IG: E-mails on Hillary server from highly classified “special access programs”

posted at 2:01 pm on January 19, 2016 by Ed Morrissey

Hillary Clinton’s secret e-mail server contained more highly classified information than previously thought, according to a letter from the Inspector General overseeing the material. Fox News got an exclusive look at a letter from Thursday that concludes that “several dozen” e-mails contained classified information ranging from confidential to top secret from “special access programs” — information that should have only been seen by a handful of government officials. There could be no mistaking the nature of this information, or its sensitivity:

Fox News exclusively obtained the text of the unclassified letter, sent Jan. 14 from Intelligence Community Inspector General I. Charles McCullough III. It laid out the findings of a recent comprehensive review by intelligence agencies that identified “several dozen” additional classified emails — including specific intelligence known as “special access programs” (SAP). …

“To date, I have received two sworn declarations from one [intelligence community] element. These declarations cover several dozen emails containing classified information determined by the IC element to be at the confidential, secret, and top secret/sap levels,” said the IG letter to lawmakers with oversight of the intelligence community and State Department. “According to the declarant, these documents contain information derived from classified IC element sources.”

Intelligence from a “special access program,” or SAP, is even more sensitive than that designated as “top secret” – as were two emails identified last summer in a random sample pulled from Clinton’s private server she used as secretary of state. Access to a SAP is restricted to those with a “need-to-know” because exposure of the intelligence would likely reveal the source, putting a method of intelligence collection — or a human asset — at risk. Currently, some 1,340 emails designated “classified” have been found on Clinton’s server, though the Democratic presidential candidate insists the information was not classified at the time.

“There is absolutely no way that one could not recognize SAP material,” a former senior law enforcement with decades of experience investigating violations of SAP procedures told Fox News. “It is the most sensitive of the sensitive.”

As Catherine Herridge and Pamela Browne note, the SAP classification was set out in an executive order issued by Barack Obama in December 2009. The order, EO 13526, makes it crystal clear that the impact of exposure on national security from these programs is considered “exceptional,” and that only Cabinet level officials or their principal deputies have the authority assign SAP status. The EO emphasizes that it is only to be used when “the normal criteria for determining eligibility for access applicable to information classified at the same level are not deemed sufficient to protect the information from unauthorized disclosure,” and that these programs have to be regularly reviewed to maintain SAP status.

In other words, SAP designation requires even more security and oversight than other classified information. Transmitting it over an unsecured system, and storing it in an unauthorized location and manner, would create even more vulnerabilities for national security. That brings us back to 18 USC 793 and especially 18 USC 1924, and perhaps other statutes as well. The former makes the exposure and/or unauthorized transmission of classified information a felony, even if it happens through “gross negligence” rather than malice. The latter deals with removal and retention of classified material:

(a) Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.

(b) For purposes of this section, the provision of documents and materials to the Congress shall not constitute an offense under subsection (a).

(c) In this section, the term “classified information of the United States” means information originated, owned, or possessed by the United States Government concerning the national defense or foreign relations of the United States that has been determined pursuant to law or Executive order to require protection against unauthorized disclosure in the interests of national security.

Hillary Clinton retained that information at her residence on her e-mail server for years. She required her subordinates to communicate with her over this unauthorized and unsecured system, creating the exposure through her own gross negligence. As an official with a clearance, Hillary was well aware of the consequences of her decisions, as were those who worked for her and did not attempt to report these violations. Under 18 USC 793 (g), that might qualify everyone involved as members of a conspiracy:

(g) If two or more persons conspire to violate any of the foregoing provisions of this section, and one or more of such persons do any act to effect the object of the conspiracy, each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be subject to the punishment provided for the offense which is the object of such conspiracy.

This puts even more pressure on the Department of Justice to take action against Hillary and her team. No one can pretend that they didn’t know about the ramifications for using this illicit server, and no one can pretend that they thought information from programs with SAP designations were unclassified and in the open. Those who helped Hillary carry out this scheme and who moved SAP information into an unsecured system may find out that they were the real saps.

Update: Guy Benson notes the connection to David Petraeus is even clearer:

According to court documents, former CIA Director David Petraeus was prosecuted for sharing intelligence from special access programs with his biographer and mistress Paula Broadwell. At the heart of his prosecution was a non-disclosure agreement where Petraeus agreed to protect these closely held government programs, with the understanding “unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention or negligent handling … could cause irreparable injury to the United States or be used to advantage by a foreign nation.” Clinton signed an identical non-disclosure agreement Jan. 22, 2009.

