Hillary Clinton's scandals explained briefly

[LivingWordUnity]

The swamp of politics will not be drained until we (people) eliminate private campaign financing completely.

I agree. Trump's campaign has been mostly self-financed. By contrast, Hillary Clinton's campaign is financed by George Soros and other Wallstreet billionaires and Saudi Arabia and others. America will be on the auction block if she gets elected.

 

[redleghunter]

And of course there is no direct collusion between the crony capitalists and Democrats:

WIKILEAKS 34069 - Citibank

https://www.wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/34069

Fw:

From: fromanm@citi.com
To: prouse@barackobama.com, jmessina@barackobama.com, john.podesta@gmail.com
Date: 2008-11-03 02:09
Subject: Fw:

Attached is the latest version of the Personnel org chart, taking into account the input I received from Jim earlier this evening.

Pete/Jim, other than the input from Jenn Clark re systems people, I think we have what we need from the campaign. As we discussed, between the vetting, cluster and confirmation teams, we could end up needing additional research resources, so if there are additional people you'd like to place and there are additional slots, we might want to discuss that at some point.

One question: In moving Matt Nugen to Public Liaison, are we going to have an issue not having someone from the Biden camp in senior management?

John, the only vacanies in your court are the Energy/Environment cluster head and senior personnel staff member.

Chris/Katy, please let me know what else you need from me to get these folks on the list for badges, payroll, equipment, etc.

Please let me know if you have any comments/corrections. Thanks.

 

[redleghunter]

I agree. Trump's campaign has been mostly self-financed. By contrast, Hillary Clinton's campaign is financed by George Soros and other Wallstreet billionaires and Saudi Arabia and others. America will be on the auction block if she gets elected.

See the Citibank wikileaks post above.

 

[redleghunter]

And for the millennials out there...this is what the HRC campaign thinks of you:

WIKILEAKS - she needs a more trivial approach to her arsenal

https://wikileaks.org/podesta-emails/emailid/34866

Begin forwarded message:

From: wendy
Subject: Re: Mook Memo-March Matters
Date: February 10, 2016 at 10:05:58 AM EST
To: Mbronfein

Reviewed the memo -> And still no mention of driving young people just high level references to groups like AA, Hispanic & Women.

It's sad but I'd also advise she needs a more trivial approach to her an arsenal. BS has made his campaign/movement symbiotic with a pop culture trend. HRC needs this kind of infusion to pull younger voters. And she may not be the best face of it so so maybe it's trending figures to advocate for her b/c that's the crap that young people pay attention to. I hate to generalize a generation but by social media nature, they "follow". So if someone they identify as cool endorses - they will likely fall in line with that candidate.

(Don't forget Bill had "don't stop" campaign song, that was a pop culture play and had his Saxophone moments. It's {redacted profanity} dumb but being "cool" counts for more than it maybe should)

 

[LivingWordUnity]

See the Citibank wikileaks post above.

At one point, the Hillary Clinton campaign strategists even boasted openly about how they have way more money than Trump and how they were sure that Hillary Clinton would win the election because she has more money to blow on ads.

 

[redleghunter]

At one point, the Hillary Clinton campaign strategists even boasted openly about how they have way more money than Trump and how they were sure that Hillary Clinton would win the election because she has more money to blow on ads.

We already knew the establishment media was behind her. We kinda knew all politicians are beholden to Wall Street. But this collusion even before the election day in 2008? Wow.

 

[Uncle Siggy]

And for the millennials out there...this is what the HRC campaign thinks of you:

Sounds like she thinks they're shallow and is going to count on that to help get herself elected...

 

[imind]

give it up...this is just pathetic...

 

[redleghunter]

give it up...this is just pathetic...

Anthony Weiner?

 

[MrSpikey]

The statute does not include "intent." That's the point.

The first clause:

"Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or"

Hillary's possession, access to or control over any document she was entitled to have in relation to her position would have been authorized.

The second:

(f)
Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

What's the proper place of custody for an email?

Even without going through the rest of the boilerplate, "gross negligence" relates to intent, so the statue does indeed include it.

 

[MrSpikey]

Yes. How do documents which already have an originating source lose labels? Someone must remove them. No source necessary. Let's employ a bit of brain power.

Yes, let's.

While I'm sure there are Gov't standards relating to attaching labels to digital files, are these always preserved in every email interaction?

