"In one e-mail, Clinton pressured Sullivan to declassify cabled remarks by a foreign leader.
“Just e-mail it,” Clinton snapped, to which Sullivan replied: “Trust me, I share your exasperation. But until ops converts it to the unclassified e-mail system, there is no physical way for me to e-mail it.”
In another recently released e-mail, Clinton instructed Sullivan to convert a classified document into an unclassified e-mail attachment by scanning it into an unsecured computer and sending it to her without any classified markings. “Turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send non-secure,” she ordered.
Top Secret/SCI e-mails received by Clinton include a 2012 staff e-mail sent to the then-secretary containing investigative data about Benghazi terrorist suspects wanted by the FBI and sourcing a regional security officer. They also 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.
“Receiving Top Secret SAP intelligence outside secure channels is a mortal sin,” said Chris Farrell, director of investigations for Judicial Watch, the Washington-based public law firm that has successfully sued State for Clinton’s e-mails." NY Post
-------------
She has one hell of a problem.
IMO this NY Post article can only be a deliberate leak designed by the leaker(s) to block Obama's ability to suppress the FBI investigation as well as DOJ action against Clinton and her immediate personal staff. This article, and the implied threat of more such leaks effectively shuts out the possibility of a POTUS intervention in the investigation.
It will be surprising if there are not indictments.
Biden stands in the wings, "licking his chops" in anticipation of fulfilment of his life long dream.
One must ask why she would have done something so foolish as to conduct the business of her office by masses of unclassified E-mail handled by a personally owned server located in her house. This server was backed up by another server located in Denver, Colorado. That server was maintained by a "mom and pop" business that kept the back-up server in a guest bathroom in their apartment.
I can only attribute this madness to an arrogance so profound that it cast caution to the wind in the belief that she was above the law.
It was one thing to maintain contact with friends like Sid B. by private E-mail but to try to run the State Department this way was just crazy. pl
http://nypost.com/2016/01/24/hillarys-team-copied-intel-off-top-secret-server-to-email/
Arrogance coupled with the frustration of being a perceived 'second banana' for a lifetime. I saw this regularly in the decades of organizational HR work. People who felt 'blocked' did increasingly illicit and/or illogical actions until they imploded.
Posted by: BabelFish | 24 January 2016 at 06:38 PM
As a constitutional officer responsible for the matters of state, it seems to me the Secretary of State should have the power to decide to simply ignore whether something has been designated"secret" or not if the item is used within the constitutional scope of her office. By using it, she simply declassified it.
Posted by: Origin | 24 January 2016 at 07:07 PM
This is not a Right Wing Conspiracy but most likely her paranoia and lack of administrative skills have placed her in this position. Yup no one else did this but HRC. So assuming she is not dumb i assume her lawyers have been negotiating a settlement where she pleads to a Misdemeanor and then she runs around saying it was just a Technicality. So when this occurs is the question. It is obvious if she does not then one by one her staff will get indicted.
Politics is a filthy business.
Posted by: Bobo | 24 January 2016 at 07:13 PM
Laws are for the little people. Banksters can just pay a fine and admit no guilt. Her husband apparently spent his last day in office signing pardons for rich crooks. Perhaps Obama will do as much for her! If the usual political and financial pressures on the judicial authorities fail to prevent a prosecution and conviction, perhaps she can flee to Israel, from where there is no extradition. Maybe she could even win the campaign and make a victory speech from there. Is there any constitutional impediment to a convicted felon becoming President? If not, she could even pardon herself!
Posted by: cynic | 24 January 2016 at 07:18 PM
We might wish to take account of the Obama element. As someone who finds the man insufferable, I should take pains to rein in any impulse to blame him for things indiscriminately. But it is reasonable to consider that his hands-off management style, especially in regard to the big players in his administration (Gates, Brennan, Petraeus, Geithner & Assoc., Clinton), was a facilitating factor which encouraged them to follow their instincts without feel constrained by oversight/accountability from the White House. Hillary's arrogance, as well as ambition, is legendary. That does not mean, though, that she is oblivious to possible constraints or consequences. The justifiable conviction that there were neither constraints nor consequences to be expected from Obama may well have contributed to her recklessness.
Posted by: mbrenner | 24 January 2016 at 07:23 PM
One shouldn't be surprised, this lady has acted like this all along in her life. Personal ambitions, and greed came before all else, including respect, integrity, family and country. She will be willing to burn this country and everybody in it if that was the ticket to seal her name in history. At the time, her impersonal and non emotional behavior with her husband' infidelity and publicly lying, scared me. IMO ,For that she was rewarded a senate seat.
Posted by: Kooshy | 24 January 2016 at 07:25 PM
I agree HRC is near done. The allegations are incredibly serious yet we don't see front and center reporting by the major tv channels. Bloomberg (and perhaps Biden) wait in the wings (it is no coincidence that Bloomberg is dropping a trial balloon regarding his candidacy right now). Fast forward to the general election, and we may see two multi-billionaires running against a chap with a "socialist" history who refuses to take contributions from the big banks. What a show that would be. What a choice.
