Tag Archives: email server

FBI Director Comey was board member of HSBC – Clinton Foundation & Drug Cartel ‘bank of choice’

https://i1.wp.com/21stcenturywire.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/3-FBI-CLINTON-EMAILS.jpg

Much has been made recently about the FBI and the Department of Justice letting off favored presidential candidate Hillary Clinton for admittedly mishandling classified information and using her own private email servers to do state business during her time as US Secretary of State. FBI Director James Comey was manning the key choke-point in the decision to not hold Clinton accountable for what so many before her have received convictions for. What many are not aware of is the political and financial links between Hillary Clinton and James Comey behind the curtain

An argument can be made that FBI Director James Comey has multiple conflicts of interest when it comes to interfacing with the great and the good, and the Clintons in particular. Based on the evidence available to hand – one could easily flag-up Comey’s relationship and past and present involvement with questionable banks, and the Clintons – as a conflict of interest, if not an accessory to  institutional corruption, where Comey’s role as a top-level ‘fixer’ is self evident – fixing outcomes for those members of an elite international club of high finance and organized crime.
Many are unaware that Comey’s served on the board of banking giant HSBC (‘international drug money clearing house’) before parachuting softly into the head of the FBI in 2013. That’s only the beginning…

It appears that James Comey (who is actually a lawyer by trade) also has long history of cases ending favorable to Clintons, including the case of Sandy Berger, a former Clinton Administration aid. During the Berger probe, Comey said publicly that ‘we take issues of classified information very seriously’, all the while seeming to undermine the scope of the investigation – presumably to protect the Clintons:

“In 2004, Comey, then serving as a deputy attorney general in the Justice Department, apparently limited the scope of the criminal investigation of Sandy Berger, which left out former Clinton administration officials who may have coordinated with Berger in his removal and destruction of classified records from the National Archives. The documents were relevant to accusations that the Clinton administration was negligent in the build-up to the 9/11 terrorist attack.”

“Curiously, Berger, Lynch and Cheryl Mills all worked as partners in the Washington law firm Hogan & Hartson, which prepared tax returns for the Clintons and did patent work for a software firm that played a role in the private email server Hillary Clinton used when she was secretary of state.”

“Hogan & Hartson in Virginia filed a patent trademark request on May 19, 2004, for Denver-based MX Logic Inc., the computer software firm that developed the email encryption system used to manage Clinton’s private email server beginning in July 2013. A tech expert has observed that employees of MX Logic could have had access to all the emails that went through her account.

In 1999, President Bill Clinton nominated [Loretta] Lynch for the first of her two terms as U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of New York, a position she held until she joined Hogan & Hartson in March 2002 to become a partner in the firm’s Litigation Practice Group.” (Source WND)

Many will also be unaware that before Comey was installed by the Obama Administration as FBI Director, he was on the board of Director at HSBC Bank – a bank implicated in international money laundering, including the laundering of billions on behalf of international drugs and narcotics trafficking cartels.

Good qualification to be FBI Director? Not really…

Investment Watch Blog

It seems that our beloved FBI Director is or until very recently was a director and board member of HSBC, which is tightly connected to the Clinton Foundation. Check out some of these links:

http://www.hsbc.com/news-and-insight/2013/former-us-deputy-attorney-general-joins-hsbc-board
“Mr. Comey’s appointment will be for an initial three-year term which, subject to re-election by shareholders, will expire at the conclusion of the 2016 Annual General Meeting.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/feb/10/hillary-clinton-foundation-donors-hsbc-swiss-bank
“Clinton foundation received up to $81m from clients of controversial HSBC bank”

https://www.clintonfoundation.org/search/node/HSBC
It’s like a revolving door of money and special projects that the bank and the CF are involved in.

