"[REPOST]Long article analysis of DoJ/FBI, Cheryl Mills, HRC, and excellent comments.(Bernie Group)"
"I AM REPOSTING BECAUSE IT IS RELEVANT TO THIS GROUP
I am posting this article here in the Bernie Group because it is a very long and thoughtful analytical piece also with many many comments following. I realize that National Review has a right bent to it, but the discussion there should not frighten thoughtful people here.
First I will post just three of the comments. And then I will post a link to the article. And then an excerpt from the article.
..............................................
My name is Ed Coet. I am a retired US Army Intelligence Officer. In my last job in the army I was the Chief of the Human Intelligence Branch for the US European Command in Stuttgart, Germany. In that capacity I was also the Designated Program Manager for a Special Access Program (SAP) like the SAP that Hillary Clinton is alleged to have compromised in the most recent State Department Inspector General report to congress and which has been widely reported in the news.
Here is what I personally know about SAP’s and what I can attest to in an unclassified forum:
1. The names of each SAP are themselves classified Top Secret because the information within the SAP are far and above Top Secret.
2. SAP’s are so sensitive that even people who have security clearances giving them access to Top Secret Sensitive Compartment Information (TS SCI), an enormously high security clearance level, cannot have accesses to a SAP’s unless they receive a special indoctrination into the SAP based on an operational "must know" that exceeds all other "need to know" standards.
3. Being "read on" for a SAP is far more then acknowledging in writing that you have been briefed on the SAP. It is an in-depth "indoctrination" into the given SAP, and each SAP is itself compartmented separately from other SAPS. Having access to one SAP does not give you access to another SAP, and in fact rarely does. Only a tiny handful of people have knowledge of all SAP’s. SAP’s are the most stringently compartmented and protected information in the entire US government.
4. Unlike Top Secret SCI which is maintained in highly secure Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilitates (SCIF’s) managed by specially trained Special Security Officers (SSO’s) at various levels of command, every single SAP is managed by an individually designated Program Manager for each individual SAP covering an entire theater of operations. In other words, SAP Program Managers are far fewer in number than there is SSO’s. SSO’s are not cleared to even know about SAP’s or to maintain information about them in their already enormously secure SCIF’s. How SAP’s are secured cannot be discussed because of the sensitive beyond Top Secret nature in which it is done.
5. Unlike individuals with the highest Top Secret SCI access security clearances, who must undergo a special background information with periodic "bring-up" background investigation, those tiny few who have access to SAP’s must also endure periodic polygraph tests in addition to the most comprehensive of special background investigations. I used to have to schedule four-star generals and admirals to be polygraphed in order for them to maintain their access to my SAP. Many generals and admirals who obviously have the highest security clearances still did not rate being indoctrinated into my SAP. In fact, they didn’t even know the SAP existed.
6. Compromise of a SAP is the single most dangerous security violation that can ever happen to the USA. Even the enormously damaging revelations of the Edward Snowden’s TOP Secret SCI security compromise does not reach the level of a SAP compromise.
7. To put SAP information in to an unsecure sever like Hillary Clinton’s unsecure server is a class one felony that could, in some cases, result in life in prison. That is because such a compromise is so dangerous that it could and likely will result in the death of people protected by and within the scope of the SAP.
As a former SAP Program Manager I believe it is inconceivable that if it is verified that Hillary Clinton’s server actually had SAP information on it that she could possibly escape indictment and criminal prosecution. As hard as it is to imagine, that would even be worse then electing to not prosecute a mass murdering serial killer because even they could not inflict as much damage on our country as the compromise of a SAP. Compromise of a SAP not only could — but without doubt would — cause serious damage to our national security.
If it is true that Hillary Clinton had SAP information on her unsecure server, whether it was marked or not, you can be sure that the FBI will strongly recommend that charges be brought against Hillary Clinton and continue in an exhaustive investigation to trace back to every single person that had even the tiniest role in this unbelievable security compromise.
If the Attorney General, through "prosecutorial discretion," elected not to prosecute this crime, I believe congress would have no alternative but to impeach her, and the FBI would then have no choice but to conduct a criminal investigation of her for a deliberate cover up –- so grave is this security violation.
If President Obama were to pardon Hillary Clinton for a compromise of this magnitude he would render himself in the historical record as an "enemy of the state," and could himself face criminal prosecution –- so grave is such a security compromise. Nobody, not even the POTUS could gets away with something like this in our system of government.
If anyone could escape persecution for compromising a SAP, we are deep trouble as a nation. No president who loves this country and is true to his oath would ever allow anyone, not even his or her closest and most loved relative, to get away with a SAP compromise. It is simply unimaginable that this could ever happen.
