Page 1 of 1

State Dept. intensifies email probe of Hillary Clinton’s former aides

Posted: 29 Sep 2019, 11:40
by Zmeselo


State Dept. intensifies email probe of Hillary Clinton’s former aides


Former secretary of state Hillary Clinton speaks at Georgetown University on Friday. (Win Mcnamee/Getty Images)

By Greg Miller, Greg Jaffe and Karoun Demirjian


https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... story.html

September 28

The Trump administration is investigating the email records of dozens of current and former senior State Department officials who sent messages to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email, reviving a politically toxic matter that overshadowed the 2016 election, current and former officials said.

As many as 130 officials have been contacted in recent weeks by State Department investigators — a list that includes senior officials who reported directly to Clinton as well as others in lower-level jobs whose emails were at some point relayed to her inbox, said current and former State Department officials. Those targeted were notified that emails they sent years ago have been retroactively classified and now constitute potential security violations, according to letters reviewed by The Washington Post.

In virtually all of the cases, potentially sensitive information, now recategorized as “classified,” was sent to Clinton’s unsecure inbox.

State Department investigators began contacting the former officials about 18 months ago, after President Trump’s election, and then seemed to drop the effort before picking it up in August, officials said.

Senior State Department officials said that they are following standard protocol in an investigation that began during the latter days of the Obama administration and is nearing completion.
This has nothing to do with who is in the White House,
said a senior State Department official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about an ongoing probe.
This is about the time it took to go through millions of emails, which is about 3½ years.

Trump speaks about Clinton's emails during meeting w
In a Sept. 25 meeting with Ukraine's president, President Trump was asked a question about a 2016 probe into former secretary of state Hillary Clinton's emails. (The Washington Post)


To many of those under scrutiny, including some of the Democratic Party’s top foreign policy experts, the recent flurry of activity surrounding the Clinton email case represents a new front on which the Trump administration could be accused of employing the powers of the executive branch against perceived political adversaries.

The existence of the probe follows revelations that the president used multiple levers of his office to pressure the leader of Ukraine to pursue investigations that Trump hoped would produce damaging information about Democrats, including potential presidential rival Joe Biden.

State Department officials vigorously denied there was any political motivation behind their actions, and said that the reviews of retroactively classified emails were conducted by career bureaucrats who did not know the names of the subjects being investigated.
The process is set up in a manner to completely avoid any appearance of political bias,
said a second senior State Department official, who was speaking on condition of anonymity to describe the mechanics of an internal probe.

Clinton’s use of a private email server during her term as secretary triggered multiple investigations by the State Department, the FBI and Congress. The bureau did not accuse her of breaking the law, but she blamed the FBI’s unusual public handling of the matter as a major factor in her loss in the 2016 election.
I’d like to think that this is just routine, but something strange is going on,
said Jeffrey Feltman, a former assistant secretary for Near East Affairs. In early 2018 Feltman received a letter informing him that a half dozen of his messages included classified information. Then a few weeks ago he was found culpable for more than 50 emails that contained classified information.
A couple of the emails cited by State as problems were sent after my May 2012 retirement, when I was already working for the United Nations,
he said.

A former senior U.S. official familiar with the email investigation described it as a way for Republicans
to keep the Clinton email issue alive.
The former official said the probe was
a way to tarnish a whole bunch of Democratic foreign policy people
and discourage if not prevent them from returning to government service.

The probe is being carried out by investigators from the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security. Republican lawmakers, led by Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), have been pressing Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to complete the review of classified information sent to Clinton’s private emails and report back to Congress.

State Department officials said they were bound by law to adjudicate any violations.

Former Obama administration officials, however, described the probe as a remarkably aggressive crackdown by an administration with its own troubled record of handling classified material. Trump has improperly disclosed classified information to foreign officials and used phones that national security officials warned were vulnerable to foreign surveillance, according to current and former officials.

At the same time, Trump overrode the concerns of his former White House chief of staff and U.S. intelligence officials to give his son-in-law and senior White House adviser Jared Kushner access to highly classified materials, officials said.

The list of State officials being questioned includes prominent ambassadors and assistant secretaries of state responsible for U.S. policy in the Middle East, Europe and Central Asia. But it also includes dozens of current and former career bureaucrats who served as conduits for outside officials trying to get important messages to Clinton.

In most cases the bureaucrats and political appointees didn’t send the emails directly to Clinton, but passed them to William Burns, who served as deputy secretary of state, or Jake Sullivan, the former director of policy planning at the State Department. Burns and Sullivan then forwarded the messages to Clinton’s private email.

Burns and Sullivan declined to comment. Other officials spoke on the condition of anonymity, citing the sensitivity of the matter and concern for retaliation.

Those targeted began receiving letters in August, saying,
You have been identified as possibly bearing some culpability
in supposedly newly uncovered “security incidents,” according to a copy of one letter obtained by The Washington Post.

In many cases, the incidents appear to center on the sending of information attributed to foreign officials, including summaries of phone conversations with foreign diplomats — a routine occurrence among State Department employees.

There is no indication in any of the materials reviewed by The Post that the emails under scrutiny contained sensitive information about classified U.S. initiatives or programs. In one case, a former official was asked to explain dozens of messages dating back to 2009 that contained messages that foreign officials wanted relayed rapidly to Washington at a time when U.S. Foreign Service officers were equipped with BlackBerrys and other devices that were not capable of sending classified transmissions. The messages came in through “regular email” and then were forwarded through official — though unclassified — State Department channels.

In other instances officials were relaying email summaries of time-sensitive conversations with foreign leaders conducted over unclassified cellphones.

Those communications are now being “upclassified” or “reclassified,” according to several officials involved in the investigation, meaning that they have been retroactively assessed to contain material so sensitive that they should have been sent only on State Department classified systems.

Many of those who have been targeted by the probe and found “not culpable,” described it as an effort to harass diplomats for the routine conduct of their job.
It is such an obscene abuse of power and time involving so many people for so many years,
one former U.S. official said of the inquiry.
This has just sucked up people’s lives for years and years.
Several of those who have been questioned said that the State Department Bureau of Diplomatic Security investigators made it clear that they were pursuing the matter reluctantly, and under external pressure.

