Ed clintonemails.com: Who is Eric Hoteham?

[TheL8Elvis]

Of course, it was a draft sent from Blair's office to State via a classified channel. The fact that it is seemingly innocuous is quite beside the point.

No, I think that's exactly the point.

You can't explain how that information could possibly be considered classified ?

I don't have an issue with the head of the Dept of state being able to determine whether some innocuous information should be considered classified or not. And I was under the impression she was allowed to decide that.

 

[wareyin]

No, I think that's exactly the point.

You can't explain how that information could possibly be considered classified ?

I don't have an issue with the head of the Dept of state being able to determine whether some innocuous information should be considered classified or not. And I was under the impression she was allowed to decide that.

Considering that the only thing the Clinton bashers actually have is that 2 emails were forwarded to Clinton that contained "classified information" that had already been broadcast on CNN, it appears that 'classified' information doesn't have to be secret, unknown, or even sensitive.

 

[wareyin]

They never said that.

Don't you guys ever get tired of being wrong?

Law enforcement officials have said that Mrs. Clinton, who is seeking the 2016 Democratic nomination for president, is not a target of the investigation, and she has said there is no evidence that her account was hacked. There has also been no evidence that she broke the law, and many specialists believe the occasional appearance of classified information in her account was probably of marginal consequence.

 

[The Big Dog]

No, I think that's exactly the point.

You can't explain how that information could possibly be considered classified ?

I don't have an issue with the head of the Dept of state being able to determine whether some innocuous information should be considered classified or not. And I was under the impression she was allowed to decide that.

Wait, I just explained how it was classified and you just said that I can't explain how it was classified? Is this *********** opposite day?

Information from foreign governments is "born" classified as has been explained in detail in this thread, further, no Hillary just cannot unilaterally declare classified information not classified, in fact Obama issued an Order for just this reason.

The data was classified and whining that it should not have been is no defense whatsoever.

 

[Reheat]

http://www.usnews.com/news/politics...to-release-7-000-pages-of-emails-150-redacted

State Department spokesman Mark Toner said Monday none of the information censored in Monday's release was identified as classified when the emails were sent or received by Clinton, noting the redactions were made subsequently and only prior to the release of the emails under the Freedom of Information Act.

But don't let facts get in the way of your conspiracy theory.

Roll your eyes all you want, but this SPIN doesn't matter. A document is NOT classified because it has a STAMP. The nature of the material makes it classified. Note that spokesman used the word identified. I guess you're admitting that she was too stupid to recognize what should be classified or not. The nature of some of the stuff that was classified was/is a "no brainer" type of classified. Go ahead a keep buying into the spin. It will work on some of the people some of the time.

 

[Reheat]

No, I think that's exactly the point.

You can't explain how that information could possibly be considered classified ?

I don't have an issue with the head of the Dept of state being able to determine whether some innocuous information should be considered classified or not. And I was under the impression she was allowed to decide that.

She did not have the authority to declassify something classified by someone else, particularly a foreign Government Official.

This is a perfect example of her arrogance! She thought and thinks she is above laws.

 

[plague311]

It's been claimed up and down that anything from Foreign leaders is classified. He might not have done it on purpose, but he still did it. We will all be awaiting your impending anger.

No, it hasn't.

Information from foreign governments is "born" classified as has been explained in detail in this thread, further, no Hillary just cannot unilaterally declare classified information not classified, in fact Obama issued an Order for just this reason.

You were saying, Zigg? It appears that this is more evidence that even those whining about this can't get on the same page. I'll keep awaiting your pending anger, until you find some other fallacy to accuse me of that somehow enables your imminent handwaving.

 

[Ziggurat]

You were saying, Zigg? It appears that this is more evidence that even those whining about this can't get on the same page. I'll keep awaiting your pending anger, until you find some other fallacy to accuse me of that somehow enables your imminent handwaving.

My pending anger at whom? Powell? You still haven't demonstrated that I should be. To the extent that 16.5's description of the classified status of information from foreign governments differs from mine, I have no reason to prefer his description over mine.

