BLOG purpose

This BLOG is for LLNL present and past employees, friends of LLNL and anyone impacted by the privatization of the Lab to express their opinions and expose the waste, wrongdoing and any kind of injustice against employees and taxpayers by LLNS/DOE/NNSA. The opinions stated are personal opinions. Therefore, The BLOG author may or may not agree with them before making the decision to post them. Comments not conforming to BLOG rules are deleted. Blog author serves as a moderator. For new topics or suggestions, email jlscoob5@gmail.com

Sunday, March 20, 2016

Classified document handling guidelines

Will classified document handling guidelines and penalities be superceded when the new President is crowned? 

In particlar will incorrectly transferring 1800 currently classified emails without ADC, review and release as well as up to 25 TS, become the threshold for a enforcing misdemeanor? 

Does this softening apply to othrt misdemeanors as well?

70 comments:

Anonymous said...

Leona Helmsley supposedly stated that "Taxes are for the little people." I would say that Hillary and the Mailgate are in the same mindset - those pesky security rules are for the peons, not for the upper crust.

Anonymous said...

Serious question to the foreign intel service personnel assigned to follow this blog, " Do any State Department personnel follow classification guidelines?".

Anonymous said...

Nyet!

Anonymous said...

Classification guidelines get violated all the time and by everybody.

Anonymous said...

Don't worry Democrats, if Hillary is charged with a Felony, Obama will pardon her. It's just a question of timing.

Anonymous said...

if Hillary is charged with a Felony, Obama will pardon her.

March 20, 2016 at 8:31 PM

So you think the Democrats can run an indicted felon for President? Yeah, that'd be a new high for the Democratic Party. WooHoo! Take that, Bernie!

Anonymous said...

Then when are they going to charge Condolezza Rice and all the other GOP secretaries of state with felonies? Because they all did EXACTLY the same thing, but Faux News didn't bother to report that.

Because it seems to them that "it's OK" if a Republican breaks the law.

Anonymous said...

Then when are they going to charge Condolezza Rice and all the other GOP secretaries of state with felonies? Because they all did EXACTLY the same thing, but Faux News didn't bother to report that.

March 21, 2016 at 9:22 AM

They didn't report it because it isn't true. NBC news reported that Rice did not use email, and the 10 emails (not thousands like Hillary) in question were sent to the personal account of her aids. Unlike Hillary, both Rice and Powell maintained classified email accounts at State.

Anonymous said...

March 20, 2016 at 8:31 PM

"Don't worry Democrats, if Hillary is charged with a Felony, Obama will pardon her. It's just a question of timing."

Why not? gop presidents have a long and illustrious history of doing the very same thing. Of course you knew that.

Anonymous said...

March 21, 2016 at 9:29 AM

You do realize it isn't against the law to use a private email account. It certainly wasn't when Powell did it, when Rice did it and it wasn't when Clinton did it.

The question is whether or not classified was purposely and knowingly mishandled which is a very difficult thing to prove.

All of the documents in question were reclassified (including Powell's) after the fact but of course you already knew that

Anonymous said...

March 20, 2016 at 8:49 PM

What is an indicted felon? I am confused.

Anonymous said...

All of the documents in question were reclassified (including Powell's) after the fact but of course you already knew that

March 21, 2016 at 10:48 AM

Ok, so now we know that you know absolutely nothing about US classification policy. Hint: classification of information is not the same as classification of a document containing that information. It is not unusual for documents to be classified "after the fact." The information they contain is almost never classified "after the fact," especially intel information, and certainly not the TS/SCI and TS/SAP info in Hillary's emails.

Anonymous said...

What is an indicted felon? I am confused.

March 21, 2016 at 10:49 AM

Pretty obvious that it is shorthand for a person charged with a felony who has not yet been convicted.

Anonymous said...

It certainly does happen that topics are considered unclassified and then a new guide comes out for some reason (change of policy, technical advance, etc.), that suddenly makes documents that have been unclassified for years classified even to the TS level. I would not say it is terribly common but it does happen and there are rules and methods for dealing with it. I do not make excuses for Clinton as I do not know what happened and it certainly showed poor judgement, high-handedness and laziness for her to use a private server but if you know the details of what is being investigated you sure know a lot more than anyone else here.

