FNC reporting the Hilary's Email contained a "Top Secret" labeled message

January 08, 2016, 06:09 PM

sdy

I wonder what TPs (talking points) she was interested in getting ? (Note all of the white out sections)

From:

http://hotair.com/archives/201...er-is-in-her-e-mail/

Why was Hillary so anxious to get these talking points that morning? As it happens, she had a discussion with Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov that morning.

According to the State Department readout in the daily briefing later on 6/17/2011, it was quite a conversation:

QUESTION: On Syria, has Secretary Clinton spoken with her Russian counterpart, Lavrov?

MS. NULAND: She did speak to Foreign Minister Lavrov this morning, and she did discuss Syria with him.

She also discussed Middle East peace, Libya, UN Security Council 1267, and Russian-Georgian relations.

With regard to Syria, the discussion focused on action in the UN Security Council and how the U.S. and Russia can work together to make sure that we can get to a UN Security Council resolution that supports peace and security in Syria.

January 08, 2016, 06:20 PM

Bigboreshooter

Hear that sound???.......That's shotgun Joe warming up in the bullpen.

January 08, 2016, 06:23 PM

dewhorse

So if (when) she has charges brought against her will she still run? If she has the say I would say she will but if the dem leadership does I think she will get pushed aside.

zippy has no love for her or the rapist, so who is on deck? No way they let bernie carry the flag.

o'malley...yea right

biden might get "forced" to sacrifice for the betterment of the party.

Trump vs biden.....oh god I will hve to get a dvr to record what would promise to be some the best comedy since monty python.

January 08, 2016, 06:39 PM

rduckwor

I think it is wishful thinking that we will see Lying Loretta to generate an indictment. We may get to hear about the FBI findings IF someone is pissed enough to leak info. The race goes on unless her health takes her out of our misery.

RMD

January 08, 2016, 08:15 PM

oldRoger

I would think most reasonable people reading this post would have been convinced that Hillary was guilty of multiple felonies by about page four.

The only question is whether the Dems in DC can bring themselves to indict her.

No doubt there would be a revolt in the FBI and some reaction at lower levels of the DoJ if there was a recommendation to indict which the Attorney General declined.

I doubt if BHO cares whether some FBI agents resign, after all, they would just be self-selecting people he would like to get rid of anyway.

January 09, 2016, 09:08 PM

braillediver

Interesting read. These people need to be cut out of politics like a cancerous tumor.

quote:
Hillary’s EmailGate Goes Nuclear:
Does the latest release of Hillary’s State Department emails include highly classified U.S. intelligence?

http://observer.com/2016/01/hi...ilgate-goes-nuclear/

January 10, 2016, 01:12 PM

sdy

The double speak these people use is amazing.

http://www.breitbart.com/video...ssification-notices/

JOHN DICKERSON, “FACE THE NATION” HOST: This week another batch of emails were released by the State Department. One of them is back and forth between you and a staffer about a secure fax that won’t come through.

You directed him to, quote, turn into non-paper with no identifying heading and send non-secure. Aren’t you ordering him to violate the laws on handling classified material there?

CLINTON: No, not at all. As the State Department said just this week, that did not happen. It never would have happened because that’s just not the way I treated classified information.

Headings are not classification notices and so oftentimes we’re trying to get the best information we can .

Obviously what I’m asking for is whatever can be transmitted, if it doesn’t come through secure to be transmitted on the unclassified system. No, there is nothing to that like so much else that has been talked about in the last year.

From:
http://www.dhra.mil/perserec/osg/s1class/marking.htm

"Any classified document, either in hard copy or automated, must contain a header and footer with the classification, any control markings, and declassification date or designation"

The security classification is at the very top of the document.

**********************

"Headings are not classification notices and so oftentimes we’re trying to get the best information we can"

???? Translation please ?

January 10, 2016, 01:26 PM

entropy

Tick tock.....

I'd love to see Lynch balk and people walk. Perhaps THEN it would at least show a fraction of what has transpired the past 8 years.

January 10, 2016, 01:26 PM

darthfuster

quote:
Originally posted by sdy:
The double speak these people use is amazing.

http://www.breitbart.com/video...ssification-notices/

JOHN DICKERSON, “FACE THE NATION” HOST: This week another batch of emails were released by the State Department. One of them is back and forth between you and a staffer about a secure fax that won’t come through.

You directed him to, quote, turn into non-paper with no identifying heading and send non-secure. Aren’t you ordering him to violate the laws on handling classified material there?

CLINTON: No, not at all. As the State Department said just this week, that did not happen. It never would have happened because that’s just not the way I treated classified information.

Headings are not classification notices and so oftentimes we’re trying to get the best information we can .

Obviously what I’m asking for is whatever can be transmitted, if it doesn’t come through secure to be transmitted on the unclassified system. No, there is nothing to that like so much else that has been talked about in the last year.

From:
http://www.dhra.mil/perserec/osg/s1class/marking.htm

"Any classified document, either in hard copy or automated, must contain a header and footer with the classification, any control markings, and declassification date or designation"

The security classification is at the very top of the document.

**********************

"Headings are not classification notices and so oftentimes we’re trying to get the best information we can"

???? Translation please ?

Translation: I dindu nuffins....

January 10, 2016, 02:14 PM

Bytes

I'm not in any big hurry for Hildabeast to be charged. I really like this drip, drip, drip that is going on. I would like to see her in prison after she loses the election.

January 10, 2016, 02:18 PM

entropy

Can someone be pardoned by POTUS for crimes they have yet to be convicted of?

January 10, 2016, 02:30 PM

domcintosh

There isn't a one of my fellows, even the liberal ones, who believe we'd get away with the same antics Bill Clinton's Wife has. Everyone with a security clearance has had to suffer through annual trainings on the proper handling of classified material.