Hell, I'm not even angry at Clinton. Corrupt and incompetent is just who she is. Obama knew that when he appointed her, and anyone voting for her should know that by now as well. There's no point in getting mad at a scorpion for stinging you, it's just their nature.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Wait, I just explained how it was classified and you just said that I can't explain how it was classified? Is this *********** opposite day?

Information from foreign governments is "born" classified as has been explained in detail in this thread, further, no Hillary just cannot unilaterally declare classified information not classified, in fact Obama issued an Order for just this reason.

The data was classified and whining that it should not have been is no defense whatsoever.

Hmm.

It looks as if your "facts" come from here:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/423362/clinton-emails-were-born-classified-andrew-c-mccarthy

In the first year of his administration (December 29, 2009, to be exact), President Obama issued Executive Order 13526, entitled “Classified National Security Information.” It explains that information is deemed classified if its disclosure would cause “damage to the national security.” Beyond that, whether the classified information is categorized as “top secret,” “secret,” or “confidential” depends on how serious the damage would be.

With that as background, the order makes clear that there is one category of information that is automatically deemed classified: information from foreign governments. Section 1.1(d) of the executive order decrees: “The unauthorized disclosure of foreign government information is presumed to cause damage to the national security.”


So your opinion piece claims. I guess we will see if it is indeed true.

I see where the executive order says this:
(6) reveal information, including foreign government information, that would cause serious harm to relations between the United States and a foreign government, or to ongoing diplomatic activities of the United States;
And
(l) "Damage to the national security" means harm to the national defense or foreign relations of the United States from the unauthorized disclosure of information, taking into consideration such aspects of the information as the sensitivity, value, utility, and provenance of that information.

Still don't see how a statement "that U.S. and British officials would work together to promote peace." could possibly be top secret.

 

[The Big Dog]

Still don't see how a statement "that U.S. and British officials would work together to promote peace." could possibly be top secret.

You mean after quoting the exact sections that explain it, you still don't understand it?

We'll put that as an argument from incredulity. Thanks for posting.

 

[The Big Dog]

My pending anger at whom? Powell? You still haven't demonstrated that I should be. To the extent that 16.5's description of the classified status of information from foreign governments differs from mine, I have no reason to prefer his description over mine.

Hell, I'm not even angry at Clinton. Corrupt and incompetent is just who she is. Obama knew that when he appointed her, and anyone voting for her should know that by now as well. There's no point in getting mad at a scorpion for stinging you, it's just their nature.

My comments were based on an Executive Order from 2009, which was long after Powell retired.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

From a Clinton press release dated March 10, 2015

Was classified material sent or received by Secretary Clinton on this email address?

No. A separate, closed system was used by the Department for the sole purpose of handling classified communications which was designed to prevent such information from being transmitted anywhere other than within that system, including to outside email accounts.

Like I said earlier ...

Because you don't send/discuss classified material on a non-classified network. The networks are segregated. It's a given she simply wouldn't expect classified material on her email.

It would have to happen in the way that it did - someone wrote her an email that contained classified material, and sent it to her. As I have stated earlier - that could have happened even though she was using a state dept email. And of course, we know in that scenario that information would have been compromised, as the state department email servers have been compromised multiple times.

Frankly, I don't see any "incompetence" required in using personal email as SoS. I think this claim of incompetence comes from ignorance of government networks and a misunderstanding in thinking that the SoS does her job via email.

 

[plague311]

My comments were based on an Executive Order from 2009, which was long after Powell retired.

Oh, so that makes it ok to use a public email system to conduct classified business. Good to know.

More of this random poutrage comes front and center. Apparently the "common sense" requirements that are expected from Hillary should not be expected from others.

 

[The Big Dog]

Oh, so that makes it ok to use a public email system to conduct classified business. Good to know.

More of this random poutrage comes front and center. Apparently the "common sense" requirements that are expected from Hillary should not be expected from others.

FANTASTIC example of the Rule of So in action!

"common sense"? I was talking about an Executive Order that Hillary failed to comply with.