If the ongoing investigation finds that Hillarååy Clinton compromised a SAP, then we all should know with certainty, regardless of political persuasion, that she is entirely unfit to hold public office of any kind let alone President of the USA — and ALL Americans should never tolerate it. Compromising a SAP is an absolute "disqualifier" for public office and access to our nations most sensitive information – period.
ED COET
Major, US Army (Retired)
P.S. It is my sincere hope that each of you will share this article, to help other Americans understand how grave Hillary Clinton’s alleged SAP compromise is. We can’t allow anyone so careless with this level of information to have access to any classified information ever again for as long as she lives. This would surely render her unqualified and unfit to hold any public office let alone POTUS if this allegation proves to be true.
1 •Reply•Share ›
.......................................................
1 •Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Johnathan Swift Jr. • 2 hours ago
The Case Against Clinton:
The federal government’s case against Mrs. Clinton and a number of her former staff members during her tenure as the United States Secretary of State is clear and compelling. It is so straightforward and indisputable that even the most rabid Clinton partisan - say one of their grizzled veterans of the coke-hazed era of Bimbo Eruptions and disappearing billing records, who has just a few synapses firing - should even be able to understand it.
Everyone who does to work for the federal government, either as an employee or who works for a contractor in its employ, who is likely to read, discuss, use, create or develop classified documents, data or information receives a number of stern, serious briefings, countless briefings in fact. The employee or contractor is also required to sign a number of entry and exit documents pertaining to their understanding of the rules and federal laws regarding government records and state secrets.
Understanding the penalties for non-compliance and non disclosure – including many years in federal prison - for failing to follow the rules and laws which were created to safeguard all of the government’s information and especially its classified information is part of these briefings and documents, which are signed under the penalty for perjury. Because she signed such documents, knowing full well that she was personally maintaining a server with tens of thousands of government documents in digital form on them, all her inbound and outbound communications over a four year period, perjury is just the first and most obvious count against her.
We now know that Mrs. Clinton signed such documents, attesting to her compliance with the law, stating that she was abundantly clear of the laws because after countless FOIA suits, they have been produced and with her signature no less. And of course, the very document she signed makes it abundantly clear that her oft repeated subterfuge about “markings,” is of no consequence for it is the nature of the information that is classified, regardless of whether someone stripped it of its origins, headers, disclaimers and markings in an act of malfeasance or negligence. If this wasn’t the case, all any spy would have to do would be to disguise the origins of state secrets or to copy the contents of a document to be free and clear and this is clearly not the case.
No one, no matter how august the personage, is excepted from these laws, nor above them and furthermore the laws and briefings make it abundantly clear that anyone who even suspects that there has been a breach of security - that documents are not where they should be - has an affirmative requirement to report such a breach and is subject to prosecution for such a breach. Not reporting the existence of all of the records that she either received or caused or conspired to be removed from a secure government server and then transferred in some way to her own secret system was a crime in itself. When anyone with a security clearance becomes aware of even a possible breach, they are compelled by law to report it.
Everything in this case flows from one simple and easy to understand and undeniable fact, one that is Mrs. Clinton’s original sin in this case. The existence of her own private server network which was designed to have, hold and hide government documents and the state secrets that were a large part of her job, is “the smoking gun,” in this case. Even before she took office as Secretary of State, Mrs. Clinton and her confederates set out on a grand conspiracy to steal government documents and state secrets, to create what was possibly the largest security breach ever perpetrated by an official of the United States government, at least since the early days of the Cold War, when the atomic bomb secrets were stolen. She and her staff decided that they were going to construct and maintain their own computer network in order to capture and maintain all of her digital communication from her entire tenure as Secretary of State, in fact her entire digital footprint and virtually all of the documents that would have to be communicated to her for her tenure at state as well as countless communications of her confederates.
The level of premeditation, organization and arrogance of this scheme is simply breathtaking. Before taking office, she and her fellow plotters purchased a domain name and in an act of breathtaking hubris and stupidity, registered it openly, in her name, at her address, not even choosing a private registration. Thus, she might as well have painted a large target on her house for hackers, as they are known to play close attention to interesting domain registrations. The fact that she set out on this illegal course with malice and forethought is clear, because she refused to open a secure government e-Mail account when she was required to do so, knowing full well that she should and would not have direct access to anything on the secure government system in her role as Secretary of State. She also refused to use an encrypted government Blackberry, which would have allowed her to send and receive protected communications. Instead, she used a conventional handset, which would be relatively easy for foreign powers to pierce.
