Obama on Hillary Investigation: “There’s Classified, And Then There’s Classified”
“What I also know, because I handle a lot of classified information, is that there are — there’s classified, and then there’s classified,” Obama told Fox News. “There’s stuff that is really top-secret, top-secret, and there’s stuff that is being presented to the president or the secretary of state, that you might not want on the transom, or going out over the wire, but is basically stuff that you could get in open-source.”
Note what he implies: Hillary’s stuff was all the latter type of material.
Implies . . . but does not actually say.
Well. I’m always suspicious of anonymous sources, so take this with a shakerful of salt, but remember this from February:
One of the classified email chains discovered on Hillary Clinton’s personal unsecured server discussed an Afghan national’s ties to the CIA and a report that he was on the agency’s payroll, a U.S. government official with knowledge of the document told Fox News.
The discussion of a foreign national working with the U.S. government raises security implications – an executive order signed by President Obama said such unauthorized disclosures are “presumed to cause damage to the national security.”
. . . .
Based on the timing and other details, the email chain likely refers to either an October 2009 Times story that identified Afghan national Ahmed Wali Karzai, the half-brother of then-Afghan president Hamid Karzai, as a person who received “regular payments from the Central Intelligence Agency” — or an August 2010 Times story that identified Karzai aide Mohammed Zia Salehi as being on the CIA payroll. Ahmed Wali Karzai was murdered during a 2011 shoot-out, a killing later claimed by the Taliban.
But remember: Obama says there’s classified . . . and then there’s classified. Which is . . . true, but (if the report above is accurate) highly misleading.
But hey. There’s the truth [stern look, shakes head] and the truth! [nods and smiles]
I’m still waiting for Hillary to tell us how she handled the daily deluge of classified and other sensitive communications a Secretary of State must deal with to do her job. If she didn’t use the Department and other US Government approved communication methods and she didn’t mishandle restricted information, how did she do her job?
crazy (cde091) — 4/11/2016 @ 8:11 amThen Barky O, explain all of the redacted emails?
jb (8a9f1d) — 4/11/2016 @ 8:13 amthe reason she had the server was to frustrate foia requests because she’s a filthy incontinent criminal
and food stamp is so so proud of her
happyfeet (a037ad) — 4/11/2016 @ 8:17 amEven if none of the emails was “classified,” she still violated the statute by possessing emails on an unprotected server.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 4/11/2016 @ 8:22 amI watched Obama preen and smirk his way through that interview. One would find it hard to believe this is the same fellow who’s responsible for so much of what is wrong with our world today, given his high regard for himself.
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 4/11/2016 @ 8:26 amAll I heard was Obama admitting that yes, Hillary had classified information on her private server. Now I’ll be patiently waiting for someone to ask Obama if the information David Petraeus shared with his mistress was just classified, or if it was classified.
Edoc118 (4b9b34) — 4/11/2016 @ 8:42 amOne of the reasons you can get it in open-source is that it’s been leaked by virtue of being stored on unsecure servers.
Chuck Bartowski (8489f0) — 4/11/2016 @ 8:48 amAnd more of Obama’s fine work rehabilitating Nixon’s reputation for honesty.
SPQR (a3a747) — 4/11/2016 @ 8:51 amThen release all the emails without the redactions since there were no national security issues.
blackjack (5518a5) — 4/11/2016 @ 8:52 amIn Obama’s defense, most of the problems with the world today are simply things he’s exacerbated, rather than things he’s caused.
CayleyGraph (353727) — 4/11/2016 @ 9:42 am“…(T)here’s classified, and then there’s classified.”
Just like there’s rape and there’s rape-rape.
AZ Bob (7d2a2c) — 4/11/2016 @ 9:49 am…and there’s leadership and LEADERSHIP.
Colonel Haiku (d54e37) — 4/11/2016 @ 9:54 amThere’s huge, and then there’s YUGE!
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 4/11/2016 @ 10:06 amThis was the preview for the pardon speech.