 


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

With Tadlack there are no goals or goal post.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on January 19, 2016 at 6:50 PM

The way this keeps looking she should die in the gray bar hotel.

woodhull on January 19, 2016 at 6:54 PM

Except they have gone down. At least they have if you are smart enough to understand that a reduction in the growth of health care costs is an improvement. Again you keep listening to the right wing echo chamber despite them being wrong all the time.

Tlaloc on January 19, 2016 at 6:09 PM

By the way, your link’s last data was for 2013.

If you were smart enough to understand they were decreasing even before obamacare went into effect. And there is still debate on how much, if any, obamacare was responsible for the “smaller” increases. Smaller increases weren’t what was promised. Obamacare was to drive the cost curve down. People were supposed to see huge savings in their premiums.

From FactCheck: “He repeated his now years-long claim of crediting the Affordable Care Act for a slowdown in health care spending, which economists have linked mainly to the economy. In fact, the growth rate jumped in 2014, when the law’s coverage provisions were implemented.”

You are shown to be a liar pretty easily. I’d like to take credit but you made it so easy I can’t really say it took effort.

HumpBot Salvation on January 19, 2016 at 6:54 PM

Fun, sure, but not convincing since they don’t speak to the actual issue.

Tlaloc on January 19, 2016 at 6:48 PM

Well, you don’t think anything outside of King Putt’s, hilLIARy’s, or Bernie’s talking points have anything to do with actual issues.
Face it – unless one of them says it, you don’t hear it.

dentarthurdent on January 19, 2016 at 6:56 PM

Hey, I can’t blame you for wanting to ignore facts, might mess up
your talking points.

Barred on January 19, 2016 at 6:29 PM

Sometimes the well really is poisonous.

Tlaloc on January 19, 2016 at 7:06 PM

Now we’ll get to the part where tlaloc tries to move the goalposts.

HumpBot Salvation on January 19, 2016 at 6:41 PM

No I’ll point out the same thing I did originally- the only links on memeorandum are from rightwing sites as of now.

http://memeorandum.com/

That might change but hasn’t so far.

Tlaloc on January 19, 2016 at 7:08 PM

By the way, your link’s last data was for 2013.

HumpBot Salvation on January 19, 2016 at 6:54 PM

Yes I know, unlike what gets spewed in the right wing echo chamber real data takes time to collect and validate.

Tlaloc on January 19, 2016 at 7:09 PM

Well, you don’t think anything outside of King Putt’s, hilLIARy’s, or Bernie’s talking points have anything to do with actual issues.
Face it – unless one of them says it, you don’t hear it.

dentarthurdent on January 19, 2016 at 6:56 PM

Why would I face something that’s false?
I’m very happy to listen to credible sources.

Tlaloc on January 19, 2016 at 7:11 PM

This is so much fun. Tiaioc pretends not to care if the IG’s are telling the truth because he just hopes it’s all just going to go away.

blink on January 19, 2016 at 7:00 PM

*shrug*

Frankly I don’t know that any IG has said anything on the matter, I know you claim it but again your credibility is so weak I can’t really be bothered to check.

Maybe you should stop spamming ‘WOLF’ if you want people to listen to you?

Tlaloc on January 19, 2016 at 7:13 PM

Tlaloc on January 19, 2016 at 7:13 PM

Ha,Ha. Only because you won’t look.

My link was to the IG letter he sent to Congress.

Sorry it wasn’t a link to the goat site you like to visit.

Barred on January 19, 2016 at 7:25 PM

Really need to hear from the IT guy who’s taking the 5th. Give him immunity for all the illegal stuff Hillary ordered him to do and let’s get to the bottom of this.

forest on January 19, 2016 at 2:11 PM

That’s what I hope will happen. The IT guy brings down the supermen. lol

Misha on January 19, 2016 at 2:47 PM

That IT guy already has an expensive DC legal team working for him – not sure how he can afford it (wink wink). My guess is, that if he plays nicely, and doesn’t tell all – he’ll find a princely sum of money, deposited in his name, in an offshore account.

Hill60 on January 19, 2016 at 7:29 PM

It’s on CNN’s web home!

talkingpoints on January 19, 2016 at 7:45 PM

No I’ll point out the same thing I did originally- the only links on memeorandum are from rightwing sites as of now.

http://memeorandum.com/

That might change but hasn’t so far.

Tlaloc on January 19, 2016 at 7:08 PM

Yes, because memeorandum notes every single news organization that reports something. If it’s supposed to then they aren’t doing their job. They forgot the NYT, AP, NBC, TheDailyBeast, HuffingtonPost. And your implication was that it was only rightwing sites reporting the story. Funny, that you left WaPo and mediaite of the mememorandum list. Heave, ho.

