Hillary Doesn’t Just Have An Email Problem

She has an NSA problem:

Now, over two months later, I can confirm that the contents of Sid Blumenthal’s June 8, 2011, email to Hillary Clinton, sent to her personal, unclassified account, were indeed based on highly sensitive NSA information. The agency investigated this compromise and determined that Mr. Blumenthal’s highly detailed account of Sudanese goings-on, including the retelling of high-level conversations in that country, was indeed derived from NSA intelligence.

Specifically, this information was illegally lifted from four different NSA reports, all of them classified “Top Secret / Special Intelligence.” Worse, at least one of those reports was issued under the GAMMA compartment, which is an NSA handling caveat that is applied to extraordinarily sensitive information (for instance, decrypted conversations between top foreign leadership, as this was). GAMMA is properly viewed as a SIGINT Special Access Program, or SAP, several of which from the CIA Ms. Clinton compromised in another series of her “unclassified” emails.

Currently serving NSA officials have told me they have no doubt that Mr. Blumenthal’s information came from their reports. “It’s word-for-word, verbatim copying,” one of them explained. “In one case, an entire paragraph was lifted from an NSA report” that was classified Top Secret / Special Intelligence.

How Mr. Blumenthal got his hands on this information is the key question, and there’s no firm answer yet. The fact that he was able to take four separate highly classified NSA reports—none of which he was supposed to have any access to—and pass the details of them to Hillary Clinton via email only hours after NSA released them in Top Secret / Special Intelligence channels indicates something highly unusual, as well as illegal, was going on.

You don’t say.

14 thoughts on “Hillary Doesn’t Just Have An Email Problem”

  1. “something highly unusual, as well as illegal, was going on.”

    Illegal? With Shrillery? Say it ain’t so!

  2. The email thing is so full of broken laws. This all began with a brazen attempt to circumvent the FOIA. Then we have mishandling of classified data, failure to report mishandling of classified data, intent to remove markings from classified data, unlawful transmission of classified data to unauthorized personnel, and I suspect there are just a few violations of ITAR as well. Any of these things might not warrant jail time, but all of them would get a civil servant fired and made ineligible to hold a job in the US government (civil servant or contractor) again.

  3. What’s the over-under on how long it takes Jim to come up with a spin on how this is a big nothingburger?

      1. I don’t think he’d admit that, though, so he needs his DNC marching orders so he knows how to tell us this isn’t important and it’s perfectly OK for Hillary to have handled confidential information and how she totally didn’t break any laws.

    1. Sid Blumenthal is just some random guy sending unsolicited emails. Hillary can’t control what he does and they had no relationship, certainly not an employer/employee one.

  4. This will go nowhere. Obama pardon in his last 30 days. After election & regardless of election result. There is no law saying a person accepting a pardon cannot hold the office. Impeachment would be the only remaining recourse but not clear it would be lawful to persue for crimes committed prior to being in office and pardoned! In any case I see no Republican stomach for it so close to an election loss. Would be mid-term suicide. To paraphrase Bubba Bill, “Gosh shucks golly gee, those Republicans, what a hoot!”

    1. not clear it would be lawful to persue for crimes committed prior to being in office and pardoned

      If you couldn’t pursue impeachment because of a pardon, then the President could avoid impeachment simply by pardoning themselves. That’s why impeachment is tried in Congress, not the courts.

      1. That would not be the case here. And Obama has every incentive to keep any impeachment hearings or DOJ prosecutors from delving too deeply into his Administration should Hillary lose. And impeachment is not a criminal trial. It’s only outcome is removal from office should she lose in the Senate. A pardon would prevent any subsequent criminal case from being brought. OTOH should she win election she might defer any pardon under the principle of “election nullification” and thereby avoid it’s implied admission of guilt. And challenge the House to bring it on as mid-term election fodder.

        1. Agreed that impeachment is not a criminal trial, however an impeachment is based on treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors. Those are criminal acts. While violation of various espionage acts would fit for both treason and high crimes (and I suspect some bribery as well), if she is pardoned of those crimes by a previous President; the politics would be more interesting; as well your notion of election nullification.

          Anyway, I think we are mostly on the same page here. My point was that Impeachment could still be done, because it is not a criminal trial tried in the courts.

  5. OTOH Sid Vicious and Ms. Aberdeen had better be lawyering up but good. They are facing the classic Lewinsky / Hubble Syndrome. When will people learn? It’s well known that befriending the Clintons can leave one twisting in the wind while enjoying free federal housing. In the case of Sir Vicious, it couldn’t happen to a nicer fellow….

  6. As usual, I am bewildered that liberals don’t seem to be panicking about this. Of course, it is quite possible that the FBI will decide to sit on it, and there would be no recourse. But I don’t know why anyone would be confident that that will happen.

    1. The elites have a confidence because they trade in favors and deal with the gutless. Rule of law has become a joke.

Comments are closed.