FBI Director will be holding a Press Conference at 11AM EST today

a reply to: Gryphon66

nope...I keep trying to tell you there is no definition of "place of custody" just for the Espionage Act.... a place of custody is the place that meets the classified information protection guidelines that have been in place since like forever.

For the last time.. I will tell you again... If Hillary Clinton did not possess a type1 encryption device that was loaded with a current key of the proper classification, in this case top secret, (she did not) then Hillary Clinton was wrong and what she did was illegal.

Nothing what so ever to do with the Espionage Act...but you just refuse to comprehend that.

a reply to: Gryphon66

It was your source you failed to read so don't blame me for your slipshod methods.

Executive Orders cannot change established law. We know this because of the Executive orders scotus has thrown out issued by Obama. That mess aside -

Your EO has nothing to do with whats being discussed in terms of how classified info is handled. Even your linked source says this by the part I highlighted and the reference to the National Security act of 1947 and 50 USC Chapter 44, which you apparently did not read as it contradicts what you are trying to claim.

You are once again derailing the thread with information that is not relevant to whats being discussed.


I urge people to double check and verify what you post. You intentionally ignore facts / laws you don't understand and you make false claims about the law and its application.

So, what do we know?

Self-declared forum experts keep posting rather obvious mistakes, and I see no reason to continue to try to educate the uneducable, particularly when gross ignorance is so clearly matched with blind partisanship.

As to the basis for classified material in the United States, this stuff is really not hard to understand:

The United States government classification system is established under Executive Order 13526, the latest in a long series of executive orders on the topic.

So, those who claim that the Chief Executive doesn't have anything to do with the operation of the Executive Branch are seen for the ... gross negligence of the facts, once again:

Issued by President Barack Obama in 2009, Executive Order 13526 replaced earlier executive orders on the topic and modified the regulations codified to 32 C.F.R. 2001. It lays out the system of classification, declassification, and handling of national security information generated by the U.S. government and its employees and contractors, as well as information received from other governments

LInk to EO 13526 in the Federal Register

Also referenced: 32 CFR 2001

The idea that the President of the United States is not the primary source of the directives that cover the operation of all aspects of the Federal Government including the State Department is pathetically ignorant. Basic Civics 101.

The portion relevant both to the overall concern in this thread (the Comey announcement that no recommendation would be made for indictment of Clinton) and specifically, in light of the rather blatant subterfuge in dredging up the Espionage Act aka 18 USC 793 and particularly therein section (f).

There has been an attempt to obfuscate the fact that EO 13526 serves as the current basis for the classification framework of the United States government by the usual cut-and-paste tactics that actually have no relevance to the topic at hand.

For example; regarding the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 :

This Act is the fundamental U.S. law on both the civilian and the military uses of nuclear materials. On the civilian side, it provides for both the development and the regulation of the uses of nuclear materials and facilities in the United States, declaring the policy that "the development, use, and control of atomic energy shall be directed so as to promote world peace, improve the general welfare, increase the standard of living, and strengthen free competition in private enterprise." The Act requires that civilian uses of nuclear materials and facilities be licensed, and it empowers the NRC to establish by rule or order, and to enforce, such standards to govern these uses as "the Commission may deem necessary or desirable in order to protect health and safety and minimize danger to life or property."

Regarding the National Security Act of 1947

The National Security Act of 1947 was a major restructuring of the United States government's military and intelligence agencies following World War II. The majority of the provisions of the Act took effect on September 18, 1947, the day after the Senate confirmed James Forrestal as the first Secretary of Defense. His power was initially limited and it was difficult for him to exercise the authority to make his office effective. This was later changed in the amendment to the act in 1949, creating what was to be the Department of Defense. The Act merged the Department of War (renamed as the Department of the Army) and the Department of the Navy into the National Military Establishment (NME), headed by the Secretary of Defense. It also created the Department of the Air Force, which separated the Army Air Forces into its own service. Initially, each of the three service secretaries maintained quasi-cabinet status, but the act was amended on August 10, 1949, to ensure their subordination to the Secretary of Defense. At the same time, the NME was renamed as the Department of Defense. The purpose was to unify the Army, Navy, and Air Force into a federated structure. Aside from the military reorganization, the act established the National Security Council, a central place of coordination for national security policy in the executive branch, and the Central Intelligence Agency, the U.S.'s first peacetime intelligence agency. The council's function was to advise the president on domestic, foreign, and military policies, and to ensure cooperation between the various military and intelligence agencies.