Beldar (fa637a) — 4/11/2016 @ 10:09 am#8 And more of Obama’s fine work rehabilitating Nixon’s reputation for honesty.
SPQR (a3a747) — 4/11/2016 @ 8:51 am
My biggest hope in having obama as president was that people would finally recognize how corrupt the democrats are and how bad socialism is.
That hope has gone down the drain.
Joe - From Texas (debac0) — 4/11/2016 @ 10:22 amIf a US asset DIED because she compromised security, a penalty of life in prison is possible.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 4/11/2016 @ 10:52 amThis was the preview for the pardon speech.
Say, can a pardoned person invoke the 5th Amendment? (Hint: No)
Are they still subject to perjury charges if they lie? (Yes)
The day after she is pardoned, drag her ass up before the cameras on Capitol Hill and make her disclose EXACTLY what she has been pardoned of.
Kevin M (25bbee) — 4/11/2016 @ 10:54 amIf obama and hillary did not get upset with the death of 4 Americans in Benghazi, why would you think they would be concerned about the death of one Afghani?
Jim (a9b7c7) — 4/11/2016 @ 11:43 amTell that to Petraeus and countless others ….. #Obola
Rodney King's Spirit (db6706) — 4/11/2016 @ 12:05 pmWhy didn’t the Constitutional Scholar explain the legal differences between TOP SECRET and top secret.
JD (34f761) — 4/11/2016 @ 12:11 pmOne thing’s for certain, Barack’s college transcripts are Top Secret.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 4/11/2016 @ 12:14 pmGreetings:
And the lying lips, having again lied, lied on.
11B40 (6abb5c) — 4/11/2016 @ 12:17 pmSays the guy who just had to spike the football that he gave away so many details of the OBL operation he ended up putting our Pakistani source in prison. Dr. Afridi is still facing trumped up charges which now include murder.
I don’t often agree with Peter King as I think he’s a jerk. But he’s correct here; the Obama administration outed Dr. Afridi. And it’s obscene that Obama would be making light of the need to protect classified information given what he has done.
Steve57 (de44e6) — 4/11/2016 @ 12:24 pmThere is treason, and then there is TREASON ….
Rorschach (6fc5f7) — 4/11/2016 @ 12:46 pmHe can’t hide those lyin’ eyes
Colonel Haiku (fc3e51) — 4/11/2016 @ 12:58 pmAnd his smirk is a thin disguise
We thought by now he’d realize
The world has all caught on and gotten wise
Obama’s handlers probably coaches him before the interview to say that, instead of the “Rules are made for little people” reply he preferred to give in support of Hillary.
John-2 (a4c2a4) — 4/11/2016 @ 1:21 pmBlue Jean“Mom Jeans” Wiggy FartdustMom Jeans, we got us a Prez wears Mom Jeans
Mom Jeans, he got a bike and wears a helmet to boot
Remember he always falls down so he needs one
Oh, Mom Jeans, is there anything geeky as Mom Jeans?
He got training wheels
He got a turned-up nose
Sometimes he feel like (oh, the whole human race)
Laughin’ at Mom Jeans (oh, and it makes Mom Jeans blue)
Mom Jeans can fake it (oh, he really fakes it)
Somebody send him (oh, somebody send him away)
One day he’s gonna write ’em a real nasty letter
Colonel Haiku (fc3e51) — 4/11/2016 @ 1:21 pmOne day he’s gonna get his faculties together
Remember that everybody’s just waitin’ in line
Mom Jeans, look out world, his last day gonna be so fine
He got attitude
He’s fu*ked up everything
I saw that old fossil Woodward blathering on about how Clinton had no “intent” to expose secrets or some such nonsense so that’s her way out. Doesn’t the relevant statute have a strict liability or negligence mens rea element?
These guys get paid to opine and they just wing it, or worse, lie through their teeth. Sad!
