Pretty sure Bill Clinton's doodles prove Guccifer hacked into Hillary's server.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: RickinVa

Was that email part of official State Department business, or for the Clinton foundation? The Clinton Foundation does work in Northern Ireland and with the people mentioned in that email.

From your link:

After five hours of talk at Downing Street tonight, Thursday, October 8, Shaun Woodward tells me that it seems Gordon Brown has brokered a financial package with Peter Robinson and Martin McGuinness that may in turn break the deadlock on devolution of policing and justice.

From the Clinton Foundation:

Special Session on Northern Ireland, moderated by President Clinton, featured Peter Robinson, first minister from Northern Ireland Executive; Martin McGuinness, deputy First Minister, Northern Ireland Executive; Declan Kelly, economic envoy to Northern Ireland, U.S. Department of State; Shaun Woodward, Secretary of State for Northern Ireland; and Michéal Martin, Minster of Foreign Affairs, Republic of Ireland.

www.clintonfoundation.org... ireland-announ.html

So was it confidential government business, or confidential CF business?

Does it matter? Sid thought it was classified,,, so did the other agencies that reviewed it.

Somebody is in deep doo doo.

a reply to: RickinVa

Also, Rick, can you show how vetted intelligence updates from a Clinton foundation employee was used to influence decisions made at the SD?

a reply to: RickinVa

Does it matter? Sid thought it was classified,,, so did the other agencies that reviewed it.

Yes, it does. Sid thought it was confidential, not classified. The same process is used by corporations or inter-company memos that they believe should not be for the eyes of the average employee.

It also does not prove there was any wrong doing. What it proves is that the server was used for both the SD emails and the CF.

But we already knew that.

a reply to: introvert


Improperly vetted.... easy to show..... look how many of his emails she forwarded to various members of the SD....not hard to prove at all.

She had no business portraying to the State Department or anyone else for that matter, that these ad hock intelligence updates that came from her private foundation were official business.

Then we still got the 17 classified emails between Hillster and Sidster.... those won't be going away anytime soon.

See you on indictment recommendation day... coming up shortly.

What a great day to be alive!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

17 classified emails between Hillary and Sidney:

C05762494
C05766147
C05764341
C05764767
C05760780
C05760281
C05766854
C05766452
C05774510
C05774835
C05768686
C05788754
C05779465
C05787402
C05794900
C05794915
C05795628

foia.state.gov... to look up each code, paste it into the search terms box.

a reply to: RickinVa

You've provided two examples that you were quite sure were proof of an illegal act taking place, and both were easily refuted.

That is why I say we need to wait and see what happens. We have very little information as to the context of these emails and why they were classified.

Considering what just occurred, how can a logical person be expected to listen to your claims when your claims are spurious at best?

17 classified emails between Hillary and Sidney:

Are those emails part of SD business or CF business? I did as you requested and the first three refer to Northern Ireland.

It is therefore logical to conclude those emails refer to CF business.

a reply to: introvert

"You've provided two examples that you were quite sure were proof of an illegal act taking place, and both were easily refuted."

I provided one classified and one unclassified email as examples.

Easily refuted... so you just totally ignore 17 classified emails, one of which was included as an example, as easily refuted.

You have been proven wrong,,,yet again... you can't send classified emails on an unclassified server.

a reply to: RickinVa

I provided one classified and one unclassified email as examples.

Yes, both referring to things the CF is involved with.

Easily refuted... so you just totally ignore 17 classified emails, one of which was included as an example, as easily refuted.

No. I did as you asked and looked at them. The majority refer to Northern Ireland, a topic we have established is something the CF is involved in. There are a couple that are very questionable, but we have no context to go with them to make any conclusion. They refer to Iran and Germany. The CF has done work and fundraising in Germany.

Now the Iran issue is one I am interested in because it appears they raised a lot of funds in Iran during sanction negotiations, but, still, we have to have context of what was in the emails because the emails could have been CF business.

You have been proven wrong,,,yet again... you can't send classified emails on an unclassified server.

Retroactive classification. They were classified after the fact for investigative and FOIA purposes.

originally posted by: introvert

Retroactive classification. They were classified after the fact for investigative and FOIA purposes.

And because they (the reviewer staff) never saw the communications until Hillary "gave them up".

They never saw the emails in real time.

That alone rings the alarms.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: RickinVa

I provided one classified and one unclassified email as examples.

Yes, both referring to things the CF is involved with.

Easily refuted... so you just totally ignore 17 classified emails, one of which was included as an example, as easily refuted.

No. I did as you asked and looked at them. The majority refer to Northern Ireland, a topic we have established is something the CF is involved in. There are a couple that are very questionable, but we have no context to go with them to make any conclusion. They refer to Iran and Germany. The CF has done work and fundraising in Germany.

Now the Iran issue is one I am interested in because it appears they raised a lot of funds in Iran during sanction negotiations, but, still, we have to have context of what was in the emails because the emails could have been CF business.

You have been proven wrong,,,yet again... you can't send classified emails on an unclassified server.

Retroactive classification. They were classified after the fact for investigative and FOIA purposes.

So you are saying that is is perfectly fine for a Clinton Foundation employee with no security clearance what so ever, to email classified information from his AOL account to Hillarys home based email server, as long as he was discussing CF work, then it is quite permissible to email classified material from your AOL account?

You do not make sense.

The Clinton Foundation and the State Department are two totally different subjects. There shouldn't be any talk of CF business on State.gov emails... period....she forwarded tons of them to state.gov emails.