You might have noticed that copying and pasting parts of a larger document is a popular option here. That wouldn't preserve any such labels. But under the law you cited, that would be fine, as long as it wasn't transmitted in any of the dubious ways that law lays out, labels or no labels.

 

[redleghunter]

Hillary's possession, access to or control over any document she was entitled to have in relation to her position would have been authorized.

Not on an unapproved private unsecured server not certified to contain, transmit and receive classified information.

Was she authorized to view the classified material? Check

Was she authorized to transmit the classified information to people with proper clearance and need to know? Check.

Was she authorized to do both of the above outside of an approved compartment and on an unapproved, unsecured network? No.

The set up of a private server is the intent. Even though intent is not necessary to invoke the statute.

 

[redleghunter]

What's the proper place of custody for an email?

On an approved and secure network. Not on an unsecured network at home.

 

[redleghunter]

While I'm sure there are Gov't standards relating to attaching labels to digital files, are these always preserved in every email interaction?

Yes they must be retained in every transmission. If they are not, it is called classified spillage which is a security violation requiring investigation and systems sanitation.

Safeguarding classified information is not comparable to interweb activity. Perhaps that was the problem.

 

[MrSpikey]

Not on an unapproved private unsecured server not certified to contain, transmit and receive classified information.

Was she authorized to view the classified material? Check

Then she didn't have unauthorized "access to" it, as per the statute. You ignore the rest of the requirements. What a surprise...

Was she authorized to do both of the above outside of an approved compartment and on an unapproved, unsecured network? No.

If the people who received it were entitled to do so, the statute is clearly not broken,

The set up of a private server is the intent. Even though intent is not necessary to invoke the statute.

Sorry, that made my laugh out loud. Make your mind up, please...

 

[redleghunter]

You might have noticed that copying and pasting parts of a larger document is a popular option here. That wouldn't preserve any such labels. But under the law you cited, that would be fine, as long as it wasn't transmitted in any of the dubious ways that law lays out, labels or no labels.

Actually a lot of what people cut and paste on the internet to another location is copyright violation.

However we are not dealing with the unsecured unclassified network are we? We are talking about closely held national highly classified information.

Information which should NEVER been on a private server.

 

[MrSpikey]

On an approved and secure network. Not on an unsecured network at home.

That's not stated in the law. Unlike physical documents, emails duplicate and end up in multiple places - the author's computer, their email server, the destination server, the recipients email. I'd agree they need to update the wording to apply to digital situations, as opposed to physical documents that can be kept under physical security.

 

[MrSpikey]

Yes they must be retained in every transmission. If they are not, it is called classified spillage which is a security violation requiring investigation and systems sanitation.

Safeguarding classified information is not comparable to interweb activity. Perhaps that was the problem.

If someone discusses one of these verbally with a colleague, how should that document markup be retained?

 

[MrSpikey]

Actually a lot of what people cut and paste on the internet to another location is copyright violation.

However we are not dealing with the unsecured unclassified network are we? We are talking about closely held national highly classified information.

Information which should NEVER been on a private server.

We're talking about information exchanged between people who are entitled to have it - which clearly does not violate the statute you provided, however it was transmitted.

I'd actually tend to agree with you on the principle of the private server, but the FBI didn't find evidence to bring charges. We can talk stupid or reckless, but not criminal.

 

[redleghunter]

Then she didn't have unauthorized "access to" it, as per the statute. You ignore the rest of the requirements. What a surprise...



If the people who received it were entitled to do so, the statute is clearly not broken,



Sorry, that made my laugh out loud. Make your mind up, please...

I think you missed the point of what I posted.

As Sec State HRC was granted access to classified information. She was authorized to transmit said data to those who had the proper clearance and need to know.

She was authorized to do all of the above on only approved, properly secured classified systems.

Her private server met none of the above criteria. None. She knowingly used her private unsecured server to conduct classified business transmitting classified information over an unsecured unapproved system to people who used unsecured unapproved systems. That is illegal.

I am not regurgitating this from some internet site. I have a job which involves handling such classified material on a daily basis for over 25 years.

Just because someone has access and need to know does not mean they can take classified information home with them and do what they will. There are designated areas and procedures for handling classified information. On a home or foundation server is not the place. Not even the same ballpark.