Intel analyst: Finding SAP material in Hillary’s e-mail is indeed a smoking gun

posted at 4:01 pm on January 21, 2016 by Ed Morrissey

Did Inspector General Charles McCullough provide a “smoking gun” demonstrating illegality on Hillary Clinton’s unauthorized and secret e-mail server? Depends on who you ask. Despite finding information relating to highly classified “special access programs” in several dozen e-mails, it’s just an issue of poor judgment, according to David Axelrod:

NBC News talked to “officials” who claim the information exposed was “innocuous,” but the only one on the record is Team Hillary flack Brian Fallon — who accused the Obama-appointed McCullough yesterday of being part of a Republican conspiracy:

The classified material included in the latest batch of Hillary Clinton emails flagged by an internal watchdog involved discussions of CIA drone strikes, which are among the worst kept secrets in Washington, senior U.S. officials briefed on the matter tell NBC News.

The officials say the emails included relatively “innocuous” conversations by State Department officials about the CIA drone program, which technically is considered a “Special Access Program” because officials are briefed on it only if they have a “need to know.”

Well, maybe. But if they are so innocuous, why are some lawmakers barred from accessing them?

Some of Hillary Clinton’s emails on her private server contained information so secret that senior lawmakers who oversee the State Department cannot read them without fulfilling additional security requirements, Fox News has learned.

The emails in question, as Fox News first reported earlier this week, contained intelligence classified at a level beyond “top secret.” Because of this designation, not all the lawmakers on key committees reviewing the case have high enough clearances.

A source with knowledge of the intelligence review told Fox News that senior members of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, despite having high-level clearances, are among those not authorized to read the intelligence from so-called “special access programs” without taking additional security steps — like signing new non-disclosure agreements.

These programs are highly restricted to protect intelligence community sources and methods.

Make no mistake, writes intel analyst and former Special Ops member Anthony DeChristopher in The Hill today, this is indeed a smoking gun. Exposure of SAP data should be enough to make anyone with a significant clearance “mess their pantsuit”:

As more information from Hillary Clinton’s server has been made available, it is clear that the contents of the server contained Imagery Intelligence (IMINT), Human Intelligence (HUMINT), and Signal Intelligence (SIGINT).  Understanding that much of the information has beenretroactively classified, there are a few facts that are tough to grasp—at least from the perspective of an intelligence practitioner.

First, when imagery that is classified SECRET//NOFORN (no foreign national) is viewed, regardless of the absence of classification markings, it is distinctly evident. Second, any documents that contain or reference HUMINT is always classified SECRET, and if specificnames of sources or handlers are mentioned, they are at a minimum SECRET//NOFORN.  Third, SIGINT is always classified at the TS level.  It’s not uncommon for some SI to be downgraded and shared over SECRET mediums, however, it is highly unlikely that a Secretary of State would receive downgraded intelligence.  Finally, SAP intelligence has been discovered on Clinton’s private server, and many are now calling this the smoking gun.  SAP is a specialized management system of additional security controls designed to protect SAR or Special Access Required.  SAR has to do with extremely perishable operational methods and capabilities, and only selected individuals who are “read on” or “indoctrinated” are permitted access to these programs.  The mishandling of SAP can cause catastrophic damage to current collection methods, techniques and personnel.

In other words, if you have worked with classified material for more than a day, it seems highly implausible that someone could receive any of the aforementioned over an un-secure medium without alarm bells sounding.  However, reading about a Special Access Program on an unclassified device would make anyone even remotely familiar with intelligence mess their pantsuit.

DeChristopher calls this a time for Hillary — and the FBI — to make good on her declaration that “no one is too big to jail”:

With more damming information being released almost weekly now, it’s interesting that during last Sunday’s Democratic debate, Clinton resoundingly stated: “No one is too big for jail.”  Although the context was referencing bank CEOs and Hedge fund managers, the obvious correlation left many scratching their heads and wondering—did Hillary Clinton just say, “I dare you” to the FBI?”

Not to the FBI — to the Department of Justice. And it’s time that Loretta Lynch called Hillary’s dare, or be asked to explain why she won’t.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Not to the FBI — to the Department of Justice. And it’s time that Loretta Lynch called Hillary’s dare, or be asked to explain why she won’t.

