quote:

Originally posted by lastmanstanding:
I admire all of you who can remain optimistic and hold the belief that accountability and justice can still reach the same places that corruption and deceit do.
I just can't fool myself anymore.

I was optimistic until I read this from Politico below. The things the intelligence community classified as TS are suddenly not because of a "flawed process"? And/or the TS determination of the information happened after the emails were sent, so no foul?

This backtracking on the classification level is how she will get out of the security violations.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
http://www.politico.com/story/...ly-classified-215599

The U.S. intelligence community has retreated from claims that two emails in Hillary Clinton’s private account contained top-secret information, a source familiar with the situation told POLITICO.

"The initial determination was based on a flawed process," the source said. "There was an intelligence product people thought [one of the emails] was based on, but that actually postdated the email in question."

State Department spokesman John Kirby said Friday he was unaware of any resolution of the classification issue regarding the messages McCullough's office said had been deemed "top secret."

"As far as I know we’ve received no final decision by the intelligence community with respect to these two emails," Kirby said at a daily briefing for reporters. "As far as we know, that process is ongoing."

The governmental machinery is slowly grinding away to prove that poor Hillary absolutely did nothing at all out of bounds. By election time, she'll not only be exonerated, but will be a hero for all her unappreciated efforts overseas by a vindictive administration. All of the dipshits in this country will swallow it hook, line, and sinker.

I'm putting my hopes in a massive stroke or heart attack, contrary to my signature line.

quote:

Originally posted by gearhounds:
The governmental machinery is slowly grinding away to prove that poor Hillary absolutely did nothing at all out of bounds. By election time, she'll not only be exonerated, but will be a hero for all her unappreciated efforts overseas by a vindictive administration. All of the dipshits in this country will swallow it hook, line, and sinker.

I'm putting my hopes in a massive stroke or heart attack, contrary to my signature line.

The only thing...

ONLY
THING

...that will save this country from Hitlery is the Independent vote. I believe in my heart of optimistic hearts the Independents see right through that witch.

Posted by darthfuster:

quote:

Most of us, myself included, labor under the reflex that this is a nation of laws that affect all of us equally. What you have described is the kind of systemic corruption that plagues 3rd world nations and eventually results in 3rd world conditions. See Mexico for illustration. I am guilty of having to be reminded that this is not the country I was told I lived in. We are not as free as we were told. We are not as equal as we were intended to be. If Hillary skates or is somehow pardoned like Nixon, I will know that we are a fallen society and not need to be reminded of our corrupted state ever again.

We may have labored under the delusion that politically important people were treated the same under the law, but I think that is no longer so, if it ever was.

You mention Nixon, Nixon would have been convicted had the impeachment gone to trial because Republicans would have joined Democrats in voting to convict. In fact Congressional GOP leaders went to Nixon and told him to resign or face conviction. Imagine Harry Reid telling Obama that.

If anyone thinks that any member of Harry Reid’s Senate Cabal would join the GOP to impeach any Liberal Government Officeholder, regardless of the crime or office, you have not been paying attention.

Back to Hillary;
Hillary was an employee of the Democrat House Nixon Impeachment Staff in 1974.
Hillary was fired by her boss, Jerry Zeifman, General Counsel and Chief of Staff for the House Judiciary Committee.
“I decided that I would not recommend her (Hillary) for any position of public or private trust.”
Why; Hillary had lied to him and other staff members repeatedly regarding her duties and the results of her legal research.

Hillary and Bill went on to Arkansas where for 15 years they were engaged in numerous shady fund raising schemes including the White Water affair, even the NY Times printed exhaustive detail about this, but of course in 1993, after the elections.

This pair got into the Whitehouse at least partially thanks to Ross Perot’s disruptive impact on the ’92 elections.

Once in office they proceeded to stuff the Bureaucracy with liberal/progressives whose impact we still feel.

No, I do not think that all politicians are the same, some are much more corrupt, and I count Hillary and Bill among the most corrupt.

Hillary Clinton Signed NDA Affirming She Would Not Illegally Transmit Classified Information, But:
Clapper's Cleaners Clear Hillary of Transmitting "Highly" Classified Information

It was assumed she had, as all principles are required to, but Hillary and Obama have been, get this, cagey and evasive on this point.