One official said the investigators were apologetic:
They realize how absurd it is.
Those targeted do not appear to be in jeopardy of criminal prosecution — the FBI investigation of the Clinton email case has been closed since before the 2016 election. But many fear the results of the probe will damage their reputations and complicate their ability to maintain security clearances.

Several said they have received follow-on letters saying that investigators
determined that the [security] incident is valid,
but that they did not “bear any individual culpability” — an ambiguous designation that could pose complications in future background checks and confirmation hearings.
It gives them a way to hassle pretty much anyone,
a former senior U.S. official said.

In many instances, the officials said that it had been so long since they had been questioned that they assumed the email case had been resolved, even though Trump routinely rails about the Clinton email issue.

Trump raised the issue as recently as Wednesday, calling it “one of the great crimes committed” by his 2016 opponent.

Trump faces impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives in the wake of a whistleblower report by a CIA officer exposing Trump’s efforts on a July 25 call to pressure the leader of Ukraine to pursue investigations that Trump hoped would generate embarrassing material about Biden.

Trump’s request for that “favor” came as his administration was withholding hundreds of millions of dollars in aid from Kiev and dangling a potential White House visit for Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky.

The FBI began examining Clinton’s use of a private email server in July 2015, based on a referral from the intelligence community inspector general. Their investigation sought to determine whether anyone — especially the former secretary of state — had broken federal law in discussing classified information on unclassified systems.

Investigators reviewed 30,000 emails that Clinton turned back over to the State Department after leaving others, and took other steps, including tracking down computers and other devices Clinton had used, to find thousands more. Their investigation included examinations of the archived government accounts of people who had been in government at the same time as Clinton and who might have naturally exchanged messages with her.

Although Clinton was considered the biggest player in the investigation, she was never formally labeled a subject or target, and investigators also considered the conduct of her top aides and colleagues.

About a year later, in July 2016, then-FBI Director James B. Comey announced he was recommending the case be closed with no charges. He said Clinton’s and her aides’ handling of classified information was “extremely careless,” but not such that it warranted criminal charges. He suggested those who did wrong could face job-related consequences, and took a broad swipe at the State Department, saying its employees’ use of unclassified email systems was
generally lacking in the kind of care for classified information found elsewhere in the government,
according to his prepared remarks.

A few months later, the bureau resumed the inquiry after discovering more of Clinton’s correspondence with a top aide on a device investigators were examining in a separate investigation of the aide’s husband. But they found nothing to change their conclusion and closed the case again just before the 2016 election.

Paul Sonne, Shane Harris, Matt Zapotosky and Julie Tate contributed to this report.

Greg Jaffe is a national political reporter for The Washington Post, where he has been since March 2009. Previously, he covered the White House, foreign policy and the U.S. military for The Post.

Karoun Demirjian is a congressional reporter covering national security, including defense, foreign policy, intelligence and matters concerning the judiciary. She was previously a correspondent based in The Post's bureau in Moscow.

Re: State Dept. intensifies email probe of Hillary Clinton’s former aides

Posted: 29 Sep 2019, 16:05
by pastlast
SHUT UP NIGGGGER and KNOW YOUR PLACE! NIGGGER NOW GO BOOTLICK WHITEMAN BOOTS!...NIGGGGER!!! "You're DIRT" You're not even a nigggger, you're an African" Even WORST...STUPID PFDJ clown!...LOL


Zmeselo wrote:
29 Sep 2019, 11:40


State Dept. intensifies email probe of Hillary Clinton’s former aides


Former secretary of state Hillary Clinton speaks at Georgetown University on Friday. (Win Mcnamee/Getty Images)

By Greg Miller, Greg Jaffe and Karoun Demirjian


https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... story.html

September 28

The Trump administration is investigating the email records of dozens of current and former senior State Department officials who sent messages to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email, reviving a politically toxic matter that overshadowed the 2016 election, current and former officials said.

As many as 130 officials have been contacted in recent weeks by State Department investigators — a list that includes senior officials who reported directly to Clinton as well as others in lower-level jobs whose emails were at some point relayed to her inbox, said current and former State Department officials. Those targeted were notified that emails they sent years ago have been retroactively classified and now constitute potential security violations, according to letters reviewed by The Washington Post.

In virtually all of the cases, potentially sensitive information, now recategorized as “classified,” was sent to Clinton’s unsecure inbox.

State Department investigators began contacting the former officials about 18 months ago, after President Trump’s election, and then seemed to drop the effort before picking it up in August, officials said.

Senior State Department officials said that they are following standard protocol in an investigation that began during the latter days of the Obama administration and is nearing completion.
This has nothing to do with who is in the White House,
said a senior State Department official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about an ongoing probe.
This is about the time it took to go through millions of emails, which is about 3½ years.

Trump speaks about Clinton's emails during meeting w
In a Sept. 25 meeting with Ukraine's president, President Trump was asked a question about a 2016 probe into former secretary of state Hillary Clinton's emails. (The Washington Post)


To many of those under scrutiny, including some of the Democratic Party’s top foreign policy experts, the recent flurry of activity surrounding the Clinton email case represents a new front on which the Trump administration could be accused of employing the powers of the executive branch against perceived political adversaries.

The existence of the probe follows revelations that the president used multiple levers of his office to pressure the leader of Ukraine to pursue investigations that Trump hoped would produce damaging information about Democrats, including potential presidential rival Joe Biden.

State Department officials vigorously denied there was any political motivation behind their actions, and said that the reviews of retroactively classified emails were conducted by career bureaucrats who did not know the names of the subjects being investigated.
The process is set up in a manner to completely avoid any appearance of political bias,
said a second senior State Department official, who was speaking on condition of anonymity to describe the mechanics of an internal probe.

Clinton’s use of a private email server during her term as secretary triggered multiple investigations by the State Department, the FBI and Congress. The bureau did not accuse her of breaking the law, but she blamed the FBI’s unusual public handling of the matter as a major factor in her loss in the 2016 election.
I’d like to think that this is just routine, but something strange is going on,
said Jeffrey Feltman, a former assistant secretary for Near East Affairs. In early 2018 Feltman received a letter informing him that a half dozen of his messages included classified information. Then a few weeks ago he was found culpable for more than 50 emails that contained classified information.
A couple of the emails cited by State as problems were sent after my May 2012 retirement, when I was already working for the United Nations,
he said.

