Hillary's well known and obsessive secrecy comes back to haunt her. Again

[cali]

Way to keep the email mess alive. Finally, Hillary has turned over the server and the thumb nail drive to the FBI. This was inevitable and everyone knows it, but she and her oh so brilliant advisors dragged it out for ages. Why? All it did was fuel speculation and bad press.

And to top it off? Two of her private emails were labeled top secret. The rebuke ads write themselves.

She's her own worst enemy.

[Hoyt]

1. That's good to know if I ever want to bash Clinton. n/t

[cali]

2. it's factual.

[applegrove]

64. Instead of saying obsessive secrecy try well earned privacy. If you had been stalked by

people who want to do you in politically, with any warping of any facts, for 25 years, you would be private where you could too.

[cali]

67. that would not be factual. and she's running for president. privacy

particularly re her former position as SoS, is not part of that.

[HereSince1628]

3. Her defense will be, probably has been, that things weren't classified when she got them...

To the general public this sounds like a reasonable argument but its actually an admission that Clinton had material on a private server and that at least a few times that storage of material was inappropriate.

The Sec of State's position engages in communication that creates records, such as emails, which have to be classified after the fact. As Sec her meaningful written interchanges with heads of Intelligence agencies would likely rather commonly produce these documents.

Whoever serves in that role must have some sense not merely of the presence of a classification mark-up on a document but also of the SENSITIVITY of information while it is being discussed. This isn't rocket science, really. It's mostly an awareness of the nature of material that the government doesn't want others to know. Most people who understand the nature of the information they work with, grasp this quite quickly, and handle yet-to-be-classified materials appropriately.

No doubt Sec Clinton did, too.

What we see is Clinton making a legalistic appeal to a largely ignorant public. The emails weren't classified when she dealt with them. That's just bs. The Sec of State isn't an intern working as a filing assistant.

A person in Clinton's role should not have needed an underling to assign classification to material that ultimately was considered Top Secret. Clinton should have understood the sensitive nature of the material, and as Clinton isn't a stupid person at all, she very likely did.

What we're witnessing is excuse making for a rather routine problem in classified document handling. The key action and problem with her response is she's deflecting to the classification process rather than her management of sensitive material on a non-government server.

The need for proper handling of sensitive material prior to classification really is a routine issue. It's so routine that there are protocols for this circumstance. Considering the issues during Clinton's tenure as Sec of State she likely dealt with such documents correctly many hundreds of times.

These few emails wouldn't be problems at all if the emails had been on a government server. It becomes a problem because sensitive yet to be classified government documents should not have been on a personal/private server.

And she can't admit making a mistake, so she's weasling about it exploiting the public's lack of understanding.

[jeff47]

11. This defense is similiar to Rove's "I didn't know Valarie Plame's name was classified"

It works for partisans and people who have never been involved with classified information.

People who have been involved with classified information know this excuse is utter bullshit, because they're familiar with the system for marking classified documents.

Similarly, your "yet to be classified" doesn't fly for people who have handled classified information. The information is classified. The instant you write it in an email or a document, that document becomes classified. There is not a formal process where someone decides to stamp the document SECRET or not. If you aren't sure, you mark it classified and ask for someone to review it.

This is why the in-briefing and classification guides exist. It teaches you what information is classified, so that new information is properly handled the instant it exists. The degree of trouble you get in for not properly classifying something will depend on how tenuous the connection to the classification guide for that specific information.

[dsc]

12. If by substantially similar you mean utterly different than you are absolutely correct

Rove didn't give out her name what he did to and hid the fact he did for years was confirm for reporters that she worked at the CIA. He was Novak's second source for that fact. He knew full well that was classified and plus it is quite different than giving her name. But again nice of you to bring us Rove's point of view to us I don't know what we would have done without it.

[jeff47]

14. :facepalm:

Rove's defense and this defense of Clinton both do not fly because people actually familiar with the classification system know it doesn't work the way the defense claims.

There is no way Rove could have not known her identity was classified. Because we're familiar with the classification system. Document markings mean there is no way Rove could not have known.
"Not yet classified" does not work for Clinton, because we're familiar with the classification system. The situation this poster described does not exist.

I apologize that the realities of our classification system does not fit with your agenda.