So you just found out that the story about above top secret materials was a bad joke and your response is naturally to insist this requires a grand jury?

Your flow chart is very simple- no matter what the input your output is always to demand the clintons be tried.

Tlaloc on January 21, 2016 at 5:39 PM

another liberal troll free thread

The Notorious G.O.P on January 21, 2016 at 5:42 PM

The fog of war…?

Seven Percent Solution on January 21, 2016 at 5:43 PM

Biden needs to jump in.

anotherJoe on January 21, 2016 at 4:04 PM

I have no doubt that will come to pass.

1. Consider that like a snowball rolling down ‘Hill’ (pardon the pun) the criminal case against #Comrade Clinton is gaining it’s own momentum.

The outcome will either be her in an Orange pant suit or the reputation for the rule of law and the FBI in tatters.

2. Biden is the only one his majesty would trust to maintain his ‘legacy’ of destroying Liberty.
3. There is no love loss between #Comrade Clinton and Obama.

So Biden is the likely replacement candidate.

Now the question is what running mate will the Democratic National socialist Committee pick to energize their voters?

Most likely from the distaff side of the party.
Plus perhaps one of minority qualities so to speak.

Throw in another assurance of staying the Obama course and you arrive at Michelle Obama.

Torcert on January 21, 2016 at 5:53 PM

Your flow chart is very simple- no matter what the input your output is always to demand the clintons be tried.

Tlaloc on January 21, 2016 at 5:39 PM

In the gun liability thread you stated that you want everything to go to the courts and let them decide, but when hilLIARy is involved in something illegal, you don’t want the courts involved.
Care to explain the difference?

dentarthurdent on January 21, 2016 at 5:57 PM

Venezuela does it better.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on January 21, 2016 at 5:58 PM

another liberal troll free thread

The Notorious G.O.P on January 21, 2016 at 5:42 PM

Missed it by that much……

dentarthurdent on January 21, 2016 at 5:58 PM

no matter what the input your output is always to demand the clintons be tried.

Tlaloc on January 21, 2016 at 5:39 PM

Well, at least now he’s conceding that conservatives want the trial to happen as part of the justice system.

The Schaef on January 21, 2016 at 5:59 PM

When you say “smoking gun” do you mean one of nonpartisan’s “nonlethal” skeet guns?

anuts on January 21, 2016 at 5:38 PM

Or more like the one Vince Foster met in Fort Marcy park?

dentarthurdent on January 21, 2016 at 5:59 PM

Grandma done stole the lock box code.

Obama got no secretes now.

The Senate’s crimes known.

The House incest on film.

Grandma gonna run or burn it all down.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on January 21, 2016 at 6:01 PM

Venezuela does it better.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on January 21, 2016 at 5:58 PM

Ohhh.. don’t get me started…

Torcert on January 21, 2016 at 6:06 PM

Or more like the one Vince Foster met in Fort Marcy park?
dentarthurdent on January 21, 2016 at 5:59 PM

Nah… I still don’t think this does any damage to Hillary’s freedom or even her campaign. The people willing to vote for her already don’t exactly come across as caring about the law.

anuts on January 21, 2016 at 6:14 PM

In the gun liability thread you stated that you want everything to go to the courts and let them decide, but when hilLIARy is involved in something illegal, you don’t want the courts involved.
Care to explain the difference?

dentarthurdent on January 21, 2016 at 5:57 PM

I have no problem with you suing Hillary for anything you want. You’re talking about a prosecution, very different thing.

Tlaloc on January 21, 2016 at 6:16 PM

Tialoc…pssst she’s not family. You don’t need to shred the few ounces of integrity that you have left.

CWforFreedom on January 21, 2016 at 6:27 PM

Tialoc…pssst she’s not family. You don’t need to shred the few ounces of integrity that you have left.

CWforFreedom on January 21, 2016 at 6:27 PM

From where did you get the idea he had/has any integrity? LOL :D

Anti-ControI on January 21, 2016 at 6:36 PM

Tialoc…pssst she’s not family. You don’t need to shred the few ounces of integrity that you have left.
CWforFreedom on January 21, 2016 at 6:27 PM

From where did you get the idea he had/has any integrity? LOL :D
Anti-ControI on January 21, 2016 at 6:36 PM

How do we know?… has anyone ever seen Tlaloc and Chelsea in the same room together?
Or in different rooms at the same time?