A former senior U.S. official familiar with the email investigation described it as a way for Republicans
to keep the Clinton email issue alive.
The former official said the probe was
a way to tarnish a whole bunch of Democratic foreign policy people
and discourage if not prevent them from returning to government service.

The probe is being carried out by investigators from the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security. Republican lawmakers, led by Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), have been pressing Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to complete the review of classified information sent to Clinton’s private emails and report back to Congress.

State Department officials said they were bound by law to adjudicate any violations.

Former Obama administration officials, however, described the probe as a remarkably aggressive crackdown by an administration with its own troubled record of handling classified material. Trump has improperly disclosed classified information to foreign officials and used phones that national security officials warned were vulnerable to foreign surveillance, according to current and former officials.

At the same time, Trump overrode the concerns of his former White House chief of staff and U.S. intelligence officials to give his son-in-law and senior White House adviser Jared Kushner access to highly classified materials, officials said.

The list of State officials being questioned includes prominent ambassadors and assistant secretaries of state responsible for U.S. policy in the Middle East, Europe and Central Asia. But it also includes dozens of current and former career bureaucrats who served as conduits for outside officials trying to get important messages to Clinton.

In most cases the bureaucrats and political appointees didn’t send the emails directly to Clinton, but passed them to William Burns, who served as deputy secretary of state, or Jake Sullivan, the former director of policy planning at the State Department. Burns and Sullivan then forwarded the messages to Clinton’s private email.

Burns and Sullivan declined to comment. Other officials spoke on the condition of anonymity, citing the sensitivity of the matter and concern for retaliation.

Those targeted began receiving letters in August, saying,
You have been identified as possibly bearing some culpability
in supposedly newly uncovered “security incidents,” according to a copy of one letter obtained by The Washington Post.

In many cases, the incidents appear to center on the sending of information attributed to foreign officials, including summaries of phone conversations with foreign diplomats — a routine occurrence among State Department employees.

There is no indication in any of the materials reviewed by The Post that the emails under scrutiny contained sensitive information about classified U.S. initiatives or programs. In one case, a former official was asked to explain dozens of messages dating back to 2009 that contained messages that foreign officials wanted relayed rapidly to Washington at a time when U.S. Foreign Service officers were equipped with BlackBerrys and other devices that were not capable of sending classified transmissions. The messages came in through “regular email” and then were forwarded through official — though unclassified — State Department channels.

In other instances officials were relaying email summaries of time-sensitive conversations with foreign leaders conducted over unclassified cellphones.

Those communications are now being “upclassified” or “reclassified,” according to several officials involved in the investigation, meaning that they have been retroactively assessed to contain material so sensitive that they should have been sent only on State Department classified systems.

Many of those who have been targeted by the probe and found “not culpable,” described it as an effort to harass diplomats for the routine conduct of their job.
It is such an obscene abuse of power and time involving so many people for so many years,
one former U.S. official said of the inquiry.
This has just sucked up people’s lives for years and years.
Several of those who have been questioned said that the State Department Bureau of Diplomatic Security investigators made it clear that they were pursuing the matter reluctantly, and under external pressure.

One official said the investigators were apologetic:
They realize how absurd it is.
Those targeted do not appear to be in jeopardy of criminal prosecution — the FBI investigation of the Clinton email case has been closed since before the 2016 election. But many fear the results of the probe will damage their reputations and complicate their ability to maintain security clearances.

Several said they have received follow-on letters saying that investigators
determined that the [security] incident is valid,
but that they did not “bear any individual culpability” — an ambiguous designation that could pose complications in future background checks and confirmation hearings.
It gives them a way to hassle pretty much anyone,
a former senior U.S. official said.

In many instances, the officials said that it had been so long since they had been questioned that they assumed the email case had been resolved, even though Trump routinely rails about the Clinton email issue.

Trump raised the issue as recently as Wednesday, calling it “one of the great crimes committed” by his 2016 opponent.

Trump faces impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives in the wake of a whistleblower report by a CIA officer exposing Trump’s efforts on a July 25 call to pressure the leader of Ukraine to pursue investigations that Trump hoped would generate embarrassing material about Biden.

Trump’s request for that “favor” came as his administration was withholding hundreds of millions of dollars in aid from Kiev and dangling a potential White House visit for Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky.

The FBI began examining Clinton’s use of a private email server in July 2015, based on a referral from the intelligence community inspector general. Their investigation sought to determine whether anyone — especially the former secretary of state — had broken federal law in discussing classified information on unclassified systems.

Investigators reviewed 30,000 emails that Clinton turned back over to the State Department after leaving others, and took other steps, including tracking down computers and other devices Clinton had used, to find thousands more. Their investigation included examinations of the archived government accounts of people who had been in government at the same time as Clinton and who might have naturally exchanged messages with her.

Although Clinton was considered the biggest player in the investigation, she was never formally labeled a subject or target, and investigators also considered the conduct of her top aides and colleagues.

About a year later, in July 2016, then-FBI Director James B. Comey announced he was recommending the case be closed with no charges. He said Clinton’s and her aides’ handling of classified information was “extremely careless,” but not such that it warranted criminal charges. He suggested those who did wrong could face job-related consequences, and took a broad swipe at the State Department, saying its employees’ use of unclassified email systems was
generally lacking in the kind of care for classified information found elsewhere in the government,
according to his prepared remarks.

A few months later, the bureau resumed the inquiry after discovering more of Clinton’s correspondence with a top aide on a device investigators were examining in a separate investigation of the aide’s husband. But they found nothing to change their conclusion and closed the case again just before the 2016 election.

Paul Sonne, Shane Harris, Matt Zapotosky and Julie Tate contributed to this report.

Greg Jaffe is a national political reporter for The Washington Post, where he has been since March 2009. Previously, he covered the White House, foreign policy and the U.S. military for The Post.

Karoun Demirjian is a congressional reporter covering national security, including defense, foreign policy, intelligence and matters concerning the judiciary. She was previously a correspondent based in The Post's bureau in Moscow.

Re: State Dept. intensifies email probe of Hillary Clinton’s former aides

Posted: 29 Sep 2019, 17:06
by Zmeselo
Do they look like niggérs or Africans to you, mr. baboon?



Greg Miller, the Washington Post


Greg Jaffe, the Washington Post
pastlast wrote:
29 Sep 2019, 16:05
SHUT UP NIGGGGER and KNOW YOUR PLACE! NIGGGER NOW GO BOOTLICK WHITEMAN BOOTS!...NIGGGGER!!! "You're DIRT" You're not even a nigggger, you're an African" Even WORST...STUPID PFDJ clown!...LOL


Zmeselo wrote:
29 Sep 2019, 11:40


State Dept. intensifies email probe of Hillary Clinton’s former aides


Former secretary of state Hillary Clinton speaks at Georgetown University on Friday. (Win Mcnamee/Getty Images)

By Greg Miller, Greg Jaffe and Karoun Demirjian


https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... story.html

September 28

The Trump administration is investigating the email records of dozens of current and former senior State Department officials who sent messages to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email, reviving a politically toxic matter that overshadowed the 2016 election, current and former officials said.

As many as 130 officials have been contacted in recent weeks by State Department investigators — a list that includes senior officials who reported directly to Clinton as well as others in lower-level jobs whose emails were at some point relayed to her inbox, said current and former State Department officials. Those targeted were notified that emails they sent years ago have been retroactively classified and now constitute potential security violations, according to letters reviewed by The Washington Post.

In virtually all of the cases, potentially sensitive information, now recategorized as “classified,” was sent to Clinton’s unsecure inbox.

State Department investigators began contacting the former officials about 18 months ago, after President Trump’s election, and then seemed to drop the effort before picking it up in August, officials said.

Senior State Department officials said that they are following standard protocol in an investigation that began during the latter days of the Obama administration and is nearing completion.
This has nothing to do with who is in the White House,
said a senior State Department official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about an ongoing probe.
This is about the time it took to go through millions of emails, which is about 3½ years.

Trump speaks about Clinton's emails during meeting w
In a Sept. 25 meeting with Ukraine's president, President Trump was asked a question about a 2016 probe into former secretary of state Hillary Clinton's emails. (The Washington Post)


To many of those under scrutiny, including some of the Democratic Party’s top foreign policy experts, the recent flurry of activity surrounding the Clinton email case represents a new front on which the Trump administration could be accused of employing the powers of the executive branch against perceived political adversaries.

The existence of the probe follows revelations that the president used multiple levers of his office to pressure the leader of Ukraine to pursue investigations that Trump hoped would produce damaging information about Democrats, including potential presidential rival Joe Biden.

State Department officials vigorously denied there was any political motivation behind their actions, and said that the reviews of retroactively classified emails were conducted by career bureaucrats who did not know the names of the subjects being investigated.
The process is set up in a manner to completely avoid any appearance of political bias,
said a second senior State Department official, who was speaking on condition of anonymity to describe the mechanics of an internal probe.

Clinton’s use of a private email server during her term as secretary triggered multiple investigations by the State Department, the FBI and Congress. The bureau did not accuse her of breaking the law, but she blamed the FBI’s unusual public handling of the matter as a major factor in her loss in the 2016 election.
I’d like to think that this is just routine, but something strange is going on,
said Jeffrey Feltman, a former assistant secretary for Near East Affairs. In early 2018 Feltman received a letter informing him that a half dozen of his messages included classified information. Then a few weeks ago he was found culpable for more than 50 emails that contained classified information.
A couple of the emails cited by State as problems were sent after my May 2012 retirement, when I was already working for the United Nations,
he said.

A former senior U.S. official familiar with the email investigation described it as a way for Republicans
to keep the Clinton email issue alive.
The former official said the probe was
a way to tarnish a whole bunch of Democratic foreign policy people
and discourage if not prevent them from returning to government service.

The probe is being carried out by investigators from the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security. Republican lawmakers, led by Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), have been pressing Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to complete the review of classified information sent to Clinton’s private emails and report back to Congress.

State Department officials said they were bound by law to adjudicate any violations.

Former Obama administration officials, however, described the probe as a remarkably aggressive crackdown by an administration with its own troubled record of handling classified material. Trump has improperly disclosed classified information to foreign officials and used phones that national security officials warned were vulnerable to foreign surveillance, according to current and former officials.

At the same time, Trump overrode the concerns of his former White House chief of staff and U.S. intelligence officials to give his son-in-law and senior White House adviser Jared Kushner access to highly classified materials, officials said.

The list of State officials being questioned includes prominent ambassadors and assistant secretaries of state responsible for U.S. policy in the Middle East, Europe and Central Asia. But it also includes dozens of current and former career bureaucrats who served as conduits for outside officials trying to get important messages to Clinton.

In most cases the bureaucrats and political appointees didn’t send the emails directly to Clinton, but passed them to William Burns, who served as deputy secretary of state, or Jake Sullivan, the former director of policy planning at the State Department. Burns and Sullivan then forwarded the messages to Clinton’s private email.

Burns and Sullivan declined to comment. Other officials spoke on the condition of anonymity, citing the sensitivity of the matter and concern for retaliation.

Those targeted began receiving letters in August, saying,
You have been identified as possibly bearing some culpability
in supposedly newly uncovered “security incidents,” according to a copy of one letter obtained by The Washington Post.

In many cases, the incidents appear to center on the sending of information attributed to foreign officials, including summaries of phone conversations with foreign diplomats — a routine occurrence among State Department employees.

There is no indication in any of the materials reviewed by The Post that the emails under scrutiny contained sensitive information about classified U.S. initiatives or programs. In one case, a former official was asked to explain dozens of messages dating back to 2009 that contained messages that foreign officials wanted relayed rapidly to Washington at a time when U.S. Foreign Service officers were equipped with BlackBerrys and other devices that were not capable of sending classified transmissions. The messages came in through “regular email” and then were forwarded through official — though unclassified — State Department channels.

In other instances officials were relaying email summaries of time-sensitive conversations with foreign leaders conducted over unclassified cellphones.

Those communications are now being “upclassified” or “reclassified,” according to several officials involved in the investigation, meaning that they have been retroactively assessed to contain material so sensitive that they should have been sent only on State Department classified systems.

Many of those who have been targeted by the probe and found “not culpable,” described it as an effort to harass diplomats for the routine conduct of their job.
It is such an obscene abuse of power and time involving so many people for so many years,
one former U.S. official said of the inquiry.
This has just sucked up people’s lives for years and years.
Several of those who have been questioned said that the State Department Bureau of Diplomatic Security investigators made it clear that they were pursuing the matter reluctantly, and under external pressure.

One official said the investigators were apologetic:
They realize how absurd it is.
Those targeted do not appear to be in jeopardy of criminal prosecution — the FBI investigation of the Clinton email case has been closed since before the 2016 election. But many fear the results of the probe will damage their reputations and complicate their ability to maintain security clearances.

Several said they have received follow-on letters saying that investigators
determined that the [security] incident is valid,
but that they did not “bear any individual culpability” — an ambiguous designation that could pose complications in future background checks and confirmation hearings.
It gives them a way to hassle pretty much anyone,
a former senior U.S. official said.

In many instances, the officials said that it had been so long since they had been questioned that they assumed the email case had been resolved, even though Trump routinely rails about the Clinton email issue.

Trump raised the issue as recently as Wednesday, calling it “one of the great crimes committed” by his 2016 opponent.

Trump faces impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives in the wake of a whistleblower report by a CIA officer exposing Trump’s efforts on a July 25 call to pressure the leader of Ukraine to pursue investigations that Trump hoped would generate embarrassing material about Biden.

Trump’s request for that “favor” came as his administration was withholding hundreds of millions of dollars in aid from Kiev and dangling a potential White House visit for Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky.

The FBI began examining Clinton’s use of a private email server in July 2015, based on a referral from the intelligence community inspector general. Their investigation sought to determine whether anyone — especially the former secretary of state — had broken federal law in discussing classified information on unclassified systems.

Investigators reviewed 30,000 emails that Clinton turned back over to the State Department after leaving others, and took other steps, including tracking down computers and other devices Clinton had used, to find thousands more. Their investigation included examinations of the archived government accounts of people who had been in government at the same time as Clinton and who might have naturally exchanged messages with her.

Although Clinton was considered the biggest player in the investigation, she was never formally labeled a subject or target, and investigators also considered the conduct of her top aides and colleagues.

About a year later, in July 2016, then-FBI Director James B. Comey announced he was recommending the case be closed with no charges. He said Clinton’s and her aides’ handling of classified information was “extremely careless,” but not such that it warranted criminal charges. He suggested those who did wrong could face job-related consequences, and took a broad swipe at the State Department, saying its employees’ use of unclassified email systems was
generally lacking in the kind of care for classified information found elsewhere in the government,
according to his prepared remarks.

A few months later, the bureau resumed the inquiry after discovering more of Clinton’s correspondence with a top aide on a device investigators were examining in a separate investigation of the aide’s husband. But they found nothing to change their conclusion and closed the case again just before the 2016 election.

Paul Sonne, Shane Harris, Matt Zapotosky and Julie Tate contributed to this report.

Greg Jaffe is a national political reporter for The Washington Post, where he has been since March 2009. Previously, he covered the White House, foreign policy and the U.S. military for The Post.

Karoun Demirjian is a congressional reporter covering national security, including defense, foreign policy, intelligence and matters concerning the judiciary. She was previously a correspondent based in The Post's bureau in Moscow.

Re: State Dept. intensifies email probe of Hillary Clinton’s former aides

Posted: 29 Sep 2019, 18:17
by pastlast
NO NIGGGER BUT YOU ARE A NIGGGER FOR TRYING TO POST THIS GARBAGE on an African site: NIGGGER KNOW YOUR PLACE!

YOU ARE LICKING THEIR BOOTS those WHITE MEN you USE AS YOUR MASTERS! NIGGGER KNOW YOUR PLACE.! NOW SHUT THE FACK UP!!!! NIGGGGGER!!!!!

Zmeselo wrote:
29 Sep 2019, 17:06
Do they look like niggérs or Africans to you, mr. baboon?



Greg Miller, the Washington Post


Greg Jaffe, the Washington Post
pastlast wrote:
29 Sep 2019, 16:05
SHUT UP NIGGGGER and KNOW YOUR PLACE! NIGGGER NOW GO BOOTLICK WHITEMAN BOOTS!...NIGGGGER!!! "You're DIRT" You're not even a nigggger, you're an African" Even WORST...STUPID PFDJ clown!...LOL


Zmeselo wrote:
29 Sep 2019, 11:40


State Dept. intensifies email probe of Hillary Clinton’s former aides


Former secretary of state Hillary Clinton speaks at Georgetown University on Friday. (Win Mcnamee/Getty Images)

By Greg Miller, Greg Jaffe and Karoun Demirjian


https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... story.html

September 28

The Trump administration is investigating the email records of dozens of current and former senior State Department officials who sent messages to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s private email, reviving a politically toxic matter that overshadowed the 2016 election, current and former officials said.

As many as 130 officials have been contacted in recent weeks by State Department investigators — a list that includes senior officials who reported directly to Clinton as well as others in lower-level jobs whose emails were at some point relayed to her inbox, said current and former State Department officials. Those targeted were notified that emails they sent years ago have been retroactively classified and now constitute potential security violations, according to letters reviewed by The Washington Post.

In virtually all of the cases, potentially sensitive information, now recategorized as “classified,” was sent to Clinton’s unsecure inbox.

State Department investigators began contacting the former officials about 18 months ago, after President Trump’s election, and then seemed to drop the effort before picking it up in August, officials said.

Senior State Department officials said that they are following standard protocol in an investigation that began during the latter days of the Obama administration and is nearing completion.
This has nothing to do with who is in the White House,
said a senior State Department official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak publicly about an ongoing probe.
This is about the time it took to go through millions of emails, which is about 3½ years.

Trump speaks about Clinton's emails during meeting w
In a Sept. 25 meeting with Ukraine's president, President Trump was asked a question about a 2016 probe into former secretary of state Hillary Clinton's emails. (The Washington Post)


To many of those under scrutiny, including some of the Democratic Party’s top foreign policy experts, the recent flurry of activity surrounding the Clinton email case represents a new front on which the Trump administration could be accused of employing the powers of the executive branch against perceived political adversaries.

The existence of the probe follows revelations that the president used multiple levers of his office to pressure the leader of Ukraine to pursue investigations that Trump hoped would produce damaging information about Democrats, including potential presidential rival Joe Biden.

State Department officials vigorously denied there was any political motivation behind their actions, and said that the reviews of retroactively classified emails were conducted by career bureaucrats who did not know the names of the subjects being investigated.
The process is set up in a manner to completely avoid any appearance of political bias,
said a second senior State Department official, who was speaking on condition of anonymity to describe the mechanics of an internal probe.

Clinton’s use of a private email server during her term as secretary triggered multiple investigations by the State Department, the FBI and Congress. The bureau did not accuse her of breaking the law, but she blamed the FBI’s unusual public handling of the matter as a major factor in her loss in the 2016 election.
I’d like to think that this is just routine, but something strange is going on,
said Jeffrey Feltman, a former assistant secretary for Near East Affairs. In early 2018 Feltman received a letter informing him that a half dozen of his messages included classified information. Then a few weeks ago he was found culpable for more than 50 emails that contained classified information.
A couple of the emails cited by State as problems were sent after my May 2012 retirement, when I was already working for the United Nations,
he said.

A former senior U.S. official familiar with the email investigation described it as a way for Republicans
to keep the Clinton email issue alive.
The former official said the probe was
a way to tarnish a whole bunch of Democratic foreign policy people
and discourage if not prevent them from returning to government service.

The probe is being carried out by investigators from the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security. Republican lawmakers, led by Sen. Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa), have been pressing Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to complete the review of classified information sent to Clinton’s private emails and report back to Congress.

State Department officials said they were bound by law to adjudicate any violations.

Former Obama administration officials, however, described the probe as a remarkably aggressive crackdown by an administration with its own troubled record of handling classified material. Trump has improperly disclosed classified information to foreign officials and used phones that national security officials warned were vulnerable to foreign surveillance, according to current and former officials.

At the same time, Trump overrode the concerns of his former White House chief of staff and U.S. intelligence officials to give his son-in-law and senior White House adviser Jared Kushner access to highly classified materials, officials said.

The list of State officials being questioned includes prominent ambassadors and assistant secretaries of state responsible for U.S. policy in the Middle East, Europe and Central Asia. But it also includes dozens of current and former career bureaucrats who served as conduits for outside officials trying to get important messages to Clinton.

In most cases the bureaucrats and political appointees didn’t send the emails directly to Clinton, but passed them to William Burns, who served as deputy secretary of state, or Jake Sullivan, the former director of policy planning at the State Department. Burns and Sullivan then forwarded the messages to Clinton’s private email.

Burns and Sullivan declined to comment. Other officials spoke on the condition of anonymity, citing the sensitivity of the matter and concern for retaliation.

Those targeted began receiving letters in August, saying,
You have been identified as possibly bearing some culpability
in supposedly newly uncovered “security incidents,” according to a copy of one letter obtained by The Washington Post.

In many cases, the incidents appear to center on the sending of information attributed to foreign officials, including summaries of phone conversations with foreign diplomats — a routine occurrence among State Department employees.

There is no indication in any of the materials reviewed by The Post that the emails under scrutiny contained sensitive information about classified U.S. initiatives or programs. In one case, a former official was asked to explain dozens of messages dating back to 2009 that contained messages that foreign officials wanted relayed rapidly to Washington at a time when U.S. Foreign Service officers were equipped with BlackBerrys and other devices that were not capable of sending classified transmissions. The messages came in through “regular email” and then were forwarded through official — though unclassified — State Department channels.

In other instances officials were relaying email summaries of time-sensitive conversations with foreign leaders conducted over unclassified cellphones.

Those communications are now being “upclassified” or “reclassified,” according to several officials involved in the investigation, meaning that they have been retroactively assessed to contain material so sensitive that they should have been sent only on State Department classified systems.

Many of those who have been targeted by the probe and found “not culpable,” described it as an effort to harass diplomats for the routine conduct of their job.
It is such an obscene abuse of power and time involving so many people for so many years,
one former U.S. official said of the inquiry.
This has just sucked up people’s lives for years and years.
Several of those who have been questioned said that the State Department Bureau of Diplomatic Security investigators made it clear that they were pursuing the matter reluctantly, and under external pressure.

One official said the investigators were apologetic:
They realize how absurd it is.
Those targeted do not appear to be in jeopardy of criminal prosecution — the FBI investigation of the Clinton email case has been closed since before the 2016 election. But many fear the results of the probe will damage their reputations and complicate their ability to maintain security clearances.

Several said they have received follow-on letters saying that investigators
determined that the [security] incident is valid,
but that they did not “bear any individual culpability” — an ambiguous designation that could pose complications in future background checks and confirmation hearings.
It gives them a way to hassle pretty much anyone,
a former senior U.S. official said.

In many instances, the officials said that it had been so long since they had been questioned that they assumed the email case had been resolved, even though Trump routinely rails about the Clinton email issue.

Trump raised the issue as recently as Wednesday, calling it “one of the great crimes committed” by his 2016 opponent.

Trump faces impeachment proceedings in the House of Representatives in the wake of a whistleblower report by a CIA officer exposing Trump’s efforts on a July 25 call to pressure the leader of Ukraine to pursue investigations that Trump hoped would generate embarrassing material about Biden.

Trump’s request for that “favor” came as his administration was withholding hundreds of millions of dollars in aid from Kiev and dangling a potential White House visit for Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky.

