WikiLeaks Dispenses 23,000 Hillary Emails Marked “C” for Confidential

  • You are viewing Orangepower as a Guest. To start new threads, reply to posts, or participate in polls or contests - you must register. Registration is free and easy. Click Here to register.

Deere Poke

I'd rather be in the woods
A/V Subscriber
Feb 13, 2014
10,969
9,743
743
52
Bixby-Bristow OK
#1
http://www.speciallifeentertainment...lary-emails-marked-c-confidential-classified/

WikiLeaks Dispenses 23,000 Hillary Emails Marked “C” for Confidential (Classified)
Jul 20, 2016 by admin in NEWS
3.3k14051110




WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange told us a month ago that the next batch of leaked Hillary Clinton emails could lead to an indictment.
Now, over 23,000 cables were just put out for the world to see.

FBI Director James Comey claimed that Clinton may have not understood what was classified and what wasn’t, but WikiLeaks isn’t buying it.

More via The Hill:




FBI Director James Comey on Thursday said it was not clear whether Hillary Clinton fully understood the government’s marking system for classified messages.

During a House Oversight Committee hearing, Rep. Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) pressed Comey about whether he was testifying that Clinton didn’t know what a classified marking is.

“No, not that she would have no idea what a classified marking would be,” Comey responded. “It’s an interesting question whether she … was actually sophisticated enough to understand what a C in [parentheses] means.”

“You asked me if I would assume someone would know,” he added. “Probably before this investigation, I would have. I am not so sure of that any longer. I think it’s possible — possible — that she didn’t know what a C meant when she saw it in the body of an email like that.”


She didn’t get it, you guys.

Cut her a break!

Classic.



That’s who I want running the country – an old woman who doesn’t understand what she’s doing.

Are Democrat voters honestly foolish enough to believe Hillary did nothing wrong?

Source
 

Deere Poke

I'd rather be in the woods
A/V Subscriber
Feb 13, 2014
10,969
9,743
743
52
Bixby-Bristow OK
#2
Link to wikileaks page with the actual e-mails.

https://wikileaks.org/plusd/?qproje...IDENTIAL&qtfrom=2009-01-10&qsort=tdesc#result

Holy crap I have never had any training on identifying classified documents but you would have to be brain dead to not notice it on these.

Have to copy the whole link or it takes you to a different page that brings up a bunch of unmarked stuff.

Never mind went to bb code and fixed it.
 
Last edited:

NYC Poke

The Veil of Ignorance
Sep 24, 2007
38,783
45,668
1,743
#4
Is there a legal distinction between something marked "Confidential" versus things marked "Classified" or "Top Secret"?
 

Deere Poke

I'd rather be in the woods
A/V Subscriber
Feb 13, 2014
10,969
9,743
743
52
Bixby-Bristow OK
#6
Is there a legal distinction between something marked "Confidential" versus things marked "Classified" or "Top Secret"?
Did you look at the e-mails they are clearly marked classified. Hmm the wikileaks link I posted isn't pulling the right page you have to copy and paste the entire link not just the first part that is orange.

here is one of the e-mails. Read the first line. How do you not know that is classified?