[dsc]

16. my point

and it would help if you actually read posts you respond to, is that Rove didn't give out her ID he confirmed her employment. Everyone, including him under oath, said that is what he did. He didn't, as in the opposite of did, simply say this is Valerie Plame. He did, as in the opposite of did, confirm for journalists so they could publish, her employment.

[jeff47]

25. "Identification" is not just a name.

Rove identified her as a CIA agent. Because her identity as a CIA agent was what was classified. Not just her name.

When you show someone your "ID", such as a driver's license, you are not providing just your name. You are providing a host of other information that specifies you from everyone else on the planet.

[dsc]

28. His words were "I didn't know her name was classified"

that is the defense you said was "substantially similar" to what Hillary is saying. those are quotes from your post incase you are wondering.

[jeff47]

29. Her name is also part of her identification.

Ok, let's pretend he never said her name.

Rove: There's a CIA agent somewhere!!

Boy, that is totally the same thing as saying "CIA agent Valerie Plame".

I eagerly await your attack for using the verb "say" instead of "write".

[dsc]

31. again he disclosed what she did

or more accurately confirmed what she did, not who she was. And yes, Karl Rove damn well knew that was classified information. That is my point. His defense was a lie. Hers, to the best I can discern, isn't a lie.

[jeff47]

33. The defense proposed above is a lie.

The defense above that I replied to relies on there being some sort of review where something becomes classified, and it is not classified until that review.

That is a lie. It is not how the classification system works. It is also not the defense Clinton has been providing.

[dsc]

35. So jane doe typist in the cia

just gets to classify data willy nilly? I frankly don't think that is what happens nor should it be what happens. I can understand treating something as classified pending review but since these were emails and were sent to other people most, if not all of whom, worked in the government, then it seems such review should have occurred well before now. Every story I have read has suggested that isn't what happened. Instead, as the emails are being looked at now, other agencies are saying this should be classified for whatever reason. That is not the same as sending classified info via email.

[jeff47]

39. No, Jane Doe typist is provided a classification guide and an in-briefing discussing that guide.

And if Jane is typing something where she is not sure if it is classified, she is supposed to mark it with the highest classification it might have based on that guide, and then go seek guidance from the appropriate people behind that classification guide.

The information does not default to unclassified.

Instead, as the emails are being looked at now, other agencies are saying this should be classified for whatever reason. That is not the same as sending classified info via email.

The emails are being reviewed now because they were not known to exist before now.

That doesn't mean they were unclassified before now. That means they were classified, and the person sending the email failed to label them properly. And since Clinton was running her own server, Clinton failed to store them properly.

This is, quite literally, sending classified information via email. Not properly labeling the email does not make it unclassified.

[dsc]

40. Of course they were known to exist before

she wasn't sending them to herself for crying out loud. This has all the hallmarks of one department (state) saying this stuff isn't classified while another (I am guessing CIA) is saying this stuff is classified. This is why we have stuff still classified from WW1 that refers to dirgibles.

[jeff47]

59. Would you prefer "known to exist by people who were competent with classified information"?

This is why we have stuff still classified from WW1 that refers to dirgibles.

Claims like this is why we have now have automatic declassification dates on classified documents. The date is set based on the usefulness of the information. "Air Force One will be landing in Iraq on 25 December 2002 at 6am local time" will be scheduled to be declassified sometime shortly after December 25th 2002, because keeping that secret is no longer useful. And classified information is actually a pretty big pain in the ass.

There's only a few things that are exempted from automatic declassification. Such as plans for nuclear weapons. Here's an article on it.

As for State versus other agencies, that battle will be arbitrated above those agencies if need be. If the specific information is not leaked to the public, we won't know whether State is being lax/covering for their former boss, or if the intelligence agencies are being paranoid.

[merrily]

41. Excellent explanation. And, if you have labeled something top secret.....

[Divernan]

4. Her stubborn refusal to respond to Whitewater subpoena resulted in Bill's impeachment

(On Edit: To belabor the obvious, she ignored a legal subpoena in order to keep her business records SECRET.)

Bottom line, she was subpoenaed to produce to a court her billing records from when she was a partner at the Rose law firm. Against the advice of counsel, she stonewalled and for two years, she insisted she had no idea where they were and they couldn't be found. According to Sid Blumenthal's Clinton era book The Clinton Wars, HRC was the one who was against just putting out every detail they had on Whitewater and killing the issue. He wrote of her being extremely angry after several Democrats, including Moynihan, Kerry and Bradley - some former prosecutors recommended that.