Essentially, the National Security Act set up the different departments of the Executive Branch and associated Federal Agencies (Department of Defense, CIA, etc.)

Neither of these pieces of legislation negate or otherwise diminish the facts presented herein or in this discussion.

I encourage anyone interested here to utilize these links and references and make your own determination of the facts.

a reply to: Gryphon66

"There has been an attempt to obfuscate the fact that EO 13526 serves as the current basis for the classification framework of the United States government by the usual cut-and-paste tactics that actually have no relevance to the topic at hand."

The only one obfuscating around here is you.

The EO 13526 does serve as the current basis for the classification framework. But the EO is only a basic guideline that states what may be classified, why it may be classified, how long it may be classified, what level of classification information is assigned, etc. But it does not serve as the basis of the requirements set forth for safeguarding of that classified information.

Those guidelines have been derived over the years and are enforced by NSA.

Like I said before...

Point out to me in EO 13526 exactly where it states what the specific physical requirements are to build a SCIF to house Secret and Top Secret information?

Where does it state what type 1 encryption devices are authorized?

Where does it state that there must be two person integrity when dealing with TS material?

And why on God's green earth does everybody and their mother need to get approval from NSA before they can ever receive classified information if the NSA doesn't play a significant part in the classified information program?

Go ahead. Knock your self out. Good grief.

You ever bothered to look at NSA's website?

www.nsa.gov...

Saves lives

Defends vital networks (like Siprnet, Niprnet and NSAnet)

Advances U.S. goals and alliances

Protects privacy rights

Is a unique asset

We are well-positioned to carry out our missions because NSA is both a member of the Defense Department and an Intelligence Community agency. U.S. leaders, policymakers, war fighters, law enforcement agencies and our Intelligence Community partners face some of the gravest national security challenges in U.S. history. To overcome the very real threats to our country, national decision makers: Need to know what our adversaries are doing and what their capabilities are so they can make decisions and plans, and execute policies and operations; Need to be able to communicate and exchange information securely, so that our adversaries can't undermine our plans; Must be able to outmaneuver those who would do us harm in cyberspace. NSA is the world leader in cryptology - the art and science of making and breaking codes. It is this expertise- from our people and technology- that allows us to accomplish the goals of discovering adversaries' secrets, protecting U.S. secrets, and outmaneuvering our adversaries in cyberspace while at the same time protecting the privacy rights of the American people.

The Information Assurance (IA) mission at the National Security Agency (NSA) serves a role unlike that of any other U.S. Government entity. National Security Directive (NSD) 42 authorizes NSA to secure National Security Systems, which includes systems that handle classified information or are otherwise critical to military or intelligence activities. IA has a pivotal leadership role in performing this responsibility, and partners with government, industry, and academia to execute the IA mission.

The NSA has the sole responsibility for the physical and digital security and safeguarding of classified information. They write the rules. Hillary broke every single one of them. Period.

