Posted on 09/01/2015 8:21:11 PM PDT by Nachum
Solomon reports part of concern about the information being unsecured on Clinton’s home server is that it could have been hacked by the North Koreans–who would then know more about U.S. spying capabilities.
Solomon reports the information was likely summarized from a secure site and sent in unclassified systems up the chain to Clinton.
“One of the most serious potential breaches of national security identified so far by the intelligence community inside Hillary Rodham Clinton’s private emails involves the relaying of classified information concerning the movement of North Korean nuclear assets, which was obtained from spy satellites.
“Multiple intelligence sources who spoke to The Washington Times, solely on the condition of anonymity, said concerns about the movement of the North Korean information through Mrs. Clinton’s unsecured server are twofold.
“First, spy satellite information is frequently classified at the top-secret level and handled within a special compartment called Talent-Keyhole. This means it is one of the most sensitive forms of intelligence gathered by the U.S.
“Second, the North Koreans have assembled a massive cyberhacking army under an elite military spy program known as Bureau 121, which is increasingly aggressive in targeting systems for hacking, especially vulnerable private systems. The North Koreans, for instance, have been blamed by the U.S. for the hack of Sony movie studios.”
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
We have foreign spies in top levels of our government.
Congress should charge Hillary Clinton for military spying and espianoge.
All democrats who back Hillary have blood on their hands... Oh, and nice graphic...
This is serious I wonder if Hillary will go down...
This could be the beginning of the end for Hillary............................... Never happen, her Zombie Voter Army is too strong.
Agreed.
Now what if the Clintons have the "goods" on Obama??
Can anyone explain to me how Hillary is not already in jail facing charges? If this were anyone else but Hillary clinton, the FBI would have already arrested them and the AG would have filed charges. Is she doesnt face charges, the AG is saying US laws no longer apply to anyone. No reason to obey any laws anymore, because the SOS can violate just about any laws there are and not be charge. Democrats are saying there are no absolutes. Sky is the linit, do anything you want, there are no consequences
Trump ripped into Huma and “the Perv” the other day, from the audience’s reaction you’d have thought it was a stand up comedy routine not a political speech !
I saw that! People were having fun, weren’t they? And, half that crowd were democrats!
It is fun to have fun again. None of that white knuckles feeling, in the grip of fear and anxiety, for our candidate this time. Not with Trump!
Even if they had anything, it's too late to release them.
Obama has near dictorial powers at this point. With a smirk and a wave of his left hand, he can order the indictments of 4 star generals and former CIA Directors. Obama can have a former Speaker of the House hauled away by the FBI for "structuring" (i.e. deducting his own money from his bank account). Hillary has no Federal agency answering her orders right now, and she doesn't have 99% the media behind her. In fact, there is serious reason to believe Obama can call on the dogs of the press at his whim.
I also believe Obama is backed by Satan and/or demonic forces.
"For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
Ephesians 6:12
It's a nice fantasy that Hillary will suddenly release their treasure trove of Obama scandal information (7 years late), and that these two will destroy each other politically and in the press. But that is all it is. A fantasy.
I think she will use what she has on The One to get him to give her a full pardon for all of her years of “government service”.
Not even a tinge of friendliness!
Snowden did not do a PUBLIC release of capabilities, rather a private one to various Chinese and Russian depts ... which is why so many want him to be disappeared.
Another question arises, given so many leakers of classified material: if an erstwhile friendly foreign gov comes across info vital to US Nat Def, would they be willing to pass it on as they could be ID’d as source?
And now that the FBI has a digital copy of her email, they apparently will be able to tell if her server was hacked and by whom.
Madeleine Half/brite. Headshake.
She keeps such good company.
I remember her photo kissing Hashim Thachi. KLA leader in Kosovo.
Have also seen Derr Hilderbeast photographed with Thaci.
"Snowden did not do a PUBLIC release of capabilities, rather a private one to various Chinese and Russian depts ... which is why so many want him to be disappeared."
Well there are too many unknowns here to comment. I don't know what Snowden may or may not have given to enemy governments in private, I sure hope it was nothing, and I am still assuming none. We'll probably never know for sure, but I thought he insisted that he refused to let out assets and capabilities and was carefully screening eberything and confining his issue to spying on Americans.
I consider our eyes and ears to be two separate things. telling the world we are listening to everything is not news, telling them what we can actually see is serious business, and singlehandedly undermines retirement of all those assets that those birds replaced. *If* she slipped and let capabilities out then it will be a costly lesson financially for the taxpayers. Besides, if access to our really secret birds ( or anything of that level of sensitivity ) was directly available outside of the pentagon, let alone to a contractor sitting Hawaii, then we have a huge problem on our hands. Military Intelligence will have finally become an oxymoron ( Hillary and intelligence in the same sentence, is already an oxymoron ).