Now again, even the most mentally challenged reader would know that logically, there is no way in today’s world for the Secretary of State, who is fifth in the line of Presidential Succession, to be able to do his or her job today without seeing and creating countless secret documents in digital form, especially as they are often trotting the globe, meeting with foreign leaders. The government rates every communication between a cabinet secretary and her staff as at least sensitive and of course, depending on what is being discussed, it can go to the highest levels of state secrecy. Her schedule and daily movements alone would be of great interest to a foreign power or terrorist organization. Once on the road or even when she was in the United States and away from her office in Foggy Bottom, she would have to receive phone calls and e-mails that included sensitive and classified information. However, because, by choice, she was not able to receive those through the governments protected network, everything had to be routed through her conventional cell phone or her own poorly designed and protected server system, placing it all at risk of being intercepted by free lance or state sponsored hackers.
Any record of a private conversation with a foreign diplomat from someone at State is automatically classified and to be protected at all costs from exposure. A Secretary would routinely be sent information on military campaigns and capabilities, which of course would be of great value to foreign governments or of course terrorists. And, a Secretary may even be sent the names of covert operatives who work under State Department cover at embassies, or even the names of foreign operatives – information of such gravity that exposure could mean death to those exposed. Movements of State Department personnel – ambassadors for example – and the security of State Department embassies and facilities would be something that one would see in the communications to a Secretary of State. All of this would be only sent to someone with the faith that this flow of information was being transferred on a secure system and being maintained and archived according to the laws of the United States.
Now, what Mrs. Clinton and her plotters did was breathtaking in its gravity. They simply stole her entire digital footprint as Secretary of State for four years and maintained it on her own secret server system, which was either located at her house or at the Clinton family offices in New York, or possibly mirrored in both locations, it is not yet clear which is the case. For four years, her confederates downloaded information from the State Department’s secure system and then copied that information – classified information minus its origins and markings - in some manner and sent the very sensitive and classified information that is necessary for her to do her job to her unsecured system. This took a number of steps, so it was very clear that they were consciously committing a crime each time they did so. Not just a few innocuous and stray e-mails, but all of her e-mails and all of the classified briefing information that she had to know in order to do her job. It was all stolen from government systems and then transferred to her secret system, in an elaborate conspiracy to avoid Constitutionally-mandated Congressional oversight and of course the Freedom of Information Act. She and her team of plotters stole thousands and thousands of documents, then maintained them on a secret server, then after she left office, it was all transferred to the “care” of a computer firm that does not even have a security clearance and they kept it in a water closet. The fact that she had no intention of ever turning over any of this information to the government was made clear by the fact that when she signed out of her role as Secretary of State, she was required to turn over any work product or communications that she may have inadvertently
And of course trying to blame this on her staff simply won’t wash. If this was innocuous, unintentional, once she saw the first classified information or discussion about anything to do with her work as one of the most powerful people in the government come across the digital transom, she was compelled by law to report the breach and would have stopped the practice, nipping this whole thing in the bud. However, she did this for four years.
And by the way, when satellite intelligence is compromised and proved to have been collected by a hostile power it's actually a might bit more serious than people have been indicating, it is actaully a death penality offense, but with all the cackling and coughing, few people are aware of the seriousness of the crimes she committed, based only on public information and we know here server had satellite intelligence according to the Inspector General.
3 •Reply•Share › Show 1 new reply
Avatar
Johnathan Swift Jr. • 2 hours ago
First set of lies from the original press conference:
Here are a few solely from that UN Press Conference over her emails…
First, when I got to work as secretary of state, I opted for convenience to use my personal email account
(that account was specifically created days before she started solely for the job. It wasnt her personal account)
I thought it would be easier to carry just one device for my work and for my personal emails instead of two.
(she had multiple devices – up to at least 4, in fact, according to her own words)
I fully complied with every rule that I was governed by
(not surprisingly, storing sensitive & classified Government records on home servers away from Government ever having access to it is against the rules)
I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.
(except, of course, for those nearly 1.700 classified and 43 Top Secrete emails we’ve been made aware of so far)
But as I — as I said, I saw it as a matter of convenience, and it was allowed. Others had done it.
(no one had a private server to capture everything away from Government hands, and no one else used solely private accounts. They had Official accounts and personal accounts. She never had an official account despite her aids even recommending she use one)
...............................................
•Reply•Share ›
Avatar
Matt Matter tfile • 5 hours ago
Because at the end of the day, we would like to think we are not Democrats, Republicans or Independents, but still Americans and that a sense of fair play and doing what is right will in the end win out over parochial interests. In other words, do what's best for your country not what you perceive as the political party you happened to support.
Clearest case of what needs to be done to further the American political ideal in the last 100 years. Let her HRC stand the court, if she's not guilty, let it play itself out. Failure to do anything else leaves half this country with the belief that justice was politically thwarted.