Anonymous said...

March 21, 2016 at 11:21 AM

You are truly ignorant. Hope this helps.

"Derivative classification is the process of determining whether information that is to be included in a document or material has been classified and, if it has, ensuring that it is identified as classified information by marking or similar means. Information is derivatively classified whenever it is extracted, paraphrased, restated, or generated in a new form. Application of classification markings to a document or other material as directed by a security classification guide or other source material is derivative classification. Simply photocopying or otherwise mechanically reproducing classified material is not derivative classification."

Unlike you, I didn't make this up. Read it.

Anonymous said...

March 21, 2016 at 11:29 AM

Oh, short hand. Is that your own special shorthand because I have never heard of such a thing. Is there any other special short hand you would like to share.

Anonymous said...

March 21, 2016 at 11:21 AM

I hope and pray you are not an ADC.

Anonymous said...

March 21, 2016 at 9:29 AM

And Powell destroyed all of the emails that were sent to him on his private email account while secretary of state. That is a violation FOIA law.

Anonymous said...

March 21, 2016 at 11:21 AM

You are truly ignorant. Hope this helps.

"Derivative classification is the process of determining whether information that is to be included in a document or material has been classified and, if it has, ensuring that it is identified as classified information by marking or similar means. Information is derivatively classified whenever it is extracted, paraphrased, restated, or generated in a new form. Application of classification markings to a document or other material as directed by a security classification guide or other source material is derivative classification. Simply photocopying or otherwise mechanically reproducing classified material is not derivative classification."

Unlike you, I didn't make this up. Read it.

March 21, 2016 at 5:17 PM

Uh, OK, you can copy and paste from a training document which has absolutely nothing to do with the subject. I know much more about classification policy than you do, having spent my government career in that field. If you want a response, then here it is: Either 1) the people sending classified information to Hillary were too ignorant of classification rules to recognize it as such or 2) they illegally extracted information to send to her from classified documents via an unsecured network, or 3) they stripped classification markings from documents to send them unsecure in hopes of getting away with it, or because she directed them to. Any way you choose, mishandling classified information (a felony) is a slam dunk for the FBI.

Anonymous said...

Powell's alleged failures do not justify the fact that 1800 classified emails, not properly released were on her personal email server.

Any one of you who did this would be typing from Levenworth. Yet the oblivious c**t ( ..said with particular affection..) dismisses there is no crime.

Again anothet Hillbilly lumpkin. "I guess it all depends on what meaning of is is.

A pox on her... a rapid, incurable pox.

Anonymous said...

A pox on her... a rapid, incurable pox.

March 21, 2016 at 7:33 PM

Actually between her poorly-controlled thyroid problem, and her frequent uncontrollable coughing fits, she may already have the "pox." Given her health problems, and Bill's obvious emaciation and mental decline, I doubt either one of them will survive the first four-year term. Bill shows all the symptoms of early Parkinson's with the attendant digestive problems and Lewy body dementia. Hope she chooses a good VP.

Anonymous said...

Wow, do you live with the Clintons or are you their personal physician?

Anonymous said...

March 21, 2016 at 7:33 PM

They aren't alleged, they are facts. Powell destroyed all of his emails from his private server so now we will never know what he may have said to whom and about what.
What you don't understand is the Secretary of State can classify or declassify anything that is a State Department communication.
1800 RECENTLY classified emails, you forgot that part didn't you They were not classified at the time they were created.

Are people at LLNL this uninformed?

Anonymous said...

March 21, 2016 at 7:27 PM

The Secretary of State can classify or declassify any State Department communication. Slam dunk for the truth.

You don't know anything about classification policy. I just pray to God you aren't an ADC.

Anonymous said...

March 21, 2016 at 7:33 PM

Well, everyone I know at LLNL that has anything to do with classified should be in Levenworth. Everyone I know including myself has mishandled classified at one time or another. What a d**k head ( ..said with particular affection..) .

