Breaking: ‘Top Secret’ emails found on Clinton Server

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: IAMTAT

So six years ago she borrowed this book from a staffer?

Send—the classic guide to email for office and home—has become indispensable for readers navigating the impersonal, and at times overwhelming, world of electronic communication. Filled with real-life email success (and horror) stories and a wealth of useful and entertaining examples, Send dissects all the major minefields and pitfalls of email. It provides clear rules for constructing effective emails, for handheld etiquette, for handling the “emotional email,” and for navigating all of today’s hot-button issues. It offers essential strategies to help you both better manage the ever-increasing number of emails you receive and improve the ones you send. Send is now more than ever the essential book about email for businesspeople and professionals everywhere.

www.amazon.com...

Not for nothing...but do you guys ever wonder about your scandal meter? What you consider evidence?

Do you ever apply it in a non-partisan way?

Yes, THAT's the Amazon page of book Hillary requested. Thanks for posting.
I wonder if Hillary posted a review for it.

She had to borrow it.... that's when her and Bill were so, so poor.... living in their hovel.

Yah...Maybe she even has a library card? Now that would be a Scandal!!

Nah, it should be ludicrous that anyone would believe and/or vote for this very wealthy woman that tried to purvey the notion that her and her former POTUS husband were poor after they left the White House.

Yet there they are out there... ready to put 'a woman in the White House'.

Migrating is different than removing and destroying hard drives, and replacing them with new blank hard drives.

The servers were BLANK, not MIGRATED.

All I know is that the US gov needs some better email admins, or maybe this and the IRS debacle are why they use morons.

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: IAMTAT

So six years ago she borrowed this book from a staffer?

Send—the classic guide to email for office and home—has become indispensable for readers navigating the impersonal, and at times overwhelming, world of electronic communication. Filled with real-life email success (and horror) stories and a wealth of useful and entertaining examples, Send dissects all the major minefields and pitfalls of email. It provides clear rules for constructing effective emails, for handheld etiquette, for handling the “emotional email,” and for navigating all of today’s hot-button issues. It offers essential strategies to help you both better manage the ever-increasing number of emails you receive and improve the ones you send. Send is now more than ever the essential book about email for businesspeople and professionals everywhere.

www.amazon.com...

Not for nothing...but do you guys ever wonder about your scandal meter? What you consider evidence?

Do you ever apply it in a non-partisan way?

Yes, THAT's the Amazon page of book Hillary requested. Thanks for posting.
I wonder if Hillary posted a review for it.

She had to borrow it.... that's when her and Bill were so, so poor.... living in their hovel.

Yah...Maybe she even has a library card? Now that would be a Scandal!!

Nah, it should be ludicrous that anyone would believe and/or vote for this very wealthy woman that tried to purvey the notion that her and her former POTUS husband were poor after they left the White House.

Yet there they are out there... ready to put 'a woman in the White House'.

Maybe start an OP on that opinion? And cite the fact that she borrowed a book in 6 years ago or whatever?

I am just straightening out the facts for those who care about such things.

originally posted by: AshFan
Migrating is different than removing and destroying hard drives, and replacing them with new blank hard drives.

The servers were BLANK, not MIGRATED.

Platte River Networks has retained control of the old server since it took over management of the Clintons’ e-mail system. She said that the old server “was blank,” and no longer contained useful data.

“The information had been migrated over to a different server for purposes of transition,” from the old system to one run by Platte River, she said, recalling the transfer that occurred in June 2013.

As for the server they were migrated to..

In addition to obtaining the old server, the FBI recently obtained a thumb drive in the possession of Clinton’s lawyer, David Kendall, that contained copies of work e-mails kept on the server.

www.washingtonpost.com...

originally posted by: Indigo5
a reply to: IAMTAT

aaahh...Ok...gave you a star for that.

Still...Ok to "hate" the woman...but let's sort out the reality and facts of what we know and don't know and not muddy waters with half-truths and headlines absent relevant facts. You can always hate her after you get a better view of the situation.

I don't "Hate" the woman...but I sure as hell don't trust her. The woman is a certified compulsive liar.
Hillary didn't just pop out of thin air in 2007...I've followed her exploits since Whitewater....many years ago in Arkansas. Interesting reading, BTW...if you're so inclined to get the relevant facts and gain a better view of the situation that truly IS Hillary Rodham Clinton.

P.S. Thanks for the star....back at ya.

Honestly, this doesn't suprise me and it bugs me like crazy!

Politicians forget that they have a job that we the people give them to perform. What company allows an employee to do their "job" using their own email which also breaks "company" rules? None that I know of. Well maybe Mary Kay.

