of HER MESS (of crimes) says something different.
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/08/20/deceptions-hillary-clinton.html
And this:
A ‘Formal Criminal Investigation’ of Hillary’s E-mails Is ‘Under Consideration’
Either the FBI is going to take Hillary Clinton’s e-mail server and the classified information in e-mails extremely seriously . . . or a whole bunch of former FBI agents are going to be disappointed with their former employer.
For now, federal authorities characterize the Justice Department inquiry into Hillary Clinton’s private email server as a security situation: a simple matter of finding out whether classified information leaked out during her tenure as secretary of state, and where it went.
Except, former government officials said, that’s not going to be so simple.
“I think that the FBI will be moving with all deliberate speed to determine whether there were serious breaches of national security here,” said Ron Hosko, who used to lead the FBI’s criminal investigative division.
He said agents will direct their questions not just at Clinton, but also her close associates at the State Department and beyond.
“I would want to know how did this occur to begin with, who knew, who approved,” Hosko said.
Authorities are asking whether Clinton or her aides mishandled secrets about the Benghazi attacks and other subjects by corresponding about them in emails.
For her part, Clinton said she did not use that email account to send or receive anything marked classified.
“Whether it was a personal account or a government account, I did not send classified material, and I did not receive any material that was marked or designated classified which is the way you know whether something is,” she said Tuesday in a question-and-answer session with reporters.
Why is Clinton emphasizing the idea that none of those messages were marked? Because what she knew — her intent — matters a lot under the law. If the Justice Department and FBI inquiry turns into a formal criminal investigation.
Are we really to believe that when she’s reading about -- you name it, drone strikes, satellite images, evacuation plans for staffers in Benghazi -- that Hillary Clinton never thought that any of that information was classified?
The inspector general’s report said that the classification labels had been removed . . .
“We note that none of the emails we reviewed had classification or dissemination markings, but some included [intelligence community]-derived classified information and should have been handled as classified, appropriately marked, and transmitted via a secure network,” wrote McCullough, the inspector general for the intelligence community, who described his review as incomplete.
A spokeswoman for McCullough, Andrea Williams, said Friday that there are at least four emails of concern, which have yet to be released by the State Department under the Freedom of Information Act. “They were not marked at all but contained classified information,” she wrote in an email to TIME Friday.
. . . which suggests some staffers were taking off the classified label and then sending it to Hillary.
Here’s the bombshell:
Two lawyers familiar with the inquiry told NPR that a formal criminal investigation is under consideration and could happen soon -- although they caution that Clinton herself may not be the target.
In other words, look out, staffers.
Here’s Michael Hayden -- former director of the NSA, and former director of the CIA -- declaring that the e-mail system would be “a very juicy target” and “not very difficult if you have the resources and talented people to go after it. The NSA does this all the time against, I would suggest, better defended targets.”
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2015/08/20/deceptions-hillary-clinton.html
And this:
A ‘Formal Criminal Investigation’ of Hillary’s E-mails Is ‘Under Consideration’
Either the FBI is going to take Hillary Clinton’s e-mail server and the classified information in e-mails extremely seriously . . . or a whole bunch of former FBI agents are going to be disappointed with their former employer.
For now, federal authorities characterize the Justice Department inquiry into Hillary Clinton’s private email server as a security situation: a simple matter of finding out whether classified information leaked out during her tenure as secretary of state, and where it went.
Except, former government officials said, that’s not going to be so simple.
“I think that the FBI will be moving with all deliberate speed to determine whether there were serious breaches of national security here,” said Ron Hosko, who used to lead the FBI’s criminal investigative division.
He said agents will direct their questions not just at Clinton, but also her close associates at the State Department and beyond.
“I would want to know how did this occur to begin with, who knew, who approved,” Hosko said.
Authorities are asking whether Clinton or her aides mishandled secrets about the Benghazi attacks and other subjects by corresponding about them in emails.
For her part, Clinton said she did not use that email account to send or receive anything marked classified.
“Whether it was a personal account or a government account, I did not send classified material, and I did not receive any material that was marked or designated classified which is the way you know whether something is,” she said Tuesday in a question-and-answer session with reporters.
Why is Clinton emphasizing the idea that none of those messages were marked? Because what she knew — her intent — matters a lot under the law. If the Justice Department and FBI inquiry turns into a formal criminal investigation.
Are we really to believe that when she’s reading about -- you name it, drone strikes, satellite images, evacuation plans for staffers in Benghazi -- that Hillary Clinton never thought that any of that information was classified?
The inspector general’s report said that the classification labels had been removed . . .
“We note that none of the emails we reviewed had classification or dissemination markings, but some included [intelligence community]-derived classified information and should have been handled as classified, appropriately marked, and transmitted via a secure network,” wrote McCullough, the inspector general for the intelligence community, who described his review as incomplete.
A spokeswoman for McCullough, Andrea Williams, said Friday that there are at least four emails of concern, which have yet to be released by the State Department under the Freedom of Information Act. “They were not marked at all but contained classified information,” she wrote in an email to TIME Friday.
. . . which suggests some staffers were taking off the classified label and then sending it to Hillary.
Here’s the bombshell:
Two lawyers familiar with the inquiry told NPR that a formal criminal investigation is under consideration and could happen soon -- although they caution that Clinton herself may not be the target.
In other words, look out, staffers.
Here’s Michael Hayden -- former director of the NSA, and former director of the CIA -- declaring that the e-mail system would be “a very juicy target” and “not very difficult if you have the resources and talented people to go after it. The NSA does this all the time against, I would suggest, better defended targets.”
Last edited:
