Hillary Clinton is Done

[The Big Dog]

Zero is pretty absolute. Considering that there have been people locked up in recent years for giving away or selling secret information, I'm going to say your zero is disproved for all intents and purposes. Unless, of course, you assume that Assange, Snowden, the Russians, the Chinese, the Israelis, and some of our "friends" in the EU all got those documents directly from the various government servers (or "they just fell off the back of a truck, I swear") and moved them to the WWW directly from inside the departments. My assumption is going to be that certain employees probably moved that stuff out on thumb drives or other "non-secure" devices.

I'm going to say somewhere between the two... from 1 to 89%.

My bad, forgot to declare the rounding. It is actually closer to .001%

1% of people grossly violating their security clearance? Other than Hillary's staff in the state department? Seems a wee bit far fetched, although that would explain Hillary's inexplicable popularity...

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I'd say zero. You think people are taking home classified intelligence on a unsecured device?

That is automatic lose security clearance and likely job.

90% of people with security clearances breach their security clearances?

Wow.

You're still conflating what was done here with criminal misconduct when you have no evidence other than your interpretation of incomplete information.

... Considering that there have been people locked up in recent years for giving away or selling secret information, I'm going to say your zero is disproved for all intents and purposes. Unless, of course, you assume that Assange, Snowden, the Russians, the Chinese, the Israelis, and some of our "friends" in the EU all got those documents directly from the various government servers (or "they just fell off the back of a truck, I swear") and moved them to the WWW directly from inside the departments. My assumption is going to be that certain employees probably moved that stuff out on thumb drives or other "non-secure" devices.

I'm going to say somewhere between the two... from 1 to 89%.

And we all know Clinton sold classified secrets.


The point being, in case it's missed, is that this, like much of intradepartmental communication, has not passed the line into criminal activity, not even close.

 

[Bob001]

Try 90%.

What amazes me is how trumped up the outrage is over nothing. Our country was not in danger.

A presidential National Security Advisor and a former CIA Director are among the people who have been prosecuted for mishandling classified material. Lower level bureaucrats have gone to jail. You seem to adopt the "everybody does it, so what" line pretty reflexively. Sometimes that's true. Sometimes it's not.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/2005/0...-pleads-guilty-to-taking-classified-docs.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/08/27/us/prosecution-may-be-urged-in-cia-case.html
http://www.navytimes.com/story/mili...for-mishandling-classified-material/30862027/

 

[The Big Dog]

You're still conflating what was done here with criminal misconduct when you have no evidence other than your interpretation of incomplete information.

You just claimed that 90% of people with security clearances violate them which is utterly ridiculous.

Just ridiculous.....

 

[Bob001]

....
The point being, in case it's missed, is that this, like much of intradepartmental communication, has not passed the line into criminal activity, not even close.

Mishandling classified information, even inadvertently, by itself alone can be prosecuted as a crime and sometimes is. You don't have to sell it, publish it or give it away. "Criminal activity" does not only mean "activity harmful to the United States," any more than speeding is legal as long as you don't run over anybody.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

A presidential National Security Advisor and a former CIA Director are among the people who have been prosecuted for mishandling classified material. Lower level bureaucrats have gone to jail. You seem to adopt the "everybody does it, so what" line pretty reflexively. Sometimes that's true. Sometimes it's not.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/2005/0...-pleads-guilty-to-taking-classified-docs.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2000/08/27/us/prosecution-may-be-urged-in-cia-case.html
http://www.navytimes.com/story/mili...for-mishandling-classified-material/30862027/

No, but this straw man has come up now, what, half dozen times?

What everybody does is commonplace business that doesn't rise to the level of criminal misconduct.

What everyone doesn't do, is what the people actually charged and convicted did.


Your first link:

Taking classified documents

Your second:

Ms. Reno initially declined to prosecute Mr. Deutch, who had acknowledged a breach of security and apologized.

From Wiki on Mr Deutch:

Over two years after his departure, the matter was referred to the Department of Justice, where Attorney General Janet Reno declined prosecution. She did, however, recommend an investigation to determine whether Deutch should retain his security clearance.[8]

So essentially he got a reprimand years after he left office. He plead guilty to a misdemeanor and we don't know how the material differed from Clinton's. Details of covert operations differs from intergovernmental communiques.

