Did a Hacked Hillary E-mail Result in the Ambush of Ambassador Chris Stevens?

[Jeff]

OK this deserved it's own thread. If these E mails Hillary was messing with did in fact cause this man his life she should be tried as a spy and given the same sentence they would get for killing a American Ambassador, which honestly I am not sure what it is but I would hope it is death by lethal injection. It is time to get to the bottom of this trash and start making people take responsibility, we all know someone dropped the ball, well when you drop the ball with highly classified material that you know is only to go across a secure line, then you should hang for that.



The New York Post (http://nypost.com/2015/08/23/hillarys-e-mail-defense-is-total-bs-former-state-dept-officials/) reported yesterday on the classified nature of some of Hillary Clinton’s e-mails.
“They include a 2011 message from Clinton’s top aides that contains military intelligence from United States Africa Command gleaned from satellite images of troop movements in Libya, along with the travel and protection plans for Ambassador Christopher Stevens, who was later killed in a terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya. Another staff *e-mail sent to Clinton in 2012 contained investigative data about Benghazi terrorist suspects wanted by the FBI.”





http://minutemennews.com/2015/08/did-a-hacked-hillary-e-mail-result-in-the-ambush-of-ambassador-chris-stevens/

[Black Diamond]

She's the new Teflon Don.

[Kathianne]

She's the new Teflon Don.

Seems more like a scandal magnet.

[Jeff]

Seems more like a scandal magnet.

NO magnet Kat, she is a walking scandal. :laugh:

[Russ]

Wow! If Hillary's unprotected email server could potentially have led to the Benghazi attack, that would be the biggest scandal to hit American politics since Aaron Burr.

[Kathianne]

NO magnet Kat, she is a walking scandal. :laugh:
Much better stated, thanks!

[Kathianne]

Related:

http://hotair.com/archives/2015/08/25/classified-hillary-e-mail-contained-embassy-security-issues-sensitive-diplomatic-discussions/


Classified Hillary e-mail contained embassy security issues, sensitive diplomatic discussionsPOSTED AT 10:01 AM ON AUGUST 25, 2015 BY ED MORRISSEY
We already got a hint of this last week (http://hotair.com/archives/2015/08/20/classified-clintonemail-com-messages-included-benghazi-intel-military-movements/), when Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/08/19/sensitive-emails-from-clinton-aides-kick-started-fbi-probe-candidate-downplays/?cmpid=cmty_twitter_fn) identified some of the subject matter in now-redacted e-mails from Hillary Clinton’s secret server — the part of the cache she shared, anyway. Two of the e-mails that got retroactively classified dealt with security issues in Benghazi and military intelligence on Libyan troop movements. The classification codes on those redactions from State suggest that, despite Hillary’s disclaimers, those materials were classified at the time those e-mails were sent (http://hotair.com/archives/2015/08/21/reuters-dozens-of-hillary-emails-were-always-classified/).


The Washington Examiner’s Sarah Westwood took a deeper look (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/article/2570763) at the redactions from State, and discovered that these were no fluke. The redactions involve high-level diplomatic discussions, embassy security issues, and even one about the travels of Jim Webb, who is now her opponent for the Democratic presidential nomination. Furthermore, Westwood notes that Hillary wrote some of those e-mails herself:



Despite her campaign’s claims that Clinton was simply a “passive recipient” of classified information, a review of her emails indicates she wrote messages that are now classified.


For example, in July 2009, she discussed relations with Russia and Afghanistan (https://foia.state.gov/searchapp/DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_JulyWeb/Web_030/DOC_0C05763934/C05763934.pdf) with then-Deputy Secretary William Burns in an email that has been partially classified. She also discussed her travel plans with Burns over the private network.

Another exchange drips with irony. Eric Boswell ended up as a scapegoat (http://hotair.com/archives/2012/12/19/three-state-dept-officials-resign-in-the-wake-of-damning-benghazi-report/) for the failure of State to adequately protect the consulate in Benghazi, thanks in large part to the so-called Accountability Review Board that magically decided that no one at the political appointment level should be accountable for this failure. Boswell had raised security issues at other embassies in a meeting three years earlier, raising the kind of vulnerabilities that State would not want out in public. And yet, Huma Abedin passed them along through an unencrypted, unsecured server to Hillary:



Huma Abedin, Clinton’s former deputy chief of staff, forwarded a summary of a high-level Sept. 2009 meeting to Clinton in which she detailed the “embassy security issues (https://foia.state.gov/searchapp/DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_JulyWeb/Web_038-039/DOC_0C05764698/C05764698.pdf)” that were discussed.


The issues had been raised by Eric Boswell, a diplomatic security official who was later forced to resign in the wake of the 2012 terror attack in Benghazi.

Here’s the classification note added to the page under the redactions:


http://media.hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/state-classified.jpg (http://media.hotair.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/state-classified.jpg)


Declassification dates are set for 10 years after material is first classified. The e-mail was created and sent by Daniel Smith to Abedin, Cheryl Mills, and Jake Sullivan on September 21, 2009, and forwarded two minutes later by Abedin to Hillary Clinton. The declassify date of 9/21/2019 shows that State considered this information classified at that time — as well it should, since it disclosed embassy security gaps and vulnerabilities. Only an idiot would send something like that in the open, and yet that’s exactly what happened.