So the Whitewater investigation dragged on for 2 years until a White House employee found a stack of files (the Rose billing records) on a table outside the door to HRC's office in the White House family quarters and turned them in. Ken Starr had pretty much shut down his investigation at that point, but the discovery of those documents led him to reopen it, and it was AFTER that that L'Affaire Lewinsky developed. THAT led to Bill being deposed about Monica, and getting caught (blue dress evidence)lying under oath and THAT led to his impeachment.
Now here's the documentation of all of the above:

Interesting that the Republicans pushing on the email investigation and missing emails have not, as far as I've seen, mentioned the similarity to the missing Whitewater documents. That was some 20 years ago, so younger posters probably never heard of this, but I have no doubt that GOP oppo research team is drooling to throw this at HRC should she win the primary.

Republicans on the special Senate Whitewater committee released a report from the Federal Bureau of Investigation today showing that the fingerprints of the First Lady, Hillary Rodham Clinton, were found on records discovered in the White House family quarters two years after they were first sought by investigators.


http://www.nytimes.com/1996/06/05/us/hillary-clinton-s-fingerprints-among-those-found-on-papers.html

Those Whitewater documents had been subpoenaed from HRC and for 2 years she stoutly claimed she had absolutely no idea where they were. Then they were found on a table in the first family's private quarters - just outside the door to HRC's office. And she again disavowed any knowledge of how they got there.

It was so painful and ugly, for me as a Democrat who had worked for Bill's election and even been a guest at his first inauguration, to go through all the years of investigations and embarrassing results thereof. If she's the Dem. nominee, we will all have to go through months and months of rehashing this yet again. Horrifying to contemplate. If the Clintons had come clean and cooperated with the Whitewater investigations, Ken Starr would never have gotten around to Monica Lewinsky.

In January 1998, Starr suddenly requested and received permission to expand his investigation again. The new area of inquiry: whether Clinton and his close friend Vernon E. Jordan Jr. encouraged Monica Lewinsky to lie under oath about whether she had an affair with the president. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/whitewater/whitewater.htm

Ted Koppel did a masterful Nightline report on the whole incident. Here's a link to the transcript of Ted Koppel's coverage of this nightmare. HRC is caught in mis-statement after mis-statement after mis-statement and keeps trying to spin and twist her way out of it. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/clinton/etc/01301996.html
The Whitewater Lost And Found Records
January 30, 1996
Correspondent: Chris Bury
Anchor: Ted Koppel

Announcer: January 30th, 1996.

TED KOPPEL (VO): The accusation? Obstruction of justice, knowingly withholding subpoenaed documents. The location? A book room on the third floor of the White House, a room in the first family's private quarters. One clue? A White House log handed over today with the names of all the people who might have had access - from Mrs Clinton's chief of staff, to Chelsea Clinton's friends, to dignitaries visiting the President. Tonight, the mystery of the lost and found records.


ANNOUNCER: This is ABC News Nightline. Reporting from Washington, Ted Koppel.
TED KOPPEL: Almost exactly two years ago, a subpoena was issued for some billing records from the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock, Arkansas. These are records that go back about 10 years or so and that would, it was believed, shed some light on how much work attorney Hillary Clinton did on a particular real estate deal, and for whom she did that work. For the better part of these last two years, those records could not be found. Then, seemingly out of nowhere, they turned up earlier this month in the office of a woman named Carolyn Huber. What turned that into a major story is that Ms Huber works at the White House, and that she says she found the billing records in the private quarters of the first family - found them, in fact, last August, right outside Mrs Clinton's private office - didn't know what they were, packed them up, didn't realize what they were until a couple of weeks ago, when she was tidying up her own office. If someone has been deliberately concealing those records, that would be a federal crime. The White House says that a surprisingly large number of people actually had access to the Clintons' private quarters last August We'll tell you more about that later, but we want to use most of our time this evening to put this latest development into context. We begin by taking something both the President and the first lady have said recently.

CHRIS BURY, ABC NEWS (VO): The President and Mrs Clinton complain that the questions keep changing, but the controversies over Whitewater and the Travel Office have stayed alive, in large part, because the answers keep changing, too.