Classified By: Acting Deputy Chief of Mission Marc Wall for Reasons 1.4 (b) and (d) 1. (C) SUMMARY: Responding to concerns raised in ref in meetings on February 26, senior Foreign Ministry and Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry officials confirmed the Japan Drilling Company (JDC) renewed contracts to supply two rigs in Iran's South Pars gas field in 2008 and 2009. They stressed the need to avoid enabling Iran to capitalize on such investments to gain international legitimacy. The Japanese officials said Japan strictly implements UNSC resolutions on Iran and questioned whether the JDC investment is significant enough to trigger the Iran Sanctions Act. The officials also expressed concern that, while Japanese firms have reduced investment in Iran's oil sector in the past, Chinese firms have filled the void and weakened international pressure on Iran. END SUMMARY. 2. (C) Acting Deputy Chief of Mission (ADCM) shared reftel points in separate meetings with Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) Trade Policy Bureau Director General Hideichi Okada and Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) Middle Eastern Affairs Director General Toshiro Suzuki February 26. 3. (C) Okada said Japan has been working closely with the United States on Iran nuclear and related issues and has been strictly imposing measures defined in several UNSC Resolutions on Iran. Okada added that Japan's efforts have occasionally exceeded UNSC requirements, and he referred to Inpex Corporation's reduction of its stake in the Azadegan oil field from 75% to 10%. However, Okada said, following the Japanese company's move, "another country" moved in to take its place. Okada said Japan would therefore appreciate efforts to coordinate with other international actors to make international sanctions more effective. (NOTE: Okada was referring to the China National Petroleum Corporation's reported investment in Azadegan in the fall of 2009). 4. (C) Okada said a preliminary review of the Japan Drilling Company's (JDC) activities in Iran, based on reports that appeared in a February 8 article in Platts, found the company's investment amounts to only 400,000 yen. Okada said JDC entered a contract to supply two rigs to service South Pars in 2003, and the contract was renewed in 2008-2009, information that came to light when the company recently went public. Okada added that JDC appears to be a private company. Okada also asked for additional information on the Iran Sanctions Act's definition of investment, noting that Japan imports crude oil from Iran, but it is difficult to know "where to draw the line." The ADCM stressed the issue is not so much about the letter as the spirit of the law and the risk of enabling Iran to use such deals to resist pressure to comply with international obligations. Okada agreed this is a "very sensitive, important time" in dealing with Iran and said he would look into the matter carefully and make a "best effort" to convey concern to JDC. 5. (C) Separately, DG Suzuki said he became aware of the JDC matter after the Deputy Secretary raised it with Japanese Ambassador Fujisaki earlier in the week, and MOFA is still investigating in coordination with METI. Suzuki said the company has been in operation for some time and established a small joint venture in Iran that operates two rigs, one on a contract renewed in 2008, the other in January 2009. Suzuki said he understands reports of these past transactions are what recently surfaced in the Iranian press and sparked current scrutiny. Suzuki said JDC's investment does not appear to be very large and pledged to continue looking into the matter. 6. (C) Suzuki subsequently echoed Okada's message about Chinese investment in Iran moving into the "vacuum" left by Japan, which he said had caused some embarrassment to parts of the Japanese government and the business community. Suzuki added that Japan's trade volume with Iran has been consistently declining, and Japan continues to strictly implement UNSC resolutions. Suzuki said that while Japan has had some high-level political contact, including the current visit to Japan of Iranian Parliament Speaker Ari Larijani, Japan is maintaining "conservative" economic ties and is wary of Iran's efforts to "choreograph" a positive bilateral relationship. 7. (C) Turning to the Larijani visit, Suzuki described Japanese Deputy Foreign Minister Kenichiro Sasae's hour-long meeting with Larijani the previous day as "intensive" and said Sasae made very clear Japan's position that it would join tougher measures developed in the U.N. and that Iran must accommodate its IAEA obligations as a "starting point" for future discussions. Noting "the Iranians are not dumb," Suzuki said Larijani could in no way mistake Japan's strict position on Iran.
 

Binman4OSU

Legendary Cowboy
Aug 31, 2007
29,124
15,756
1,743
Stupid about AGW!!
#11
There are 3 levels of classified info in the US Govt....this was established by Obama in 2009 by EO 13526

Confidential, Secret and Top Secret. Govt employees can not handle any information which is above their security clearance.

Confidential is the lowest level classification and is given to items which could damage national security if disclosed to the public without proper authorization and includes data which other governments consider restricted information.

Secret is the middle level classification and is given to items which could cause serious damage to national security if publicly disclosed

Top Secret is the highest level of classification and is given to items if disclosed would cause exceptionally grave damage to National Security...only 1.4 million Americans are estimated to hold this level of clearance

Every paragraph of these documents which contains one of these 3 levels of information must have a C, S, or TS marked next to each paragraph designating the content of the paragraph.

If the entire document is considered one of the three levels then each paragraph is not marked but the whole words classifying the document must appear on the top, bottom and both the left and right sides and the back of the documents to classify it as such.