Well, the WFB scoops: She did sign the form.

Lachlan Markay:

As the nation's chief diplomat, Hillary Clinton was responsible for ascertaining whether information in her possession was classified and acknowledged that "negligent handling" of that information could jeopardize national security, according to a copy of an agreement she signed upon taking the job.

A day after assuming office as secretary of state, Clinton signed a Sensitive Compartmented Information Nondisclosure Agreement that laid out criminal penalties for "any unauthorized disclosure" of classified information.

Experts have guessed that Clinton signed such an agreement, but a copy of her specific contract, obtained by the Competitive Enterprise Institute through an open records request and shared with the Washington Free Beacon, reveals for the first time the exact language of the NDA.

"I have been advised that the unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of SCI by me could cause irreparable injury to the United States or be used to advantage by a foreign nation," the agreement states.

...

In addition to her SCI agreement, Clinton signed a separate NDA for all other classified information. It contains similar language, including prohibiting "negligent handling of classified information," requiring her to ascertain whether information is classified and laying out criminal penalties.

It adds, "I will never divulge classified information to anyone unless: (a) I have officially verified that the recipient has been properly authorized to receive it; or (b) I have been given prior written notice of authorization" from the proper authorizes.

There's more, including a bit about Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills.

On the other hand, the fix is in, as it was always in: The inquiry into the emails now finds they didn't contain any highly classified information, and that previous statements that they did were based on a "flawed process" in the initial analysis.

Released on a Friday.

Because it's a lie.

The U.S. intelligence community has retreated from claims that two emails in Hillary Clinton’s private account contained top-secret information, a source familiar with the situation told POLITICO.

The determination came from Director of National Intelligence James Clapper's office and concluded that the two emails did not include highly classified intelligence secrets. Concerns about the emails' classification helped trigger an ongoing FBI inquiry into Clinton's private email setup.

Intelligence Community Inspector General I. Charles McCullough III made the claim that two of the emails contained top-secret information; the State Department publicly stated its disagreement and asked Clapper's office to referee the dispute. Now, that disagreement has been resolved in State's favor, said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

Intelligence officials claimed one email in Clinton’s account was classified because it contained information from a top-secret intelligence community "product" or report, but a further review determined that the report was not issued until several days after the email in question was written, the source said.

Um, classified information is spread to people before it is formally included in a written report. Just like any reporter will might talk about a story before actually filing it.

So Hillary heard the ultra top secret information before it was in the report, and spread it around, and now Clapper's Clean-Up Crew is claiming "Well if she spread it around before the classified report, the information wasn't classified when she transmitted it."

And what about all the classified information she transmitted which wasn't "highly" classified, just classified? I guess we're just calling mulligans on the whole US classification and secrecy system, for La Laide Reine.

Good God.

Like I said, they're releasing this on a Friday, not on a Monday, because it's actually bad news -- this is corruption at the highest levels of our government. They hope the stink dissipates by Monday, so Hillary can just say "I've been cleared" without people noticing the logic used to clear her makes no sense.

http://ace.mu.nu/

I still wonder what was going on in Benghazi, and the lack of a coherent story makes me suspicious that something really heinous was afoot.

One theory, really heinous, has been floated, that the idea was that Ambassador Stevens was set up to be kidnapped, and released after intense negotiations led by candidate BHO in the week or so before the election. The plan was thwarted when the security forces available actually responded and proved stronger than anticipated and the kidnapping could not be accomplished. Stevens holed up in the burning "safe room" and was asphyxiated.

Why the stand down order described in "13 Hours?" Why the utter inaction of US forces everywhere?

Any ideas?

quote:

I still wonder what was going on in Benghazi, and the lack of a coherent story makes me suspicious that something really heinous was afoot.

Absent the facts, only some few of which have been exposed, with more to come as the digging goes on and the FOIA process continues, we all can only speculate.

It may be only money corruption, Hillary doing favors for which Bill is paid via speaking engagements.
It could be cover-ups of illegal arms transfers or other forms of subversion because there is no limit to what we should anticipate from the Clinton Mafia, and their friends.

