"Trump and the Truth" FBI Lied and altered Clinton email documents by placing a (C) on them to trick her. SMDH. https://t.co/py5Ns6XNIY— SouthFlorida4Hillary (@SFL4Hillary) September 3, 2016
Apparently I was correct.
Courtesy of ABC News:
FBI Director James Comey recently said his agency could prove the presence of classified information in the e-mails but found no evidence to indicate that Clinton knew she was sending or receiving classified information — a conclusion reflected in the FBI documents released today.
“Clinton did not recall receiving any emails she thought should not have been on an unclassified system,” reads a summary of the FBI’s findings from July. “She relied on State officials to use their judgment when emailing her and could not recall anyone raising concerns with her regarding the sensitivity of the information she received at her email address.”
As Comey said before, three email chains with Clinton included at least one paragraph marked with a “(C),” indicating the paragraph contained confidential material.
“Clinton stated she did not know what the ‘(C)’ meant at the beginning of the paragraphs and speculated it was referencing paragraphs marked in alphabetical order,” according to the FBI summary.
In addition, the paragraphs were not properly marked, lacking a header or footer indicating they contained classified information. But before their interview with Clinton, FBI agents placed the appropriate header on one of the emails to see how she would respond.
When confronted with the altered document, Clinton recognized the header and footer as indicating the presence of classified information, but she didn’t connect them to the “(C)” marking and said she didn’t think the email’s content was in fact classified. She questioned why it was marked as such, according to the FBI summary.
To be clear not only did the FBI determine after the fact that multiple e-mails contained classified information though they were not classified at the time they were sent, an accusation refuted by the State Department, but then during the interview they also attempted to trip Clinton up by falsely marking the header of one her e-mails to see if she recognized what it meant.
Not only did she recognize what the markings were, but she also determined that it was false and not reflective of the content of the e-mail.
In fact we have never been told exactly why those few passages were marked with a "C" for classified in the first place, or whether or not they should have been marked that way.
It also should be noted that for documents originating within the State Department the Secretary of State, in this case Hillary Clinton, has some control over what is, or is not, considered classified. So for many of them if she did not believe they were classified, then they weren't.
Also remember the fact that the folks sending the e-mails to Hillary's server were ultimately responsible for their content being stored on a "unsecured" server, so since Hillary did not forward those e-mails she herself took no action which put potentially classified information at risk.
And finally, and possibly most importantly, since there is NO evidence that Hillary's e-mail server was hacked, while the State Department's was, then the argument that information was less secure on her server is factually inaccurate.
Man you are really going out of your way lately to defend your queen.
ReplyDeleteI guess you're one of those idiots who doesn't like facts. Ps, we don't have a monarchy in this country you dumbfuck. So give it a goddamn rest with your "queen" bullshit.
DeleteCelia, go back you your own blog and keep spreading lies, loser.
DeleteNervous much Sarah?
DeleteWhat a silly thing to say.
DeleteFrozen Justice must be too boring to stay at home.
DeleteSame for SPHASH also too. What, nobody visiting?
DeleteFuck the FBI and Comey. He needs his ass fired!
ReplyDeleteVote Hillary Clinton. She is smart as shit, quick on her feet and so damned well qualified to be POTUS it isn't funny!
I respect your hatred of Sarah Palin, otherwise, your an ifiot. Do some research. It is obvious to anyone that can read; if Hillary is elected it means they (the Clintons) have dossiers on everyone. The Clintons could not be more corrupt.
ReplyDeleteDo some research? That's rich coming from someone who refuses to be told anything.
Delete11:57
DeleteFact free paranoid conspiracy theories.
The feeble minded fall for them.
@11:57, WTF does "your an ifiot" mean? You must be lacking in your proofreading before posting your anger.
DeleteJust giving an example of what a ifiot does in their spare time. It's obvious to anyone who can read.
Delete"In fact we have never been told exactly why those few passages were marked with a "C" for classified in the first place, or whether or not they should have been marked that way."
ReplyDeleteI've read that at least one of them was a schedule change for Hillary meeting with a head of state of another country. Any mention of such a schedule is classified due to security concerns, but . . . seems pretty minor in light of the huge spotlight shone on her emails.
Comey should be out on his traitorous ass.