In case I need to clarify, the company in question is the government. But it's the same idea. The people are the shareholders and the president is simply the CEO.

What she did was illegal and not only should she not be allowed to run for president, she should also be held accountable to the full extent of the law.

Politician's are given power and trust by the people - part of that trust is the ability for us to fully audit and account for their actions while performing that job. If they don't like it, look for another career.

Big news break here: Denver Company Hosting Hillarys Server was Sued for Illegal Activity
There are actual court documents at the link.
Daily Mail.com

The Internet company used by Hillary Clinton to maintain her private server was sued for stealing dozens of phone lines including some which were used by the White House.

Platte River Networks is said to have illegally accessed the master database for all US phone numbers.

It also seized 390 lines in a move that created chaos across the US government.

Among the phone numbers which the company took - which all suddenly stopped working - were lines for White House military support desks, the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy, a lawsuit claims.

a reply to: burntheships

Now I *really* smell espionage and treason !!!

And I bet Hillary knew it.

This could end the Democrat Party as we know it.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: burntheships

Now I *really* smell espionage and treason !!!

Would be the million dollar fly on the wall to know who picked
this company for the deed of wiping the server.

They seized phone lines of Military members and the Whitehouse?
Would this be considered terrorism corrupt politics if it is true?
Outrageous!

originally posted by: Indigo5

originally posted by: Bilk22
I'm not sure if this has been mentioned yet - I am catching up on a few pages - BUT, email Hillary, she herself created, could post-facto be considered classified, yet weren't at the time of sending, but are now considered that due to their content.

Short story on the facts here..

According to the inspector general the emails contained "information" "derived" from classified information or docs at the time they "originated".

That means the information was classified by another agency at the time it was emailed to Hillary. We don't know when it was classified.

The State Department is responsible for classifying their own material.

According to the State Department, the "information" had been circulated on non-classified servers and email systems at State since 2009.

So it's possible it wasn't classified when it was first circulated at State...but was classified before it was emailed to Hillary..but State never classified it. Example: 2009 CIA shares unclassified Satellite data with State. State references the info in emails amongst themselves...maybe in 2011 the CIA tags the info as Classified...but State (who is responsible for classifying their own info) never follows suit and the info. continues to circulate and lands on Hillary's server in 2012.

The Inspector General did not file this as a criminal inquiry, but rather a security "heads-up" as he is obligated to do.

This was an email sent to Hillary Clinton.

So what we likely have is some State Department employee who shared the information without concern for it's classified origins or it wasn't classified at the time back in 2009 or earlier...and the information became semi-common knowledge and was not considered classified going forward as State Department employees shared it and it eventually got mentioned in an email to Hillary.

If it is satellite data from 09 or prior, it might be hard to discern whether anyone at State should have recognized it as potentially classified. I would suspect it appears innocuous since it was "circulated" without concern on non-secure servers for 6 years or more without being recognized as potentially classified.

So if their is a sacrificial lamb to be offered to the witch hunt it will be someone in NSA or CIA that shared the info with State in 09 or earlier without the classified label..or the employee at State who first shared the data disregarding a classified label.

When Hillary claimed she has not communicated classified material on her personal server (sent or received) she is technically correct...because State is responsible for classifying all of their own material and communications and this was not classified by State.

This is the same reason the IG referred the material to the State department last week....for classification.

Notice none of that is in defense of Clinton, nor asking for her to be burned at the stake...so everyone save the ideological drama...that is just what we have thus far.

Now back to..."drown her! She's a witch!!!"

She was the top officer of the State Department. You speak about this as if she was somehow tangentially attached to it. It's a pretty sure bet she can have something to say about what needs to be classified.

None of this would be an issue if she didn't choose to use her own server - for what reason is anyone's guess, though it's a pretty good bet she wanted to have total control over who saw what - but she did use her own server and put sensitive info at risk and apparently, at the very least, broke protocol by doing so. Maybe even broke the law by doing so if it's found she sent or asked to receive correspondence on a non-sanctioned device.

Does one plus one still equal two? Clinton was Secretary of State. As such, we have to assume she was emailed and sent hundreds of classified documents during her tenure. We also know she only had an official SD email address, or at least used one, for only a very short time at the end of her tenure. Anyone sending her an email with classified info prior to her switching would have to know her email address wasn't a government address. So essentially Clinton and everyone who ever sent her anything classified were violating the law and could face possible jail time. That has to be a good number of people and possibly the POTUS. I mean she worked for the guy. He had to have stuff sent to her and he also had to have received stuff from her.

This isn't even talked about here or by the MSM. Why isn't anyone asking those questions? "Mrs. Clinton, what email address did your boss use to send you documents he wanted you to read or have? What email address did he use to send general correspondence to you?"