This is the same HSBC that was accused of laundering drug cartel money, was heavily involved in the LIBOR scandal, and who knows what else, and all while our esteemed FBI Director James “she didn’t intend it” Comey was part of the senior leadership.

by 21st Century Wire | Blacklisted News

First “Shocking” Deposition In Clinton Email Case Reveals She Did Not Use A Password

https://i1.wp.com/www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/images/user5/imageroot/2016/05/13/lewis%20lukens.jpg

U.S. Ambassador Lewis Lukens’s sworn testimony in the case of Hillary Clinton’s privatization of the U.S. Secretary of State’s email is the first evidence to be released in the Clinton email cases, and it was published on May 26th at the website of Judicial Watch, the organization that originally brought the suit. Headlining “First Deposition Testimony from Clinton Email Discovery Released”, it reported that:

Judicial Watch today released the deposition transcript of Ambassador Lewis Lukens, former deputy assistant secretary of state and executive director of the State Department’s executive secretariat.  The transcript is available here.  Amb. Lukens was deposed last week as part of the discovery granted to Judicial Watch by U.S. District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan in response to its Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit involving former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s unsecured, non-government email system (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of State (No. 1:13-cv-01363)).

Lukens is the first of seven depositions of former Clinton top aides and State Department officials that Judicial Watch has scheduled over the next four weeks.  Also to be deposed are Cheryl Mills and Huma Abedin, as well as top State Department official Patrick Kennedy, and former State IT employee Bryan Pagliano.

In his testimony, Lukens described his State Department role:

I’ve been a Foreign Service officer for 27 years. I’ve served in Southern China; in the Ivory Coast; in Sydney, Australia; in Dublin, Ireland; in Baghdad; Vancouver, British Columbia; Dakar, Senegal; and three tours in Washington, D.C., as well as my current position in San Francisco.

While Clinton was Secretary of State, his role was heading “logistics and management support” and he had “roughly 110 employees working for me” including the “IRM” or Information Resource Management team. Also, during his questioning, he was asked “You traveled with Mrs. Clinton on all of her foreign travel?” while he was employed there, and he answered: “Yes.”

Representative excerpts from his testimony will be presented here:

While Clinton’s office was being prepared for her:

Q: Do you know if Mrs. Clinton — if the IRM office set up an e-mail address for Mrs. Clinton?
A: I don’t believe they did.
Q: Do you know why they didn’t?
A: I don’t think it was asked for.
Q: Would Mrs. Clinton have — was it required for Mrs. Clinton to ask for an e-mail address for one to be assigned to her?
A: Yes.
Q: Was it unusual — at the time did you think it was unusual that Mrs. Clinton didn’t want an e-mail address assigned to her?
A: No.
Q: Why not?
A: I’m not aware of former Secretaries of State having e-mail addresses on our system.

In other words: her having an e-mail address assigned to her was “required,” but the custom at the U.S. Department of State was to ignore this ‘requirement’.

(AUTHOR’S NOTE: Regardless of whether violating the regulations or even the law has been ignored in the past, violations are supposed to be punished or prosecuted. Prior refusal to prosecute does not constitute legal excuse for continuing refusal to prosecute: it instead constitutes a government in which some persons who are supposedly in the service of, and who are definitely being paid by, the public, are, in practice, above the regulations or even the laws — in other words, a dictatorship. However, this aspect of the questioning was not pursued.)

Lukens then said that her violation on that matter was ignored and that a “BB” or Blackberry account was instead requested by “HRC’ Hillary Rodham Clinton. Lukens’s notes indicated that he had asked HRC’s agent, “On the BB for HRC, can we chat this morning?” and “I may have thought of a workaround [to evade the State Department’s regulations] but need more info on her BB use.” He explained during this questioning of him: “So the crux of the issue was that BlackBerrys and iPhones are not allowed in the Secretary’s office suite, so the question was, how is the Secretary going to be able to check her e-mails if she’s not able to have the Blackberry at her desk with her.”

Q: And so what did you — did you propose a solution at that point?