ReplyDeleteFrom the article: As Comey said before ... at least one paragraph marked with a “(C),” indicating the paragraph contained confidential material.
ReplyDeleteIf he's telling the truth, security standards sure have gone downhill in the fifty-plus years since I retired from the armed forces. Back then, if a single paragraph within a document was classified, the top and bottom of every page of the document had to state that classification, spelled out in words. Relying on a coy "(C)" in the middle of a document, and nothing else strikes me as being ABYSMALLY STUPID.
By the way, one can see where CONFIDENTIAL—not to be confused with "(C)"—rates as a classification level here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classified_information
In clearer terms the FBI tried to trick Hilary into condemning herself. My dog wtf is wrong with the FBI and WHO gave those orders????? She better clean that house first thing and get the dross out of there ASAP.
ReplyDeleteFrom a Canadian friend who is followed by the regime because he has its number:
ReplyDelete"I haven't followed Obama's China visit in any detail. I did see that Chinese officials were forceful and rude with Americans arriving on an airport tarmac. The Chinese regime does not respect the U.S. and being "nice" to the Chinese regime is foolish and they see this "niceness" as stupidity and weakness but those who think that problems can be hugged away don't realize that there are some entities, such as this Chinese communist regime, which look at such things as weakness, as they hold no value in kindness or morality.
The U.S. has helped to keep evil at bay for the rest of the world for a number of decades and if they hadn't the world would be a living horror (why defense is important), as there have indeed been powerful, brutal and I would say even evil regimes that the the U.S. has held at bay. Of course, being in a powerful position will bring criticism, valid or not, so the U.S. has been shown very little appreciation. Of course there have been individuals in U.S. business and politics who have abused their power and wealth to the detriment of others at home and internationally but overall the U.S. has taken on a massive responsibility, spending huge wealth and many thousands of lives to hold some of these malevolent entities at bay and I personally am very grateful for that. Even though the U.S. has unwisely weakened its position in the world in recent years, they still have the most powerful military. But even still, look at what the Chinese regime is doing in the South China Sea, literally building military bases in international waters, breaking international laws at will and creating a massive power base and threat to the region as well as the rest of the world. And this is when the U.S. still has the most powerful military. Imagine if the U.S. was not powerful militarily; what the Chinese regime would be doing internationally in that case?
Anyway, a bit of a tangent perhaps, but the thoughts came, so I shared.
Chinese tourists are pretty rude too.
DeleteRead Duhkotas's latest Fecebook post.
ReplyDeleteUmm, no thanks I trust that you Palin-panty sniffers will fill us in ;-)
Delete@2:44 PM WTF ?
DeleteWe know what the (C) means. It means Confidential, which is the lowest classification level for classified information. It is defined as information that would "damage" national security if publicly disclosed, again, without the proper authorization.
ReplyDeleteShe already said she takes responsibility for what people in the State Dept sent through her server and private email. It's silly to claim the head of the department isn't responsible for what people who work for her sent her anyway, but it's sillier when she's already taken responsibility.
In a number of posts you've equated "the FBI found no evidence the server was hacked" with meaning it was proven it was never hacked therefore the server was more secure than government servers that are known to have been hacked. Each time you conveniently leave out the part where the FBI said that a skilled hacker would leave no evidence, therefore absence of evidence of a hack isn't sufficient to conclude it was never hacked. Even without that part in place, you can't get from "no evidence it was hacked" to "using that private server was really a good thing". It's nonsense. Besides, Clinton admits using the private server, the private email account, a single device for personal and business were wrong choices.
You should read the real documents instead of distilling and embelishing stories from hyper-pro Clinton sources.
Wow, it looks like RAM is back on the job.
DeleteBet your brown nose is happy, Bekki.
"Each time you conveniently leave out the part where the FBI said that a skilled hacker would leave no evidence, therefore absence of evidence of a hack isn't sufficient to conclude it was never hacked."
DeleteSo to be clear 2:24 you believe that the folks who hacked the DNC, White House, State Department, and NSA were bumbling amateurs and that is why they were found out, while the folks who possibly hacked Clinton's private server were internet ninjas who left not a trace?
Remember her server has been scrupulously inspected by both the State Department and the FBI looking for anything to indicate a hack took place and they found nothing.