Makes us a banana republic and will only lead to the additional fragmentation of this country. Not what I think you want to see happen. Gonna lead to the United States of Democrats and the Unites States of Republicans. Signs are already there. Be a patriot, and do the right thing and demand accountability to save your country letting the chips fall where they may.
Imagine for a moment, if Nixon had been able to thwart impeachment through denying any potential prosecutorial oversight. That would have fundamentally changed this country. The shoe is now on the other foot, and only the integrity of doing what is right will not prevent a massive constitutional crisis. You cannot nominate someone who so openly and blazingly disregarded national security protocols.
Why then should not the rest of the country who doesn't agree with failure to indict, then not secede since this is no longer the government which is a nation of laws? Riddle me that batman? Tell me why we aren't one step closer to armed rebellion and secession at a grand scale. Everyone who is in the Department of Defense knows that HRC broke the law. Everyone, doesn't matter whether they are Dems, Reps, or Independents, we all know.
You would think that the potential impacts of the downstream effects associated with this, would scare the hell out of you, because you cannot have a government in which half the people perceive the POTUS as illegitimately elected because the Obama administration protected Clinton from prosecution. Then we are just a spark away from turning on each other.
..........................................
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/435393/hillary-clinton-e-mails-Cheryl-Mills-DOJ
Why would the Justice Department agree to such a restriction? Here, the Post kicks up some sand, tossing into the mix that Mills is “an attorney herself.” But as someone once said, what difference, at this point, does that make?
RELATED: The Clinton E-mail Case Transcends Hillary’s Presidential Campaign Mills was not Clinton’s lawyer — not at the State Department and not in the production of the e-mails to the State Department nearly two years later. Mills was a government official when the improper e-mail communications arrangement was in use. Her own actions and communications with Clinton and others in connection with the production — and destruction — of e-mails is highly relevant. Moreover, absent a written waiver from the government, the rules of professional ethics forbid a lawyer who has been a public official from representing a client “in connection with a matter in which the lawyer participated personally and substantially as a public officer or employee.”
This rule would bar Mills from acting as Clinton’s lawyer even if another obvious conflict of interest did not already prevent such an arrangement (namely, the fact that they are joint participants in potentially criminal transactions under investigation).
Remember, Clinton, Mills, and other top Clinton staffers knew that Clinton’s e-mails were not preserved in State Department files. They knew this notwithstanding that federal law and procedure, which discourage any use of private e-mail accounts for government business (let alone systematic use of private e-mail), require that, if private e-mail is used for an official communication, a copy of that communication must be placed in government files. Clinton and Mills well knew that this was not done. The e-mails remained stored on Clinton’s private server for nearly two years after Clinton and Mills left the State Department at the end of President Obama’s first term in early
December 2014, under pressure from public and congressional demands for information, the State Department finally requested that Clinton surrender any government records she may have kept when she left. Only then did Clinton acknowledge the homebrew server system on which 62,320 e-mails were said to be stored. Of these, only 30,490 were turned over to the State Department — in a paper form that was impossible to search digitally, forcing the Department to expend mammoth resources and taxpayer dollars to scan them into its filing system. Clinton then unilaterally deemed the remaining 31,830 e-mails “private, personal records” — which she undertook to destroy by deleting them, despite their having been significant enough to preserve up until that point.
Destroying government files is a felony, every bit as much as is mishandling classified information. (See my column discussing federal embezzlement statute and Shannen Coffin’s column discussing federal concealment and destruction statute.) Moreover, if those 31,830 e-mails contained information responsive to FOIA requests, congressional investigations (e.g., probes of Benghazi and the State Department’s abuse of FOIA), or due-process discovery rules governing judicial proceedings (e.g., the Khatallah case involving the Benghazi massacre), attempting to destroy them by deleting them could amount to felony obstruction of judicial or other governmental proceedings. Before Clinton tried to destroy those thousands of e-mails (some or all of which the FBI may since have been able to retrieve from the server), it was her duty to review them with the State Department to assure its concurrence that they were indeed private. For now, we have only the dubious say-so of Clinton and her confederates. The FBI and the rest of us are expected to believe one of the highest-ranking, busiest officials in the United States government had time for 31,830 e-mails about yoga routines, wedding gowns, and the like.
How can it be possible that the FBI is not being permitted by the Justice Department to ask a key witness — an accomplice witness — about one of the central transactions under investigation? "
= new reply since forum marked as read
Take down The Machine before it takes down America...
[link:
|
that the alerters find so objectionable.
Maybe - just maybe - it's the content: people who are knowledgeable of data security storage and how bad this looks for a certain Democratic candidate.
0-7 .... #FeelTheBern
