Whoa: Hillary e-mail instructs aide to transmit classified data without markings
+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 16

Thread: Whoa: Hillary e-mail instructs aide to transmit classified data without markings

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    8,390

    Default Whoa: Hillary e-mail instructs aide to transmit classified data without markings

    Gotta believe she will look better in an orange jumpsuit!


    http://hotair.com/archives/2016/01/0...hout-markings/


    Has the State Department released a smoking gun in the Hillary Clinton e-mail scandal? In a thread from June 2011, Hillary exchanges e-mails with Jake Sullivan, then her deputy chief of staff and now her campaign foreign-policy adviser, in which she impatiently waits for a set of talking points. When Sullivan tells her that the source is having trouble with the secure fax, Hillary then orders Sullivan to have the data stripped of its markings and sent through a non-secure channel.
    That should be game, set, and match, yes?
    Trump has betrayed campaign promises, on a special prosecutor for Hillary....,

    and Illegal Dreamers...he simply walked away from the promises.




    It's time for a Constitutional Convention.









  2. Remove Advertisements
    TheBassBarn.com
    Advertisements
     

  3. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    57,487

    Thumbs up Let’s see if they really will

    Quote Originally Posted by OUTCAST2 View Post
    Gotta believe she will look better in an orange jumpsuit!


    http://hotair.com/archives/2016/01/0...hout-markings/


    Has the State Department released a smoking gun in the Hillary Clinton e-mail scandal? In a thread from June 2011, Hillary exchanges e-mails with Jake Sullivan, then her deputy chief of staff and now her campaign foreign-policy adviser, in which she impatiently waits for a set of talking points. When Sullivan tells her that the source is having trouble with the secure fax, Hillary then orders Sullivan to have the data stripped of its markings and sent through a non-secure channel.
    That should be game, set, and match, yes?

    A former U.S. Attorney predicts a Watergate-style showdown in the Department of Justice if Attorney General Loretta Lynch overrules a potential FBI recommendation to indict Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.“The [FBI] has so much information about criminal conduct by her and her staff that there is no way that they walk away from this,” Joseph diGenova, formerly the District of Columbia’s U.S. Attorney, told Laura Ingraham in a Tuesday radio interview. “They are going to make a recommendation that people be charged and then Loretta Lynch is going to have the decision of a lifetime.“I believe that the evidence that the FBI is compiling will be so compelling that, unless [Lynch] agrees to the charges, there will be a massive revolt inside the FBI, which she will not be able to survive as an attorney general. It will be like Watergate. It will be unbelievable.”DiGenova is referring to the Watergate scandal’s “Saturday Night Massacre” Oct. 20, 1973, when President Richard Nixon sacked Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox and Attorney General Elliot Richardson and Deputy Attorney General William Ruckelshaus resigned in protest.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/07/hi...#ixzz3wg8TNKBA
    Legal Reform
    Reduce the numbers of Lawyers in Public Office

    "The more corrupt the state, the more it legislates." - Tacitus


  4. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    8,390

    Default

    Methinks Joe Biden knows something between the WH and Justice Department that is looking like an indictment.

    Hence his recent public pronouncement that he "Regrets every day" not getting in the race.


    Trump has betrayed campaign promises, on a special prosecutor for Hillary....,

    and Illegal Dreamers...he simply walked away from the promises.




    It's time for a Constitutional Convention.









  5. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    57,487

    Default

    Anybody think Obama would give her a pardon
    Legal Reform
    Reduce the numbers of Lawyers in Public Office

    "The more corrupt the state, the more it legislates." - Tacitus


  6. #5
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    lumberton
    Posts
    26,496

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hardtop View Post
    Anybody think Obama would give her a pardon
    Yea pardon me while they put these Bracelets on you.

  7. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    57,487

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GLENN BROOKS View Post
    Yea pardon me while they put these Bracelets on you.
    Those two idiots could destroy the Dem party for years to come
    Legal Reform
    Reduce the numbers of Lawyers in Public Office

    "The more corrupt the state, the more it legislates." - Tacitus


  8. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Dublin, Pa./ Mystic Island
    Posts
    849

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hardtop View Post
    Anybody think Obama would give her a pardon
    I'll take a pardon over her being president.
    Welfare is NOT A CAREER

    I lock my doors for your protection not mine!

  9. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    8,390

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hardtop View Post
    Anybody think Obama would give her a pardon
    Nah, that incites rebellion. (Maybe eventually he will, but not before she's out of the race.)

    More likely, DNC Convention hands nomination to Biden--they're not going to pin their hopes on the Socialist, and O'Malley is DOA.

    Sanders supporters will stomp their feet and hold their breath till they're Smurfs, but Dem's are used to throwing out the rules when the rules don't favor them.
    Trump has betrayed campaign promises, on a special prosecutor for Hillary....,

    and Illegal Dreamers...he simply walked away from the promises.




    It's time for a Constitutional Convention.









