! Not a pretty scene. I agree .....problematic for us all.

[Waiting For Everyman]

25. She had millions in Foundation/State graft to hide too.

It wasn't just thwarting FOIA. (And it isn't the first time the Clinton's have seen to it that the law was broken to foil FOIA; google Sandy Berger.)

There were at least three more reasons. One, to hide Bill's involvement in helping her do her work as SoS, which may have been extensive and could be why having her unsecured and unauthorized Blackberry was so important to her. Two, to hide her own private sources like Blumenthal, possibly amounting to running a private State Dept. behind Obama's back. The extent of the last two points are not certain, but this fourth one is and it was the big one...

She was confident the private server meant that no one would ever find out about the way both Clintons dovetailed State Dept. actions with Foundation donations (for payoffs and laundering) to facilitate some very big deals around the world, between combinations of: foreign governments, our government, donors, and their inner circle of friends.

(If it weren't for a fluke hacker getting into her secret aide Blumenthal's email, all of this would've remained hidden. And the hacker found Blumenthal, because as a Romanian he was following a Romanian woman pol who had a longtime crush on Colin Powell, who led to Petraeus, Bush and others, and through one of them to Blumenthal, then HRC.)

So the 6-figure speeches weren't the only source of millions for the Clintons.

And it wasn't done once, it was done a lot. It's part of the FBI investigation, and RICO has been brought up. If the FBI doesn't touch it, Congress will.

And Hillary's snottiness to Grassley a few weeks back probably didn't do her any good, but that's who she is.

This investigation is not partisan bullshit. It's big, ugly, and serious.

If she gets elected, there's no way she doesn't get impeached. This is all we will hear about until then and this is all that will get done. And next cycle, it will be a big handicap to run against.

It's a sucker bet risk, and the Dem party is taking it.

[yourpaljoey]

34. Excellent telling of the crux of the biscuit. The biggest scandal of this generation.

[grasswire]

58. the crust of the biscuit?

Joey, you crack me up.

[opiate69]

60. No... crux of the biscuit.

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080127104928AA9GkMc

[grasswire]

61. I know.

I was just tweaking Joey.

[opiate69]

62. Ah... my bad.. carry on lol

[grasswire]

57. thank you

Excellent. First mention I have seen here of RICO, but I certainly have thought of it throughout this denouement.

[Uncle Joe]

63. I agree with your analysis, Waiting For Everyman. n/t

[YouDig]

28. Michael Hayden, the new Hero of the Bernie campaign!

[leveymg]

36. In the end, we all have to rely upon the same basic patriotism and laws, regardless of ideology.

It is sad that so many still remain enthralled with someone like Hillary who demonstrably believes herself to be above both.

[bunnies]

37. Indeed. Bill Clinton never should have appointed him. nt

[randome]

30. Another premature email-gasm. You should wait a day or two between sessions.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font][hr]

[JoePhilly]

39. + 1

[notadmblnd]

33. This needs to stay up front and center here

so a great big giant kick for it.

[Sancho]

40. Some people here discount RW nuts...if he's your hero you should reconsider being on DU

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Hayden_(general)

On January 23, 2006, General Hayden participated in a news conference.[18] A YouTube video[19] was posted of Michael Hayden telling reporters at a press conference that "probable cause" is not required by the Fourth Amendment, indicating instead that the standard is whether the search or seizure is reasonable.


George W. Bush announces his nomination of Hayden as the next Director of the CIA as Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte looks on.
Hayden referred to people who believed that enhanced interrogation techniques used against CIA detainees have never yielded useful intelligence, as "interrogation deniers".[20]

Hayden authorized spying and human experimentation -- including the use of high-powered microwave weapons -- on American citizens to continue in the wake of the firing of Secretary of the Air Force Michael Wynne, according to one highly credentialed former NASA, Department of Defense, and CIA scientist. [Duncan, Robert, P., "Project: Soul Catcher, Vol. 2, Secrets of Cyber and Cybernetic Warfare Revealed, Higher Order Thinkers Publishing, Boise.]