Anonymous said...

The Secretary of State can classify or declassify any State Department communication. Slam dunk for the truth.

March 22, 2016 at 8:32 AM

1) The State Department cannot declassify information classified by another agency. The TS/SAP and TS/SCI info was, and is, classified by the intel community, so State can't touch it, regardless of who sent or received the "communication."

2) The State Department still classifies the info in the 1800 emails, as evidenced by the redactions made before public release, so obviously neither Hillary nor anyone else at State declassified it.

Anonymous said...

It's all over the Internet, for those who look.
This story reports what the State Department found...


http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/election/article63218372.html#emlnl=Evening_Newsletter

At least 2,079 Clinton emails contain classified material

By Anita Kumar
akumar@mcclatchydc.com

WASHINGTON

At least 2,079 emails that Hillary Clinton sent or received contained classified material, according to the State Department’s final update from its review of more than 30,000 emails.

The State Department released a new batch of 3,871 pages of Clinton’s emails Monday evening in response to a court order. Of those, 261 contain classified information. Most were at the confidential level, which is the lowest level of classification. Twenty-three of them were at the Secret level.

None of Clinton’s emails was marked as classified during her tenure, State Department officials say, but intelligence officials say some material was clearly classified at the time. Her aides also sent and received classified information.

Clinton, running a tough race for the Democratic nomination for president, has been under fire for months for exclusively using personal email routed through a private server while serving as the nation’s top diplomat. The FBI launched an inquiry into the handling of sensitive information after classified information was found in some.

In response to a public records lawsuit, the State Department is releasing Clinton’s emails monthly after partially or entirely redacting any containing sensitive U.S. or foreign government information. It has released 52,402 pages of emails.

According to the Republican National Committee, 2,063 emails were found to contain classified information on “foreign relations or foreign activities of the United States, including confidential sources;” 1,478 were found to contain classified “foreign government information” and 28 emails were found to contain classified information on “intelligence activities (including covert action), intelligence sources or methods, or cryptology;” and 4 emails were found to contain classified information on “vulnerabilities or capabilities of systems, installations, infrastructures, projects, plans, or protection services relating to the national security.”

Three weeks ago, the State Department designated 22 of previously reviewed emails “top secret” – the first time it has deemed any of Clinton’s emails to be classified at a level that can cause “exceptionally grave” damage to national security if disclosed. The 22 emails will not be released to the public. The department is releasing other classified emails with some redactions.

Clinton’s campaign has refuted the “top secret” designation and demanded that all of Clinton’s emails be released to the public.

The State Department inspector general said recently he had discovered that former Secretary of State Colin Powell and former Secretary Condoleezza Rice’s aides had classified information in their personal emails. Powell has rejected those allegations.

The State Department had been ordered by a federal judge to release all of Clinton’s emails in January in response to a public records lawsuit. But the State Department said it would be unable to meet that deadline. Monday’s release was the 14th and final release.

Is America sick of Hillary's emails?

Not all of America is sick of the ongoing investigations into Hillary Clinton. Almost half of registered voters think the Benghazi investigation should continue. However, America is not split as cleanly on her use of a private email server. Lee Meringoff of the Marist Institute explains. (Marist)


Anita Kumar: 202-383-6017, @anitakumar01

Anonymous said...

The Secretary of State determines classification levels of everything generated by the state department, not the "intel community".

The FBI, not State, reclassified a few emails to TS and S, not State.

State can reclassify anything it creates or generates which means it can declassify it as well. In fact, that has and does happen as matter of record.

Anonymous said...

The FBI didn't "reclassify" anything. Their agents didn't even have the clearance to review the emails containing TS/SCI and TS/SAP information classified by the Intel community. Go back and listen to the Congressional testimony, and public statements, of Clapper and the other Intel Directors. The classification of documents that are generated by State, that contain information classified by the Intel community, is solely determined by the Intel community. Document classification is not the same as information classification. Get a clue. Clinton long-time advisor Sidney Blumenthal sent her emails, some text of which was taken verbatim from TS/SCI reports, even though Blumenthal has no security clearance. How did that happen??