Posted by: DC | 24 January 2016 at 07:25 PM
origin
IMO your argument would have weight with regard to classifications originating in the State Department, but her de-classifications went far beyond that. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 24 January 2016 at 07:35 PM
Incorrect. The originator (or originating agency) controls classification in accordance with regulations. Much of the email releases contain material derived from other agencies.
Some information, however, is inherently classified, and the SecState does not have the authority to lower the classification even if DoS is the originator. Theoretically, only the President can unilaterally declassify classified information, but, in practice not even the President can declassify inherently classified information.
Posted by: JM Gavin | 24 January 2016 at 07:44 PM
I guess we'll soon find out if Hillary could stand in the middle of 5th Avenue and shoot somebody without losing voters. The true believers will rationalize this away. Besides, how many candidates won elections from jail?
Posted by: The Twisted Genius | 24 January 2016 at 07:46 PM
Maybe this is why Sanders doesn't hammer away at this issue. He's just biding his time as she blows herself up.
Posted by: The Twisted Genius | 24 January 2016 at 07:48 PM
Why are these allegations serious; I confess that I do not grasp what is going on here?
Posted by: Babak Makkinejad | 24 January 2016 at 07:55 PM
Certainly, the test would be whether the act was within the scope of her duties and authority. ...even if the item was classified by another department. By the way, in my earlier post, I made an error, the duties of the SOS are not defined in the Constitution, but by statute, so the office in not a "constitutional" office.
Posted by: Origin | 24 January 2016 at 08:02 PM
Obama and more importantly his globalist-financier handlers have no desire whatsoever to see the Clintons return to the White House. They want Joe Biden to succeed Obama and they will almost certainly get what they want. The stage has been set. Trump, the New Yorker who uses other people's money to build up his phantom billions while occasionally going bankrupt, is probably working for the same handlers, and he is probably correct in saying that Goldman Sachs owns Ted Cruz, meaning that Cruz is working for them, too. The indictment of Hillary will be topped off with more revelations about her and her husband's separate sex lives, and she will quit the race. With Trump and Sanders as the choice, Biden will enter the race, and he will win.
The leak is not designed to prevent Obama from helping Hillary win, it's designed to give him cover for not helping her, and for not wanting to.
Posted by: rg | 24 January 2016 at 08:05 PM
Babak
This is a federal felony crime that we are discussing. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 24 January 2016 at 08:11 PM
TTG, Honey Fitz? JFK's grandfather.
Posted by: BabelFish | 24 January 2016 at 08:32 PM
There is another investigation concerning using her office for profit. Leaks are too detailed to be from GOP operative so she is going to jail.
Posted by: Jose | 24 January 2016 at 08:35 PM
This activity is not uncommon and in the past has often been undertaken to avoid FOI requests.
We have seen this in many levels of Governance, ( in BC one sensitive Government department followed a policy of triple deleting all e-mails to foil and FOI requests or investigations).
It's a symptom of Public Service being suborned to personal service.
It would also be interesting to find out how many of the classified e-mails and their contents, have been retroactively reclassified, another means that many branches of the Government have adopted to foil FOI requests, stall investigations and audits, and "frame" whistleblowers.
Posted by: Brunswick | 24 January 2016 at 08:52 PM
TTG,
If she had shot Bill back in the day I'm sure she would have gotten off just like Dan Sickles did. Heck that might even have helped her get elected.
Posted by: Fred | 24 January 2016 at 08:56 PM
While Joe Biden certainly can enter the race, he already can't be on the ballot in 30 states (having missed the filing deadlines).
Posted by: JM Gavin | 24 January 2016 at 09:41 PM
Exactly right. Not just Sanders but we should note that the Republicans are quite restrained in discussing those emails. They are hoping beyond hope that she gets the nomination so they can then start firing away, if the Justice Dept doesn't take her down before then.
Posted by: ToivoS | 24 January 2016 at 10:03 PM
BabelFish,
Here's a few headlines:
Joseph Morrissey, a Virginia politician with a county jail-issued ankle monitor -- accused of having sex with his 17-year-old secretary -- campaigns for re-election, and wins.
The voters of Bridgeport, Connecticut elected Joseph Ganim, who served seven years on corruption charges since the last time he led the city as their mayor
Mark Sanford was censured and nearly impeached as governor of South Carolina over an adultery scandal but won back his old seat in Congress four years later.
Texas State Representative Ron Reynolds with Felony Indictment Wins Re-Election by a Landslide… Then Gets Convicted for Misdemeanor 3 Days Later.
The electorate's standards for their political officials are in the gutter.
Posted by: The Twisted Genius | 24 January 2016 at 10:13 PM
More than theoretically. I believe the President, by statute, has the power to declassify on his own authority. Just like he has the unlimited authority to pardon though the latter is explicit in the Constitution. The SoS does not.
Posted by: doug | 24 January 2016 at 10:59 PM
TTG, Agree completely.
Posted by: readerOfTeaLeaves | 25 January 2016 at 01:07 AM
I predict this will all disappear into the infamous "memory hole," and will in no way impede her implacable and inevitable march to occupancy of the White House. Perhaps I am just an incurable fatalist.
Posted by: Bill H | 25 January 2016 at 01:19 AM