Further, while you appear to believe that people are applying a double standard, I have said repeatedly that I have no problem if Powell ends up in the jail cell right next to Hillary's.

lolz, good to see you have your dander up (a/k/a Poutrage) about Powell, tho, I assume you agree that both should end up in the clink, right... you would not want to apply a double standard, Amiright?

 

[TheL8Elvis]

You mean after quoting the exact sections that explain it, you still don't understand it?

We'll put that as an argument from incredulity. Thanks for posting.

HERE is "its a public statment just email it":
https://foia.state.gov/searchapp/DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0119/DOC_0C05773830/C05773830.pdf
ANd here is the blair statment email (apparently not top secret):
https://foia.state.gov/searchapp/DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0119/DOC_0C05773833/C05773833.pdf
And here is the statment she made:
http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/texttrans/2010/02/20100211193023eaifas0.3572504.html


And I'm not saying I don't believe it - I am saying I don't understand how emailing a statement she was going to make to the public , just because the draft of it it happened to come from an email on a classified system, falls under any section I quoted.

If that's the case - not only did she have someone email it .... she then released it to the public !!11!

If that was really classified info, they should be rolling in to lock her up any second ....

Or, wait.... It's simply the case that wasn't classified information.

 

[The Big Dog]

HERE is "its a public statment just email it":
https://foia.state.gov/searchapp/DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0119/DOC_0C05773830/C05773830.pdf
ANd here is the blair statment email (apparently not top secret):
https://foia.state.gov/searchapp/DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_August_Web/IPS-0119/DOC_0C05773833/C05773833.pdf
And here is the statment she made:
http://iipdigital.usembassy.gov/st/english/texttrans/2010/02/20100211193023eaifas0.3572504.html


And I'm not saying I don't believe it - I am saying I don't understand how emailing a statement she was going to make to the public , just because the draft of it it happened to come from an email on a classified system, falls under any section I quoted.

If that's the case - not only did she have someone email it .... she then released it to the public !!11!

If that was really classified info, they should be rolling in to lock her up any second ....

Or, wait.... It's simply the case that wasn't classified information.

Wow, you just attached a link to the email that says it was on the classified server and a quote above that says that data from foreign governments is preemptively classified.

And you are still trying to get your head around why it was classified?

lol, 'k.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Wow, you just attached a link to the email that says it was on the classified server and a quote above that says that data from foreign governments is preemptively classified.
And you are still trying to get your head around why it was classified?

lol, 'k.

This quote ????
(6) reveal information, including foreign government information, that would cause serious harm to relations between the United States and a foreign government, or to ongoing diplomatic activities of the United States;

That doesn't say what you think it does.

And you seem to be ignoring the fact that she released the "classified information" from the " classified server " in a public statement !@11

But you keep telling yourself that was actually classified material.

 

[davefoc]

Like I said earlier ...

Because you don't send/discuss classified material on a non-classified network. The networks are segregated.

It's a given she simply wouldn't expect classified material on her email.

It would have to happen in the way that it did - someone wrote her an email that contained classified material, and sent it to her. As I have stated earlier - that could have happened even though she was using a state dept email. And of course, we know in that scenario that information would have been compromised, as the state department email servers have been compromised multiple times.

Frankly, I don't see any "incompetence" required in using personal email as SoS. I think this claim of incompetence comes from ignorance of government networks and a misunderstanding in thinking that the SoS does her job via email.

The presumed fact that Clinton received information that was classifiable on her machine does not seem to be a major problem for her. Like you suggest, she can make a reasonable argument that the fault lies with the people that sent her the information. Although I still think that setting up an email server for the SoS is problematic with regard to that because one would expect people to send the SoS sensitive information on her email server and as such Clinton should not have relied on a private server set up by unvetted people that wasn't specifically physically secured with unknown procedures for back up and protection of any physical media.

