In email, Hillary Clinton tells aide to send talking points "nonsecure"

CBS News ^ | 1/8/16 | REENA FLORES

[Gunner TLW]

Norseman, your scenario, sending your fantasy football picks over a secure network, “Siper”, then migrating that information from a secure network, after removing the header that identifies that your document was derived from a secure network, for the purpose of now sending over a non-secure network, is patently against regulations and illegal. In fact, this exact scenario, minus the fantasy football reference, is covered in the training protocols that ALL users of classified information/transmission must attend and by signature declare there awareness of.

Why do you assume that these particular “Talking Points” are not for use in a classified discussion that Mrs. Clinton my participate or needs Situational Awareness of?

[Norseman]

I’m not assuming anything whatsoever. I’m just pointing out that there’s a lot of assumptions being made and they might be incorrect.

You, for example, are assuming that the “secure fax machine” was part of a secure government network covered by the protocol you claim knowledge of.

I’m assuming nothing about the talking points. In fact, I’m not even certain that TPs stood for Talking Points.

All of these are open question? Including, Did the State Department suddenly decide to hang Hillary out to dry by releasing this email? That’s the biggest assumption of all, in my opinion. If it was as deadly as people are claiming, I doubt it ever would have seen the light of day, but I could be wrong.

[Gunner TLW]

Sir, the “Secure Fax Machine” can ONLY be used on a secure network. If that “Secure Fax Machine” was purposely, or inadvertently, hooked up to a non-secure network, that would also constitute a serious violation of existing regulations. No fax machine can be interchanged from secure to non-secure and back again.

A secure fax machine is set to place a heading on all correspondence received IOT ensure that anyone receiving a product from the secure network can readily identify the security level; Secret, or TS(SCI)!

Mrs. Clinton ordering a subordinate to remove the heading, placed on all documents produced by a secure fax machine, so those documents can be forwarded on a non-secure network violates numerous security protocols: And She absolutely was aware of that!

[Norseman]

Where does anyone say that a secure fax machine was hooked up to a non-secure network? Another assumption.

Where does anyone say the fax machine was switched back and forth?

Where does anyone say that the same machine was used to send the “nonpaper”?

All assumptions.

The subject line was classified per the redaction, assuming B5 means redacted because it was classified. (I don’t know. Is that what B5 means?)

So she has the talking points (an assumption) rewritten as a non-paper (another assumption), leaves off the classified part (the subject matter) and has it emailed to her. She would know what the subject matter was, but conceivably the writer of the non-paper could, by omitting any mention of the subject in the writeup, produce something that didn’t require classification, e.g., “He’s having an affair.” (Without knowing the subject, that’s useless info.)

Again, all this is a steaming pile of assumptions, including the assumption that State decided to hang the next President of the United States (hopefully not, but in their minds?) out to dry.

[Norseman]

>>...after removing the header that identifies that your document was derived from a secure network,...<<

It appears from the email exchange that they couldn’t get the fax to send, so did that identifying header you’re assuming was there ever even get affixed to something?

Besides, if “non-paper” is being interpreted correctly, it was a separate document from the talking points (assuming that’s what TP represents.) It wouldn’t have anything affixed as it wouldn’t have been sent yet. It hadn’t even been written, from the sounds of it (though that’s another assumption.)