LegendHasIt on January 21, 2016 at 6:42 PM

I have no problem with you suing Hillary for anything you want. You’re talking about a prosecution, very different thing.

Tlaloc on January 21, 2016 at 6:16 PM

So you don’t think the courts should be used to make decisions about justice and the law when there is sufficient evidence of criminal activity?
Is the legal system supposed to be about enforcing the law or just a lottery game for people to take money from other people?

Come on – splain it to us rubes – What is the main purpose of our legal system?

dentarthurdent on January 21, 2016 at 6:48 PM

Tialoc…pssst she’s not family. You don’t need to shred the few ounces of integrity that you have left.

CWforFreedom on January 21, 2016 at 6:27 PM

Uh huh, that’d have more impact if you guys weren’t dredging every sewer to try and find anything you could throw at hillary.

Tlaloc on January 21, 2016 at 6:49 PM

So you don’t think the courts should be used to make decisions about justice and the law when there is sufficient evidence of criminal activity?
Is the legal system supposed to be about enforcing the law or just a lottery game for people to take money from other people?

Come on – splain it to us rubes – What is the main purpose of our legal system?

dentarthurdent on January 21, 2016 at 6:48 PM

I’ve highlighted the flaw in your argument.

Tlaloc on January 21, 2016 at 6:50 PM

What doesn’t seem to be occurring to anyone is that other people outside of State had to be involved in sending classified material to the SoS over these insecure channels.

There is no way that all this material evolved or was initiated under State’s aegis.

This intel was developed elsewhere and sent to Hillary or her surrogates over Hill’s bathroom server. They knew. It is because there is a huge team of OTHER PLAYERS all through the Administration- including Barry?- who would be implicated in this security failure that this will ultimately result in nothing but some low-level reassignments.

Dolce Far Niente on January 21, 2016 at 5:26 PM

Not necessarily. The “outside of State” agency/department sent the classified emails and/or documents over authorized, secure means to State (SIPRNET or JWICS), where they thought the emails/documents would remain on the secure network, viewed only within a SCIF. Then someone (illegally) at State used “sneakernet” (printing the document/email off the secure network, removed the classification headings, then scanning the document/email into an unsecure network) to email them to HRC. The folks at the originating agency/department would have no knowledge of the illegal “spillage” of classified documents/emails from the secure network over to an unsecure network.

Not only would those using the “sneakernet” be criminally liable, but also those maintaining the SCIF who should have been monitoring the activities within and should have prevented the “spillage”.

This would mean, of course, that several other individuals are as guilty as HRC. Who are they and what deals are the FBI/DOJ willing to make to entice them to talk?

It’s ironic that all this is in the news. Today, when I fired up my government workstation, I was informed that I needed to complete my annual Cyber Awareness training and test which deals with proper safeguarding sensitive and classified materials.

GAlpha10 on January 21, 2016 at 6:50 PM

I am convinced of it: the Clintons have major dirt on the president, and/or his closest confidants.

Aizen on January 21, 2016 at 4:15 PM

Email by nature involves multiple people. If Mrs Clinton is guilty of mishandling information then so are a lot of other people — senders and recipients — possibly including Mr Obama.

Moreover, government employs lots of people to look for security vulnerabilities and find problems such as Mrs Clinton’s server and insecure emails. At the very least the NSA was monitoring everything going into and out of the country, therefore they were monitoring her insecure emails too. Similarly the state department IT staff should have been asking questions and too their counterparts in friendly foreign governments.

That leads to some harsh possibilities:

(1) The security agencies of the USA and her allies are spectacularly incompetent and failed to notice a major, long-term security breach.

(2) The breach was noticed but nobody did anything about it because of idleness or incompetence or treachery in the security agencies.

(3) The breach was noticed and properly reported but nothing was done about it because of incompetence, idleness or treachery at a level of government higher than SoS — presidential level.

(4) The breach was noticed and properly reported but nothing was done about it because this was actually a sophisticated intelligence bluff intended to spread misinformation to enemies.

Of those four options, 4 seems very unlikely and 1 not much more likely given the time-scales and the number of people who should have been aware of the problem. Option 2 also seems unlikely. That leaves option 3: namely that this breach was done with the knowledge and connivance of the president.