However, I think the main issue for Clinton here is that she received information that was obviously sensitive and possibly subject to being classified and she doesn't seem to have done anything about it. I hope that memos can be found where she makes it clear that people should not be using her email to send her sensitive information or evidence can be found that she reported the existence of sensitive material on her server. I suspect that neither of those things happened because that would constitute an affirmative defense of Clinton. What would be left of this scandal if that had been done would be some miscellaneous malfeasance that partisans would ignore and moderates might accept as the lesser of two evils.

 

[The Big Dog]

With that as background, the order makes clear that there is one category of information that is automatically deemed classified: information from foreign governments. Section 1.1(d) of the executive order decrees: “The unauthorized disclosure of foreign government information is presumed to cause damage to the national security.”
[/I]

This quote ????
(6) reveal information, including foreign government information, that would cause serious harm to relations between the United States and a foreign government, or to ongoing diplomatic activities of the United States;

That doesn't say what you think it does.

And you seem to be ignoring the fact that she released the "classified information" from the " classified server " in a public statement !@11

But you keep telling yourself that was actually classified material.

No, the quote above.

I'm a little bit blown away at just how wrong you keep getting everything.

Here is the order, read it.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-classified-national-security-information

By the way the "draft" language was classified under Section 6.1 (s) 1 of that order.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Hmm.

It looks as if your "facts" come from here:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/423362/clinton-emails-were-born-classified-andrew-c-mccarthy

In the first year of his administration (December 29, 2009, to be exact), President Obama issued Executive Order 13526, entitled “Classified National Security Information.” It explains that information is deemed classified if its disclosure would cause “damage to the national security.” Beyond that, whether the classified information is categorized as “top secret,” “secret,” or “confidential” depends on how serious the damage would be.

With that as background, the order makes clear that there is one category of information that is automatically deemed classified: information from foreign governments. Section 1.1(d) of the executive order decrees: “The unauthorized disclosure of foreign government information is presumed to cause damage to the national security.”

So your opinion piece claims. I guess we will see if it is indeed true.

I see where the executive order says this:
(6) reveal information, including foreign government information, that would cause serious harm to relations between the United States and a foreign government, or to ongoing diplomatic activities of the United States;
And
(l) "Damage to the national security" means harm to the national defense or foreign relations of the United States from the unauthorized disclosure of information, taking into consideration such aspects of the information as the sensitivity, value, utility, and provenance of that information.

Still don't see how a statement "that U.S. and British officials would work together to promote peace." could possibly be top secret.

No, the quote above.

That quote "above" , as I already pointed out, came from an opinion piece.

But let's look at section 1.1:
Section 1.1. Classification Standards.
(a) Information may be originally classified under the terms of this order only if all of the following conditions are met:

(1) an original classification authority is classifying the information;

(2) the information is owned by, produced by or for, or is under the control of the United States Government;

(3) the information falls within one or more of the categories of information listed in section 1.4 of this order; and

(4) the original classification authority determines that the unauthorized disclosure of the information reasonably could be expected to result in damage to the national security, which includes defense against transnational terrorism, and the original classification authority is able to identify or describe the damage.

(b) If there is significant doubt about the need to classify information, it shall not be classified. This provision does not:

(1) amplify or modify the substantive criteria or procedures for classification; or

(2) create any substantive or procedural rights subject to judicial review.

(c) Classified information shall not be declassified automatically as a result of any unauthorized disclosure of identical or similar information.

(d) The unauthorized disclosure of foreign government information is presumed to cause damage to the national security.

I don't know how anyone reads this and comes away with the conclusion that "there is one category of information that is automatically deemed classified:information from foreign governments"

I'm a little bit blown away at just how wrong you keep getting everything.

Here is the order, read it.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-classified-national-security-information

By the way the "draft" language was classified under Section 6.1 (s) 1 of that order.

Sec. 6.1. Definitions. For purposes of this order:
(s) "Foreign government information" means:
(1) information provided to the United States Government by a foreign government or governments,
an international organization of governments, or any element thereof, with the expectation that the information, the source of the information, or both, are to be held in confidence;

Thanks - since HRC was preparing a public statement containing that information, there is no way possible that information was expected to be held in confidence.