Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
90. That was before 1/22 when the FBI confirmed there were TS/SAP classified materials on the server
Sat Mar 26, 2016, 04:12 PM
Mar 2016

Too many people assume too much about the President's omniscience at any given moment about matters not immediately before him. Note, he hasn't repeated that statement. That decision is now for the FBI Director, and then the AG. In the end, come January 22, we will know what Obama really thinks, and whether like Bill Clinton in the case of CIA Director John Deutch, he decides to issue a pardon.

Most people who have signed a security agreement know what the consequences would be if they, too, decided to host classified information on a private server. They know she broke the law. Here are the thoughts of one of them:

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/presidential-campaign/266477-the-smoking-gun

Special Access Programs (SAP) is a game changer. It is now undeniably clear that the results of the FBI investigation will be the end of one of two things: Hillary’s bid for the White House or the legitimacy of the FBI—at least when it comes to prosecuting cases on the mishandling of classified material.

. . .

As more information from Hillary Clinton’s server has been made available, it is clear that the contents of the server contained Imagery Intelligence (IMINT), Human Intelligence (HUMINT), and Signal Intelligence (SIGINT). Understanding that much of the information has been retroactively classified, there are a few facts that are tough to grasp—at least from the perspective of an intelligence practitioner.

First, when imagery that is classified SECRET//NOFORN (no foreign national) is viewed, regardless of the absence of classification markings, it is distinctly evident. Second, any documents that contain or reference HUMINT is always classified SECRET, and if specific names of sources or handlers are mentioned, they are at a minimum SECRET//NOFORN. Third, SIGINT is always classified at the TS level. It’s not uncommon for some SI to be downgraded and shared over SECRET mediums, however, it is highly unlikely that a Secretary of State would receive downgraded intelligence. Finally, SAP intelligence has been discovered on Clinton’s private server, and many are now calling this the smoking gun. SAP is a specialized management system of additional security controls designed to protect SAR or Special Access Required. SAR has to do with extremely perishable operational methods and capabilities, and only selected individuals who are “read on” or “indoctrinated” are permitted access to these programs. The mishandling of SAP can cause catastrophic damage to current collection methods, techniques and personnel.

In other words, if you have worked with classified material for more than a day, it seems highly implausible that someone could receive any of the aforementioned over an un-secure medium without alarm bells sounding. However, reading about a Special Access Program on an unclassified device would make anyone even remotely familiar with intelligence mess their pantsuit.