The FBI began examining Clinton’s use of a private email server in July 2015, based on a referral from the intelligence community inspector general. Their investigation sought to determine whether anyone — especially the former secretary of state — had broken federal law in discussing classified information on unclassified systems.

Investigators reviewed 30,000 emails that Clinton turned back over to the State Department after leaving others, and took other steps, including tracking down computers and other devices Clinton had used, to find thousands more. Their investigation included examinations of the archived government accounts of people who had been in government at the same time as Clinton and who might have naturally exchanged messages with her.

Although Clinton was considered the biggest player in the investigation, she was never formally labeled a subject or target, and investigators also considered the conduct of her top aides and colleagues.

About a year later, in July 2016, then-FBI Director James B. Comey announced he was recommending the case be closed with no charges. He said Clinton’s and her aides’ handling of classified information was “extremely careless,” but not such that it warranted criminal charges. He suggested those who did wrong could face job-related consequences, and took a broad swipe at the State Department, saying its employees’ use of unclassified email systems was
generally lacking in the kind of care for classified information found elsewhere in the government,
according to his prepared remarks.

A few months later, the bureau resumed the inquiry after discovering more of Clinton’s correspondence with a top aide on a device investigators were examining in a separate investigation of the aide’s husband. But they found nothing to change their conclusion and closed the case again just before the 2016 election.

Paul Sonne, Shane Harris, Matt Zapotosky and Julie Tate contributed to this report.

Greg Jaffe is a national political reporter for The Washington Post, where he has been since March 2009. Previously, he covered the White House, foreign policy and the U.S. military for The Post.

Karoun Demirjian is a congressional reporter covering national security, including defense, foreign policy, intelligence and matters concerning the judiciary. She was previously a correspondent based in The Post's bureau in Moscow.

Re: State Dept. intensifies email probe of Hillary Clinton’s former aides

Posted: 29 Sep 2019, 18:53
by Zmeselo
You defending Hitlery, what is it?

And since when, does an agame lístro tell an Eritrean what to do?

Since- no time!

Wait for more of such articles, house negro:



Re: State Dept. intensifies email probe of Hillary Clinton’s former aides

Posted: 29 Sep 2019, 19:28
by pastlast
Malcolm X was NEVER a Supporter or Supported Any Ideas by PFDJ, a Fake "revolution" group which is a Continuing a Dictatorship for WESTERN/ARAB Agendas in Eritrea!

You Can Lie To Eritreans and thats not Working...YIAKIL is HAPPENING....

But You can't Convince Ethiopians to Accept PFDJ's ARAB/WESTERN Agenda! Arab's Negro SHUT tha FCK UP!
Zmeselo wrote:
29 Sep 2019, 18:53
You defending Hitlery, what is it?

And since when, does an agame lístro tell an Eritrean what to do?

Since- no time!

Wait for more of such articles, house negro:



Re: State Dept. intensifies email probe of Hillary Clinton’s former aides

Posted: 29 Sep 2019, 19:33
by Zmeselo

Re: State Dept. intensifies email probe of Hillary Clinton’s former aides

Posted: 29 Sep 2019, 19:44
by pastlast
REJECTION is a SHARMUUTA that ISAYAS AFWRKI/PFDJ HATES....The US Rejected ISAYAS AFWRKI OFFER OF ERITREA as a BASE for CONTINENTAL RAPE as you STATE:


Why YOU MAD NIGGGGER? The White MASTER REJECTED your HOUSE NEGRO Isayas AFWRKI!...Lol

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2566711.stm

Wednesday, 11 December, 2002, 17:16 GMT
US to keep Horn military base
Djibouti President Omar Ismael Guelleh (l) and Donald Rumsfeld (c) with presidential guards (r)
But Djibouti will not support unilateral attacks on Iraq
The United States will retain its military base in Djibouti for several years, US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has said.
The US has set up a regional anti-terror headquarters in Djibouti, which is strategically situated near Yemen, Sudan and Somalia - all suspected of having links to al-Qaeda.

We need to be where the action is. There is no question this is an area where there is action

Donald Rumsfeld
Some 900 US troops are now based at former French Foreign Legion base Camp Lemonier and hundreds more are due to arrive in the next few days, the Associated Press reports.

However, President Omar Ismael Guelleh has said that he will only allow Djibouti to be used as a base to attack Iraq if it is sanctioned by the United Nations.

Djibouti also hosts some 2,700 troops from its former colonial power, France.

Expanding base

Following last month's attacks on Israeli targets near the Kenyan resort of Mombasa, the US warned of possible terror attacks in Djibouti, among other East African countries.

"We need to be where the action is. There is no question this is an area where there is action," Mr Rumsfeld said.


"[There are] a number of terrorists for example just across the water in Yemen and in the southern part of Saudi Arabia. These are serious problems."

His visit comes as North Korean scud missiles bound for Yemen were intercepted by US and Spanish forces in the Arabian Sea.

AFP news agency quoted US military sources as saying that Camp Lemonier is "rapidly expanding" as they were "adding to it by the day".

On Tuesday, Eritrean President Isaias Afewerki offered to let the US use its military bases as part of its war on terror.


Mr Rumsfeld did not say whether the US would take Eritrea up on its offer.

After visiting Eritrea, Ethiopia and Djibouti, Mr Rumsfeld is finishing his tour of the region in the Gulf state of Qatar.
Zmeselo wrote:
29 Sep 2019, 19:33

Re: State Dept. intensifies email probe of Hillary Clinton’s former aides

Posted: 29 Sep 2019, 20:11
by Zmeselo
A look at Ethiopia's support of Al-Qaeda terrorists against Eritrea


Ethiopian-backed Al-Qaeda terrorists, the Eritrean Islamic Reform Movement, formerly known as the Eritrean Islamic Jihad Movement. Their ideology (Wahhabism) comes from Saudi Arabia; their attire known as "Perahan Tunban" comes from Afghanistan and their support comes from Ethiopia & Saudi Arabia. There is nothing Eritrean about them.

The so-called Eritrean Islamic Reform Movement (EIRM), which up until 2003 was known as the Eritrean Islamic Jihad Movement (EIJM), is an Ethiopian-backed Al-Qaeda terrorist group that aims to establish an Islamic Caliphate in Eritrea by overthrowing the secular Eritrean government.