Anonymous said...

The FBI asked that classifications be changed and the classifications were changed. It is a matter of public record. Get back to us after you do some more research.

Anonymous said...

The FBI asked that classifications be changed and the classifications were changed. It is a matter of public record.

March 22, 2016 at 7:58 PM

Huh? When did the FBI ask, and who did they ask?? Citations, please, or just admit you are in the tank for Hillary.

Anonymous said...

Obfuscation. The c**t deserves jail if she doesn't catch a well deserved 30-06 fromna Bejghazi victim relative on the way.

Anonymous said...

Youband I both would be In Levenworth for doingbwhatbshe did,

Anonymous said...

So do it pisshead. Transcribe 100 confidential emails ver batim without review and realese and send them to your home address. Sound really stupid? Illegal? She did it. Over and over. Stupid broad. Deserves the strap.

Anonymous said...

And whos the dipwad that admits to many, thousands of deliberate security violations? You'vd earned the cell next to the beast.

Anonymous said...

Wait a minute here. Can anyone site a report on these releases? For example how could someone without any clearances (Blumenthal mentioned above) send information from a TS report? Can't happen as far as I can see. Not even the Sec of State can get someone into a SCIF without a clearance to see a TS report. Clinton has said that some of the reports that were classified were from newspapers and were later classified. This would seem to me to be the only way an uncleared person could send parts of a TS document to her: someone over classified a newspaper report. True it is important not to verify a report that a newspaper gets about something classified, but no one has said that was what happened either. Not a Hillary supporter but calling her a "c**t" etc. just makes me think you hate women in authority. She is very polarizing and arrogant and should never have used her own rather than government email but that doesn't make your accusations correct or that it is OK to refer to any woman you dislike that way. Perhaps you are a d**k or worse. Again, a citation would help.

Anonymous said...

Clinton has said that some of the reports that were classified were from newspapers and were later classified. This would seem to me to be the only way an uncleared person could send parts of a TS document to her...

March 23, 2016 at 1:56 PM

Are you really that naive?? Blumenthal had a TS clearance for many years, and has many friends in the intel community. Someone said something they shouldn't have, and even gave him a document to read that they shouldn't have, because he is an influential friend who can get him a very lucrative job if Hillary gets elected to something later. It happens all the time at high government levels. The Clintons and their high-level friends are not known for believing the rules apply to them. You sound like a fine little law-abiding gentleman; just not a very bright one.

Anonymous said...

You sound like a fine little liar who does not know what you are talking about. Do you think the FBI doesn't know all about this. Are you that naive?

Anonymous said...

March 23, 2016 at 8:38 PM

If course I know the FBI knows about it, that was my source. In any case, I am not naive I just know that the FBI recommendation for an indictment, coming soon, will be squashed by the Justice Dept. at the insistence of Obama, and Hillary will skate. We all will then become less than we were, morally and in the eyes of the world.

Anonymous said...

If Blumenthal sent TS to Clinton then he is the one who will be indicted.

Since you seem to have all of the inside scoop can you tell us how much of the information you are sharing with us is classified? If the FBI knew you were sharing this special information I am sure they would like to talk to you. I don't believe anything you say actually. You somehow have the inside dope right from the FBI? You are full of baloney.

The FBI has to inform anyone they are investigating that they are a target. Clinton isn't a target.

"If course I know the FBI knows about it, that was my source", what a bunch of hot gas. This penchant of the gop ding dongs to make up "facts" to fit their narrative is really quite sad.

Sober up before you post next time, please?

Anonymous said...

March 22, 2016 at 9:16 PM

Can I polish my skills on you d**k head? I am reporting your comment to the secret service. Your failed threat is a felony.

Anonymous said...

veiled threat, not failed threat. Your comment has been sent. Have a nice day d**k head.

Anonymous said...

March 22, 2016 at 8:47 PM

I'm not doing research for you. Do it yourself.

Anonymous said...