People are still talking about this as if it could be explained away by carelessness or a lack of training, but those explanations are ridiculous. Mrs Clinton was SoS and former “first-lady”; there is no way she didn’t know what was and wasn’t classified or what the risks were. Moreover, if you are technologically inept you don’t go to the trouble of setting-up your own email server when you could just use the systems already in place.

People are also talking about this as if she alone could be blamed; that too is ridiculous since there must have been dozens if not hundreds of people who could have, and should have, been aware of that there was, or might be, a problem. The more people involved, the harder it is to believe that this was merely a prolonged, unnoticed mishap.

Whether these misdeeds were committed for idealism or money or both is yet to be discovered, but these events certainly weren’t ‘happenstance’ or an ‘unfortunate misunderstanding’ or have some other non-deliberate cause.

Therefore we must conclude that she deliberately exposed that information and if we rule out gross negligence in the intelligence agencies then it is inconceivable that Mr Obama was not aware of this exposure — because people are paid to tell him such things — and therefore he must have somehow approved of it.

In short, the ‘major dirt’ that she has on the President is quite possibly that they colluded in this matter and that the top office of government is occupied by a traitor and criminal.

YiZhangZhe on January 21, 2016 at 6:50 PM

So you don’t think the courts should be used to make decisions about justice and the law when there is sufficient evidence of criminal activity?
Is the legal system supposed to be about enforcing the law or just a lottery game for people to take money from other people?

Come on – splain it to us rubes – What is the main purpose of our legal system?

dentarthurdent on January 21, 2016 at 6:48 PM

I’ve highlighted the flaw in your argument.

Tlaloc on January 21, 2016 at 6:50 PM

Translation: I’ve been chased into a corner.

itsspideyman on January 21, 2016 at 6:56 PM

I’ve highlighted the flaw in your argument.

Tlaloc on January 21, 2016 at 6:50 PM

Stop the charade. You know as well as we do that there are, at last count, 1340 classified email/documents that were either in the 30,000 emails released by State, or found on her illegal, unsecure, private server. This is not a claim. This is a fact. Everyone of those emails is evidence of a violation of the Espionage Act, a federal felony. So, there is more than sufficient evidence of criminal activity. How many more classified emails/documents do you need to see to accept that your heroine is a criminal.

GAlpha10 on January 21, 2016 at 6:56 PM

I’ve highlighted the flaw in your argument.

Tlaloc on January 21, 2016 at 6:50 PM

You’ve highlighted exactly the fact that you leftards keep trying to cover up and ignore.
There IS in fact more than enough evidence to put her and her entire staff on trial – and let the courts decide.

dentarthurdent on January 21, 2016 at 6:57 PM

I’ve got a question.

Has anyone read anywhere whether or not Hillary herself actually had clearance to access the SAP material?

From the sounds of things, it seems that it’s possible she did not (a whole nother can of worms crimes).

If she did not, who sent them to her? Blumenthal?

Oxymoron on January 21, 2016 at 6:58 PM

Uh huh, that’d have more impact if you guys weren’t dredging every sewer to try and find anything you could throw at hillary.

Tlaloc on January 21, 2016 at 6:49 PM

Well that’s where she does most of her work – so it’s the most logical place to look for the evidence.

dentarthurdent on January 21, 2016 at 6:58 PM

Translation: I’ve been chased into a corner.

itsspideyman on January 21, 2016 at 6:56 PM

This corner is incredibly spacious and un-constricting…

And there are no walls. Are you sure you know what a corner is?

Tlaloc on January 21, 2016 at 6:59 PM

This corner is incredibly spacious and un-constricting…
And there are no walls. Are you sure you know what a corner is?

Tlaloc on January 21, 2016 at 6:59 PM

To be expected of someone with no morals, ethics or boundaries, and no facts on your side of the argument.

dentarthurdent on January 21, 2016 at 7:02 PM

In short, the ‘major dirt’ that she has on the President is quite possibly that they colluded in this matter and that the top office of government is occupied by a traitor and criminal.

YiZhangZhe on January 21, 2016 at 6:50 PM

BINGO!!!!