A: So my proposal was to set up a computer on her desk, a standalone computer [not part of the State Department’s system], for her to be able to access the Internet to check her e-mails [privatized — and therefore not subject to FOIA requests or historians’ investigations].

However, Clinton’s agent insisted on a private computer also being set up “across the hall” “for her to check her BlackBerry” even though no private BlackBerry was allowed on the premises. This was to be the “workaround.”

In an email, Lukens had written, and the questioner referenced it:

Also think we should go ahead, but will await your green light, and set up a standalone PC in the Secretary’s office connected to the Internet, but not go through our system, to enable her to check her e-mails from her desk.

That proposal was accepted and was done. Then:

Q: Do you know if this setup would have been any different from the setup of other employees?
A: Yes, this would have been different.
Q: How would it have been different?
A: My understanding is that most of the employees’ computers in the State Department are connected through the State Department’s OpenNet e-mail system …
Q: So this would have been separate from the OpenNet system?
A: Correct.

He was asked why he had proposed this solution, and he said it was “For ease of access” and, “as far as I knew, there was no requirement for her to be connected to our system” (even though he had earlier said that her having an email address assigned to her in the State Department’s system, the OpenNet system, was “required”). He said that the “ease of access” would be because of there being “fewer passwords.”

He was asked whether doing things this way was necessary in order for her to be able to access the Internet from the State Department, and he said, ”the Internet is available” to employees at the office, just as anywhere.

He was asked about the inconvenience of the State Department’s passwords system, and he said that he eliminated her need for any passwords:

A: She wouldn’t have had a password.
Q: So the computer would have just been open and be able to use without going through any security features?
A: Correct.

Though he was paid by U.S. taxpayers, apparently his only concern was to please his superiors, whom he trusted unquestioningly despite their evident unconcern about “security” etc.

In further questioning of Mr. Lukens, it became clear that he never gave any thought to what the purpose behind the State Department’s regulations was: he didn’t even notice that Hillary Clinton’s buddy and top aide Huma Abedin at the Department was also using only a private email account — even though he regularly had been communicating via email with her.

* * *

And then the Daily Caller adds the following:

Shocking Deposition: Hillary Clueless On Using Computer Emails

As Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton never used a password to protect her computer emails, and she was clueless about how regular emails work on a conventional computer, according to a deposition of a foreign service officer at the State Department.

She also continued to push for the use of her personal Blackberry phone in the Secretary’s highly-secured government suite even though National Security Agency (NSA) regulations barred its use in that office.

The revelations came as part of a May 18 deposition released Thursday by Judicial Watch, the nonprofit government watchdog group, of Lewis A. Lukens, a veteran 27-year foreign service officer at the State Department who served as the deputy executive secretary and executive director of the Office of the Secretariat from 2008 to 2011.

From the start of her term in January 2009, State Department officials grappled with Clinton’s ignorance of the use of basic computers.  In a January 24, 2009 email from Lukens to the department’s Undersecretary Patrick Kennedy, the foreign service officer said Clinton didn’t know how to use a computer for emails.

Citing a conversation Lukens had with Clinton Chief of Staff Cheryl Mills, he wrote, “She says problem (sic) is HRC does not know how to use a computer to do emails — only Blackberry.”  HRC refers to Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Judicial Watch attorney Michael Bekesha asked Lukens if State Department policy barred the use of personal cell phones in the Secretary’s official office suite, which is one of the most tightly secured facilities in government. Lukens explained the prohibition: “So the crux of the issue was that BlackBerrys and iPhones are not allowed in the Secretary’s office suite, so the question was, how is the Secretary going to be able to check her emails if she’s not able to have the Blackberry at her desk with her.

The NSA rebuffed multiple attempts  by Clinton to carry her Blackberry into her  office.

Lukens also said Clinton did not use a password to protect her stand-alone computer from unwanted intruders such as hackers. During the deposition, Lukens volunteered that the stand-alone computer adjacent to her suite did not have a password for protection  “She wouldn’t have had a password.”