And keeping Chelsea Manning in mind, from your third:

pleaded guilty to the unauthorized removal and retention of classified materials.

Nishimura, deployed in Afghanistan in 2007 and 2008 as a regional engineer, admitted to downloading classified briefings and digital records onto his personal electronic devices. He carried the materials off base and brought them back to the U.S. when his deployment ended.

None of those comes close to an analogy to Clinton's emails. It shows how far the truth has to be stretched to make Clinton into a criminal.

 

[Bob001]

Those sound like personal emails. How exactly would details of those emails come to public attention ?

Some people might not agree that emails involving State Department or any government business, or in which she conducts foundation business with foreign governments are not "personal" in the sense that she implies. The recovered emails might be subject to FOIA requests, or they might be archived as public records, or a whistleblower might just pass the juiciest stuff to reporters. I can think of more ways they could come out than ways they could be kept secret.

 

[The Big Dog]

No, but this straw man has come up now, what, half dozen times?

What everybody does is commonplace business that doesn't rise to the level of criminal misconduct.

What everyone doesn't do, is what the people actually charged and convicted did.

You know what folks, make up your own mind regarding the claim that violating security clearances is business as usual.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

You know what folks, make up your own mind regarding the claim that violating security clearances is business as usual.

See my additional edits in that post.

 

[Bob001]

.....
None of those comes close to an analogy to Clinton's emails. It shows how far the truth has to be stretched to make Clinton into a criminal.

No one knows yet whether Clinton is a criminal. The point is that you claimed 90% of government workers routinely violate their security clearances. That's just ridiculous, and even officials at the highest levels -- the CIA Director! -- have suffered consequences for doing what they weren't supposed to do, even when no harm resulted.

 

[Foolmewunz]

My bad, forgot to declare the rounding. It is actually closer to .001%

1% of people grossly violating their security clearance? Other than Hillary's staff in the state department? Seems a wee bit far fetched, although that would explain Hillary's inexplicable popularity...

The claim wasn't just State, it was government employees. You're saying that not more than 9.5* federal employees with Top Secret clearance have EVER taken work home on a laptop, forwarded themselves an attachment, carried documents off-site?

I don't work for the government, but I know I fudged the rules about pushing myself copies of contracts, proposals, etc... This was clearly against our company internal regulations, but I was a good/loyal employee and there are only so many hours in a day and I needed to work on that stuff. I am certain it was quite common in my own company. I'd be pretty sure that it's also quite common in our bureaucracy. Government agencies/departments tend to overdo the Top Secret bit, as we've seen repeatedly. I'm pretty sure that people with no nefarious ideas would feel comfortable circumventing a nuisance rule.

ETA: *# of persons with Top Secret clearance 1.4 million. 34% of those are contractors (thus, not "federal employees"). .001% of the remainder would be less than 9.5. I'm giving you the rounding.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

No one knows yet whether Clinton is a criminal. The point is that you claimed 90% of government workers routinely violate their security clearances. That's just ridiculous, and even officials at the highest levels -- the CIA Director! -- have suffered consequences for doing what they weren't supposed to do, even when no harm resulted.

More straw. You guys just can't help yourselves. You have to put words in my mouth in order to make your argument.

According to your definition of criminal, anything one does wrong at work is criminal. Yet the only people you can find actually charged and convicted did things far more serious and more potentially damaging than Clinton's use of her email server.

It would seem your confirmation bias will not allow you to see the difference between an imperfection in work practices and criminally mishandling confidential information.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

The claim wasn't just State, it was government employees. You're saying that not more than 9.5* federal employees with Top Secret clearance have EVER taken work home on a laptop, forwarded themselves an attachment, carried documents off-site?

I don't work for the government, but I know I fudged the rules about pushing myself copies of contracts, proposals, etc... This was clearly against our company internal regulations, but I was a good/loyal employee and there are only so many hours in a day and I needed to work on that stuff. I am certain it was quite common in my own company. I'd be pretty sure that it's also quite common in our bureaucracy. Government agencies/departments tend to overdo the Top Secret bit, as we've seen repeatedly. I'm pretty sure that people with no nefarious ideas would feel comfortable circumventing a nuisance rule.

ETA: *# of persons with Top Secret clearance 1.4 million. 34% of those are contractors (thus, not "federal employees"). .001% of the remainder would be less than 9.5. I'm giving you the rounding.