Old Reader (08f24c) — 4/11/2016 @ 2:11 pmwoodward has been given misleading scoops, like mark felt, invented them for casey, hid them with armitage,
http://observer.com/2016/04/amid-shocking-chinese-spy-case-our-navy-can-no-longer-be-trusted/
narciso (732bc0) — 4/11/2016 @ 5:50 pmHillary Clinton’s intent was clear when she set up her own unsecured server. She wanted to put the recorded evidence of her duplicity beyond public reach, and she wanted to sell American secrets to foreign governments by leaving information on her server where it could be easily accessed in exchange for big donations to the Clinton Foundation.
ropelight (0adb4e) — 4/11/2016 @ 6:36 pmropelight,
The best way for you to fight Hillary is to throw your support behind the GOP candidate who contributed to her last presidential campaign.
Oh my God.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 4/11/2016 @ 6:48 pmnot that is matters,
https://pjmedia.com/michaelledeen/2016/04/10/terrible-things-are-happening
nor her embrace of a 9/11 relativist,
narciso (732bc0) — 4/11/2016 @ 7:01 pmObama here was serving as what old-time trial lawyers call an “oath-helper,” a practice that dates back to the Middle Ages. It amounts to a claim by Obama as follows: “You believe me, and I believe Hillary, therefore you should believe Hillary.”
It presumes everything, proves nothing, and is inevitably the refuge of scoundrels without a better defense.
Beldar (fa637a) — 4/11/2016 @ 7:47 pmHelpful oath-helper link.
Beldar (fa637a) — 4/11/2016 @ 7:48 pmThe statutes at issue do not require specific intent but speak in terms of negligence (has reason to know, etc). But I suppose her motives on why she set up the server might be relevant in deciding the question of negligence. Had she set up the server to further some legitimate public good, one would need to weigh that good relative to the costs (and probability) of disclosure of state secrets. But, of course, she had no legitimate public purpose to set up the private server, since her purpose was to avoid scrutiny and be as free as possible from FOIA requests and such (as well have the power to delete emails at her whim that is not subject to government archiving).
Also, Obama seemed to defend Clinton sending the documents by email. But that’s not the issue, right? Isn’t sending classified documents under a properly encrypted channel perfectly legal? It has to be. The question is that Clinton set up a private server to further her own purposes and in doing negligently handled state secrets. How is this any different than Petraeus giving his biographer classified info? Both the the nature and scope of the offense seem much greater in Clinton’s case.
Old Reader (08f24c) — 4/11/2016 @ 9:51 pmThe whole thing is a distraction. It isn’t “classified information” – that’s a bureaucratic term used to manage secrets. It is “national secrets” and they don’t have to be “classified” for their disclosure to be a crime.
But, it is useful to review the definitions of the three main levels of classification, given Obama’s “there’s top secret, and then there’s top secret, top secret.” Notice that even “confidential” classification has the potential for serious consequences.
Once upon long ago (decades), I had clearances, both in the military and otherwise. I learned a few very important secrets, and this was at the “Secret” classification level, and I heard them from people without anyone mentioning the classification. Of course, these people knew I had the clearance and “need to know.” Today, those secrets are known publicly, but I still don’t feel hesisstant mentioning them. Note again: not marked (or briefed as) classified at any level – at least to me; very damaging to US security and yet not at the “Top Secret” level Obama so blithely tosses around.
We know that Hillary’s email contained information “beyond Top Secret” – meaning a variety of Top Secret (SAP) that is even more critical. Lots and lots of her email included Confidential level.
Hillary was completely careless with important national security information. All the blather about “classified” and when or whether it was marked is distraction.
Top secret: Highest degree of protection for information that is paramount in national defense matters and whose unauthorized disclosure may cause extremely grave danger or damage to the nation.
Secret: Unauthorized disclosure of which may result in serious damage or danger.
Confidential: Unauthorized disclosure of which may undermine the defense or government operations.
John Moore (8ad7da) — 4/12/2016 @ 8:36 pmThere’s “flapping your gums”, and then there’s “interfering in an active investigation”.
mojo (a3d457) — 4/13/2016 @ 8:06 am