Bekesha asked, astonished, “So the computer would have just been open and be able  to use without going through any security features?

“Correct,” Lukens replied.

He added that to the best of his knowledge, Clinton never received a waiver to use the Blackberry in the State Department headquarters.

“Do you know if — do you know if waivers or exceptions were made for State — or employees of the Office of the Secretary to use their State Department BlackBerrys within the executive suite within the office of the Secretary,” Bekesha asked.

“I’m not aware of any waivers that were made,” Lukens replied.

Mills eventually was able to set up a room “adjacent” to her secure office to allow her to look at her unsecured Blackberry emails.  But it appears that Clinton rarely used the room.

Instead, the Secretary of State would go into a hallway to use her blackberry.

Lukens said in the deposition he saw Clinton using her blackberry in the hall “maybe a half dozen times.”

The official said that he thought Clinton wanted to use the Blackberry “to stay in touch with family and friends,”

He said he didn’t know if she was conducting official business on a private server or with a non-governmental email address. Clinton used an email domain address “clintonemail.com.”

As late as 2011, State Department officials were still trying to get Clinton to use a government-issued blackberry.  But Huma Abedin, Clinton’s deputy chief of staff, shot it down, saying in an August 30, 2011 email “let’s discuss the State Blackberry, [it] doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.”

Bekesha, asked Lukens if Abedin also used a non-state department email address.

“Do you recall if Ms. Abedin used non-state.gov e-mail accounts to correspond with you,” Bekesha asked.

“Well, the answer is yes,” he replied.

Lukens displayed a great lack of curiosity about Clinton’s use of prohibited electronic devices.

“Did you ever think about whether or not she was going to use that equipment to conduct official government business,” asked the Judicial Watch attorney.

“I did not,” he replied.

Judge Sullivan, the State Department’s Inspector General and the Inspector General for the Intelligence Community have expressed deep dissatisfaction with the State Department’s examination of the Clinton emails, as well as its failure to identify classified materials on her server.

The inspector generals, unlike State Department officials, found at least two dozen emails contained either “Top Secret” designation or the highest government classification called “Special Access Programs,” or SAP.  They found up to 1200 emails contained some form of classification material.

Lukens, as executive director of the executive secretariat for the State Department, said he was only trained once to handle documents under the Freedom of Information Act — in 1989 — when he first joined the department. He’s never had a refresher course in the years since that first training.

“Do you know if any point after 1989 you received updated guidance or training about the use of email as it related to federal records and the Freedom of Information Act,” Bekesha asked.

“Not that I recall,” replied Lukens.

The State Department official also revealed that he routinely deleted official emails “to clear out space in my inbox.

He said he “kept files for various trips and things where I would keep e-mails until trips were over, but after trips were over I would often delete the files to clear — to clear out space in my inbox.”

Source: ZeroHedge


Meanwhile, Crooked Clinton Rally Supporters Are Caught Sitting Down During National Anthem

Most Americans know it’s respectful to stand during the national anthem. Many supporters of Hillary Clinton apparently didn’t get that memo.

Prior to a rally with Bill Clinton in Edison, New Jersey on Friday, a high school choir attempted to lead the few hundred attendees in a rendition of the Star Spangled Banner.

But a video from the crowd shows many people sitting down, talking with their neighbors or staring at their phones — and completely ignoring the song.

https://dailycrusadernewsdotcom.files.wordpress.com/2016/05/hillary_clinton_24007578223.jpg?w=620&h=264&crop=1

https://i1.wp.com/a.disquscdn.com/uploads/mediaembed/images/3385/4743/original.gif

Source: The Crusader Journal

 

Signals Intelligence Indicates Wall Street Dropping Hillary Clinton…

FIRST, if you have not followed the “Tripwire Series” this update might take a while to fully digest.  There are key indications the real presidential decision-makers have shifted.