Removing the header and transmitting classified material via unclassified means is worthy of an extended stay at Leavenworth.

January 10, 2016, 02:32 PM

Test1968

quote:
Originally posted by entropy:
Can someone be pardoned by POTUS for crimes they have yet to be convicted of?

Yes. Ford pardoned Nixon for Watergate and he hadn't been charged with any crimes

January 10, 2016, 02:35 PM

entropy

quote:
Originally posted by Test1968:
quote:
Originally posted by entropy:
Can someone be pardoned by POTUS for crimes they have yet to be convicted of?

Yes. Ford pardoned Nixon for Watergate and he hadn't been charged with any crimes

What if POTUS is complicent?

Oh....nevermind. There I go again thinking laws matter.

January 10, 2016, 02:41 PM

JALLEN

quote:
Originally posted by Test1968:
quote:
Originally posted by entropy:
Can someone be pardoned by POTUS for crimes they have yet to be convicted of?

Yes. Ford pardoned Nixon for Watergate and he hadn't been charged with any crimes

There are no restrictions on the pardon power, other than, presumably, acts and omissions occurring in the past.

A pardon for future crimes would be valuable, indeed, for many.

Luckily, I have enough willpower to control the driving ambition that rages within me.

When you had the votes, we did things your way. Now, we have the votes and you will be doing things our way. This lesson in political reality from Lyndon B. Johnson

"Some things are apparent. Where government moves in, community retreats, civil society disintegrates and our ability to control our own destiny atrophies. The result is: families under siege; war in the streets; unapologetic expropriation of property; the precipitous decline of the rule of law; the rapid rise of corruption; the loss of civility and the triumph of deceit. The result is a debased, debauched culture which finds moral depravity entertaining and virtue contemptible." - Justice Janice Rogers Brown

January 10, 2016, 03:28 PM

Sig2340

quote:
Originally posted by entropy:
Can someone be pardoned by POTUS for crimes they have yet to be convicted of?

See Richard Milhouse Nixon.

January 10, 2016, 03:35 PM

sdy

From a post above:

quote:
JOHN DICKERSON, “FACE THE NATION” HOST: This week another batch of emails were released by the State Department. One of them is back and forth between you and a staffer about a secure fax that won’t come through. You directed him to, quote, turn into non-paper with no identifying heading and send non-secure. Aren’t you ordering him to violate the laws on handling classified material there?

CLINTON: No, not at all. As the State Department said just this week , that did not happen

But here is what the State Dept said:

State Dept spokesman John Kirby

http://www.powerlineblog.com/a...put-out-the-fire.php

QUESTION: Well, I mean, yeah. It would – some, including Senator Grassley, say that this suggests that former Secretary Clinton was asking her deputy chief of staff to remove potentially classified information from what was to be a secure fax and put it into an email that was – that would be sent unclassified into her private server.

Would that be a violation of State Department rules if that was the case? I mean, first of all, is that the case? Is that what was happening here?

MR KIRBY : I don’t know that it’s the case. And as you know, I’m not going to talk about former Secretary Clinton’s email practices. That’s not our role here, not least of which also those practices are under review and investigation, so it wouldn’t be appropriate for me to talk about that.

And as for the intention, the motivation, I simply wouldn’t have that information.

**********************

Hillary Clinton is lying so fast and furious that Eric Holder must be jealous.

This really is getting into some strange territory.

January 10, 2016, 04:05 PM

entropy

Maybe they will indict her, and the entire zoo of them will move to Dubai with Zippy.

January 10, 2016, 06:53 PM

SapperSteel

Some pertinent current coverage at this LINK.

quote:
Smoking Gun: Email Suggests Hillary Broke Law
Clinton instructed an aide to remove the classification marking from information, a federal offense
by Keith Koffler

The latest batch of Hillary Clinton emails released by the State Department early Friday contain what may be the smoking gun that forces the Justice Department to charge the former secretary of state with a crime, according to former federal prosecutor Joseph diGenova.

“This is gigantic,” said diGenova. “She caused to be removed a classified marking and then had it transmitted in an unencrypted manner. That is a felony. The removal of the classified marking is a federal crime. It is the same thing to order someone to do it as if she had done it herself.”

On the June 17, 2011, email chain with senior State Department adviser Jake Sullivan, Clinton apparently asked Sullivan to change the marking on classified information so that it is no longer flagged as classified.

Clinton, using her private email server, asks for “the TPs,” apparently a reference to talking points being prepared for her. Sullivan, who is using his official State Department email, responds, “They say they’ve had issues sending secure fax. They’re working on it.” Clinton responds, “If they can’t, turn into nonpaper w[ith] no identifying heading and send nonsecure.”

It’s not clear if Sullivan actually followed through on Clinton’s orders. But if he did, it may expose Clinton to serious legal jeopardy.

“This makes it impossible for the bureau not to recommend charges,” diGenova said of the FBI. “This makes it impossible not to go forward, and it certainly ties the hand of the attorney general.”

Some have speculated that while the FBI may recommend charges, Attorney General Loretta Lynch might try to avoid doing so for political reasons.

The revelation also appears to put the lie to Clinton’s claim that she never handled classified information on her server.

“I did not send nor receive anything that was classified at the time,” she has claimed. By instructing her aide to send her material marked classified, it is clear that she not only may have received classified information, but that it was indeed “classified at the time.”

“This means that when she said, ‘I never received anything marked classified,’ she in fact did,” diGenova said.

David Bossie, president of the watchdog group Citizens United, said the email could become the emblem of Hillary’s email scandal.

“It proves that Hillary Clinton affirmatively instructed senior staff to send classified data to an unsecured server,” he said. “With that, it cements into history, much like the famous Bill Clinton finger wag.”