Yes I know, unlike what gets spewed in the right wing echo chamber real data takes time to collect and validate.

Tlaloc on January 19, 2016 at 7:09 PM

Or YOU picked an article that supports your echo-chamber rather than using more current information.

https://www.cms.gov/Research-Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/NationalHealthExpendData/Downloads/highlights.pdf

And still doesn’t address the promise to bend the cost curve downward to below where it was.

HumpBot Salvation on January 19, 2016 at 7:46 PM

What we need is a President who can’t or won’t follow national security laws. I think it’s clear that Clinton thought she could get away with intentionally breaking the law, but got caught. So she’s adopted the standard Clinton procedure, which is to try to lie your way out of it.

grumpyank on January 19, 2016 at 8:10 PM

“With Tadlack there are no goals or goal post.”

Exactly. He/she just likes to disagree.

grumpyank on January 19, 2016 at 8:21 PM

I’m very happy to listen to credible sources.

Kenny Bania on January 19, 2016 at 7:11 PM

Is NBC News “Credible” enough for you, Comedy Gold? That was your Comedy Mentor’s network, after all…

How about a little fire, Scarecrow?

Hillary Clinton Emails Held Info Beyond Top Secret: IG

Hillary Clinton Emails Held Info Beyond Top Secret: IG

Emails from Hillary Clinton’s home server contained information classified at levels higher than previously known, including a level meant to protect some of the most sensitive U.S. intelligence, according to a document obtained by NBC News.

In a letter to lawmakers, the intelligence community’s internal watchdog says some of Clinton’s emails contained information classified Top Secret/Special Access Program, a secrecy designation that includes some of the most closely held U.S. intelligence matters.

Two American intelligence officials tell NBC News these are not the same two emails from Clinton’s server that have long been reported as containing information deemed Top Secret.

Oh, and CNN also has the story now, too. Are they now a “credible mainstream source” or will you demote them?

(Drum Roll)

F-

Del Dolemonte on January 19, 2016 at 9:01 PM

Del Dolemonte on January 19, 2016 at 9:01 PM

Hillary is the only credible source.

HidetheDecline on January 19, 2016 at 9:09 PM

Never voted for either GWB or GHWB.

Tlaloc on January 19, 2016 at 6:10 PM

Doesn’t matter. You’re part of the same group, so you’re the same people. you taught me that.

Still mad I ignored your whiny stalker routine?

Tlaloc on January 19, 2016 at 6:11 PM

Still can’t try to discredit people without lying about what they say?

You know, it’s funny, you talk about quoting people, and yet, I have quoted you at every turn, but every single time you make these accusations, you provide no quotes. You are asked for quotes, and you leave the thread without comment.

So you ready to talk about the merit of quoting things around you? Or you still intent on trying to sidetrack people with non-related and false accusations?

The Schaef on January 19, 2016 at 9:24 PM

I’m very happy to listen to credible sources.

Tlaloc on January 19, 2016 at 7:11 PM

You ignored 2,000 scientific studies to make a scientific claim based on something out of Webster’s Dictionary. That’s how much you value credible sources.

The Schaef on January 19, 2016 at 9:25 PM

Well look there. The list keeps on growing.

Inspector General: Clinton emails had intel from most secretive, classified programs — EXCLUSIVE: Hillary Clinton’s emails on her unsecured, homebrew server contained intelligence from the U.S. government’s most secretive and highly classified programs, according to an unclassified letter …
+
Discussion: NBC News, CNN, The Daily Caller, Liberal Values, Weasel Zippers, Doug Ross, Townhall.com, Business Insider, Hot Air, Washington Post, Le·gal In·sur·rec· tion, Washington Free Beacon, John Hawkins’ Right Wing News, Power Line, Mediaite, Fox News Insider and Front Page Magazine

Especially like this from “Liberal Values”

The news report initially came from Fox in what was labeled as an exclusive report earlier today. Subsequently the report was verified independently by real news outlets including CNN , CBS News, NBC News, and AP. CNN reported that, “A spokeswoman for the inspector general confirmed to CNN the report was accurate.” NBC News was among the news services which contained their own copy of the letter. They report:

Emails from Hillary Clinton’s home server contained information classified at levels higher than previously known, including a level meant to protect some of the most sensitive U.S. intelligence, according to a document obtained by NBC News.

In a letter to lawmakers, the intelligence community’s internal watchdog says some of Clinton’s emails contained information classified Top Secret/Special Access Program, a secrecy designation that includes some of the most closely held U.S. intelligence matters.