I would strongly suggest you watch this video before continuing, and remind yourself that Andrea Mitchell is Alan Greenspan’s wife (this is one of the “keys” moving forward).

The video is Mika Brezinski outlining the latest State Department report on the Hillary Clinton E-Mail Scandal:  “it feels like Hillary Clinton is lying”…

Last year, against tremendous opposition, we outlined what would happen if two specific occurrences took place:  #1) If Donald Trump secured the GOP nomination; and, #2) If Hillary Clinton crossed a particular threshold and appeared “unelectable”.

What we stated then, eerily remains today.

If Trump won (he has), and it appeared Clinton was too weak to defeat him (looking possible), the power-brokers who ultimately control U.S. elections (Wall street) would move to replace Clinton with an alternate candidate.  They’d have no choice.

Who the alternate candidate doesn’t really matter.  The reasoning we have continually evidenced within expanded explanations about the Congressional Legislative Agenda being dictated by Wall Street interests.

♦ The influences who control the legislative agenda have already put in place, convinced and paid for, the politicians needed to advance their interests (the legislative priorities).

♦ Those interests don’t care about who occupies the White House so long as that occupant is incapable of derailing their objectives.

♦ There is only one current candidate who is a risk to that Wall Street goal, Donald Trump.  The second candidate, be it Hillary or Bernie, does not represent the same risk.

♦ Bernie cannot disrupt the legislative agenda because he is external to the party structure who currently control the construct (Leader McConnell and Speaker Ryan).

♦ Only Donald Trump can disrupt the agenda because he would also carry an electoral mandate and allegiance with elements inside structure of the party apparatus.

In essence Trump can block them, Bernie cannot.

mcconnell ryan

trump mcconnelltom donohue dinner at saudi embassy

SIGNALS – What we are now seeing is a shift:

♦ Trump is polling equal to, or ahead of, Hillary Clinton.  That’s a bad indicator for those Legislative Priorities.

♦ Clinton is looking more and more weak.  Her failure to defeat Trump would eliminate the ability of the Legislative Priorities to advance.

♦ Clinton’s E-Mail scandal now looks toxic to her ability.

Globalists VS Nationalists.

♦ Last night on ABC’s Jimmy Kimmel the question was raised about Donald Trump debating Bernie Sanders.  Why ABC? Who owns ABC?  Answer = Disney Corp., a specific corporate benefactor (and constructionist) of the Wall Street Legislative Agenda.

♦ MSNBC now questioning Hillary’s candidacy.  Specifically Andrea Mitchell (wife of former Fed Chair Alan Greenspan), a specific tool of the Wall Street Legislative Agenda.

♦ Alan Greenspan is antithetical to a Donald Trump candidacy.

greenspan

These signals are NOT disconnected.

Also, Senator Elizabeth Warren is attacking Donald Trump. When we outlined the risk to Clinton’s nomination, Elizabeth Warren was predicted to join the Bernie Sanders ticket as the Vice-President pick. They need a ticket which can defeat Donald Trump.

Remember, with republicans in control of the House and Senate, and with the hundreds of millions already spent to secure the agenda items, only Donald Trump represents the risk.

There are literally trillions of dollars at stake.

Do you really think Barack Obama is remaining in Washington DC in 2017/2018 because his kid needs to finish High School?

♦ Prior Reference and Resources – (links to internal MSM references are contained within prior outlines): RNC Rule Changes RNC Rule Battles

