Clinton's server had classified material beyond 'top secret'

[Alcibiades]

So by red tape you mean the security protocols for handling classified communications?

It's my understanding that Clinton didn't violate any security protocols that were implemented at the time. Her private server was neither expressly permitted nor prohibited, but at a later time such servers were prohibited. Is that incorrect?

You can store work emails at home, or use your own email address, or even your own private server. It might not very professional, especially when working for the government or a big corporation, but you absolutely cannot, ever, store classified information at home or access it on a personal device.

If it was retroactively classified, then perhaps there is room for error there.  But if she knowingly stored classified information on her home server/devices, then she broke the law, period.

[Admiral Yi]

No, I'm saying that I'm incapable of reliably concluding whether she's making a poor choice, a poor choice but is singled out for it, or not a poor choice at all, because of all the false attacks against her in the past.

For a person who's incapable of concluding whether she made a poor choice, you seem to be arguing very passionately that she did not make a poor choice.

[garbon]

I must admit that I am enjoying this effort by the Clinton-bashers to tie themselves into pretzels to "prove" that Clinton "revealed classified information" much more than I enjoyed the pretzel-making in Benghazigate.  I know a lot more about this stuff.

I think Seedy hit the nail on the head:  this server stuff wasn't even on Clinton's radar.  And the assumption that State's unclassified email system was more secure than Clinton's private server is hilariously ill-informed.

The best part, though, is the idea that retroactive security classifications create security breaches for those who shared the info before it was classified.  All this retroactive classification is designed to do is to embarrass Clinton; if this was real info the security guys would just be serving to inform the enemies of the US where to look for classified information.  Real security guys protecting read codeword stuff would never say stuff like this.  When I worked on Sea Shadow (now declassified) we couldn't even acknowledge that there was a program, and never publicly responded to breaches of security.

Yeah, well said.

[DGuller]

No, I'm saying that I'm incapable of reliably concluding whether she's making a poor choice, a poor choice but is singled out for it, or not a poor choice at all, because of all the false attacks against her in the past.

For a person who's incapable of concluding whether she made a poor choice, you seem to be arguing very passionately that she did not make a poor choice.

You must be having a different poster in mind.

[Jacob]

If it was retroactively classified, then perhaps there is room for error there.  But if she knowingly stored classified information on her home server/devices, then she broke the law, period.

Did she break the law? I don't think anything has been reported to that effect - and I'm pretty sure that if she had, it would be reported by now.

[citizen k]

If it was retroactively classified, then perhaps there is room for error there.  But if she knowingly stored classified information on her home server/devices, then she broke the law, period.

Did she break the law? I don't think anything has been reported to that effect - and I'm pretty sure that if she had, it would be reported by now.

The FBI is still looking into it.

[Admiral Yi]

You must be having a different poster in mind.

It's possible.  So your position is you just don't know either way?

[garbon]

If it was retroactively classified, then perhaps there is room for error there.  But if she knowingly stored classified information on her home server/devices, then she broke the law, period.

Did she break the law? I don't think anything has been reported to that effect - and I'm pretty sure that if she had, it would be reported by now.

The FBI is still looking into it.

I think the latest news is that the FBI is now looking into whether or not Clinton's team 'copy and pasted' information from a secure server.

[DGuller]

You must be having a different poster in mind.

It's possible.  So your position is you just don't know either way?

I have absolutely no idea how objectively important and relevant the e-mail scandal is.

[Eddie Teach]

I have absolutely no idea how objectively important and relevant the e-mail scandal is.

The Fate of the Republic hinges upon it.

[Alcibiades]

Yes, she had beyond top secret documents on her server.

There is, by the way, no such thin such as "beyond top secret documents."

Sure they even say what the category is.  Stuff in the public domain that the "Intel community" wishes was secret.

No, they are referring to "Special Access Programs".  But they are using it incorrectly, it does not making anything more classified or mean it is more sensitive. The article is attempting to paint this "worse" than it is.  The government compartmentalizes information and you need to be read on to different programs to have access to them to limit access and make sure people have "need to know" before accessing it.  For instance, regardless of any level of clearance someone may have they cannot access top secret information relating specifically to "X" without being read-on to that particular program or group.

The government does this to protect information and to stop people snooping into stuff they have no need to know.  Came in to effect after major leaks to the Russians, I believe.

[mongers]

Yes, she had beyond top secret documents on her server.

There is, by the way, no such thin such as "beyond top secret documents."

Sure they even say what the category is.  Stuff in the public domain that the "Intel community" wishes was secret.

No, they are referring to "Special Access Programs".  But they are using it incorrectly, it does not making anything more classified or mean it is more sensitive. The article is attempting to paint this "worse" than it is.  The government compartmentalizes information and you need to be read on to different programs to have access to them to limit access and make sure people have "need to know" before accessing it.  For instance, regardless of any level of clearance someone may have they cannot access top secret information relating specifically to "X" without being read-on to that particular program or group.

The government does this to protect information and to stop people snooping into stuff they have no need to know.  Came in to effect after major leaks to the Russians, I believe.

Alks, are you sure the structure of government secrecy isn't in itself a secret also? 

[Alcibiades]

Yes, she had beyond top secret documents on her server.

There is, by the way, no such thin such as "beyond top secret documents."

Sure they even say what the category is.  Stuff in the public domain that the "Intel community" wishes was secret.

No, they are referring to "Special Access Programs".  But they are using it incorrectly, it does not making anything more classified or mean it is more sensitive. The article is attempting to paint this "worse" than it is.  The government compartmentalizes information and you need to be read on to different programs to have access to them to limit access and make sure people have "need to know" before accessing it.  For instance, regardless of any level of clearance someone may have they cannot access top secret information relating specifically to "X" without being read-on to that particular program or group.

The government does this to protect information and to stop people snooping into stuff they have no need to know.  Came in to effect after major leaks to the Russians, I believe.

Alks, are you sure the structure of government secrecy isn't in itself a secret also? 

I checked before I posted.   

[mongers]

Yes, she had beyond top secret documents on her server.

There is, by the way, no such thin such as "beyond top secret documents."

Sure they even say what the category is.  Stuff in the public domain that the "Intel community" wishes was secret.

No, they are referring to "Special Access Programs".  But they are using it incorrectly, it does not making anything more classified or mean it is more sensitive. The article is attempting to paint this "worse" than it is.  The government compartmentalizes information and you need to be read on to different programs to have access to them to limit access and make sure people have "need to know" before accessing it.  For instance, regardless of any level of clearance someone may have they cannot access top secret information relating specifically to "X" without being read-on to that particular program or group.

The government does this to protect information and to stop people snooping into stuff they have no need to know.  Came in to effect after major leaks to the Russians, I believe.

Alks, are you sure the structure of government secrecy isn't in itself a secret also? 

I checked before I posted.   

Well played.

[Malthus]

This "beyond top secret" stuff reminds me of:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_Beyond_Zebra!