Offs please don't even try to say she didn't know. onecaliberal Mar 2016 #1
She knew, and she signed a security agreement that day where the penalties were laid out. Linked leveymg Mar 2016 #13
Not only did she know AgerolanAmerican Mar 2016 #38
As a Private in the US Army I had to sign off on that breifing FreakinDJ Mar 2016 #79
Yes, so you know what would happen to you if you ran classified info on your own server leveymg Mar 2016 #84
Special Treatment for Hillary FreakinDJ Mar 2016 #85
But, isn't she the one who can "work with the other side?" leveymg Mar 2016 #87
If she's claiming to be the most ready for the Oval Office, Jarqui Mar 2016 #2
She's not using lack of training as an excuse. She has nothing to excuse. pnwmom Mar 2016 #4
Sorry, no -- there are standards... she doesn't get to make them up at her own whim. JudyM Mar 2016 #14
By law, the agency head gets to ESTABLISH standards for his or her own agency. pnwmom Mar 2016 #15
By law, there are standard definitions - she can adjust particulars, but the idea that she can say JudyM Mar 2016 #17
She never sent classified documents through her server. She used the classified system pnwmom Mar 2016 #18
If she always used it, we wouldn't know she relied on Sid Blumenthal cprise Mar 2016 #63
I do not agree with this whatsoever Jarqui Mar 2016 #25
The SoS was supposed to send classified email on the separate, classified system. pnwmom Mar 2016 #27
Ok, please produce Hillary's .gov email address that received these Jarqui Mar 2016 #37
You want me to produce her CLASSIFIED address? pnwmom Mar 2016 #42
Nope. What I am citing was an exchange of testimony in the House Jarqui Mar 2016 #44
^^ BOOM ^^ revbones Mar 2016 #55
Bookmarking this - TY! n/t ebayfool Mar 2016 #82
Nothing will ever come of any of this. Nothing. Laser102 Mar 2016 #57
I'm suspect CIA Director Deutsch and General Petraeus felt similarly or they Jarqui Mar 2016 #64
FREE BEACON? Really? MADem Mar 2016 #9
Sorry, I simply do not subscribe to shoot the messenger. I never will. Jarqui Mar 2016 #21
Well, maybe you should follow the idea of MADem Mar 2016 #22
Once again, you're wrong. Jarqui Mar 2016 #35
No, I'm not. You were looking for anything to "prove" your assertion. MADem Mar 2016 #36
Here's a problem with this reasoning: Jarqui Mar 2016 #43
That is party-hack logic cprise Mar 2016 #54
His two links said the same thing--the 2nd one was from the wingnut server. MADem Mar 2016 #56
Finding a govt document on Google is 'the company you keep' cprise Mar 2016 #58
When you have a choice of sources and you "choose" Free Beacon my thought is that this is where MADem Mar 2016 #60
She wasn't some "senior staffer" -- she was agency head. As such, Federal law makes her pnwmom Mar 2016 #3
This is the absolute truth. She is the most senior cabinet official. MADem Mar 2016 #10
But much of the really sensitive classified material found did not originate at State Yo_Mama Mar 2016 #47
grasping for the life preserver rtracey Mar 2016 #5
If this is true that . . Major Hogwash Mar 2016 #6
Why? She was the head of the agency. She was the one who determined pnwmom Mar 2016 #8
Classified info arises from any departments, and she had to follow rules on that info Yo_Mama Mar 2016 #48
Right. And handling that is simple, too. Classified documents from other departments pnwmom Mar 2016 #49
What is the "classified system" you refer to? snagglepuss Mar 2016 #80
L. O. L~! MADem Mar 2016 #7
I had to do it annually as a lowly government contractor. bluedigger Mar 2016 #11
Right. Because you were a lowly govt. contractor. She was the Agency Head, pnwmom Mar 2016 #19
A good leader doesn't ask their subordinates to do anything they aren't willing to do. bluedigger Mar 2016 #20
Nonsense. She had some duties that were HERS and not theirs. pnwmom Mar 2016 #50
ONLY FOR THEIR OWN INFORMATION. Get it? Yo_Mama Mar 2016 #52
Prove that with something other than RW hysteria based on rumors pnwmom Mar 2016 #53
And if you were a lowly enlisted member of the military, or even a senior officer, MADem Mar 2016 #23
Ohhhh NO,,, EMAILS,,,,, Oh the horror of it all!,,Drink! Cryptoad Mar 2016 #12
What a bullshit story man of few w Mar 2016 #26
I think she had security clearance as a senator too, so MGKrebs Mar 2016 #16
She got a classified material control brief as FLOTUS, too. MADem Mar 2016 #24
This is a GOP story, period. This story exists to destroy Hillary, period. Jackie Wilson Said Mar 2016 #28
Of COURSE it is--that's why the "proof" comes from The FREE BEACON. MADem Mar 2016 #61
But....She's so experienced monicaangela Mar 2016 #29
She's way more experienced than Bernie, for goddamned sure. Darb Mar 2016 #31
Bwahahahahahahahahaha monicaangela Mar 2016 #32