Director of the Central Intelligence Agency[edit]

Michael Hayden speaking at the 2015 Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in National Harbor, Maryland on February 27, 2015.
On May 8, 2006, Hayden was nominated by President George W. Bush to be Director of the Central Intelligence Agency after the resignation of Porter J. Goss on May 5, 2006.[21] He was later confirmed on May 26, 2006 as Director, 78–15, by full U.S. Senate vote.[22]

Critics of the nomination and Hayden's attempts to increase domestic surveillance included Senator Dianne Feinstein who stated on May 11, 2006 that "I happen to believe we are on our way to a major constitutional confrontation on Fourth Amendment guarantees of unreasonable search and seizure".[23]

In 2007, Hayden lobbied to allow the CIA to conduct drone strikes purely on the behavior of ground vehicles, with no further evidence of connection to terrorism.[24]

In 2008 Hayden warned from the destabilizing consequences of Muslim migration to Europe that might raise the possibility of civil unrest.[25]

In 2013, after the P5+1 reached a nuclear agreement with Iran, Hayden said, "We have accepted Iranian uranium enrichment."[26]

[Segami]

44. kick

[Blue_Tires]

45. So... During the Snowald saga

Hayden could have said 2+2=4 and nobody here would have believed him...

But now all of a sudden his words are gospel... LOL

[AzDar]

46. Hayden is saying what most have known to be true from Day 1 ... THE MINUTE Hillary's Home-

Cooked Server went live, it was illegal... The hacking by Foreign Intelligence just underscores how
frightening her judgement seems to be.

[morningfog]

47. Ew. I won't even click to listen to that vile piece of shit. Hayden is evil incarnate.

[beedle]

53. Neither will I

But I don't need to know anything more than she used a private server in her basement for government (SoS) business.

If I, working in a regular company went to my boss and even asked for permission to run my own email server in my basement and use it for company business, there's an 80% chance I would be fired ... best case they would laugh in my face and never trust my judgment again with anything important ... if I were to actually set up an email server in my basement and use it for company business, AND then communicate on official company business though it with someone my boss explicitly forbid me to communicate with???? Jesus, I can't imagine how fired and sued I would be ... I'd even assume the company would strongly consider asking that I be charged criminally with theft and fraud.

There would be no need for hackers breaking in, or Russians or Chinese getting hold of my emails, or any other kind of speculation.

How Hillary fans can rationalize this as some kind of 'non-event' is mind numbing.

[felix_numinous]

50. Amazing how Clinton said Snowdon should face the consequences

for his leaks, and is such a fan of the Patriot Act--except when it applies to her. Her mention of a "Manhattan-like Project' for national security was creepy.

From Rolling Stone:

The questioning, instead, tilted heavily toward national security and the threat of ISIS. It was on this subject that Clinton issued a troubling call to arms for the nation's tech companies and government to join forces against encrypted private communications.

You might imagine that Clinton — of all people — would be sensitive to the liberty interests of hiding personal communications from prying eyes. This is the public servant, after all, who as secretary of state maintained a private email server — with the benefit to Clinton of being able to vet and delete her own communications before they became a permanent part of the public record.

In this context, it was troubling Saturday evening to hear Clinton's response to a question about the power of high technology to ensure privacy. Blasting "encrypted communication that no law enforcement agency can break into," Clinton said, "I would hope that, given the extraordinary capacities that the tech community has and the legitimate needs and questions from law enforcement, that there could be a Manhattan-like project — something that would bring the government and the tech communities together to see they're not adversaries, they've got to be partners."





Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/edward-snowden-clintons-call-for-a-manhattan-like-project-is-terrifying-20151220#ixzz48U1zHjyf
Follow us: @rollingstone on Twitter | RollingStone on Facebook

[AzDar]

52. ...

[CompanyFirstSergeant]

51. "This investigation is not partisan bullshit. It's big, ugly, and serious."

From post #25 above.

That about sums it up.

[felix_numinous]

54. Wow!! I just read post #25 again

missed that the first time.

[grasswire]

59. yeah, too bad that can't be pinned somewhere. nt

[ViseGrip]

64. Hill n Bill were running another 'state dept' behind Obama's back. That's how I see this.