CHRIS BURY (VO): On January 15th, Mrs Clinton told a radio interviewer all documents had been released. Five days later, the White House issued a statement to The New York Times saying that wasn't quite true. On Castle Grande, Hillary Clinton's legal work for a land deal regulators describe as fraudulent: in May 1995 she told the Resolution Trust Corporation, quote, 'I don't believe I knew anything about any of these real estate parcels and projects.' But after billing records showed Hillary Clinton had at least 14 conversations with Seth Ward, the major player in the deal, Mrs Clinton told Barbara Walters she knew the project by another name.

HILLARY CLINTON: ('20/20,' January 19, 1996) And so when I was asked about it last year, I didn't recognize it, I didn't remember it. The billing records show I did not do work for Castle Grande. I did work for something called IDC, which was not related to Castle Grande.

CHRIS BURY (VO): That is not how Susan McDougal, the Clintons' former business partner, remembers it.
SUSAN MCDOUGAL: It was always the same thing. As far as I know, IDC and- and- and Castle Grande were one and the same.

It's not the initial decision to use her own private email account, it's the perceived cover-up. It was an attempted cover-up by Bill Clinton which resulted in his impeachment. "Bill Clinton, the 42nd President of the United States, was impeached by the House of Representatives on two charges, one of perjury and one of obstruction of justice, on December 19, 1998."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Bill_Clinton

[dsc]

13. right it is all her fault

none of the fault belongs to the right wing. No not at all.

[merrily]

42. How did the right wing make her ignore a subpoena?

[dsc]

44. He wasn't impeached for anything at all to do with Whitewater

not a God damned thing. He got Impeached, with three adulterers and a child molester taking prominite part in doing so it must be said, for adultery. It is ridiculous to say any subpeoneas issued to her had a God damned thing to do with this.

[merrily]

47. He is not running again. She is. How did the right wing make her ignore a subpoena for almost two

years? And why do you think she did that?

[dsc]

52. maybe because she correctly figured it wasn't any of their God damned business

but like may people here you of course, pass up the change to blame men (either right wing ones who did the Impeaching) or the Democrat who didn't keep his marriage vows but instead blame a woman. How unshocking.

[merrily]

55. Are you kidding? A court subpoena? Blame the woman? WTF? She is the one who was responsible for

complying with the subpoena. Who else would I blame? The judge?

I am not discussing his impeachment. That is another poster. What I am saying is that, before his impeachment, during the investigation of whitewater, she had an obligation to comply with a subpoena and she failed to do that for almost two years. Regardless of whether that resulted in his impeachment or not--and I don't know if it did or not--failure to produce her records from her law firm in response to a lawful subpoena was on her and no one else.

When you get a subpoena from a court, you don't get to decide it's not the court's business. Maybe, your lawyer can appeal it. I don't know. But you don't get to ignore it for 2 years.

[cali]

5. "today is not a good day in Clintonworld"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/08/12/this-e-mail-story-keeps-getting-worse-for-hillary-clinton/

[m-lekktor]

58. ....

[virtualobserver]

6. That is why it is so painful to support Hillary (or Bill)

They always drag these things out and make them a million times worse.

I hope and pray that she does not win the nomination.
I can't take this kind of stuff for 4 to 8 years.....my nerves aren't up to it anymore.

[TwilightGardener]

7. Can you even BE President while being denied a security clearance? LOL.

Anyone else would have lost theirs. I'm surprised the FBI allowed a private lawyer to keep her thumb drive for so long. Who else would get away with that?

[jeff47]

9. The president doesn't have a security clearance. He or she is the security clearance.

Congress punted the job of figuring out the system for classified information to the Executive branch. So the classification system works however the President says it works.

As a result, the President doesn't actually have a security clearance. They get to see everything no matter what. The President (through a giant pile of intermediaries) grants security clearances to other people.

As for that private lawyer, he has a security clearance. And he stored the information as required for SECRET, which was all that was thought to be in the emails before yesterday.

[TwilightGardener]

19. I guess what I'm saying is, as anything other than President, she shouldn't now be able to get

a security clearance for any other government job. Which would seem a disqualifier for a higher office.

[jeff47]

23. I get the point, I'm just trying to explain how it works.

Lots of people have weird ideas of how classified information works, because most people only "see" it on TV or in movies where it's a plot device.

But back to your example, if the President says "grant that clearance", they grant the clearance. If Obama wanted to give Manning and Snowden their security clearances back, there is nothing legally stopping him.