A question frequently asked and never answered is what in the hell was Stevens doing in such a dangerous place at all? Some ask why he was not provided adequate security in advance, which is an excellent question. But for me the question is; what could possibly have been important enough for Stevens to be there at all, ever?

Absent facts we are left to speculate.

Our speculation is very dangerous because we fall prey to imagining increasingly devious plots which unfortunately could be true.

All of this could have stopped with a bit of honesty, if the explanation was really incompetence, most of us would sigh and go on. The fact we continue to get the run around, suggests to me that there is something terribly wrong under this rock and it must be turned over.

quote:

Originally posted by oldRoger:

quote:

I still wonder what was going on in Benghazi, and the lack of a coherent story makes me suspicious that something really heinous was afoot.

Absent the facts, only some few of which have been exposed, with more to come as the digging goes on and the FOIA process continues, we all can only speculate.

It may be only money corruption, Hillary doing favors for which Bill is paid via speaking engagements.
It could be cover-ups of illegal arms transfers or other forms of subversion because there is no limit to what we should anticipate from the Clinton Mafia, and their friends.

A question frequently asked and never answered is what in the hell was Stevens doing in such a dangerous place at all? Some ask why he was not provided adequate security in advance, which is an excellent question. But for me the question is; what could possibly have been important enough for Stevens to be there at all, ever?

Absent facts we are left to speculate.

Our speculation is very dangerous because we fall prey to imagining increasingly devious plots which unfortunately could be true.

All of this could have stopped with a bit of honesty, if the explanation was really incompetence, most of us would sigh and go on. The fact we continue to get the run around, suggests to me that there is something terribly wrong under this rock and it must be turned over.

The only thing worse than uninformed speculation is accurate uninformed speculation.

I expect or at least am not surprised by the politicization of the Whitehouse which leads to this sort of problem.

What has me concerned, make that frightened, is that the politicization of the DoJ, FBI, IRS, and top levels of the Military make it possible that we will not have enough facts soon enough to convince the wavering “independent” voter and so risk a repeat. Had information been forthcoming we may not have had a second Obama term.

I remember that the Nixon DoJ, FBI, and IRS, did stand up to a POTUS who had gone rogue. Alas those days seem only history.

got this from JoeSig

Arg pirates, this curdles my milk.

Here is the real Hillary Clinton without the spackle and the wig.

quote:

Originally posted by JALLEN:

One theory, really heinous, has been floated, that the idea was that Ambassador Stevens was set up to be kidnapped, and released after intense negotiations led by candidate BHO in the week or so before the election. The plan was thwarted when the security forces available actually responded and proved stronger than anticipated and the kidnapping could not be accomplished. Stevens holed up in the burning "safe room" and was asphyxiated.

Why the stand down order described in "13 Hours?" Why the utter inaction of US forces everywhere?

Any ideas?

JAllen, did you read the same 13 Hours: The Inside Account of What Really Happened In Benghaz that I did?

For most of the critical first hour, the security forces at the diplomatic residence didn't do anything except hide.

The four local Blue Mountain Libya (BML) unarmed security guards at the main entrance, plus some other locals, fled like rabbits for the "orchard" and back gate. One BML guy headed for the canteen. One can hardly blame them, since they faced AK, RPD, and RPG armed attackers.

The three armed 17 FEB militia guys present ran like mangy hyenas chasing those rabbits and did so without firing a shot.

As for the five Diplomatic security (DS) guys, at the start of the attack, the five DS guys were in three locations:
- DS agent Alec Henderson in the Tactical Operations Center (TOC)
- Three DS agents, David Ubben and Scott Wickland and an unnamed DS agent (UDSA1) from Tripoli were lounging outside the residence; and
- Another unnamed DS agent from Tripoli (UDSA2) was inside the residence watching security monitors.

All were armed with handguns. Once Henderson sounded the alarm (moments after the attack began), all of them scrambled to get their individual body armor (IBA), M4s and shotguns, and other gear. Except for Wickland’s, all of their gear was in the Canteen or the TOC. Once they were armed and armored:
- Ubben moved to the TOC where he joined Henderson
- Wickland was in the closed and locked safe haven with Smith and Stevens, and
- The two DS agents from Tripoli, along with one BML guy who hadn’t run for the back gate, barricaded themselves in a room in the Canteen.