GAlpha10 on January 21, 2016 at 7:03 PM

What’s wrong? Don’t you like Tiaioc’s circular logic?

blink on January 21, 2016 at 7:04 PM

Coincidently, we just watched Monty Python In Search of the Holy Grail the other night.
I keep picturing the black knight on the ground with no arms or legs yelling at King Arthur that he’s fine, it’s just a flesh wound, and “come back and fight me you coward”……

dentarthurdent on January 21, 2016 at 7:07 PM


This would mean, of course, that several other individuals are as guilty as HRC. Who are they and what deals are the FBI/DOJ willing to make to entice them to talk?

It’s ironic that all this is in the news. Today, when I fired up my government workstation, I was informed that I needed to complete my annual Cyber Awareness training and test which deals with proper safeguarding sensitive and classified materials.

GAlpha10 on January 21, 2016 at 6:50 PM

Had you done anything remotely similar you would be writing us from jail.


People are also talking about this as if she alone could be blamed; that too is ridiculous since there must have been dozens if not hundreds of people who could have, and should have, been aware of that there was, or might be, a problem. The more people involved, the harder it is to believe that this was merely a prolonged, unnoticed mishap.

Whether these misdeeds were committed for idealism or money or both is yet to be discovered, but these events certainly weren’t ‘happenstance’ or an ‘unfortunate misunderstanding’ or have some other non-deliberate cause.

Therefore we must conclude that she deliberately exposed that information and if we rule out gross negligence in the intelligence agencies then it is inconceivable that Mr Obama was not aware of this exposure — because people are paid to tell him such things — and therefore he must have somehow approved of it.

In short, the ‘major dirt’ that she has on the President is quite possibly that they colluded in this matter and that the top office of government is occupied by a traitor and criminal.

YiZhangZhe on January 21, 2016 at 6:50 PM

Nice analysis.
I’m not totally sure we can rule out gross negligence as a contributing factor to the cover-up, however.

AesopFan on January 21, 2016 at 7:28 PM

I’m not totally sure we can rule out gross negligence as a contributing factor to the cover-up, however.

AesopFan on January 21, 2016 at 7:28 PM

In my mind, there are two types of negligence: deliberate and non-deliberate.

For those who truly don’t know any better, they are probably not deliberately being negligent, but are still failing to comply with laws, rules, and regulations.

The deliberately negligent are those who are purposely failing to comply with laws, rules, and regulations because they feel they are above the law, the rules don’t apply to them, or breaking the law, rules, or regulations is necessary to fulfill their end result.

In the case of HRC, she and her accomplices are deliberately negligent. The private server and email service was deliberately set up to allow her to hide from Congressional oversight, FOIA requests, and prying eyes.

Yes, it was more convenient. It is much easier to obstruct justice if you have sole possession of all of your email traffic, and can pick and choose which emails get destroyed and which are retained. Her Thighness, and her accomplices, could not be bothered with the minor details of violating numerous federal laws, thousands of times. She believes she is above the law. I hope she falls, and falls hard.

GAlpha10 on January 21, 2016 at 8:04 PM

One reason that some along the chain of information did or said nothing is they were intimidated into doing nothing. Fear can be a powerful motivator to say or do nothing. The Clintons do have a body count.

Tinker on January 21, 2016 at 8:16 PM

No, don’t you understand? If Loretta Lynch refuses to do anything than that proves that Hillary didn’t do anything wrong. After all, a prosecutor never refuses to prosecute someone despite the existence of evidence.

What’s wrong? Don’t you like Tiaioc’s circular logic?

blink on January 21, 2016 at 7:04 PM

Tlaloc should familiarise himself with prosecutorial discretion.

More importantly, should a Republican win the Presidency and barring a last-minute pardon by Obama, a future AG can accept any possible referral and recommendation from the FBI and convene a grand jury. The statute of limitations will not have expired.

Lime in the Coconut on January 21, 2016 at 8:18 PM

If a young, black, gay mid-level analyst at a governmental agency was found to have SAP material on his personal computer at home, he’d get 20 years, at minimum, in a maximum security prison.

But, Tlaloc is just fine with giving an elitist, rich, white, and powerful woman a complete pass for the exact same thing.

Lime in the Coconut on January 21, 2016 at 8:26 PM

Not to the FBI — to the Department of Justice. And it’s time that Loretta Lynch called Hillary’s dare, or be asked to explain why she won’t.