  10. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Freehold, NJ
    Posts
    4,151

    Default

    Here is what I wrote a friend regarding this topic:

    I do not have faith in Obama, as EVERYTHING he does is political and this would throw the Dems into turmoil. He wants to protect his legacy created by fiat against the will of the US citizens and hopefully will be reversed if a Republican gets into office. Clinton is playing into that hoping that she can leverage that into saving her own ***, as she is well-aware of what she did. Of course this is a complicated situation in that the Clintons and Obama despise each other.

    Attorney General Loretta Lynch was appointed by Obama, so she is beholden to him. I think she is better than Eric Holder was, but her views on tend to align with Obama or he would not have picked her. So she could be influenced to decline prosecution, and the evidence developed would theoretically go into the archives without the public knowing the details.


    However, there are many dedicated LEO's and prosecutors, in addition to the political and ***-kissing hacks, and some are undoubtedly aware of the evidence. Also, there are witnesses that are aware of the evidence that they turned over to the GJ, as well as analysts that developed that information. They would be up in arms, and the leaks would begin. Trust me LEO's and intelligence operators understand how to identify sources of evidence and are very adept at being able to avoid leaving those "fingerprints". So if there is a compelling case and the DoJ wants to bury it, the **** will hit the fan. Not to mention, the DoJ will NEVER be able to criminally prosecute anyone in government abusing classified information, or for conflicts of interest.


    Our dear president has been unleashing lawlessness during his entire tenure. One has to fight fire with fire, and it will turn into the wild wild West should they bury a case that should be prosecuted.


    Obama may decide to let the AG prosecute if the evidence warrants, and that would benefit him on many fronts including sticking it to the Clintons, and trying to salvage some positive information as to his ever-failing legacy.


    What makes me think this is the way Biden bowed out of the presidential race, saying there was insufficient time to prepare a campaign (including the primary battle). Obama was there, which seemed weird. Also Biden used the euphemism of the "door or window is closed" with respect to a candidacy. It struck me that just like a window or door is closed, it can also be opened again. Let's say that Clinton wins the primary, gets indicted, and the Democrat Party selects Biden as the candidate. Not sure exactly how the mechanics would work, but the Democrats certainly would have a candidate even if it meant involvement by the courts (as with the former Senator Lautenberg being able to substitute for Torricelli in the US Senate race for NJ when he was on the verge of getting indicted despite the ballot deadlines that had passed).


    In that manner, Biden would avoid all of the pre-primary scrutiny into the skeletons in his closet and the American public would have little time to re-learn of Biden's past foibles. And certainly Biden would protect EVERYTHING that Obama forced down the throats of US citizens.
    “The men the American people admire most extravagantly are the most daring liars; the men they detest most violently are those who try to tell them the truth.”
    ~ HL Mencken

  11. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Freehold, NJ
    Posts
    4,151

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OUTCAST2 View Post
    Gotta believe she will look better in an orange jumpsuit!


    http://hotair.com/archives/2016/01/0...hout-markings/


    Has the State Department released a smoking gun in the Hillary Clinton e-mail scandal? In a thread from June 2011, Hillary exchanges e-mails with Jake Sullivan, then her deputy chief of staff and now her campaign foreign-policy adviser, in which she impatiently waits for a set of talking points. When Sullivan tells her that the source is having trouble with the secure fax, Hillary then orders Sullivan to have the data stripped of its markings and sent through a non-secure channel.
    That should be game, set, and match, yes?

    If it is true that they can prove that Hillary instructed her staff to remove the classification marking and then transmit it through insecure means, I think that it will demonstrate intent to commit a crime involving the unlawful distribution of classified material. She would not instruct someone to do that, unless she knew that it was improper, and she was going to create a false impression as a defense that she was not aware that the document was classified since in had no markings.
    “The men the American people admire most extravagantly are the most daring liars; the men they detest most violently are those who try to tell them the truth.”
    ~ HL Mencken

  12. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,878

    Default




  13. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    8,390

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fishin' Finn View Post
    If it is true that they can prove that Hillary instructed her staff to remove the classification marking and then transmit it through insecure means, I think that it will demonstrate intent to commit a crime involving the unlawful distribution of classified material. She would not instruct someone to do that, unless she knew that it was improper, and she was going to create a false impression as a defense that she was not aware that the document was classified since in had no markings.
    This one walks like a duck, looks like a duck, quacks like a duck........
    Trump has betrayed campaign promises, on a special prosecutor for Hillary....,

    and Illegal Dreamers...he simply walked away from the promises.




    It's time for a Constitutional Convention.