None put up a fight, instead taking positions where they were safe and could defend themselves.

In the span of <10 minutes, the attackers overran (1) the main gate, (2) the 17 FEB militia barracks, and (3) the residence (in that order), torching buildings and vehicles as they went, until they reached the residence.

Getting there, they used an RPG to blow open the reinforced front door. They started on an orgy of looting and arson, but not a systematic search intent on finding and capturing the Ambassador, who was known to be present from the recon and visits during the day. There was a clue as to where Stevens was-the locked, steel-barred gate separating the “safe haven” where Stevens, Sean Smith, and Wickland were hiding from the rest of the residence.
But there isn’t a systematic search for Stevens. The book refers only to some desultory searching by the attackers, stating “Several reached the safe-haven gate and banged on the bars… The attackers attempted to break-in, but the bolts and locks held.” If they were serious about kidnapping Stevens, they would easily have opened the grate with one of the RPGs they had. Alternatively, they could have walked outside and used an RPG against a window leading into that section of the building. Yes, it might have killed the people inside, but if the objective was kidnapping the Ambassador, and the plan went awry and killed him, from the attackers' POV, so what? Why not take that chance?

It wasn't until some time passed after the assault that the Americans started coming out of hiding, the first being Wickland, the DSS agent in the burning residence, who realized staying inside a burning smoke-filled building was not a plan for survival. It was after he got out that he found he'd been separated from Smith and Stevens.

And just to be clear: Strickland did his job with courage that, IMO, borders on “above and beyond the call of duty.” His job was to get Smith and Stevens to the safety of the "panic room" in the residence, and to stay with them until the cavalry arrived. Sadly, that plan did not account for the attackers deciding to burn the building with diesel fuel, releasing a hellish heat and thick toxic smoke from the various plastic and olefin materials present. I respect Wickland’s courage for going back in, time and again, to try to find them, and understand that the heat and smoke were so overwhelming he knew if he kept it up with a fifth try, he'd just become one more dead American. Some forty minutes later the CIA Global Response Staff (GRS) guys looking in the entrance foyer, described the scene before them “… red-hot coals from the wood of incinerated furniture.” Jack Silva described being “… hit by the most intense blast of heat he’d ever experienced…” They describe not being able to stay in the burning residence for more than a minute. The smoke is so thick and acrid Tyrone Woods gets lost and is nearly overcome by the smoke, saved only by GRS officer John (Tig) Tiegen’s voice calling to him. This is 40-45 minutes after the attack.

So, based on the actions of the diplomatic residence security (all of it, the Blue Mountain guys, the 17 FEB guys, the DS) is I cannot believe that their actions, including hiding in the "safe area," were significant factor in preventing an orchestrated plan for Stevens' kidnapping. I can accept that it might have prevented an opportunistic kidnapping (i.e., by hiding Stevens he wasn't kidnapped).

As for the CIA Station Chief’s order to his security force at the CIA Annex, to “stand down,” and not go rushing pell mell into the streets to try to reach the residence, I maintain that was the correct call at that moment.

Look at the state of affairs facing Bob. The diplomatic residence is on fire. There is a ton of gun fire, plus explosions coming from that direction.

There is frantic radio traffic saying the residence is being overrun.

In the face of this Bob has just five GRS staff plus two others with military experience to defend a compound, where there were around 20 other Americans in the employ of the CIA, executing a mission we can only speculate at.

Bob’s job is the execution of the CIA mission and the safety of the people under his command (Bob is a case officer, after all). It is not use all of his security assets as a QRF for the State Department.

As we have seen at the residence, eight armed men were unable (if fact did little) to stop the horde of attackers there. Yes, the CIA guys were highly trained and experienced operators, but as the tragic events the next morning proved, even they can be killed by the golden BB and the sacred geometry of chance.

At that moment, was it reasonable for Bob to believe there was no attack coming on the CIA facility? I have to say no; in fact, I’d argue that the facts on the ground suggest there was a high likelihood of an impending attack, since there was one going on at another burning American facility 0.75 miles away.

