Hillary’s maid and those classified emails
Left and right are having their usual argument, this time about the riskiness of Hillary Clinton’s practice of having her maid print out some of her work-related emails. Here’s a summary of the initial story:
As secretary of state, Hillary Clinton routinely asked her maid to print out sensitive government emails and documents ”” including ones containing classified information ”” from her house in Washington, D.C., e-mails and FBI memos show. But the housekeeper lacked the security clearance to handle such material.
The left pooh-poohs it, saying that the information it wasn’t classified at the time and only received its classified designation later, so no problem:
Neither of the two classified emails referenced by the New York Post were sent by Clinton, and Clinton did not make any request for Santos to print either email. Both emails were classified years after the fact — one in October 2015, and another in January 2016 — at the lowest level of classification, “confidential.” The sole case the Post cited of Clinton asking for a message to be printed was not classified…
As reported by the Associated Press, information that may become classified later is frequently shared on unclassified State Department systems, a routine occurrence that predated the current administration. Not only was Clinton’s “transmission of now-classified information” over an unclassified system “consistent” with agency practice, according to experts, concerns arise equally whether the retroactively classified information is “carried over the government system or a private server.”
Indeed, there’s plenty of concern to go around.
The quotes from people trying to minimize this are not particularly reassuring as far as I’m concerned. Personally, although I’ve got nothing against Hillary’s maid, who no doubt is a lovely person, she has no business whatsoever having access to a single email of Hillary’s that has anything to do with State business, much less her entire email account, and whether these particular emails were classified or not (and when) is an issue but not the only issue.
For example, I don’t know how Hillary’s printer worked. But if it’s anything like the printers with which I’m familiar, the email has to be open in order for it to be printed, which means that the entire account must be signed into and accessible.
Did the maid have her email password? Or did Hillary keep herself signed in at all times? The mind boggles.
These emails will continue to haunt clinton and the media for some time.
.
It is possible (though I doubt clinton would know how to do this) to print to PDF and ask someone else to print that file.
As an IT person, this is chilling . . .
I always like to resort to the “Imagine if Dick Cheney’s maid was printing classified emails…”
P.S. Scooter Libby’s law license has been reinstated!
I wonder how many people use only their work email address and not a personal address for personal email?
If you work for a company that is public, the incoming and outgoing emails are saved. Lots of disk space is used for cartoons, jokes and stupid stuff. But again, there are so many reports of govt people looking at porn while at work.
As a non-IT person, this is chilling……
Get with the program people. Hillary broke no laws because to break a law, you must be subject to the law. Anyone important to the Party is above the law, though still subject to Party discipline. Arguably it started with Bill Clinton but it’s certainly been that way since 2008 when the American people supported a transition from the rule of law to the rule of men.
The latest example is FBI Director Comey who has betrayed his constitutional oath in order to quell calls by the Party to discipline him. Comey well knows that the maid puts paid to the notion of “intent”.
But more relevant is the question; “at this point, what difference does it make?”
The implied answer being, why none at all…
Another day, another felony. Y-A-W-N.
I can already hear George Stephanopoulos sniffing how it’s old news anyway, move on, get a life.
We are comfortable numb with the corruption and crimes of the Clintons. All three of them.
Cornhead,
I think you mean comfortably numb, a great song. Dar Williams does a fine cover. We have tickets to a Dar Williams/Richard Shindell performance at Legion Arts in Cedar Rapids. Too bad for you it is sold out. Or I would invite you to attend with us and spend the night in castle parker before returning to NE.
Something I could not imagine saying 4 months ago, I hope there is a possibility djt wins.
See Bill Whittle on Clinton vs. a Turnip:
https://pjmedia.com/video/bill-whittle-compares-hillary-clinton-vs-a-turnip/
RS,
I would welcome the opportunity to vote turnip.
Neo is quoting from Media Matters now?? Even as an exemplar from the left, the stench is quite high. But the points therein are worth mention because the scope, quantity, complexity, and context of the email scandal DOES make it difficult to understand.