The President literally makes the rules, and thus does not have to follow the rules he or she sets for others.

[Romulox]

8. This is a serious violation of Federal Law.

We are at the "What did she know, and when did she know it?" phase of this investigation.

[merrily]

43. Thumbdrivegate.

[jeff47]

10. No, the "rebuke ads" level was where we were before TS/SCI was found.

We are now at "how bad will the Congressional hearings be?" and "Will there be an indictment?" level.

[Zorra]

15. She looks extremely stressed and worried lately.

I've been wondering if she's considering terminating her campaign.

[Purveyor]

34. The Biden speculation didn't happen without reason. I think

they know the 'gig' is up...

[merrily]

48. BINGO

[Vinca]

17. This is more of her being overhandled.

You can imagine the conversation way back when about whether to use the State Department email or private email. The handlers, no doubt, wanted to be sure Republicans couldn't see her emails and spin them if she ran for POTUS again. They've achieved the exact opposite of what the plan probably was. She IS her own worst enemy.

[Prism]

18. I didn't care about this until the "top secret" revelation

I am more convinced than ever that she is going to lose the general for us. I almost want to bug out of political discussion and just wait for the Republican inevitability at this point. People do not like her. Stuff like this is why. It's the perception, not entirely unearned, that she just doesn't see herself as accountable to the peasants.

Rules are for other people.

[merrily]

45. She can't lose the general for us if Bernie is the nominee.

[morningfog]

20. Turned them over after claiming they were destroyed.

She can't be trusted to tell the truth.

I hope her lies are uncovered enough so that we aren't stuck with her as the nominee.

[840high]

56. That's my hope.

[LiberalAndProud]

21. With all due respect, bullshit.

I say this as a Bernie supporter, but the FBI has been aware and has agreed that Hillary's attorney could hold that thumb drive in his possession. He has a some sort of security clearance. They knew to ask for the thumb drive because they knew where it was.

I hate this sort of dishonesty when it's directed at Bernie, I will call it out when it's my side doing it.

[jeff47]

24. Nope, not Bullshit. Changing the level changes the rules.

Until now, it was thought the thumbdrive and server only contained SECRET. The lawyer stored the thumbdrive in a safe rated for SECRET. That rating includes things like how long it takes to crack the safe, the alarm systems around it, the time for a police response, and so on.

Finding TS/SCI changes the rules. The SECRET-rated safe is no longer good enough. The requirements for storing TS/SCI go up quite a bit from SECRET. So it has to be turned over to someone who has a TS/SCI facility to store it.

[Purveyor]

36. Your knowledge with TS/SCI is quite informative. Thanks

for providing some intelligence on this matter.

[jeff47]

38. Got some use out of an old job. ;)

[oasis]

22. Wily Clinton tactic. After countless attacks over the years

the Clintons have learned to annoy their accusers by running out the clock on the release of information. Then, Whamo, nothing there y'all.

[merrily]

68. Amazing, right?

[Rosa Luxemburg]

26. Too much speculation is not good for a candidate

The Benghazi thing is basically a witch hunt. However voters start to think twice when there is some doubt.

[HassleCat]

27. As I undertsnd it

Many other federal officials, including Secretaries of State, used personal e-mail accounts. Clinton is one of the few who have cooperated to any extent. The two e-mails in question were not initially classified because they did not contain material that was sensitive at the time. I would not be too quick to leap on Trey Gowdy's bandwagon.

[Motown_Johnny]

30. and none of them should be Presidential nominees either.

[jeff47]

37. You have a slight misunderstanding.

The two e-mails in question were not initially classified because they did not contain material that was sensitive at the time.

This is the claim Clinton was using for all of the classified emails. The intelligence agencies say this is false, that the information was always classified.

In addition, TS/SCI information isn't so easy to accidentally think is unclassified. It's things like "Here's the names and cover identities of our spies". It would require either incompetence or an incredibly rare event to think it was not classified at all.

"I didn't know it was classified" when it comes to TS/SCI is the equivalent of "the dog ate my homework". There is a very small likelihood that your dog actually ate your homework.

[HassleCat]

50. I don't know

I worked with all sorts of classified material in the military, including confidential, secret and top secret. It was clear some of it was way over-classified. In addition, there was the practice of senior officers sending top secret messages about parties they didn't want their wives discovering. I have no idea if they still do massive over-classification, but it wouldn't surprise me at all. If such is the case, I can see where a reasonable person would think something is not classified, only to have it deemed sensitive later on.