If that ain't enough... straight from the horses mouth.... National Security Directive 42:

The Director, National Security Agency, is designated the National Manager for National Security Telecommunications and Information Systems Security and is responsible to the Secretary of Defense as Executive Agent for carrying out the foregoing responsibilities. In fulfilling these responsibilities the National Manager shall:

a. Examine U.S. Government national security systems and evaluate their vulnerability to foreign interception and exploitation. Any such activities, including those involving monitoring of official telecommunications, shall be conducted in strict compliance with law, Executive Order and implementing procedures, and applicable Presidential directive. No monitoring shall be performed without advising the heads of the agencies, departments, or services concerned;

b. Act as the U.S. Government focal point for cryptography, telecommunications systems security, and information systems security for national security systems;

c. Conduct, approve, or endorse research and development of techniques and equipment to secure national security systems;

d. Review and approve all standards, techniques, systems, and equipment related to the security of national security systems;

a reply to: Gryphon66

Apparently you failed to read and or understand what it is you are looking at.

From your source - EO 13526

PART 4—SAFEGUARDING
Sec. 4.1.
General Restrictions on Access.
(a) A person may have access to classified information provided that:
(1) a favorable determination of eligibility for access has been made by
an agency head or the agency head’s designee;
(2) the person has signed an approved nondisclosure agreement; and
(3) the person has a need-to-know the information.

(b) Every person who has met the standards for access to classified information in paragraph (a) of this section shall receive contemporaneous training on the proper safeguarding of classified information and on the criminal, civil, and administrative sanctions that may be imposed on an individual who fails to protect classified information from unauthorized disclosure.

(c) An official or employee leaving agency service may not remove classi­fied information from the agency’s control or direct that information be declassified in order to remove it from agency control.
(d) Classified information may not be removed from official premises without proper authorization.
(e) Persons authorized to disseminate classified information outside the executive branch shall ensure the protection of the information in a manner equivalent to that provided within the executive branch.
(f) Consistent with law, executive orders, directives, and regulations, an agency head or senior agency official or, with respect to the Intelligence Community, the Director of National Intelligence, shall establish uniform procedures to ensure that automated information systems, including networks and telecommunications systems, that collect, create, communicate, compute, disseminate, process, or store classified information:
(1) prevent access by unauthorized persons;
(2) ensure the integrity of the information; and
VerDate Nov2008 17:28 Jan 04, 2010 Jkt 220001 PO 00000 Frm 00017 Fmt 4705 Sfmt 4790 E:FRFM�5JAE0.SGM 05JAE0
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with MISCELLANEOUS
721
Federal Register
/ Vol. 75, No. 2 / Tuesday, January 5, 2010 / Presidential Documents
(3) to the maximum extent practicable, use:
(A) common information technology standards, protocols, and interfaces
that maximize the availability of, and access to, the information in a
form and manner that facilitates its authorized use; and
(B) standardized electronic formats to maximize the accessibility of infor­
mation to persons who meet the criteria set forth in section 4.1(a) of
this order.
(g) Consistent with law, executive orders, directives, and regulations, each
agency head or senior agency official, or with respect to the Intelligence
Community, the Director of National Intelligence, shall establish controls
to ensure that classified information is used, processed, stored, reproduced,
transmitted, and destroyed under conditions that provide adequate protection
and prevent access by unauthorized persons.
(h) Consistent with directives issued pursuant to this order, an agency
shall safeguard foreign government information under standards that provide
a degree of protection at least equivalent to that required by the government
or international organization of governments that furnished the information.
When adequate to achieve equivalency, these standards may be less restrictive
than the safeguarding standards that ordinarily apply to U.S. ‘‘Confidential’’
information, including modified handling and transmission and allowing
access to individuals with a need-to-know who have not otherwise been
cleared for access to classified information or executed an approved non­
disclosure agreement.
(i)(1) Classified information originating in one agency may be disseminated
to another agency or U.S. entity by any agency to which it has been made
available without the consent of the originating agency, as long as the
criteria for access under section 4.1(a) of this order are met, unless the
originating agency has determined that prior authorization is required for
such dissemination and has marked or indicated such requirement on the
medium containing the classified information in accordance with imple­
menting directives issued pursuant to this order.