A review by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in January 2008 showed that the previous rules were not being followed consistently throughout all Govt Departments and is believed to be what prompted the EO from Obama in 2009
 

jobob85

Alcoholistic Sage
A/V Subscriber
Mar 11, 2009
21,878
26,860
1,743
#13
When you find the email on how to trade commodity futures for fun and profit, let me know.
 

Deere Poke

I'd rather be in the woods
A/V Subscriber
Feb 13, 2014
10,969
9,743
743
52
Bixby-Bristow OK
#14
There are 3 levels of classified info in the US Govt....this was established by Obama in 2009 by EO 13526

Confidential, Secret and Top Secret. Govt employees can not handle any information which is above their security clearance.

Confidential is the lowest level classification and is given to items which could damage national security if disclosed to the public without proper authorization and includes data which other governments consider restricted information.

Secret is the middle level classification and is given to items which could cause serious damage to national security if publicly disclosed

Top Secret is the highest level of classification and is given to items if disclosed would cause exceptionally grave damage to National Security...only 1.4 million Americans are estimated to hold this level of clearance

Every paragraph of these documents which contains one of these 3 levels of information must have a C, S, or TS marked next to each paragraph designating the content of the paragraph.

If the entire document is considered one of the three levels then each paragraph is not marked but the whole words classifying the document must appear on the top, bottom and both the left and right sides and the back of the documents to classify it as such.

A review by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in January 2008 showed that the previous rules were not being followed consistently throughout all Govt Departments and is believed to be what prompted the EO from Obama in 2009
I've had zero training on how to identify a classified document and I can identify that every one of these I looked at was classified. It appears Hillary is so incompetent having the line classified by whom and under which rules written across the top of a document isn't sufficient to clue her in.

A 7 year old could have ascertained these documents were classified but not the democratic parties presidential nominee. Give me a break.
 

Binman4OSU

Legendary Cowboy
Aug 31, 2007
29,124
15,756
1,743
Stupid about AGW!!
#17
They are all marked classified. Some state the level first then say they are Classified and by whom and why. Others say classified first then put the level. They are all clearly marked classified.
HAHA got to love the Official Government description of what should be marked as Confidential information

  • The information should concern the national security of the U.S. government. If the document was created by a private organization or a state government agency, it may contain classified national security information only if the organization or agency was serving as an agent of the Federal Government. Defense contractors and research laboratories are obvious examples. Also, the information should not concern personal, private, or purely political issues. Over the decades many documents have been stamped “Confidential” not because they would damage national security if released, but to indicate some other type of sensitivity. When in doubt, though, consider the document as classified.

Clear direction right there...Idiots
 

Deere Poke

I'd rather be in the woods
A/V Subscriber
Feb 13, 2014
10,969
9,743
743
52
Bixby-Bristow OK
#18
HAHA got to love the Official Government description of what should be marked as Confidential information

  • The information should concern the national security of the U.S. government. If the document was created by a private organization or a state government agency, it may contain classified national security information only if the organization or agency was serving as an agent of the Federal Government. Defense contractors and research laboratories are obvious examples. Also, the information should not concern personal, private, or purely political issues. Over the decades many documents have been stamped “Confidential” not because they would damage national security if released, but to indicate some other type of sensitivity. When in doubt, though, consider the document as classified.

Clear direction right there...Idiots
I'm going to have to turn you in that is clearly confidential information. :lol:
 

CocoCincinnati

Federal Marshal
Feb 7, 2007
16,728
24,011
1,743
Tulsa, OK
#19
So in a little over 3 months from now, some 70 million or so people will go elect a person to oversee a justice department which will charge them for doing the exact same thing the person they elected was not charged for. America.
 

NYC Poke

The Veil of Ignorance
Sep 24, 2007
38,783
45,668
1,743
#20
I'm going to have to turn you in that is clearly confidential information. :lol:
The FBI went over these with, I think, 164 agents trained on this. 23,00 emails really is not a lot. This is like a week's work for 5 or 10 agents, not 164.

And Comey is a Republican.

Get over it. There's nothing there.