[jeff47]

61. There's no longer exemptions from automatic declassification.

Don't know when you were talking about, but there's now virtually no exemptions from automatic declassification. So those wives would find out about the party anyway, including that their husband sending it around as classified.

With secret, I can understand it. There's lots of trivial stuff that's technically secret. With TS/SCI, it's pretty obvious that it should be classified at some level, even if TS/SCI is too high.

Again, there's a slim shot that this is something weird. But it's very unlikely. Getting 2 out of reviewing only 10% means either the inspectors general got extremely lucky, or there's going to be a lot more. And unless each one is the same subject, it's harder and harder to argue it's accidental.

[vadermike]

32. emails

I support Hill, but am very afraid she is already sunk and toasted because of this email thing and her trust numbers may not be able to be recovered if ever.. i think we are cooked for 2016 .. i hope i am wrong.....just my gut feeling as of right now...

[Maedhros]

46. Hillary's little adventure with her private email server lays bare her hypocrisy.

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/08/12/hillary-clinton-sanctity-protecting-classified-information/

In December 2011, Chelsea Manning’s court-martial was set to begin. None of the documents at issue in that prosecution was “top secret,” unlike the documents found on Hillary Clinton’s server. Nonetheless, the then-secretary of state convened a press conference to denounce Manning and defend the prosecution. This is what she said:

If his case goes to trial and he is convicted, Manning could face life in prison. The government has said it would not seek the death penalty.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton called Manning’s alleged actions damaging and unfortunate in remarks to reporters at the State Department on Thursday.

“I think that in an age where so much information is flying through cyberspace, we all have to be aware of the fact that some information which is sensitive, which does affect the security of individuals and relationships, deserves to be protected and we will continue to take necessary steps to do so,” Clinton said.

Manning was convicted and sentenced to 35 years in prison. At the time, the only thing Hillary Clinton had to say about that was to issue a sermon about how classified information “deserves to be protected and we will continue to take necessary steps to do so” because it “affect[s] the security of individuals and relationships.”

That was during the time that she had covertly installed a non-government server and was using it and a personal email account to receive classified and, apparently, even top-secret information. While there’s no evidence she herself placed those documents on the server or sent them herself, it is her use of a personal server and email account that — quite predictably — caused the vulnerability.

[merrily]

49. +1

[Maedhros]

51. This is even more infuriating:

https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/08/12/hillary-clinton-sanctity-protecting-classified-information/

When it comes to low-level government employees with no power, the Obama administration has purposely prosecuted them as harshly as possible to the point of vindictiveness: It has notoriously prosecuted more individuals under the Espionage Act of 1917 for improperly handling classified information than all previous administrations combined.

NSA whistleblower Tom Drake, for instance, faced years in prison, and ultimately had his career destroyed, based on the Obama DOJ’s claims that he “mishandled” classified information (it included information that was not formally classified at the time but was retroactively decreed to be such). Less than two weeks ago, “a Naval reservist was convicted and sentenced for mishandling classified military materials” despite no “evidence he intended to distribute them.” Last year, a Naval officer was convicted of mishandling classified information also in the absence of any intent to distribute it.

In the light of these new Clinton revelations, the very same people who spent years justifying this obsessive assault are now scampering for reasons why a huge exception should be made for the Democratic Party front-runner. Fascinatingly, one of the most vocal defenders of this Obama DOJ record of persecution has been Hillary Clinton herself.

[KoKo]

62. ...!

[jonno99]

53. Holy Sh!t - They'll hang that around her neck for sure if she is found to be in violation...nt

[artislife]

65. You see this is just....dumb

It just adds to the column of unelectable.

[Stellar]

54. Truthfully, I don't care about that same old....

Republic0n talking point or Benghazi, it's boring.

[840high]

57. Not to me.

[6chars]

60. seen elsewhere on DU: FACTS about the emails

http://www.democraticunderground.com/110715159

[cherokeeprogressive]

63. I don't understand how something goes from "unclassified" to TOP SECRET without someone knowing

exactly how sensitive it was in the first place.

[Scuba]

66. The scandal that isn't keeps the focus away from her real problems - private prison money ...

... Wall Street money, oil money, etc.