(2) Classified information originating in one agency may be disseminated
by any other agency to which it has been made available to a foreign
government in accordance with statute, this order, directives implementing
this order, direction of the President, or with the consent of the originating
agency. For the purposes of this section, ‘‘foreign government’’ includes
any element of a foreign government, or an international organization
of governments, or any element thereof.

(3) Documents created prior to the effective date of this order shall not
be disseminated outside any other agency to which they have been made
available without the consent of the originating agency. An agency head
or senior agency official may waive this requirement for specific informa­
tion that originated within that agency.

(4) For purposes of this section, the Department of Defense shall be consid­
ered one agency, except that any dissemination of information regarding
intelligence sources, methods, or activities shall be consistent with direc­
tives issued pursuant tosection 6.2(b) of this order.

(5) Prior consent of the originating agency is not required when referring
records for declassification review that contain information originating
in more than one agency.

Cont -

edit on 7-7-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

From section 5.4

Sec. 5.4.
General Responsibilities.
Heads of agencies that originate or handle
classified information shall:
(c) ensure that agency records systems are designed and maintained to
optimize the appropriate sharing and safeguarding of classified information,
and to facilitate its declassification under the terms of this order when
it no longer meets the standards for continued classification; and

As I said you should learn about the topic and you should know what you are talking about when you make a claim that your own source debunks.

However what you are talking about is not relevant to Clinton so im not sure of why you brought this up. If your going on about the classification topic your source also does not support your argument.

Explain / point out in your source to us the difference between classified information and how classified information is stored. In addition to whom or what agency is responsible for safeguarding classified information including storage and the criteria established for storage.

Let me help you - You willl notice this sentence is reoccurring in your source -

consistent with law, executive orders, directives, and regulations,

You must learn what your talking about instead of randomly grasping at straws and claiming it means something it doesn't.

It has nothing to do with what RickinVa is talking about.

originally posted by: RickinVa
a reply to: Gryphon66

nope...I keep trying to tell you there is no definition of "place of custody" just for the Espionage Act.... a place of custody is the place that meets the classified information protection guidelines that have been in place since like forever.

For the last time.. I will tell you again... If Hillary Clinton did not possess a type1 encryption device that was loaded with a current key of the proper classification, in this case top secret, (she did not) then Hillary Clinton was wrong and what she did was illegal.

Nothing what so ever to do with the Espionage Act...but you just refuse to comprehend that.

They do. They refuse to admit it. Like she refused to admit it. Thanks for beating your head against the stone wall of denial. It brings out the minions and everyone can see who they are.

Hillary had plenty of back and forth emails with Sydney Blumenthal that contained classified information.

Hillary should have reported that fact to the FBI when she received the first email that contained classified info from Blumenthal, because he had no security clearance.
She did not do that.
She is guilty of crimes that were not even mentioned by the FBI Director.
Any reporter worth their salt should be asking him why that was not addressed, especially when these things were available to be seen by the public after the Guccifer releases.

originally posted by: butcherguy
Hillary had plenty of back and forth emails with Sydney Blumenthal that contained classified information.

Hillary should have reported that fact to the FBI ...

Because the FBI did not have the clearance to know about the classified information, or to even know that classified information was being transmitted or received. All of that was classified. Therefore she could not reveal these things without violating the classification. The fact that she violated classified protocols, was itself being classified, so as not to compound the classification problem.

originally posted by: AMPTAH

originally posted by: butcherguy
Hillary had plenty of back and forth emails with Sydney Blumenthal that contained classified information.

Hillary should have reported that fact to the FBI ...

Because the FBI did not have the clearance to know about the classified information, or to even know that classified information was being transmitted or received. All of that was classified. Therefore she could not reveal these things without violating the classification. The fact that she violated classified protocols, was itself being classified, so as not to compound the classification problem.

So you are saying that it would have been impossible for Hillary to call the FBI and tell them that she was receiving classified information from a person that has no security clearance? Just to cover her own butt (what a normal person would do)?
Or that the FBI could not have done anything about it if she did report it???