Folks you just need to stop this. It’s Hillary friggin Clinton and the Obama Black Justice Department. Hillary may be a rich white girl but she is a useful rich white girl. There will be no indictment and Queen Pantsuit is not going to jail. Even Obama doesn’t trust Slow Joe Biden to be his presidential surrogate next term. It makes for great blog posts and comments as well as driving talk radio audience gains but there is no one in DC that cares about decency or the rule of law. The GOPe will continue to hide under rock. The Obama mob knows you are helpless…

HatfieldMcCoy on January 21, 2016 at 8:40 PM

As usual Hillary and camp spar over how the info got out, nothing about the damaging info they found, lol. Facts are facts and facts show the IG (who was appointed by Obama) found multiple sap emails were are above top secret. Hillary needs to answer for why she either didn’t understand what top secret/sap means or why she was so incompetent that she endangered lives (not to mention the lives she’s at fault for on benghazi).

soapyjeans on January 21, 2016 at 9:16 PM

Can I ask a dumb question?

Hillary keeps saying she didn’t send or receive classified info. But how on earth does one control what they RECEIVE on e-mail??

Allahs vulva on January 21, 2016 at 11:43 PM

Hillary keeps saying she didn’t send or receive classified info. But how on earth does one control what they RECEIVE on e-mail??

Allahs vulva on January 21, 2016 at 11:43 PM

One creates an external email account and publishes its address, and one appoints one of one’s servants to operate it on one’s behalf.

Then one creates another, internal, email account known only to oneself and the aforementioned servant. One instructs the servant to check all incoming email and to forward only the non-classified items to one’s internal account.

However Mrs Clinton did not, as far as one can tell, follow this procedure and appears to have fibbed rather shamelessly.

YiZhangZhe on January 22, 2016 at 12:39 AM

This is so much bigger than is actually reported. This type of intel is only viewable in a SCIF, meaning for it to end up on Hillary’s private server it must have been surreptitiously smuggled out of an intensely secure environment, and that act alone would warrant serious charges and incarceration. Then whoever loaded it onto the insecure line is in jeopardy, and the receiver (Hillary) also facing serious espionage charges and jail time, particularly since her server was accessed by the Clinton Foundation. This info should be be the lead in EVERY SINGLE STORY WRITTEN on the topic.. I can’t friggin’ believe this is out there and yet the freaking media still carries on like Hillary has a shot at being president. She’ll be in an orange jumpsuit (along with a ton of her cohorts) at the end of this. If she isn’t, then we don’t have a country anymore.

AttilaTheHun on January 22, 2016 at 6:03 AM

Hillary keeps saying she didn’t send or receive classified info. But how on earth does one control what they RECEIVE on e-mail??

You can’t, however, it is the responsibility of anyone with any type of clearance to recognize classified info, and to report it. Everyone with a clearance is trained on what elements of information will make something classified. If a classified document is received via an e-mail, the first act is physically to disconnect the computer from the internet, and turn off the computer so that the received e-mail cannot be sent further.

Failure to report, if deliberate, is a criminal offense, if unintentional, one can wind up with one’s clearance yanked.

F X Muldoon on January 22, 2016 at 7:49 AM

when there is sufficient evidence of criminal activity

Tiaioc on January 21, 2016 at 6:50 PM

There is a huge amount of evidence, overwhelming and irrefutable, whether you you accept that fact or not, it IS a fact.

Slither off.

Her crimes will not go away and they are eating at her campaign, as are Bubba’s crimes against women and their mutual corruption.

If Lynch refuses to prosecute, or Zero pardons Hillary her campaign will suffer even more.

dogsoldier on January 22, 2016 at 7:59 AM

If Loretta Lynch refuses to do anything than that proves that Hillary didn’t do anything wrong.

Don’t you like Tiaioc’s circular logic?

blink on January 21, 2016 at 7:04 PM

It’s even more basic than that:

I note how you’ve phrased that – not disproven, just rejected.

Athos on January 11, 2016 at 4:07 PM

For me the two are synonymous.

Tlaloc on January 11, 2016 at 4:23 PM

Rejected=disproven. Therefore accepted=proven.

Logic doesn’t enter into the equation at all.