This ^

 

[The Big Dog]

The claim wasn't just State, it was government employees. You're saying that not more than 9.5* federal employees with Top Secret clearance have EVER taken work home on a laptop, forwarded themselves an attachment, carried documents off-site?

I don't work for the government, but I know I fudged the rules about pushing myself copies of contracts, proposals, etc... This was clearly against our company internal regulations, but I was a good/loyal employee and there are only so many hours in a day and I needed to work on that stuff. I am certain it was quite common in my own company. I'd be pretty sure that it's also quite common in our bureaucracy. Government agencies/departments tend to overdo the Top Secret bit, as we've seen repeatedly. I'm pretty sure that people with no nefarious ideas would feel comfortable circumventing a nuisance rule.

ETA: *# of persons with Top Secret clearance 1.4 million. 34% of those are contractors (thus, not "federal employees"). .001% of the remainder would be less than 9.5. I'm giving you the rounding.

Yeah, that seems high.

You seem untroubled by the fact that someone else claimed the number was a million plus people violating classification rules, which is next level nuts. Seriously comparing your internal business guidelines to us government security regulations is silly.

 

[Bob001]

.....
I don't work for the government, but I know I fudged the rules about pushing myself copies of contracts, proposals, etc... This was clearly against our company internal regulations, but I was a good/loyal employee and there are only so many hours in a day and I needed to work on that stuff.
....

Violating company policy might get you yelled at. In the federal government it can get your security clearance revoked, it can get you fired and prohibited from all federal employment, and it might even get you a visit from the FBI. People just don't do it casually.

Here is the State Department manual for handling classified material. Make some coffee; it's 50 pages. Here's a relevant paragraph:

You must not remove classified material from official premises except when
necessary in conducting official meetings, conferences, or consultations, and
you must return this material to safe storage facilities immediately upon the
conclusion of the meeting, conference, or consultation. Residences are not considered official premises. You must not remove classified material for
reasons of personal convenience or keep it overnight in personal custody.

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/88403.pdf

And here's what can happen to you if you don't pay attention:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1924

 

[applecorped]

You just claimed that 90% of people with security clearances violate them which is utterly ridiculous.

Just ridiculous.....

Consider the source

 

[BenBurch]

At this point it doesn't matter if it was a crime or not. It keeps being the story we hear in the news. Hillary can try to change the tone, but it doesn't seem to be working very well yet. Every time this and her name come up, the damage accumulates.

 

[wareyin]

At this point it doesn't matter if it was a crime or not. It keeps being the story we hear in the news. Hillary can try to change the tone, but it doesn't seem to be working very well yet. Every time this and her name come up, the damage accumulates.

Except, it's not really in the news. Check CNN, for example. Not a peep on their politics page. Fox "News" may be flogging this faux scandal, but nobody else is.

 

[TheL8Elvis]

Emails regarding "state department business" sound like "personal emails."

I was, of course, referring to the remainder of the list. I thought it would be obvious, but apparently ...

Some people might not agree that emails involving State Department or any government business, or in which she conducts foundation business with foreign governments are not "personal" in the sense that she implies.The recovered emails might be subject to FOIA requests, or they might be archived as public records, or a whistleblower might just pass the juiciest stuff to reporters. I can think of more ways they could come out than ways they could be kept secret.

OK, but are these people with access now to her email in a position to make that decision as to what counts as personal? Because personal emails are not subject to FOIA, etc.

And I think it would be great for clinton if someone who has access to her recovered "personal" emails releases them.

I think the FBI 'recovering' her emails can only work to her advantage at this point.

 

[The Big Dog]

I was, of course, referring to the remainder of the list. I thought it would be obvious, but apparently ...

You were, huh....

The rest of the list wasn't "private" either. We have some emails that show that Bill was asking for permission to give speeches in North Korea and the Congo, among other places.... which were vetoed by the State Department.

Yeah, Bill Clinton asked for approval to go give a speech in the Congo. "Can one be a former president of the United States and accept a $650,000 speaking invitation from the ruler of a country with numerous human-rights abuses?

This last one is apparently a question that the Clinton Foundation has pondered. In e-mails obtained by ABC, the organization asked the State Department to weigh in on some controversial invites for former president Bill Clinton—invites they appeared to have seriously considered."

So, hope that clears everything up!