Anyone who sent her emails that had TS info was breaking the law. Since she said she only used one email address, well then this is a pretty big deal all the way around.

originally posted by: Bilk22
None of this would be an issue if she didn't choose to use her own server - for what reason is anyone's guess, though it's a pretty good bet she wanted to have total control over who saw what - but she did use her own server and put sensitive info at risk and apparently, at the very least, broke protocol by doing so. Maybe even broke the law by doing so if it's found she sent or asked to receive correspondence on a non-sanctioned device.

No one with power likes transparency, that's why she wanted her own server. As far as protocol goes, it was legal at the time and there was even a precedent, Colin Powell for example had one. So far there haven't been any criminal charges, only security leaks as a function of the office.

For criminal charges to be filed it will had to have been something she personally did outside the scope of the office taking actions, and even then as I've said before she will not pay a single dollar in restitution and she will not spend a single hour in jail. Those who run the government are intelligent enough to know the precedent that will be set if we seriously go after members of opposing political parties. If Hillary goes down, Cheney and Bush will go down, then Pelosi will go down, and before long we're going to be in a full blown Civil War along partisan lines.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: Bilk22
None of this would be an issue if she didn't choose to use her own server - for what reason is anyone's guess, though it's a pretty good bet she wanted to have total control over who saw what - but she did use her own server and put sensitive info at risk and apparently, at the very least, broke protocol by doing so. Maybe even broke the law by doing so if it's found she sent or asked to receive correspondence on a non-sanctioned device.

No one with power likes transparency, that's why she wanted her own server. As far as protocol goes, it was legal at the time and there was even a precedent, Colin Powell for example had one. So far there haven't been any criminal charges, only security leaks as a function of the office.

For criminal charges to be filed it will had to have been something she personally did outside the scope of the office taking actions, and even then as I've said before she will not pay a single dollar in restitution and she will not spend a single hour in jail. Those who run the government are intelligent enough to know the precedent that will be set if we seriously go after members of opposing political parties. If Hillary goes down, Cheney and Bush will go down, then Pelosi will go down, and before long we're going to be in a full blown Civil War along partisan lines.

And?

If you look back at criminal... I mean Clinton's record of getting off the hook when she and her "husband" have been caught doing things that any of us would be sitting in a maximum security prison for, you'll see a big part of what the problem is in the US. Do you really think she is sitting in an empty room somewhere listening to Enya, worrying more bumps into that fat, doughy face? I think not.

No matter what side of the idiotic political fence you slide down, these multimillionaire politicians are making the people of the US look like f***ing complacent morons too stuck up Katy Perry's ass to care who's doing what with trillions of dollars or, in this case emails from one millionaire to another millionaire.

Seriously, who can defend her and her cronies on even one of the many "scandals" that have been largely ignored by every "news" source in the US and why are these scandals anyway? You try doing one of them and see where you end up...I guess this is meant for another window here at ATS no?

This is a charade that will never be mentioned again as this horrible woman marches her way to where ever she wants to go, doing whatever it is she wants to do to whoever and however many times she wants to do it to. Cheers

THEY know they can't trust her either....

Intelligence community wants Clinton’s security clearance suspended

Security experts say that if Hillary Rodham Clinton retained her government security clearance when she left the State Department, as is normal practice, it should be suspended now that it is known her unprotected private email server contained top secret material.

“Standard procedure is that when there is evidence of a security breach, the clearance of the individual is suspended in many, but not all, cases,” said retired Army Lt. Gen. William Boykin, who was deputy undersecretary of defense for intelligence in the George W. Bush administration. “This rises to the level of requiring a suspension.”

www.washingtontimes.com...

originally posted by: Bilk22And?

And... it doesn't matter if her boss sent her classified intelligence on an unsecured network. We should not be jailing previous administrations.

Also, her boss, the President cannot be found guilty of leaking classified information while in office. Anything he chooses to divulge is instantly considered unclassified since he's the one who makes the decisions and made the information known.

Attacking Clinton is one thing, it's part of her record and she's running for office. That's fair game in my opinion, but we should stop short of criminal charges because that doesn't benefit the country.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
THEY know they can't trust her either....

The military distrusted Hillary long before this ever broke. There is ample evidence that while she was Secretary of State the Pentagon was conducting their own foreign policy behind her back.

Here's what she really thinks....

originally posted by: Aazadan
There is ample evidence that while she was Secretary of State the Pentagon was conducting their own foreign policy behind her back.

Was Hillary Commander in Chief? Nope.
So...what where does that leave her back channeling?