GrumpyOldFart on January 22, 2016 at 9:18 AM

Well Hillary is technically right. Her “basement” server never received or sent classified information as that would be illegal. She had arranged for others to review information in a SCIF, launder it and make it clean of any annoying classification and smelling sweet. How could this be bad.

As this laundering works so well with dirty money made clean by being a donation to a charity with an 80% expense ratio, why can’t it work with a server that has been cleaned with a cloth.

Basically she is daring others to call her a crook.

Jay Galt on January 22, 2016 at 12:22 PM

If Loretta Lynch refuses to do anything than that proves that Hillary didn’t do anything wrong.

Don’t you like Tiaioc’s circular logic?

blink on January 21, 2016 at 7:04 PM

It’s even more basic than that:

I note how you’ve phrased that – not disproven, just rejected.

Athos on January 11, 2016 at 4:07 PM

For me the two are synonymous.

Tlaloc on January 11, 2016 at 4:23 PM

Rejected=disproven. Therefore accepted=proven.

Logic doesn’t enter into the equation at all.

GrumpyOldFart on January 22, 2016 at 9:18 AM

Leftists like Bania are incapable of logic.

They cover up that failing by becoming accomplished Liars and Semi-Liars; they live in a George Costanza world, where a Lie isn’t a Lie if you believe it!

And one of the biggest Semi-Lies coming out of this Hillario e-mail thing came right from the top.

Hillario sez: “I never sent or received material marked classified.”

This Semi-Lie satisfies her Low-IQ Democrat Cultists, but in reality, there is no Classified level in the US government system. The levels are Unclassified, Confidential, Secret, and Top Secret.

So she never did send or receive material marked classified, because there is no such thing. Her Meal Ticket taught her well!

Del Dolemonte on January 22, 2016 at 1:09 PM

Your flow chart is very simple- no matter what the input your output is always to demand the clintons be tried.

Tlaloc on January 21, 2016 at 5:39 PM

And with yours, no matter what the input your output is always to claim that it’s a vast right-wing conspiracy.

And?

GrumpyOldFart on January 22, 2016 at 3:02 PM

Then whoever loaded it onto the insecure line is in jeopardy, and the receiver (Hillary) also facing serious espionage charges and jail time, particularly since her server was accessed by the Clinton Foundation. This info should be be the lead in EVERY SINGLE STORY WRITTEN on the topic..
AttilaTheHun on January 22, 2016 at 6:03 AM

Anyone speculating that a volunteer (or employee, even) at The Clinton Library and Massage Parlor was able to access this forbidden info, and pass it on from there? A certain Persian Person could have had such access, and passed it on to ???

And BTW: Since e-mail is by nature “virtual”, with no physical existence, there’s no way to “mark” it classified. Like, with a Sharpie or something? Like wiping it clean with a cloth, or something. “Is.”

ReggieA on January 22, 2016 at 11:29 PM

If the Clinton’s are formally prosecuted they may have to seek political-asylum in Switzerland. One of their major contributor’s Marc Rich did this many years ago so he could evade formal criminal-charges in the United States. If Barack Obama refuses to issue a full pardon, they may have no other choice.

Bugdust172 on January 23, 2016 at 11:02 PM

But what could the president pardon? Before the indictment, trial and conviction. He can’t pardon or commute a sentence that hasn’t been passed. But if the indictment happens it better not involve him, or impeachment is then on the table because all of these things are “high crimes”. You can’t even say it’s lying about sex …or yoga!

virgo on January 24, 2016 at 6:43 AM

virgo;
Gerald Ford issued a full pardon on Richard Nixon. No felony charges at all were filed on Nixon. Bill Clinton issued a full pardon on Marc Rich. There were 65 felony-charges filed on him but none of them ever made it into a court of law to prosecute Mr. Rich. He fled to Switzerland and gave up his American citizenship. His ex-wife funneled bribe-money directly into the Clinton & Gore campaign. Also she “donated” money into Hillary’s Senatorial campaign. The Democrat party will not tolerate formal prosecution on Hillary Clinton in an open court of law. A full pardon will be granted on Hillary. As everyone knows, this is like an open admission of guilt, but she will not have to do time in jail.

Bugdust172 on February 4, 2016 at 7:39 PM

Comment pages: 1 2