I'm not doing research for you. Do it yourself.

March 24, 2016 at 4:51 PM

So you admit you didn't actually do any research before you posted, and were just spouting off nonsense. Thought so.

Anonymous said...

The FBI has to inform anyone they are investigating that they are a target.

March 24, 2016 at 4:45 PM

Really? That's interesting and probably illegal. Just think about that statement, and how absurd that would be, to inform an organized crime figure, for example, so that he could immediately start hiding his activities. Please provide an official source (not Hillary)for that ridiculous statement.

Anonymous said...

Yeah, and also imagine the FBI informing terrorist suspects in the US that they are "targets"! HaHaHaHa!! Like that would make sure they'd stick around a cooperate!! What a jerk.

Anonymous said...

March 24, 2016 at 7:34 PM, March 24, 2016 at 8:51 PM

What agencies investigate white-collar crime?
White-collar offenses often fall under federal jurisdiction. If personnel from one or more of the following federal agencies have questioned you, you may be the target of a white-collar crime investigation: * Federal Bureau of Investigation * Securities and Exchange Commission * Internal Revenue Service * United States Treasury * United States Postal Service * U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service

What's a target letter?
A target letter is a letter that a federal prosecutor sends to inform someone that he or she is the target of a federal investigation. The letter informs the recipient of the nature of the charges being investigated (e.g. insider trading, wire fraud, etc.).

Target letters are sometimes sent during the target or pre-indictment phase of a white-collar crime investigation. As might be expected, a target letter advises the recipient of his or her rights, in particular the right to counsel and the right not to testify. If you receive a target letter, you are likely going to be indicted.

What does a target letter look like?
The following is a sample target letter taken from the United States Attorney's Manual:

This letter is supplied to a witness scheduled to appear before the federal Grand Jury in order to provide helpful background information about the Grand Jury. The Grand Jury consists of from sixteen to twenty-three persons from the District of _. It is their responsibility to inquire into federal crimes which may have been committed in this District. As a Grand Jury witness you will be asked to testify and answer questions, and to produce records and documents. Only the members of the Grand Jury, attorneys for the United States and a stenographer are permitted in the Grand Jury room while you testify. We advise you that the Grand Jury is conducting an investigation of possible violations of federal criminal laws involving, but not necessarily limited to *. You are advised that the destruction or alteration of any document required to be produced before the grand jury constitutes serious violation of federal law, including but not limited to Obstruction of Justice. You are advised that you are a target of the Grand Jury's investigation. You may refuse to answer any question if a truthful answer to the question would tend to incriminate you. Anything that you do or say may be used against you in a subsequent legal proceeding. If you have retained counsel, who represents you personally, the Grand Jury will permit you a reasonable opportunity to step outside the Grand Jury room and confer with counsel if you desire.

So please tell us what is it like to live in a world of your own creation? You are both remarkably ignorant. Obviously two of LLNL's best and brightest. You probably think Elvis is still alive too, don't you? You both represent the typical repub. No curiosity and a complete lack of understanding of the world around them.

Anonymous said...

I don't make this stuff up

There's no law that says federal prosecutors have to warn criminal suspects before they indict them. The practice of informing "targets" of their status is a long-standing but flexible government policy. According to the United States Attorneys' Manual, "the prosecutor, in appropriate cases, is encouraged to notify [a target] a reasonable time before seeking an indictment."

Anonymous said...

STANDARD 1.4 VICTIMS, POTENTIAL WITNESSES, AND TARGETS DURING THE INVESTIGATIVE PROCESS

(a) Throughout the course of the investigation as new information emerges, the prosecutor should reevaluate:

(i) judgments or beliefs as to the culpability or status of persons or entities identified as “witnesses,” “victims,” “subjects” and “targets,” and recognize that the status of such persons or entities may change; and

(ii) the veracity of witnesses and confidential informants and assess the accuracy and completeness of the information that each provides.

(b) Upon request and if known, the prosecutor should inform a person or the person’s counsel, whether the person is considered to be a target, subject, witness or victim, including whether their status has changed, unless doing so would compromise a continuing investigation.