  1. Following The Money
  2. The GOPe Roadmap
  3. ♦ The Roles of The Players – “The Splitters
  4. ♦ How each candidate is aligned in the Roadmap
  5. ♦ Arrow #1 Trump Hits The Super-PACs – The GOPe Achilles Heel
  6. ♦ Arrow #2 Trump Hits Bush – Inside The Wall Street Fortress
  7. ♦ Arrow #3 Trump Cuts Off Rubio/Bush switch – The GOPe Switch
  8. ♦ The Rick Perry Tripwire Exposed – DC Super-Pac
  9. ♦ Jeb Bush Super-Pac Will immediately spend $10 Million
  10. ♦ Proving there is only one political party in Washington DC
  11. ♦ Why Support Trump – Part One (The GOPe Ruse)
  12. ♦ Why Support Trump – Part Two (Stop being played)
  13. ♦ Why Support Trump – Part Three (Intellectual Details)
  14. ♦ How To Defeat the GOPe Road Map
  15. ♦ Current Polling Exposes – the Ohio, Florida, Texas, Virginia, New York Splitters
  16. ♦ Florida Polling Exposes – Donald Trump defeating Jeb’s Florida Strategy
  17. ♦ Rush Limbaugh Discusses/AffirmsThe “splitter strategy”
  18. ♦ The Biden/Sanders Paradox – Trump Winning Means Clinton Must Be Removed
  19. ♦ Salem Media Communications (GOPe Media Arm) Launches Attack
  20. ♦ Open Letter To GOPe – The Conservative Frustration
  21. ♦ Why The GOPe Will Never Stop Attacking Donald Trump
  22. ♦ Trump indicates he is well aware of the GOP Mississippi Trickery 2014
  23. ♦ GOPe (Stuart Stevens and Henry Barbour) recruit for a Mississippi style takedown
  24. ♦ Chris Christie Joins the insurgency – Christie Endorsement
  25. ♦ The Demonization of Donald Trump Begins – The Racial Onslaught Miss ’14 Redux
  26. ♦ Ben Carson Drops Out – Manipulators of his Campaign Exposed
  27. ♦ Mitt Romney admits the GOPe Road Map and Splitter Strategy
  28. ♦ The Agenda of Ted Cruz exposed – Splitter Fiorina joins forces with Cruz
  29. ♦ Team Trump begin leveraging sheer will – Paul Manafort negotiates.
  30. ♦ Paul Ryan (Wall Street Purchase) – Not Supporting Trump

trump lion

by Sundance | The Last Refuge

 

Former CIA lawyer: If an asset’s name was exposed on Hillary Clinton’s email, it could be ‘literally lethal’

Source: Business Insider

A former top lawyer to the CIA said Monday that potentially deadly intelligence information passed through Hillary Clinton’s private email system.

John Rizzo, the former acting general counsel of the CIA, responded to news that Clinton confidant Sidney Blumenthal disclosed the name of a CIA source in an email to Clinton, then the secretary of state, who forwarded that information to a colleague at the State Department.

“How dangerous is that [information] going over a public server that’s held in someone’s private home in Chappaqua, New York?” Morning Joe host Joe Scarborough said.

“It could be literally lethal,” Rizzo said. “Who has access to that? Who is trying to hack into it? If this was a foreign-based source living in Libya, let’s say, if you get outed as the CIA source over there, you’re a dead man. So it couldn’t be more serious.”

Rizzo said the names of human intelligence sources were some of the most sensitive information guarded by the CIA.

“That’s the holiest of holies inside the CIA — the true identity of a secret source,” Rizzo said. “Even inside CIA, in internal emails, in cables, you never mention or talk about the true name of a source. You use a pseudonym. So I mean, honestly, it’s quite stunning.”

Yahoo News investigative reporter Michael Isikoff said this leak of classified information was “the single most problematic email exchange we’ve seen with Hillary Clinton yet.”

Rizzo and Isikoff’s assessments come one day after President Obama defended Clinton’s private email use. Obama assured CBS that Clinton’s email use did not endanger national security.


Despite claims by Clinton and President Obama, the emails seem to have done some damage.

The FBI is carrying out a security review of Clinton’s emails. If the CIA decides to press the matter, the latest leak could trigger a new investigation.