WHO do you think investigates cases of spying?

It is the FBI.

If what you are saying is true there could never have been any cases of spies being caught in the US in the past.

originally posted by: butcherguy

It is the FBI.

If what you are saying is true there could never have been any cases of spies being caught in the US in the past.

There are different levels of classification.

For example, The FBI doesn't know anything about Area 51.

That area is beyond the FBI jurisdiction.

duplicate post

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: Indigo5

20 bucks he is worth 20 billion in 2018...and you get a star for that

I am in on that bet...along with income verification...Forbes, tax returns or something similar...not taking Donalds word for it.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: matafuchs
a reply to: Indigo5

20 bucks he is worth 20 billion in 2018...and you get a star for that

I'll take some of that virtual action.

I know the guy is a personal hero of yours ... but can't you look at the signs?

Financing his own campaign, not financing, asking for donors, even sending donations slips to foreign lawmakers ...

He's probably leveraging a personal fortune of about 100 million, if that.

His list of assets for the FEC just requires (less than informative) ranges... Greater than and less than with 50k and 100k etc.

It is not difficult to do self assessment of his land values on buildings and declare real estate worth Billions. He has admitted in court in the past his net worth changes depending on his "mood".

What does not vary though is mortgage debt. If you own 10 buildings and claim their worth at 1B, pay loan payments on those buildings to the bank annually for 500 Million and take in rent payments of 400 Million....you can be losing 100M per year regardless of what you declare the buildings worth at...and you can pretty much claim the building is worth anything. The difference between tax assessments on Trumps buildings and what he claims they are worth (if he was to sell them) is severe....and if he starts to miss payments the banks will come after him.

Looking at his liabilities statement...at bare bones, most conservative estimates, he has over 300 Million in outstanding mortgage debt loans he is making payments on...and that is calculated with bare minimum because the disclosure statement only goes up to 50M...he has 5 mortgages that are listed as "Greater than 50 Million"...the highest category the disclosure form has...which means that loan could be 50M or it could be 1B.

I think he is underwater on his assets...And he was relying on Celebrity Apprentice, Licensing his name to development projects etc. to squeak by, along with tapping into his charity foundation funds as needed. With his name brand being tarnished and no one licensing his name anymore...the TV deals gone etc. I think he is sliding toward bankruptcy fast...that is why he had to be shamed into actually distributing the Vets charity funds.

You can get clues in his assets and liabilities disclosure form
online.wsj.com...

originally posted by: AMPTAH

originally posted by: Indigo5

I think he only plays a Billionaire on TV.

This is why he wont release his tax returns...this is why the city of NY issues him a tax break for those making less than 500k annually.

That's just a game played by all smart businessmen. To pay the least tax, you've got to arrange your affairs so that you have the minimum income possible.

The vast majority of people running for President over the past 50 years have been "smart businessmen" and they have all released their tax returns. His base would cheer the fact that he found ways to avoid paying the government taxes and trump himself has bragged he avoids doing so..He is not hiding smart tax avoidance strategy..

originally posted by: butcherguy
Hillary had plenty of back and forth emails with Sydney Blumenthal that contained classified information.

Hillary should have reported that fact to the FBI when she received the first email that contained classified info from Blumenthal, because he had no security clearance.

First off - you are right on the other point. The FBI investigates leaks..and no they don't need special clearance to do so...they can and do dance around content during those investigations and liaisons from relevant agencies like CIA, NSA etc. can help them with the evidence trail without disclosing the exact classified content if for some unusual reason it is classified above the FBI investigators clearance. But more often, spy hunters in the FBI have very high clearance.

Secondly on the Blumenthal email and him not having security clearnace...Multiple sources...

As I explained in this column in January, one of the most controversial of Ms. Clinton’s emails released by the State Department under judicial order was one sent on June 8, 2011, to the Secretary of State by Sidney Blumenthal, Ms. Clinton’s unsavory friend and confidant who was running a private intelligence service for Ms. Clinton.