Lots of people laugh at the truth. Darb Mar 2016 #40
Experience? monicaangela Mar 2016 #65
She is more expeerienced. Happy? Darb Mar 2016 #66
LOL! monicaangela Mar 2016 #67
He a nobody, period. Darb Mar 2016 #70
And yet he's giving the person monicaangela Mar 2016 #72
He's getting beat soundly, except in Darb Mar 2016 #74
Okay Darb monicaangela Mar 2016 #76
Have a nice day. Darb Mar 2016 #77
I'm trying to think of someone else who served in the Senate and went on MGKrebs Mar 2016 #98
And there you go with the Darb Mar 2016 #71
My points are my points monicaangela Mar 2016 #73
Whatever you say. Darb Mar 2016 #75
I think it is more appropriate Fairgo Mar 2016 #101
I trust Bernie. Hillary - not at all. 840high Mar 2016 #45
Good for you. Darb Mar 2016 #59
This ought to rile up the teabaggers. Darb Mar 2016 #30
it's sad to see dems salivating over the hounding of the dem front runner saturnsring Mar 2016 #33
Good grief. She didn't know better? farleftlib Mar 2016 #34
And this is going to be her excuse? SoapBox Mar 2016 #39
She was a lawyer, and had been first lady and a senator. She KNEW her emails were public Zira Mar 2016 #41
.+1 840high Mar 2016 #46
She was a lawyer and knew the law. So did Obama's Department of Justice pnwmom Mar 2016 #51
+1,000! nt MADem Mar 2016 #62
Correct creon Mar 2016 #68
The USDOJ has made no such determination. That's an Oped from last September. leveymg Mar 2016 #99
There were no laws broken. creon Mar 2016 #69
Not so sure about that... MGKrebs Mar 2016 #100
makes sense. creon Mar 2016 #122
Seems we spend way too much time hearing that said about the Clintons. n/t winter is coming Mar 2016 #107
That is as may be creon Mar 2016 #121
As the article said-this is sure to be red meat for her critics. YUP--the Sanders riversedge Mar 2016 #78
What this says to me is that compliance with the Department's own rules was unimportant to her. JudyM Mar 2016 #81
President Obama knew and didn't object. pnwmom Mar 2016 #86
Obama didn't ok it - he just gave her enough rope to hang herself. leveymg Mar 2016 #88
Obama repeatedly said her use of the server did not pose a national security problem. pnwmom Mar 2016 #89
That was before 1/22 when the FBI confirmed there were TS/SAP classified materials on the server leveymg Mar 2016 #90
The FBI has never confirmed there were documents classified AT THAT TIME pnwmom Mar 2016 #91
There are no TS/SAP documents on the server - the information was stripped out of other agency docs leveymg Mar 2016 #93
You are quoting from a hit piece by a guy who calls Liz Warren "Fauxcahauntus." pnwmom Mar 2016 #94
No, you are misinformed. the source for that is CBS News leveymg Mar 2016 #95
And, if you don't like CBS News, here's the 1/9/16 report in The NYT leveymg Mar 2016 #96
As the State Department Head, Hillary had the authority pnwmom Mar 2016 #103
That is simply one example of many how classified docs "bleed" leveymg Mar 2016 #108
There was no law that required she use her .gov account for non-classified govt. emails. pnwmom Mar 2016 #114
That was a DOS regulation that changed. It has been a crime since 1917 to mishandle leveymg Mar 2016 #116
She didn't mishandle it, unlike Colin Powell who destroyed millions of emails. pnwmom Mar 2016 #118
So you are disavowing your own post? This is the one I was responding to: pnwmom Mar 2016 #102
I don't know what you're getting at, but you"re full of shit. leveymg Mar 2016 #109
Are you having trouble reading your own post, displaying the writings pnwmom Mar 2016 #119
Ignorantia juris non excusat LiberalElite Mar 2016 #83
The Justice Department said she didn't violate the law. n/t pnwmom Mar 2016 #92
Link? Or are you just posting falsies today. leveymg Mar 2016 #97
You're the one who specializes in posting RW falsies. pnwmom Mar 2016 #104
That's a falsie from last Sept. Kinda hoped you had fresh leveymg Mar 2016 #105
See my response earlier. Nothing has changed. There is still nothing pnwmom Mar 2016 #106
You can hold your breath and stamp your feet all you want. leveymg Mar 2016 #110
You can post Rethug rumors all you want. It doesn't matter where you get this stuff, pnwmom Mar 2016 #111
There has to be a germ of truth for disinformation to work. Yours are completely leveymg Mar 2016 #112
Disinformation doesn't require a germ of truth. For example, the Salem Witch trials. pnwmom Mar 2016 #113
The Salem Witch trials wasn't disinformation. It was mass hysteria. leveymg Mar 2016 #115
The Salem Witch trials was disinformation promoting mass hysteria, pnwmom Mar 2016 #117
But EXPERIENCE. dchill Mar 2016 #120
Apparently Hillary's securuty training didn't take. cpwm17 Mar 2016 #123
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Records show Clinton rece...»Reply #90