The Washington Free Beacon previously reported that this email exchange may constitute a violation of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act, meant to protect US sources from reprisals.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bombshell: Clinton E-Mails Were “Classified From The Get-Go”, Reuters Says

hillary clinton emailsJust last night, we reported that Hillary Clinton’s campaign had finally admitted that the former First Lady’s private e-mail server – which she used to handle sensitive information while serving as Secretary of State – did indeed contain documents that have since been marked classified. 

The admission comes after Clinton sought to appease GOP lawmakers by turning over her personal server to the FBI. Subsequently, reports suggested the server had been wiped clean while an audit of the e-mails Clinton handed in to the State Department showed that some of the threads looked to contain chatter about the CIA’s drone program. 

Clinton’s defense – until now anyway – is that regardless of whether some of the information was retroactively stamped “classified”, it wasn’t marked as such at the time it was sent and received and therefore, no classified information was stored on her private server. As we’ve noted, those with a security clearance are expected to exercise the highest discretion when it comes to their handling of sensitive information and as such, Clinton should have been more careful. Here’s what we said on Thursday:

While it’s certainly disconcerting that the nation’s one-time top diplomat was sending and receiving sensitive information over an unsecure private e-mail server, the issue for Clinton – because it would probably be naive to think that anyone besides voters will actually hold her accountable – is that her handling of the ordeal has served to reinforce the perception that she’s too arrogant and untrustworthy to be given the reins to the country.

That is, the public was already wary of electing yet another member of America’s political aristocracy (or oligarchy, if you will) and the fact that Clinton apparently expects Americans to believe that she had no idea the information she was receiving on her home server might one day be deemed classified (even though she’s been privy to such information in various capacities for decades) seems to underscore her arrogance and highlight her propensity to, as Jean Claude-Juncker famously put it, lie when “things become serious.”

Now, according to Reuters, Clinton’s last line of defense – that anything which is now marked “classified” wasn’t designated as such initially – may be in question. Here’s the story:

For months, the U.S. State Department has stood behind its former boss Hillary Clinton as she has repeatedly said she did not send or receive classified information on her unsecured, private email account, a practice the government forbids.

While the department is now stamping a few dozen of the publicly released emails as “Classified,” it stresses this is not evidence of rule-breaking. 

Those stamps are new, it says, and do not mean the information was classified when Clinton, the Democratic frontrunner in the 2016 presidential election, first sent or received it.

But the details included in those “Classified” stamps — which include a string of dates, letters and numbers describing the nature of the classification — appear to undermine this account, a Reuters examination of the emails and the relevant regulations has found.

The new stamps indicate that some of Clinton’s emails from her time as the nation’s most senior diplomat are filled with a type of information the U.S. government and the department’s own regulations automatically deems classified from the get-go — regardless of whether it is already marked that way or not.

In the small fraction of emails made public so far, Reuters has found at least 30 email threads from 2009, representing scores of individual emails, that include what the State Department’s own “Classified” stamps now identify as so-called ‘foreign government information.’ The U.S. government defines this as any information, written or spoken, provided in confidence to U.S. officials by their foreign counterparts.

This sort of information, which the department says Clinton both sent and received in her emails, is the only kind that must be “presumed” classified, in part to protect national security and the integrity of diplomatic interactions, according to U.S. regulations examined by Reuters.

“It’s born classified,” said J. William Leonard, a former director of the U.S. government’s Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO). Leonard was director of ISOO, part of the White House’s National Archives and Records Administration, from 2002 until 2008, and worked for both the Bill Clinton and George W. Bush administrations.

“If a foreign minister just told the secretary of state something in confidence, by U.S. rules that is classified at the moment it’s in U.S. channels and U.S. possession,” he said in a telephone interview, adding that for the State Department to say otherwise was “blowing smoke.”

We’re sure they’ll be far more on this to come, and while American voters are by now very much used to having “smoke” blown at them on the campaign trail, the poll numbers for Donald Trump (and, incidentally, for dark horse candidate “Deez Nuts“) would seem to suggest that the public’s patience with being lied to by America’s political aristocracy may have run out.

by Zero Hedge