The exchange noted by Westwood where Hillary sent classified data (https://foia.state.gov/searchapp/DOCUMENTS/HRCEmail_JulyWeb/Web_030/DOC_0C05763934/C05763934.pdf) is perhaps a bit more comical. Now-retired Deputy Secretary of State Bill Burns sent Hillary an e-mail with data that was classified during the review of her cache. Burns apparently sent it on a web-based e-mail service, because the footer has an ad for Free Credit Report. An Excellent Credit Score is 750. See Yours in Just 2 Easy Steps! Clearly, this is not a secure method of communications, and yet Hillary replies to it while also tossing in sensitive information, now classified, as an afterthought at the end of the reply.


There is no other way to describe this than willful disregard of laws and protocols pertaining to national security protections. The materials exposed here might be more sensitive and potentially dangerous than some of the Wikileaks material exposed by Bradley Manning, especially for diplomatic security. And yet, Hillary Clinton wants to run for the office which carries the ultimate responsibility for enforcing those laws and securing the nation’s sensitive data.

[Kathianne]

I just saw a bot looking at this thread. Here's something recent that seems related:

http://dailycaller.com/2016/05/25/exclusive-state-dept-staffers-looking-at-benghazi-records-idd-hillarys-email-address-much-earlier-than-thought/


EXCLUSIVE: State Dept. Staffers Looking At Benghazi Records ID’d Hillary’s Email Address Much Earlier Than Thought


State Department staffers who worked to respond to congressional requests for documents about the Sept. 11, 2012 Benghazi attacks discovered in June 2013 — a year earlier than has previously been reported — that Hillary Clinton used a personal email account.

The revelation, which was included a scathing 83-page State Department inspector general report released on Wednesday, “raises very serious questions” about the Obama administration’s lack of cooperation with the congressional committees that have looked into the Sept. 11, 2012 Benghazi attacks, said Matt Wolking, the press secretary for the House Select Committee on Benghazi.

...

[gabosaurus]

Yet another unsubstantiated and over sensationalized report on Benghazi that has no factual evidence to back it up. :rolleyes:

[jimnyc]

Yet another unsubstantiated and over sensationalized report on Benghazi that has no factual evidence to back it up. :rolleyes:

Do you think she lied to the various families - or do you think all of them are working together to claim Hillary lied?

[Kathianne]

Yet another unsubstantiated and over sensationalized report on Benghazi that has no factual evidence to back it up. :rolleyes:

Only for you and your green sky:


...The revelation, which was included a scathing 83-page State Department inspector general report released on Wednesday, “raises very serious questions” about the Obama administration’s lack of cooperation with the congressional committees that have looked into the Sept. 11, 2012 Benghazi attacks, said Matt Wolking, the press secretary for the House Select Committee on Benghazi.

...

The bolded is the source. It is substantiated by the State Department.

[Elessar]

Yet another unsubstantiated and over sensationalized report on Benghazi that has no factual evidence to back it up. :rolleyes:

You do not pay attention very well, do you?

The deeper these people dig, the more LIES and DECEPTION are discovered!

[gabosaurus]

I am talking directly about Clinton's e-mails and how they did or did not contribute to the death of the ambassador.

[Kathianne]

I am talking directly about Clinton's e-mails and how they did or did not contribute to the death of the ambassador.


The FBI recovered some, if not all the deleted emails. We'll see if DOJ does anything.

[gabosaurus]

The FBI recovered some, if not all the deleted emails. We'll see if DOJ does anything.

The key point is - what was on them and did anything violate national security? And how does such compare with past e-mail transgressions that went unpunished.
More importantly, was Clinton guilty of specific rules violations, or just bad judgement?


There was not an explicit, categorical prohibition against federal employees using personal emails when Clinton was in office, said Daniel Metcalfe, former director of the Department of Justice’s Office of Information Policy, where he administered implementation of the Freedom of Information Act. High-level officials like Clinton need the flexibility to sometimes use a personal email, such as responding to a national security emergency in the middle of the night.

So it seems she didn’t break a rule simply by using a personal email to conduct business. Rather, by using personal emails exclusively, she skirted the rules governing federal records management, Cox said.



http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/mar/12/hillary-clintons-email-did-she-follow-all-rules/

[Elessar]

The key point is - what was on them and did anything violate national security? And how does such compare with past e-mail transgressions that went unpunished.
More importantly, was Clinton guilty of specific rules violations, or just bad judgement?



http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/mar/12/hillary-clintons-email-did-she-follow-all-rules/

I and others have posted what Cyber Security is required on the Federal level.

I am thinking more will come out as the investigation continues...tip of the iceberg right now.

[gabosaurus]

I think if Clinton was running against anyone other than Trump, she would be in a lot more trouble than she is now.
I see a relatively small portion of the electorate actually supporting Clinton this fall. They will be voting AGAINST Trump.
That is how the American mind works these days. They were less worried about Clinton's transgressions than Trump's behavior. It is much easier to be against someone than for someone.

[Kathianne]

The key point is - what was on them and did anything violate national security? And how does such compare with past e-mail transgressions that went unpunished.
More importantly, was Clinton guilty of specific rules violations, or just bad judgement?



http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2015/mar/12/hillary-clintons-email-did-she-follow-all-rules/


What is quoted above is just what my point was, Gabby. In the IG report it is highlighted that she was well aware of WHY she wanted a separate system-to keep the materials she wanted away from FOIA requests, they can be pesky. ;)

She enforced the same rules on others, while pardoning herself. No surprise there, that's because she is Clinton, rules are for the lessers.

The above is one reason why I won't be voting for her either.