I'd conclude alot more are in someone's hands.
Posted on 03/12/2015 5:39:34 AM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum
In this day and age of domestic surveillance, it’s seems odd that any public official should be given the opportunity to house private email servers in their home. Although Hillary Clinton did not break any specific laws, and both Condoleezza Rice and Colin Powell also used private emails at times, there are unique circumstances with ‘Emailgate’ that warrant a unique resolution to the scandal.
It’s said the NSA can “reach into the past” in terms of surveillance and has breathtaking data collection capabilities. So, whether or not it currently has Clinton’s emails isn’t an issue. The NSA can record or collect the data of any American if such information is deemed part of national security; the communication of a Secretary of State would no doubt fit into this definition. Emails stored in a private server located in a government employee’s home are indeed “highly unusual,” as stated recently by Robert Gibbs.
First, the former Secretary of State might have stored “sensitive” communication in an unguarded location. According to The Washington Post, there might not be “classified information,” but there could be “sensitive information” on Clinton’s private servers:
“Sensitive information is different from classified information. It can be personal data, like Social Security numbers, or information on matters that other countries consider classified or important to their national security.”
So there “does not appear” to be any classified information contained therein, but it remains to be seen whether there was “sensitive” information. That sounds as if the State Department is giving itself lots of wiggle room.
Considering she used her private email account almost exclusively, rather than the government issued account, it’s logical to ask whether or not there was “sensitive” or “classified” information flowing through Clinton’s servers.
Second, Clinton and her team are being afforded an opportunity that nobody in the U.S. would be given considering the circumstances. According to CNN, the former Secretary of State can pick and choose what to disclose and what to keep hidden from public view:
So with her own server, did she also got to handpick which emails went to the State Department for public release, right?
That's right, she and her aides made those calls.
But when Clinton was in office, emails on federal accounts weren't automatically archived either and Clinton and her aides would have done some handpicking as well.
Therefore, it doesn’t seem fair or reasonable from a record-keeping standpoint that she’s allowed to sift through her own private emails and pick only the ones she deems suitable for public view. Someone in the middle of an email controversy should not have the ability to withhold correspondence that could lead to concerns over credibility or foul play.
Third, a Wired article titled Why Clinton’s Private Email Server Was Such a Security Fail explains why the words “security fail” and “national security” should never be part of the same sentence:
But as the controversy continues to swirl, the security community is focused on a different issue: the possibility that an unofficial, unprotected server held the communications of America’s top foreign affairs official for four years, leaving all of it potentially vulnerable to state-sponsored hackers.
…But instead, according to the Associated Press, Clinton ran her server from her own home. Any protection it had there—aside from the physical protection of the Secret Service—would have been limited to the Clintons’ own personal resources.
…Anyone who hacked Network Solutions would be able to quietly hijack the Clintonemail.com domain, intercepting, redirecting, and even spoofing email from Clinton’s account.
If we found out today that Dick Cheney had private servers in his home during the lead-up to the Iraq War, what would people be saying? Also, if many security analysts find fault in Clinton’s decision to store a private server in her home, there are legitimate national security concerns as to this practice and other aspects associated with “homebrew servers.”
For some Americans, the NSA isn’t an agency that protects them from terrorist threats or keeps this country safe from another catastrophic event. For many people, the NSA represents an intrusion of privacy. However, ‘Emailgate’ is an opportunity for the NSA to show Americans that it can protect the nation from possible security breaches, even when powerful members of government have made these errors of judgment. Nobody is accusing Hillary Clinton of anything treasonous or malicious, after all, Powell and Rice also used private emails at times. The primary concern with this scandal rests in the fact that private email servers were stored in a private residence, with their contents possibly being “sensitive” or “classified.”
If anyone in the country engaged in such behavior, the NSA would have likely had information on all of this citizen’s communication and activities. If Clinton compromised national security in any way, the most renowned record-keeping agency in the U.S. government should help answer some questions. If the NSA has the full record of Clinton’s emails, it should hand them over to Congress.
Goodman is a journalist and an author.
She’ll get a break even if the NSA has them. First, the NSA doesn’t want to run around saying we read everyone’s email (I know), and 2nd politically they’d be in a bail of hay.
An email server is a little more than an electronic file cabinet. Is it possible that the U.S. government would permit any former official to maintain the only copies of paper documents in their personal possession? Why then has this administration not seized the server and all the drives at that address - unless it is on-board with this theft of government documents?
Spotlight all connections between Obama’s Jarrett and HRC’s Huma, Expose entire Clinton Foundation financial records & donor list . Then chronicle HRC’s foreign policy initiatives/failures.
Run with it.
This game just started.
Wait a few months until “they” release “all” of the email from a certain timeframe. Some journalist will ask her if that is every email from that period. She will answer that it is.
Then..,email from that period will magically start appearing. They will appear from folks like “anonymous” or Wikileaks.
My guess is the setup will happen right before her coronation.
And the “insiders” already know this.
Or...the republicans already know because they had someone hacking the server years ago. So consider the independent release of the emails will burn Hillary, but it will come out that the republicans were hacking a sitting SOS. Viola...they are both burned.
Don’t believe anything either side says. It is all BS.
I'd conclude alot more are in someone's hands.
The wireless part is just until the tower. Once the packets hit the tower they become ordinary Internet traffic.
On the form OF-109, which Hillary was required by law to sign upon departure, the law pertaining to concealment, removal or mutilation of records applies, and is quite clear:
18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation of Records
(a)Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.
(b)Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.
She has already admitted to removing email files, which are covered under the auspices of this directive. Those who think she “didn’t break any law” are smoking some of Colorado’s finest.
If this email is authentic, she’s already in violation of federal law for being in possession of classified documentation on a non-government system.
Good God.. in a just world, this bitch would’ve been caged years ago.
As a private citizen, Sidney Blumenthal had no power to assign a classification level to that email.
The information in that email may not be considered classified by the State Department.
It’s hard to say since it’s not complete, and we don’t know where that information came from.
But I have no doubt at all that Hillary had true classified information and documents passed through her email account, at levels far above Confidential, but I doubt that Blumenthal email, even if totally authentic, is the smoking gun that will put Hillary behind bars.
Sidney’s email was hacked and this was on it.
There is no evidence, yet, that Hillary’s server was hacked. I think we all know intuitively that is was...but nothing has come out yet.
“As a private citizen, Sidney Blumenthal had no power to assign a classification level to that email.”
For sure... Blumenthal certainly isn’t a classification authority. I took the example as a relayed message.
I too have no doubt Hillary transmitted or received classified info. The dems would like us to believe she never transmitted or received a single sensitive or classified email during a tumultuous four-year stint, which included the suck-up to Russia, the failed Iranian revolution, the war on Libya, the Benghazi slaughter, the aftermath of the bin Laden takedown, relations with European nations, the failed attempt at a SOFA agreement with Iraq, the overthrow of Mubarak in Egypt, travel plans (remembering how she’s “the most traveled SOS ever”), or ambassadorial/staff movements.
Either Hillary is lying through her horse teeth, or she’s proven herself worthless as ice for sale in the Antarctic winter.
She's both.
If you say so....
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.