Cummings; classified emails found on personal accounts of Rice & Powell OOPS!

You make a lot of bad assumptions here. The first is that such as an SoS is not supposed to use a non-secure line for non-secure communications, whether it be a personal account, or some other. Powell stated it quite simply, that he had two email accounts, a government one on a secure server, and a non-secure one for routine communications. That is within the rules, and the Law.

The second is to claim that this has nothing to do with Benghazi. The search for communications related to Benghazi is precisely significant to wanting to see Hillary's emails on such. As it is obvious to anyone with a brain that Hillary lied about Benghazi, she has only herself to blame for being dishonest,, and incurring the wrath of those to whom the Law does matter.

While you have experience witnessing that some folks at the top think that the rules do not apply to them, that most certainly does not mean that all such think or act that way. The evidence is overwhelming that Hillary functioned in a hugely more reckless manner than did Rice or Powell.

 

You've been on a role all week. Glad the weekend is coming up. I need a break.

 

Are you familiar with the different colors? You know, blue is blue and green is green? I ask this question, because you make the claim that she did this by design, and I also believe you know your colors. If she did this by design as you say to circumvent the system, like the colors, how do you know she did this by design? And by the way, if you cannot prove your point, you decided not to tell me the truth, "by design".

 

oh, so now a SOS having a cell phone is a crime?

- - - Updated - - -

of course your not, cause a local LAN can be monitored, a personal cell network like Verizon or ATT can not

.

 

No YOU aren't addressing the issue, the issue has been raised ans a accusation made that Rice and Powell did the same as Hillary and this some how mitigates what Hillary did.

So again

If they did as accused and they still retain any security clearance it should be immediately revoked and never reinstated and should they never be elected to a position having to do with national security.

Don't you agree?

And again emails are not clasified, the information in them is classified.

 

Still waiting

If they did as accused and they still retain any security clearance it should be immediately revoked and never reinstated and should they never be elected to a position having to do with national security.

Don't you agree?

 

I'm fine w it, does that quell your petty obsessive nature?

 

The issue of Rice, Powell, and Clinton are all valid issues. The problem you always conveniently ignore, is that the problem is not of their own making, because of the infancy of the internet and e-mails. And that is the real problem you ignore while trying to place blame for partisan reasons. You are still driven by hate. Your logic in this argument does not go beyond that. And I have been proven right in the past, and will be proven right in the future. Your ability to separate actual wrong doing, with a system that involved a technological glitch, seems to elude you. And that is understandable, because you have different motives in this argument. You have from the beginning. Tunnel vision logic does that to people who wish the outcome to be what they want it to be.

So, one more time I will see if you pick up on the easy logic here from your own quote. "And again, emails are not classified, the information in them is classified". Right there tells me you have no interest in a logical discussion. Why? Because that statement doesn't make sense. How do I know that, for logic's sake? Because you yourself cannot make sense of that statement, as it relates to the argument. "The information in them is classified". That doesn't make sense.

 

It takes a willful disregard for the truth to post the above. The Internet was most assuredly not "in its infancy" when Clinton took office. Further, her setting up a private server was most assuredly not the stuff of naivete with the internet.

Then you chastise someone where it is clear that you do not understand that nature of "Classified Information". Even Obama's own executive order, cited earlier, outlines what constitutes "classified" information, and there is zero obligation for a document to actually be labeled "classified" lest the information in it somehow then be otherwise deemed "unclassifed". The expression is known as "born classified", meaning that the information is classified from the moment it takes any form.

You are wholly ignorant to just about every aspect of this topic.

 

cell phone email was a new thing..... many corps even today do not have corp email for phone

one only has to look at the VA computer systems to know how behind government is in adopting technology avail to the general public

Clinton was ahead of her time....

.

 

So does that mean you WILL support them being prosecuted meanwhile Hillary (caught red handed) is innocent? Or should we treat them all the same?

 

Email Scandal Spin: No, Hillary, Powell and Rice Didn't 'Do It Too'.....

(3) "See? Condi and Colin did it, too!" relies on a thoroughly bogus equivalency. Above all else, neither Rice nor Powell set up and used a recklessly unsecure private emails server on which they conducted all of their official business, against "clear cut rules" implemented in 2005. (A former CIA director and Secretary of Defense have each stated that her vulnerable server was likely penetrated by foreign powers like the Russians and Chinese). This review identified ten -- total -- emails that have now been assigned retroactive, low-level classification levels. Only two of them went to then-Secretary of State Powell, with the others going to Rice's aides, and both of those are now classified at the lowest level ("confidential"). As mentioned above, Hillary's server contained 1,600 classified emails and counting, including the most sensitive level of intelligence in existence (SAP, beyond-top-secret). There is no comparison between the conduct of Hillary Clinton and that of her immediate predecessors. Beyond her exclusive use of an improper and unsecure server, Sec. Clinton was personally and specifically warned about the vulnerability of her email scheme in 2011, when a State Department security expert sounded the alarm over foreign hackers seeking to infiltrate US secrets by targeting high-ranking officials' private emails. Mrs. Clinton carried on with her arrangement anyway.