What I am saying is that the over-reaction to Snowden by DC bureaucrats, who are just angry that *they* have been exposed as spying on Americans at home and abroad and at every possible step of every possible means of communication, now gets to be tested on a real damaging case of espionage committed by accident or design by a Secretary Of State. Caveat repeated - *if* it is true. I have no clue what is in most of those redacted sections. But it begs the question, why is anything redacted at all?
"Another question arises, given so many leakers of classified material: if an erstwhile friendly foreign gov comes across info vital to US Nat Def, would they be willing to pass it on as they could be ID’d as source?And now that the FBI has a digital copy of her email, they apparently will be able to tell if her server was hacked and by whom."
Yes, this is where it gets really interesting. But they do not need the email to tell if it was hacked. They could see easily every ping to that server, if not ever single I/O to it and the ISP itself. That's "if" they want to. But why this gets interesting to me is this ... what Clinton did here was to move her communication hub into the same public space that all Americans have had to trust for years, and decades. There is so much irony here! Apologies for going off the beaten path for a second ...
Most Americans have had little clue to the extent of *domestic* electronic spying which has existed since the 1950's at least, and possibly even the 1920's. Those two eras, as far as we can tell, are distinguished by one characteristic - methodology. From World War I to the 50's it appears that most relied upon hyper-intelligent humans using cryptanalysis ( e.g., Yardley, and later Friedman ). Once the DoD consolidated everything into its bureaucracy unconstrained by rules and the Constitution itself, they exploited a new, easier methodology - inserting intravenous taps right into the desired stream like a parasitic tick or leech, and to mix metaphors, milking the cow at will.
Public knowledge tells us that they first got their hooks into telcos and related companies with sweetheart deals and/or offers they couldn't refuse. Access to networks granted, data and metadata stored, data mining at will. Naturally every possible species of communication networking needed to be penetrated, and it was, and Snowden has really only confirmed some of what we already deduced from educated guesses. Everything from consumer electronics to computer operating systems falls under their purview. Chips, networking hardware and protocols, encryption schemes, "Trusted" Computing, software/microcode/firmware backdoors, nothing has been left to chance. And if WWII and the Cold War wasn't enough impetus to ignore the Constitution, then 9/11 was the final straw.
So here in the civilian consumer space where we exist within a framework of hard facts - for any given communication technology, there is not one way but multiple ways that any given communication may be compromised. They can get it in transit in multiple ways in multiple locations, they can get it at the source or target through the chips and circuits that make up the device, they can even go to the ISP's who now have much more capability than their predecessors ever dreamed, quite likely storing complete streams rather than metadata, and storing them possibly forever.
So this is the thoroughly compromised consumer space that we are stuck in and that Hillary ( and who knows how many other bureaucrats ) utilized for their communication. We can assume that the FedGov highest levels have outrageously-expensive taxpayer-funder closed-circuit satellite comm available to themselves, yet madam Hillary shielded herself so well from impartial national security minded IT personnel that she was able to make the stoopid decision to toss secrets into the public wind.
I guess she wasn't paying attention 20 years ago when hubby was in office and things like 'Carnivore' came to light as the latest incremental attack on privacy exceeding the previous incremental attack on privacy, and the previous, ad infinitum. Or maybe she was paying attention and felt it was perfectly peachy since they were in power. Can you spell Schadenfreude.
Ironically I thought this might be another elaborate Clinton propaganda move, throwing something innocuous out there to be gobbled up by their enemies and then after expending tons of energy trying to pin it to her, they are cleared because there is no there there. It still might have been her strategic intention, but she is too unintelligent to realize that one hundred years of incremental erosion of freedom justified by the catch-all no expectation of privacy in public has made it impossible to be truly free.
Dear Hillary ...
I also believe Obama is backed by Satan and/or demonic forces.Good point."For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
Ephesians 6:12
Demons are becoming more active lately, even infiltrating grade school kids that are experimenting with such evil.
Sure it is fair to give a traitor the benefit of the doubt in not telling his handlers - the Chinese - methods and means - word has it they like the Russians are very understanding about such loyalties ...
Don’t even try to argue that Eddy just decided one day to do what he did all by hisself.
Neither the Chinese nor the Russians would place and help such a spy only to get what anyone could reasonably guess what NSA/DOD/etc are up to. You are very knowledgeable when it comes to intel history but not so much when looking at real world espionage. Those guys do NOTHING for free, as the gist of your argument would have it.
Another clue to Eddy the Snowman’s duplicity lost in all the hubbub around elections and so on is that all previous collections went dark, all our allies stopped sharing; AQ/ISIS et al comms became opaque.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.