Was time needed to try to find out about what 17 FEB was doing? Yes, for as events showed, there was a need to coordinate with the 17 FEB militia. The GRS guys, plus Henry their ballsy translator, encountered a 17 FEB roadblock just a few blocks from the CIA Annex, and they ended up stopped there. After minutes of back-and-forth, two of the GRS guys, with two of the 17 FEB guys moved on foot toward the diplomatic residence. The rest of the team stopped at the roadblock saw armed men further down the street near the residence, and ended up taking a detour to get around them.

As for all of the other US assets in or around the Med, we know (1) an unarmed UAV was sent from an undisclosed location, and (2) at 2300L, Doherty was 400+ miles away in Tripoli, bribing an airplane crew to fly him and six others to Benghazi, arriving at the Annex at 0500 the next morning. Why weren't other US forces dispatched? Beats me. But, based on what is known about the deployment of US forces, none, save Doherty and crew, would have arrived before daybreak, and none at all would have changed the outcome of events at the diplomatic residence.

Bottom line:
It seems unlikely it was a planned attempt to kidnap Stevens. If it happened that he fell into the attacker’s hands, fine, but their mission was burning an American facility.
The CIA Station Chief made the correct call, based on the facts before him, his mission and responsibilities and the limited assets available to him.
It could have been prevented, since the causes were
- Wholly inadequate security plan.
- Poor planning on where people and gear (e.g., IBAs, assault rifles) were located.
- Not considering the idea the residence might be set on fire.
- A bunker mentality, when there wasn’t a force specifically tasked to undertake a rescue in the face of an armed assault and such a response was never planned or practiced (the GRS team response was agreed on, but never really practiced or considered in detail).

You give far too much credit to Arab planning and execution capabilities, in my experience.

The account described in the book would not be plausible in the slightest if it were being executed by an SAS squad, or Delta, but by a bunch of Arabs, it is certainly plausible that they wanted to kidnap the Ambassador.

I have no idea what the goal was, of course. I'm merely head scratching trying to make sense of a story that as is makes no sense.

Hillary Clinton is TOAST with butter and orange marmalade!!

quote:

Foxnews.com

The FBI has expanded its probe of Hillary Clinton's emails, with agents exploring whether multiple statements violate a federal false statements statute, according to intelligence sources familiar with the ongoing case.

Fox News is told agents are looking at 18 U.S. Code Section 1001, which pertains to "materially false" statements given either in writing, orally or through a third party. Violations also include pressuring a third party to conspire in a cover-up. Each felony violation is subject to five years in prison.

ROSAL

FYI, my lead is in jest. She'll skate.

Will you guys cut it out with the "She's gonna get away with it" shit? Damn, that's so old. Just stop it.

You don't know what's going to happen. Stop trying to discourage the rest of us, and that is precisely what you're attempting to do.

quote:

Foxnews.com

From ^^^this article:

The section of the criminal code being explored is known as "statements or entries generally," and can be applied when an individual makes misleading or false statements causing federal agents to expend additional resources and time. In this case, legal experts as well as a former FBI agent said, Section 1001 could apply if Clinton, her aides or attorney were not forthcoming with FBI agents about her emails, classification and whether only non-government records were destroyed.

Fox News judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano said the same section got Martha Stewart in trouble with the FBI. To be a violation, the statements do not need to be given under oath.

"This is a broad, brush statute that punishes individuals who are not direct and fulsome in their answers," former FBI agent Timothy Gill told Fox News. Gill is not connected to the email investigation, but spent 16 years as part of the bureau's national security branch, and worked the post 9/11 anthrax case where considerable time was spent resolving discrepancies in Bruce Ivins' statements and his unusual work activities at Fort Detrick, Md.

"It is a cover-all. The problem for a defendant is when their statements cause the bureau to expend more time, energy, resources to de-conflict their statements with the evidence," he said.

Separately, two U.S. government officials told Fox News that the FBI is doing its own classification review of the Clinton emails, effectively cutting out what has become a grinding process at the State Department. Under Secretary for Management Patrick Kennedy has argued to both Director of National Intelligence James Clapper and Congress that the "Top Secret" emails on Clinton's server could have been pulled from unclassified sources including news reports.