Two American intelligence officials tell NBC News these are not the same two emails from Clinton’s server that have long been reported as containing information deemed Top Secret.

While I would normally ignore reports from Fox, the independent confirmation from CNN and NBC News suggests that this aspect of the report should also be taken seriously:

Wrong again, shocker.

HumpBot Salvation on January 19, 2016 at 10:58 PM

Wrong again, shocker.

HumpBot Salvation on January 19, 2016 at 10:58 PM

And on that note….tlaloc has left the building.

:p

Solaratov on January 19, 2016 at 11:39 PM

After seeing for myself the IG report/letter to Congress and Govt officials and reading some of the responses attempting to ignore overwhelming evidence against Hillary Clinton, one can come to two obvious conclusions. 1. She is guilty of having classified information on a unsecured server. 2. You have to be blind not to admit that,(sorry to those people on this post who think otherwise, you know who you are). 3. Other personnel were complicit in her offenses. That being said, it is incomprehensible that some action will not be taken. I don’t think I am being overly melodramatic when I believe the entire Federal Justice Dept. would basically implode into chaos if no legal actions were taken.

whsiii on January 20, 2016 at 8:19 AM

You ignored 2,000 scientific studies to make a scientific claim based on something out of Webster’s Dictionary. That’s how much you value credible sources.

The Schaef on January 19, 2016 at 9:25 PM

In Tlaloc-world, “rejected” = “disproven,” “accepted” = “proven,” he said so himself. Therefore it should come as no surprise that facts and sources are completely beside the point.

GrumpyOldFart on January 20, 2016 at 8:36 AM

Bad server, bad. You know she’s not going to take the fall for any of this, nor will any of her underlings. Gotta get what we can get. What the IG didn’t tell us is were any of the super duper secret stuff on her server stolen or hidden in plain sight in return for a check to the Clinton Money Laundering Foundation. Always follow the money.

Kissmygrits on January 20, 2016 at 8:56 AM

The harridan’s mouthpieces are out saying the IG is coordinating or leaking these reports with the GOP to hurt her campaign.

Why isn’t she in FBI custody already? Can someone explain that? Any average Jane would be long ago, so why not her thighness?

dogsoldier on January 20, 2016 at 9:04 AM

I’m very happy to listen to credible sources.

Kenny Bania on January 19, 2016 at 7:11 PM

Like CNN, right? Let’s count the ways that CNN has been “credible” throughout their sad history:

1. CNN aired a totally fabricated report claiming that the US had nerve-gassed civilians in Laos during the Vietnam War. Veteran CNN war reporter Peter Arnett lost his job over that one.

F-#1.

2. CNN later covered up Saddam Hussein’s atrocities against his own people for 10 years. They did so solely so they could keep their precious Baghdad Bureau up and running. Their CEO admitted this journalistic fraud in an editorial in another journalistic fraud, namely the NY Times.

F-#2.

3. And a few years after that scandal, that very same CNN CEO had to resign in disgrace after falsely accusing US soldiers of “murdering” reporters in Iraq.

F-#3.

Now, if you can find 3 comparable examples of journalistic fraud being committed by “Faux News”, then maybe we’ll stop laughing at you. But we all know that you brain-dead Democrats always whine about Faux News, but whenever you’re challenged to actually prove their bias, or challenged to actually cite examples of their journalistic malpractices that are on a par with the CNN examples I cite above, you idiots never can do so, and simply run away.

But I can fondly recall a time when you Democrats had absolutely no problem with Faux News being a “credible news source”; that would be in late October and early November of 2000, when the Faux News affiliate in Portland, Maine broke the 30-year-old Chimpy Bush DUI story just a few days before the Bush-Gore election. How come you idiots didn’t whine about the “credibility” of Faux News on that occasion? We all know the answer.

F-#4.

Del Dolemonte on January 20, 2016 at 10:46 AM

I liked this paragraph from the NBC News article:

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/hillary-clinton-emails-contained-info-above-top-secret-ig-n499886

An intelligence official familiar with the matter told NBC News that the special access program in question was so sensitive that McCullough and some of his aides had to receive clearance to be read in on it before viewing the sworn declaration about the Clinton emails.

So it wasn’t classified; but the IG investigating had to get higher security clearance and approval just to read the declarations about the e-mails (not even the e-mails themselves).

Yeah… that sounds a bit classified-y to me.
But I’ll admit; I’m no expert on classified documents… maybe stuff you need to be read into before seeing also qualifies as stuff you can have on unsecured servers…

Anyone want to try that argument?
It might be the best Hillary defense you’ve got remaining…

gekkobear on January 20, 2016 at 11:35 AM