In summary, Hillary Clinton's server is the scandal. It's possible that Rice's aides and Sec. Powell may have acted improperly (though the email rules were set forth after Powell left office). They may have been sloppy with a small number of low-level classified information on an ad hoc basis. The rules and laws pertaining to the US government's data security must be followed. By everyone. But Clinton mishandled hundreds upon hundreds of classified emails, which held state secrets at the highest classification levels. In fact, just this week, the State Department deemed another seven Clinton emails too sensitive to release in any form, even with redactions, bringing that total to 29.

Intelligence officials who've seen some of the documents in question say they betray operational intelligence, the leakage of which puts covert missions and lives at risk. A former NSA official has intelligence community sources who say Clinton's emails included the true identities of CIA operatives and assets, including foreign nationals working for the agency. Unlike Powell and Rice, Mrs. Clinton exhibited ongoing gross negligence by exposing reams of sensitive and classified intelligence to foreign governments. She ignored her sworn duty to safeguard secrets, "marked and unmarked," and declined to alter her behavior after she was admonished of an explicit vulnerability pertaining to personal email use. And unlike Powell and Rice, Hillary has consistently lied about this scandal.

Her smug assertion that the (twice expanded) FBI investigation won't go anywhere amounts to waving a red flag in front of career investigators and intelligence officials, who are reportedly fuming over her irresponsible, and likely criminal, conduct. Remember, the probe reportedly entails more than just her email misconduct, Gen. David Petraeus was charged for classified intelligence spillage that was far more limited and contained, and a former US Attorney General says there's already sufficient evidence to justify an indictment. Clinton seems confident that her political power and privilege will shield her from accountability in the end, sending a less-than-subtle message to the Justice Department, which has already been influenced by two public White House statements. I'll leave you with an interesting point from Gabriel Malor:

Gabriel Malor ‎@gabrielmalor
!!! State Dept that didn't meet court-ordered deadline on Clinton emails had time to go through Powell, Rice emails. http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/coli...ffers-handled-emails-deemed/story?id=36718280 …


Gabriel Malor ‎@gabrielmalor
Prepared by State IG, sent to Cummings, who leaks to ABC. Cute. https://twitter.com/gabrielmalor/status/695371061437665281 …
4:20 PM - 4 Feb 2016.....snip~

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guyben...ed-emails-story-is-not-a-gamechanger-n2114842

 

Lol! I have friends who are computer wiz's, who tell me they still have much to learn. Your "easy out" answer was expected. Here's the problem for you; it won't help your case.

Still makes no sense. Why? Then why would an email be labeled unclassified or labeled classified, if everything was classified? You see, you're doing the same thing. You created a nonsensical argument. This a chronic condition that some people cannot escape from, and is why the Rights argument is always dismissed. I appreciate this little fun game pretending to make sense, when the argument doesn't, but it was too easy to unravel. Please, try a different one. This one has become too easy to figure out, and has gotten a little boring. But ha, thanks for playing. It was fun while it lasted.

 

You're a little late to the party Blue

 

of course all the same! wrong is wrong

 

So you agree that ignorance of emails was no excuse ? Hillary supposedly sent emails to everybody, did she not ? Did she not "delete" 30K emails that were about "yoga, Chelsea's wedding, recipes, etc" ? I think that would make one rather proficient in emails, would it not ?

 

as I said, Clinton was ahead of her time, many old timers would not know how to send or receive a email, much less form their phone

republicans do not like people that are ahead of their time, they are conservatives and hate change

.

 

Well. others had offered the Defense that Hillary was not techno-savvy enough to know anything about servers and security, etc. Which is so preposterous. I have a 90 year old Aunt who has been emailing for over 15 years, and can cut and paste with the best of them !

As for the last part of your post, have you started your TGIF partying a bit early ?

 

I doubt she was, most people that drive a car do not know how to rebuild a engine either, though they may be very good drivers

 

So you equate the ability of a driver to rebuild an engine as being equivalent to such as the SoS understanding a secure server, and Classified information ?

<facepalm>

 

Say it isn't so … ???

This scandal could mean that Condi will never ever achieve her dream career of becoming Commissioner of The NFL when Roger Goodell retires … ???

 

yes, I am sure she hired someone to build her server, I do not think she was a server expert...

 

Some people are acting as if this helps Hillary, I am not so sure. Are we just going to let government officials use personal email addresses from now on or is it a problem that has to be reigned in? And if it's reigned in for others, why does Hillary get a pass? I think this only draws more attention to the issue.

 

Personally &#8230; i find this entire bit simply revolting &#8230; NOT because I adore The Clintons -- or despise them &#8230;

I find the "Clinton Derangement Syndrome" as obnoxious (and mentally - emotionally disordered) as "O'Bama Derangement Syndrome" &#8230;

Geez, people &#8230; GET OVER IT ...

 

its not against the law.... if we want to make it against the law then we need new laws

many in congress also used personal email, why do they get a pass?


.