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: introvert

Retroactive classification. They were classified after the fact for investigative and FOIA purposes.

And because they (the reviewer staff) never saw the communications until Hillary "gave them up".

They never saw the emails in real time.

That alone rings the alarms.

If they were for Clinton Foundation purposes, the reviewer staff have no right to them. She is only bound to hand-over official SD communications.

a reply to: Sillyolme

Stumbled how jaded? They shared the server and????? What?

You really dont undertand the implications of what you just admitted to, do you?

You must have had an incredibly hard time with the transitive property of math.

They (Bill & Hillary) shared the same server.

Guccifer has Bill's doodles...

Hacked from, guess where?

Bill's (AND Hillary's) server.

Ergo, Hillary's (and Bill's) server was hacked by Guccifer.

Question:

Let's say you install a video monitoring system for your home but you don't turn on the recorder.

Let's say that someone then breaks in to your house, but since the recording device is not active no video would be captured of the event.

This would then mean your home wasn't really broken in to because the act wasn't recorded.

That is the same thing that has happened in this case

Logs for Hillary Clinton's email server turned over to the FBI by a former aide to Clinton show no evidence of suspicious foreign traffic or hacking from abroad, a person familiar with the investigation said.

In this case, absence of evidence is not the same as evidence of absence.

Records provided to a Senate committee by a cybersecurity firm last year show some suspicious attempts to reach Clinton's server from China, Germany and South Korea. The efforts may have been part of routine mapping or probing of the Internet from abroad. However, Senate Republicans noted that before the equipment was connected to Clinton's system in October 2013, some of the security features were not in place.

Pagliano, who took the Fifth Amendment to avoid providing testimony to the House Benghazi Committee, struck an immunity deal with federal prosecutors. As a result of that arrangement, he turned over server logs and spoke with FBI investigators, a source said.

source

Again, ask your "geek friends" about a computer running windows remote desktop while listening for connections and how secure such a machine would be.

a reply to: introvert

But the reviewers did not have access to the private Hillary system did they.

And we know she and others regularly sent and received official government classified material over her private network(s).

Hard to see I know, but forests actually have trees growing.

a reply to: RickinVa

So you are saying that is is perfectly fine for a Clinton Foundation employee with no security clearance what so ever, to email classified information from his AOL account to Hillarys home based email server, as long as he was discussing CF work, then it is quite permissible to email classified material from your AOL account?

Yes. It is a private organization that has the right to share it's own intelligence among it's employees. It is not their concern what the US government would deem classified.

As long as official SD classified intelligence was not emailed to CF employees, there is no wrongdoing.

Could you imagine the intelligence that is shared by large corporations about their operations in foreign countries that their employees email to each other that the US would classify if they were to investigate them? It's not any different.

a reply to: introvert


If they were for Clinton Foundation purposes, the reviewer staff have no right to them. She is only bound to hand-over official SD communications.

WRONG WRONG WRONG

1. First of all, she nor anyone else should be discussing CF work at the State Department.

2. All classified information is property of the US government.

3. Most importantly......... any emails she forwarded from anybody at the CF to members of the State Department at their .gov emails were in fact work related.

originally posted by: introvert

If they were for Clinton Foundation purposes, the reviewer staff have no right to them.

Apparently, your either confused, or not paying attention.

The emails belonged to The Federal Government. They were not hers
to withhold. She was acting Secretary of State and is bound by law
to preserve the record.

originally posted by: introvert
As long as official SD classified intelligence was not emailed to CF employees, there is no wrongdoing.

Again, you really are highly misinformed.

It is illegal for the State Department emails to be housed on a private server.

The fact that many people from the CF had access to that server is
a violation. Do you even know what a SCIF is???

a reply to: xuenchen

But the reviewers did not have access to the private Hillary system did they.

Yes, they have it. That's what they are investigating.

And we know she and others regularly sent and received official government classified material over her private network(s).

That's not illegal. If it were, there would be no discussion as to her guilt.

a reply to: introvert

"As long as official SD classified intelligence was not emailed to CF employees, there is no wrongdoing."


OOPSY.... Hillary did email Sid something classified... oh dear!!! No wrongdoing!!!!


foia.state.gov...


Somebody is in some deep doo doo.

a reply to: RickinVa

1. First of all, she nor anyone else should be discussing CF work at the State Department.

They used the same server for both SD communications and for the CF. That's not the same as what you claim.

2. All classified information is property of the US government.

When it comes in to their possession, yes. But not all information that they would deem classifiable is their property. Again, corporate intelligence is a good example. The US may classify information the corporation has if it were in government hands, but it does not mean the corporation is guilty of communicating classified government intel.

There is a big difference.

3. Most importantly......... any emails she forwarded from anybody at the CF to members of the State Department at their .gov emails were in fact work related.

True. The people she forwarded CF emails to also worked for the CF. What's the problem?

a reply to: burntheships

The emails belonged to The Federal Government. They were not hers to withhold. She was acting Secretary of State and is bound by law to preserve the record.

Not for CF foundation communications. The US government has no right to them, unless under investigation and they were handed over when they asked. That is when they were classified. That does not mean they were sharing SD info that was already classified. There is an important difference.

Again, you really are highly misinformed. It is illegal for the State Department emails to be housed on a private server.

That "fact" is still a point of contention. It's not as cut and dry as you think. If it was, charges against Hillary would be a foregone conclusion, but it's not.

a reply to: RickinVa

OOPSY.... Hillary did email Sid something classified... oh dear!!! No wrongdoing!!!!

Again, referring to business the CF is involved with.