Do want more?

Anonymous said...

Wow, this thread is populated by some real Google Masters!

Masters that is, of irrelevant details. Hint: "...unless doing so would compromise a continuing investigation."

Anonymous said...

March 25, 2016 at 10:13 AM

So, by your logic with all of the reporting on the subject, all of the speculation on the subject, all of the talking heads making their individual surmise on the subject, all of the articles on both the internet and in the press on the subject ad infinitum month after month, the FBI wouldn't inform Clinton that she was a target of investigation because it would compromise a continuing investigation? She has not been told she is a target because she isn't a target. Accept it.

We are born ignorant and we spent the rest of our lives learning about the world around us. Some learn more, some learn less. Which one are you? Hint: It begins with "L".

Tell Elvis hi when you see him bubba.

Anonymous said...

Actually, I think both of you were born smarter than you are now!

Anonymous said...

Clinton's fate will be a matter of public record. If the FBI thinks indictment is justified,and the Justice Dept. quashes it (probably on Obama's orders), then FBI sources have already said they will go public, leaking what the evidence actually is. I personally can't wait for that to happen. Think of it; either the DoJ goes for an indictment, or the FBI leaks what they have on Hillary. The fools that believe that Hillary "is not a target" are whistling past the graveyard. Comey is not a stooge for Lynch or Obama.

Anonymous said...

"the FBI wouldn't inform Clinton that she was a target of investigation because it would compromise a continuing investigation?"

That part you got correct. The first clue the FBI will give you that you should be destroying any additional evidence is handcuffs.

Anonymous said...

And since that never happened then we know nothing ever will. Well put.

Anonymous said...

March 30, 2016 at 10:15 PM

Assuming facts not in evidence.

Anonymous said...

Facts

Hasn't been indicted. no grand jury. fbi has said she is not target of investigation. investigation is wrapping up.

looks bad for the gop.
















Anonymous said...

And of course, Hillary is 52%/31% negative/positive, and is seen by a large majority as "not honest or trustworthy." And before you come back with Trump or Cruz, note that Kasich is the only actual Republican still running for President, and is also the only one who beats Clinton one-on-one in November.

Anonymous said...

He isn't going to be your nominee.

Anonymous said...

So what? He is smarter, more experienced, more honest, and more likeable than yours. That's what counts. Unless you are are uninterested in those qualities in the person you vote for, and winning is everything for you (reminds me of someone else on this blog).

Anonymous said...


March 31, 2016 at 7:33 PM

If you don't like what is written here,DON'T READ IT. What a buffoon. You sound like a trumpster: You don't want to here from anyone who has an opinion that doesn't align with your own.

Anonymous said...

March 31, 2016 at 5:01 PM

More honest? Are you serious? Would you like me to list all of the lies chump has told in the last 12 months? Even better, why don't you list them.

You are smoking some poor quality rubber bands.

Anonymous said...

Would you like me to list all of the lies chump has told in the last 12 months?

April 1, 2016 at 8:44 AM

Are you talking about Trump? Because March 31, 2016 at 5:01 PM was talking about Kasich. If that's who you meant, what lies??

Anonymous said...

Americans are soo dumb, it's hard to listen to them.

Voi La
Bay Area liaison
Technical Intelligence Directorate
San Francisco Consulate
PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA, LLC.

Anonymous said...

So don't, Chink.

Anonymous said...

Another Trump follower can't resist exposing his bigotry.

Anonymous said...

Americans are soo dumb, it's hard to listen to them.

April 1, 2016 at 7:24 PM

Yup, sounds like bigotry to me..

Anonymous said...

Yup, haven't a clue what bigotry is. Look it up.

Anonymous said...

Bigot: a person who strongly and unfairly dislikes other people, ideas, etc. : a bigoted person; especially : a person who hates or refuses to accept the members of a particular group (such as a racial or religious group) (M-W)

Yup: "Americans are soo dumb.." Matches pretty well.

Anonymous said...

Ah. Look at the entry date.

Blog Archive