Tell me another tall tale before bedtime will you please?
Trolling, trolling, trolling is the BreitFart meme.
DeleteNice personal incredulity and strawman. It's you who is telling tales or badly mistaken.
DeleteIt was the FBI that told us a hacker could access a system and not leave a trace. In addition, absence of direct evidence is not evidence something never occurred. Come on, your logical reasoning is better than that.
Let's look at Comey's entire comment on hacking of Clinton's server:
"With respect to potential computer intrusion by hostile actors, we did not find direct evidence that Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail domain, in its various configurations since 2009, was successfully hacked. But, given the nature of the system and of the actors potentially involved, we assess that we would be unlikely to see such direct evidence. We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial e-mail accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account. We also assess that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal e-mail extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account."
A reasonable person couldn't deduce from that statement that the FBI concluded Clinton's server was never hacked. Even if you stop reading at Comey's "but", you couldn't conclude what you've spun out of it: that her server was actually more secure than government systems.
Your 4 hacking examples are either specious or uninformed.
In three of your examples: DNC; State Dept; White House; the "folks" were discovered while they were still snooping in the systems. They got into the White House system via the State Dept. hack and according to Forbes 8 Apr 15 "The White House originally noticed suspicious activity on its network back in October 2014." They were noticed while in the act so it wasn't about whether they left any traces to be found later. Oranges to Clinton's server Apples.
The NSA hack, though, appears to demonstrate Comey's point. We, and apparently the NSA, learned they were hacked when ShadowBrokers posted NSA files and offered more for auction. They were in and out undetected. Proving Comey's point.
Assange hints that Wikileaks has her email. If true, then a hacker did get in and out of her server without leaving a trace. Like with the NSA hack, it wouldn't be known until something is published.
I've always thought you are an honest person, so I believe your spin comes from your desire to paint Clinton in the best possible light to counter the RWNJ's not from a deliberate intent to mispresent the facts. Good on you. It's not malicious or trolling to point out when you're mistaken*. If you're going to defend, her do it accurately.
* The State Dept didn't inspect Clinton's server.
Does any reporter or news outlet on ANY station, Cable or otherwise know that Tim Kaine is the nominee for VP for the Democratic Party? For that matter do they know HRC is running for President? The damned news is 24/7 bullshit about Drumpf and Pence. JHFC can we scream lop-sided, mysogyny, populist neo-Nazi BS?
ReplyDeleteWhere is Elizabeth? Hopefully she is preparing a full-on attack to take down Drumpf - maybe helping Politico with proving Melabnorma is here illegally? The good thing about that is that if she is proven to work here illegally in '95 and other years, that negates her citizenship. Drumpf can deport her first thing because she can be easily identified.
Hope there is scut uncovering going on in the background about the Drumpf's so the shit hits the fan after Labor Day weekend.
Our potential 2nd in command is Tim Kaine - you stupid media people! Learn it! Just because he isn't nuts and doesn't have a crazy past if you are real reporters you can speak to his accomplishments and role and give some air time to acknowledge there is something going on in the campaign besides alt-right neo-Nazi crap out of the right wing idiots.
I'm boycotting all TV news and Twitter because I am so fucking sick of seeing his ugly face and hearing about him.
DeleteIt's NPR and Netflix for me now.
Me, too. @3:57.
DeleteLeaving the work up to Hillary once again and then criticizing her for the job she does. Chris Wallace says he will not call BS on Drumpf's lies during the debate and he is really wimpy on whether he will shut Drumpf up if he is talking the whole time. Reporter? Hardly.
ReplyDeleteThink back to the FOX GOP 'debates'. FOX has no qualification to be anywhere near a Presidential debate.
DeleteWallace only reacts to bullshit once in a blue moon and then sits back and smirks as though he has justified his salary. He's a giant ass.
1. How can you have a document where "some" of the information is classified without the whole document being classified?
ReplyDelete2. How safe do you feel knowing that such idiots are running he FBI?
It's ckear that Comey and Chump are cut from the same cloth - WORN OUT, DECREPED AND USELESS. Since none of theit 'tricks' will work against a pro, Chump needs to be buried in a toxic landfill with one arm left hanging out, screming with NO ONE EVER coming to help.
ReplyDelete