With the support of the Sudan and Saudi Arabia, EIJM formed in the early 1980s, in Gedaref, Sudan. The group was originally comprised of Islamist members of the Eritrean Liberation Front (ELF), which had many of its senior members participate in the Soviet–Afghan War.

Since its formation, a number of Islamist groups split from EIJM to form their own jihadi groups. Among the biggest split came from the Eritrean Islamic Salvation Movement (EISM), which left EIJM in 1998. EISM went on to gain Ethiopian support after it changed its name to the Eritrean Islamic Party for Justice and Development, a change critics say was Addis Ababa's poor attempt of putting lipstick on an Al-Qaeda pig.

In 1994, after a series of terrorist activities such as planting of land mines in Eritrean territory; bombing of hotels; attacks on civilian buses and killing of innocent passengers; arson against farms and destruction of water pumps, the Eritrean army launched two major offensives into Eastern Sudan that devastated the EIJM of which it has yet to recover from. The Eritrean military also attempted to kill or capture Osama bin Laden, who was actively funding and supporting EIJM's activities while he was living in the Sudan.

As a result of Eritrea's salient actions to curb regional terrorism and for its efforts to hunt down Osama bin Laden, who was then hailed as a "freedom fighter" in the mainstream media, Donald Rumsfeld, the former U.S. Secretary of Defense, acknowledged the United States can learn a lot about battling terrorism from Eritrea.

Rumsfeld noted the history of Eritrea when he said that the country of about 4.5 million people
has considerably more experience than we do over a sustained period of time in battling terrorism.
He said
the United States can benefit from that experience.
Similarly, in 2007, when Ethiopia's Melez Zenawi and Susan Rice were hatching up a lie of Eritrean support for Al-Shaabab in order to place unjust UN sanctions on the country, Ted Dagne, the then African affairs specialist at the Congressional Research Service, praised Eritrea as a country that played an important role in fighting terrorism. He said:
If there is one country where the fighting of extremists and terrorists was a priority when it mattered, it was Eritrea,
said Ted Dagne, an Africa specialist for the Congressional Research Service.

After Eritrean-Sudanese relations improved in 2006, EIJM opened an office in Addis Ababa in 2006, and in 2007, the organization joined the Eritrean Democratic Alliance (EDA), which is registered with the group under the name of its political wing, the Eritrean People's Congress (EPC).

EDA is an Ethiopian-created umbrella group consisting of Islamists and ethnic-centric political parties each seeking to turn Eritrea into mini Sharia-governed chiefdoms loyal to Addis Ababa and Riyadh.

Unlike Sudan and Saudi Arabia, who seek the Islamization of Eritrea for geopolitical and ideological reasons, Ethiopia's support for the Al-Qaeda-linked organization has to do with forming a rift between Eritrean Christians and Muslims, whom are evenly split 50/50. In doing so, it seeks to erode Eritrean nationalism by artificially creating the conditions for a Lebanon-style civil war, in which Ethiopia plays the part of Syria and micromanages Eritrea, with the end goal of annexation of the country.

Unfortunately for Ethiopia and Saudi Arabia, the high degree of fragmentation of the EJIM coupled with the Eritrean army's successful counter terrorism measures over the years, has severely crippled the terrorist organization's capacity. The regional spoilers bet on Al-Qaeda-linked groups to destabilize Eritrea has been a costly and ineffective one.

When Osama bin Laden lived in the Sudan, he was hailed as a warrior and freedom fighter by the MainStream Media, even though he was openly supporting EIJM to conduct terrorists attacks against Eritrea.












Re: State Dept. intensifies email probe of Hillary Clinton’s former aides

Posted: 29 Sep 2019, 20:25
by pastlast
Isayas Afwrki STILL Went Agaisnt the US after the REJECTION is a SHARMUUTA that ISAYAS AFWRKI/PFDJ HATES....The US Rejected ISAYAS AFWRKI OFFER OF ERITREA as a BASE for CONTINENTAL RAPE as you STATE:


Why YOU MAD NIGGGGER? The White MASTER REJECTED your HOUSE NEGRO Isayas AFWRKI!...Lol

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/2566711.stm

Wednesday, 11 December, 2002, 17:16 GMT
US to keep Horn military base
Djibouti President Omar Ismael Guelleh (l) and Donald Rumsfeld (c) with presidential guards (r)
But Djibouti will not support unilateral attacks on Iraq
The United States will retain its military base in Djibouti for several years, US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has said.
The US has set up a regional anti-terror headquarters in Djibouti, which is strategically situated near Yemen, Sudan and Somalia - all suspected of having links to al-Qaeda.

We need to be where the action is. There is no question this is an area where there is action

Donald Rumsfeld
Some 900 US troops are now based at former French Foreign Legion base Camp Lemonier and hundreds more are due to arrive in the next few days, the Associated Press reports.

However, President Omar Ismael Guelleh has said that he will only allow Djibouti to be used as a base to attack Iraq if it is sanctioned by the United Nations.

Djibouti also hosts some 2,700 troops from its former colonial power, France.

Expanding base

Following last month's attacks on Israeli targets near the Kenyan resort of Mombasa, the US warned of possible terror attacks in Djibouti, among other East African countries.

"We need to be where the action is. There is no question this is an area where there is action," Mr Rumsfeld said.


"[There are] a number of terrorists for example just across the water in Yemen and in the southern part of Saudi Arabia. These are serious problems."

His visit comes as North Korean scud missiles bound for Yemen were intercepted by US and Spanish forces in the Arabian Sea.

AFP news agency quoted US military sources as saying that Camp Lemonier is "rapidly expanding" as they were "adding to it by the day".

On Tuesday, Eritrean President Isaias Afewerki offered to let the US use its military bases as part of its war on terror.


Mr Rumsfeld did not say whether the US would take Eritrea up on its offer.

After visiting Eritrea, Ethiopia and Djibouti, Mr Rumsfeld is finishing his tour of the region in the Gulf state of Qatar.
Zmeselo wrote:
29 Sep 2019, 19:33