So the main counterpoint is “Well, it wasn’t classified when I sent or received it!” We don’t really know anything about the content of the new emails of Weiner origin, but we do know quite a bit about the ones from the old portion of the investigation.
The most scurrilous fact pertinent to the counterpoint is the FACT that Hillary had people that actively deleted the classification markings before the emails were sent to Hillary.
Less scurrilous but as important is the fact the content doesn’t have to be marked classified for it to be classified. This is clearly explained in the extensive briefings given to a new Sec. of State. (Which Hillary has stated under oath that she has no recollection of.)
For example: The itinerary of any US ambassador is necessarily classified, no markings required. Same with a full resolution photo from an NRO surveillance satellite. Yet both of these were found on or from the Chappaqua server. Any direct quotes from a for. ambassador or head of state in private are also classified. So this “marked classified” stuff is just crap.
And in the realm of pure speculation: The aforementioned itinerary found in Hillary’s emails was in fact Ambassador Steven’s itinerary just before he was killed in Bengazi. Given that the FBI now says that there was a 99% prob. that major state intelligence agencies got these emails, there is a substantial prob. that Stevens was killed as direct result of Hillary’s negligence.
And was the unsecured server really an act of negligence? Gen. Hayden, former head of the NSA has gone on the record saying that if he had been the head of the Russian FSB or like agency, he would have moved heaven and earth to gain access to Hillary’s server. How many dollars would that have been worth? What would be the value of a hot tip that the “Mop Secret” maid at WhiteHaven had full access to the Hillary SCIF?
Am I the only one whose reaction to Hillary’s use of her maid to print her emails – not to mention all those other earlier emails of hers to other staff members that said “pls print” — is to wonder why on earth the woman can’t print her own emails?
It’s not a technologically difficult task, for goodness sake; you click the button with the little printer on it. Yes, it can be hard for older people to learn new technological tricks, but it’s not that tricky and she’s not that old. My mother, in her 80s, was shopping on Amazon, using Google and YouTube to look up recordings of her favorite old songs and printing out the lyrics or emailing the video links to her children — but Hillary, still in her 60s, apparently can’t figure out how to print an email. Just how incompetent and dependent can one woman be?
Mrs Whatsit:
Well, I’m not in the business of defending Hillary, but I think that having the maid print the emails only happened a few times. It was not a regular, ordinary, everyday event. And my guess is that there were some circumstances that took Clinton away from offices or access to offices, so she used email to direct the printing by the maid.
I am imagining this, though; I really don’t know. But I’m pretty sure it only happened a couple of times.
Why she couldn’t have someone else—some aide with a security clearance—do it is my question.
Geoffrey B — not to worry: if Hillary wins, Comey’s job is secure, and he might even be promoted to AG at some point. If Trump wins, he’s out. And both for the same reason — he took a dive for Hillary Clinton.
I believe Hillary will be pardoned by Barry, for safety’s sake, whether she wins or loses, because her violation of 18 USC 2071 makes her ineligible to hold federal office.
The necessity of a pardon is obvious in case Hillary loses, but why if she wins? Because it’s not clear what the statutes of limitations for her crimes are (some say five years, some say 10).Another reason for the pardon is that it is not clear whether impeachment is limited to acts committed while in office, or whether it can be applied to acts committed before taking office.
It’s also not clear whether a pardon would wipe out the crime (making impeachment impossible) or just the punishment. Here’s an interesting old law review article pointing out that the Supreme Court has said both that a pardon does not remove the guilt of the pardoned person, and that it does:
http://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=9065&context=penn_law_review
Since I don’t think Barry will take a chance that the Republicans might not obtain a 2/3rds majority in the Senate, or that Chief Justice Roberts would have a sudden attack of constitutionality, I think a pardon is highly likely even if she wins. The same goes for her henchman, otherwise they might be prosecuted and flip on her.
M J R — Chris Wallace actually said “it’s time to move on” yesterday on Fox.