"You want to go right to the source," Gill said. "Go to the originating, not the collateral, authority. Investigative protocol would demand that."

On Friday, Clapper spokesman Brian Hale confirmed that no change has been made to the two "Top Secrets" emails after a Politico report said the intelligence community was retreating from the finding.

"ODNI has made no such determination and the review is ongoing," Hale said. Andrea G. Williams, spokeswoman for the intelligence community inspector general, said she had the same information. Kennedy is seeking an appeal, but no one can explain what statute or executive order would give Clapper that authority.

A U.S. government official who was not authorized to speak on the record said the FBI is identifying suspect emails, and then going directly to the agencies who originated them and therefore own the intelligence -- and who, under the regulations, have final say on the classification.

As Fox News previously reported, at least four classified Clinton emails had their markings changed to a category that shields the content from Congress and the public, in what State Department whistleblowers believed to be an effort to hide the true extent of classified information on the former secretary of state's server.

One State Department lawyer involved in the alleged re-categorization was Kate Duval. Duval once worked in the same law firm as Clinton's current and long-time lawyer David Kendall and at the IRS during the Lois Lerner email controversy. Duval left government service for private practice in mid-September.

What was going on in Benghazi?

Well, some weapons got into the wrong hands and our ambassador was sent to negotiate for their retrieval.

Just a SWAG on my part, but Hillary wanted the ruler of Libya overthrown and pressed for the attacks on Libya. Rebels were armed and Whoops! they turned out not to be as trustworthy as we thought them to be.

Why? That is the eternal question and how to link that act to the fortunes of the Clinton Foundation remains hidden.

These people are more evil and connected than we can imagine.

RMD

So with all the Secret and Top Secret/SCI EMails pulled off her unsecure private server, and the FBI is going to Scooter Libby her?

Now if this was an everything and the kitchen sink indictment coming, then I would feel better.

http://www.politico.com/story/.../11/stonewall-215772

Clinton email companies rebuff Senate investigators

Several companies that worked on Hillary Clinton’s private server are refusing interview and document requests from congressional investigators, even as they are cooperating with the FBI.

Platte River Networks, the Denver-based tech company that housed Clinton's server after she left the State Department in 2013, has declined requests by the Senate Homeland Committee to interview five employees about the security of the system, according to correspondence reviewed by POLITICO.

And Platte is blocking another tech company, Connecticut-based Datto Inc., from answering committee questions about its cloud backup of the Clinton emails, according to a separate letter Datto sent the committee.

Datto has a confidentiality agreement with its client, Platte River, and can answer questions about that specific account only with their permission.

While the firms have voluntarily produced some information for congressional Republicans in the past, now it seems they're not willing to go beyond their legal obligations when it comes to responding to committee inquiries.

While Platte River originally told Datto it had “no objections” to Datto sharing information with the committee, the letter says “counsel to Platte River withdrew their previous non-objection, and objected to any further disclosure of confidential information to the committee."

Platte River spokesman Andy Boian said the company has already given Johnson's Homeland panel all the information it can — from invoices to internal employee emails about the server.

He said the interview requests Platte River declined weren't "formal” inquiries.

“We as a company have felt like we have done everything we can to comply with every request by both the FBI and the Homeland Security Committee, and we really have nothing left to give,” Boian said. “We have a company to run.”


Reuters reported last week that Teneo — which has close ties to Bill Clinton — refused to answer questions and provide documents for Grassley's investigation of Abedin's work status.

InfoGrate CEO Tania Neild, the New York-based technology broker for millionaires who put the Clintons in touch with Platte River in 2013, invoked a nondisclosure agreement she had with her client when she declined interviews with the panel.

Dennis Nowak, a lawyer for a fourth tech company involved in the server issue, Florida-based SECNA wouldn't say if they were answering the committee's questions. But he explained that electronic communications technology companies like theirs are governed by a law that imposes criminal and civil penalties for disclosing customer information.

Hmm. I can see the FBI insisting on controlling all of the materials or at least as many as possible just to put together a coherent case. And, given the FBI's involvement, I can see the companies' wanting to restrict the amount of information made public by the committee. I won't pretend that I trust their motives, judgement or honesty under these circumstances, but they may just be doing what they think is smart for their companies.