This email contains an amazingly detailed assessment of events in Sudan, specifically a coup being plotted by top generals in that war-torn country. Mr. Blumenthal’s information came from a top-ranking source with direct access to Sudan’s top military and intelligence officials, and recounted a high-level meeting that had taken place only 24 hours before.

To anybody familiar with intelligence reporting, this unmistakably signals intelligence, termed SIGINT in the trade.

observer.com...

Question...A PRIVATE intelligence service finds out inside information about a foreign government and potential coup and communicates the same to Secretary Clinton.

Is it classified information? YES...very much so in the eyes of CIA and NSA...they either had the info already and considered it classified. Or they didn't have it, but they would want it classified immediately.

But if Blumenthal, a private citizen running a private intelligence company finds the information on his own and gives Hillary a heads up...Did that information originate with classified sources?

If private citizen joe blow in Sudan finds something out through non us gov means and gives the Sec of State a heads up...yes they are transmitting info that might be considered classified by CIA, but how would they know? they didn't get it from CIA or any US source, they discovered it on their own.

originally posted by: Indigo5

The vast majority of people running for President over the past 50 years have been "smart businessmen" and they have all released their tax returns.

I think he is the first billionaire.

The tax strategy becomes more important the higher your wealth.

For some things, if you have much less, the savings you get with tax postponing may be not worth the hassle.

You can do a simple calculation to see why.

For example, say you have $1 to invest. The annual rate of return on your investments is 8%. And you decide to invest for a term of 10 years.

Consider the two cases:
A) your investment brings in income every year and you pay 50% tax on that to the gov.
B) your investment automatically reinvests every year without income and you pay 50% tax in the final year only.

Case A: AFTER TAX PROFIT = [$1 x (1 + 0.08 x 1/2)^10 - $1] = $0.4802
Case B: AFTER TAX PROFIT = [$1 x (1 + 0.08 x 1)^10 - $1] x 1/2 = $0.5795

So, for every $1 you invest, you gain: $0.5795 - $0.4802 = $0.0992

If you put $1 billion into this strategy, you get an extra $99 million dollars by just deferring the tax. Over the ten year period, that amounts to about $10 million extra wealth accumulation per year. So, you'd lose that $10 million per year, by taking in your returns as "income".

If you only had $1 million to start with however, then that gain becomes $10/1000 million = $10 thousand dollars per year, not really worth the effort.

And the gain for the billionaire is actually must bigger than this because "capital gains tax rate" is much less than the "income tax rate". But, this simple example gives you the basic picture, of why The Donald always defers his taxes.

Makes lots of sense for billionaires.

She's not off the hook. Congress likely will request the FBI to investigate Clinton for lying to Congress / perjury.

originally posted by: Xcathdra
She's not off the hook. Congress likely will request the FBI to investigate Clinton for lying to Congress / perjury.

Man, you guys really don't get it. She is off the hook, from a legal point of view. Her next appointment with judgment is in the general elections. The people get to vote. Will it be Hillary? Or, Trump?

This was all a joke. One of the senators pointed out that all the lawmakers have their own private servers and are exempt from this classified protocol law. Hillary Clinton was a senator before becoming Secretary of State, and as senator she was previously exempt also. When she became Secretary of State, she lost that exemption, but being Hillary, just continued on in her accustomed way, probably even forgetting she was no longer exempt. So, what prosecutor is going to charge her for doing what she used to do legally anyway, just because she changed jobs.

a reply to: AMPTAH

It is far from over... there are numerous civil lawsuits which have to work their way through the court system.

The Judicial Watch lawsuit is only one of many.

"One of the senators pointed out that all the lawmakers have their own private servers and are exempt from this classified protocol law."

No one is exempt from the rules and regulations set forth by the National Security Agency as mandated unless they specifically have a waiver in writing from the NSA. Anybody that says different is just blowing smoke.