  14. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    57,487

    Default Hillary’s EmailGate Goes Nuclear

    The latest court-ordered dump of her email, just placed online by the State Department, brings more troubles for Team Hillary. This release of over 3,000 pagesincludes 66 “Unclassified” messages that the State Department subsequently determined actually were classified; however, all but one of those 66 were deemed Confidential, the lowest classification level, while one was found to be Secret, bringing the total of Secret messages discovered so far to seven. In all, 1,340 Hillary emails at State have been reassessed as classified.
    But the biggest problem may be in a just-released email that has gotten little attention here, but plenty on the other side of the world. An email to Hillary from a close Clinton confidant late on June 8, 2011 about Sudan turns out to have explosive material in it. This message includes a detailed intelligence report from Sid Blumenthal, Hillary’s close friend, confidant, and factotum, who regularly supplied her with information from his private intelligence service. His usual source was Tyler Drumheller, a former CIA senior official and veteran spy-gadfly, whoconveniently died just before EmailGate became a serious problem for Hillary’s campaign.
    http://observer.com/2016/01/hillarys...-goes-nuclear/


    Legal Reform
    Reduce the numbers of Lawyers in Public Office

    "The more corrupt the state, the more it legislates." - Tacitus


  15. #14
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    lumberton
    Posts
    26,496

    Default

    Jimmy jr. is so ego maniacal. I can see him doing something like what was said here.Throws the indictment at her about 3 weeks before the Democratic convention then in comes Joe on the white horse. You see he knows Hillary is blowing smoke up his arse now and won't fully continue his fundamental transformation but Biden will.He also knows he needs more then 8 years to do it so Biden could finish it. The problem is he thinks Americans really love him he is about to get a reall awakening come 11/4/16.

  16. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Basking Ridge/Mantoloking, NJ
    Posts
    3,584

    Default

    This is the good stuff I've been waiting to hear about: The corruption of the Clinton money laundering operation selling access through the state dept

    EXCLUSIVE: The FBI investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of private email as secretary of state has expanded to look at whether the possible “intersection” of Clinton Foundation work and State Department business may have violated public corruption laws, three intelligence sources not authorized to speak on the record told Fox News.
    This new investigative track is in addition to the focus on classified material found on Clinton’s personal server.
    "The agents are investigating the possible intersection of Clinton Foundation donations, the dispensation of State Department contracts and whether regular processes were followed," one source said.
    The development follows press reports over the past year about the potential overlap of State Department and Clinton Foundation work, and questions over whether donors benefited from their contacts inside the administration.
    The Clinton Foundation is a public charity, known as a 501(c)(3). It had grants and contributions in excess of $144 million in 2013, the most current available data.
    Inside the FBI, pressure is growing to pursue the case.
    One intelligence source told Fox News that FBI agents would be “screaming” if a prosecution is not pursued because “many previous public corruption cases have been made and successfully prosecuted with much less evidence than what is emerging in this investigation.”
    The FBI is particularly on edge in the wake of how the case of former CIA Director David Petraeus was handled.
    One of the three sources said some FBI agents felt Petraeus was given a slap on the wrist for sharing highly classified information with his mistress and biographer Paula Broadwell, as well as lying to FBI agents about his actions. Petraeus pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor in March 2015 after a two-plus-year federal investigation in which Attorney General Eric Holder initially declined to prosecute.
    In the Petraeus case, the exposure of classified information was assessed to be limited.
    By contrast, in the Clinton case, the number of classified emails has risen to at least 1,340. A 2015 appeal by the State Department to challenge the “Top Secret” classification of at least two emails failed and, as Fox News first reported, is now considered a settled matter.
    It is unclear which of the two lines of inquiry was opened first by the FBI and whether they eventually will be combined and presented before a special grand jury. One intelligence source said the public corruption angle dates back to at least April 2015. On their official website, the FBI lists "public corruption as the FBI's top criminal priority."
    Fox News is told that about 100 special agents assigned to the investigations also were asked to sign non-disclosure agreements, with as many as 50 additional agents on “temporary duty assignment,” or TDY. The request to sign a new NDA could reflect that agents are handling the highly classified material in the emails, or serve as a reminder not to leak about the case, or both.
    "The pressure on the lead agents is brutal," a second source said. "Think of it like a military operation, you might need tanks called in along with infantry."
    Separately, a former high-ranking State Department official emphasized to Fox News that Clinton’s deliberate non-use of her government email address may be increasingly “significant.”
    “It is virtually automatic when one comes on board at the State Department to be assigned an email address,” the source said.
    “It would have taken an affirmative act not to have one assigned ... and it would also mean it was all planned out before she took office. This certainly raises questions about the so-called legal advice she claimed to have received from inside the State Department that what she was doing was proper."
    On Sunday, when asked about her email practices while secretary of state, Clinton insisted to CBS News’ "Face The Nation," "there is no there, there."
    Catherine Herridge is an award-winning Chief Intelligence correspondent for FOX News Channel (FNC) based in Washington, D.C. She covers intelligence, the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security. Herridge joined FNC in 1996 as a London-based correspondent

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Quick Reply Quick Reply

Register Now

Please enter the name by which you would like to log-in and be known on this site.

Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.


Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •