Headlines
Killary Quotes
- Thread starter Bobcat
- Start date
Ratickle
Founding Member / Super Moderator
On Jan. 22, 2009, Hillary signed two NDA’s and received a security briefing.
The standard NDA, referring to a breach in the protection of sensitive compartmentalized information or SCI, requires the signatory (in this case Hillary) to acknowledge that a breach could result in “termination of my access to SCI and removal from a position of special confidence and trust requiring such access as well as the termination of my employment or any other relationships with any Department or Agency that provides me with access to SCI.”
Paragraph 2 of the NDA requires the signatory to acknowledge that she received, “a security indoctrination concerning the nature and protection of classified information including the procedures to be followed when ascertaining whether other persons to whom you contemplate disclosing this information have been approved for access to it.”
As a condition of access to Top Secret and above classified information, Hillary was required to verbally attest to her understanding of and willingness to comply with the procedures of her NDA, which had to be signed as a condition of her access to Top Secret information.
Incidentally, Top Secret is the classification reserved for “information the unauthorized disclosure of which would cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security.” Because of its sensitivity, “Classified information may be processed by automated systems but only by those systems which have been approved for such use.” This definition excludes Hillary’s server.
Hillary’s lawyers will argue that her activities and server did not constitute what the law requires “a knowing, willful or negligent unauthorized use or disclosure” because she could not have known that the data in question was classified as it included no markings of classification.
Section 2001.45 of the Information Security Oversight Office, Doctrine No. 1, requires that classified information “be transmitted and received in an authorized manner that facilitates detection of tampering and precludes inadvertent access.”
And 18 US Code, Section 1924 (a) states that “Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.”
http://headlinesurfer.com/content/415100-proof-hillarys-guilt
The standard NDA, referring to a breach in the protection of sensitive compartmentalized information or SCI, requires the signatory (in this case Hillary) to acknowledge that a breach could result in “termination of my access to SCI and removal from a position of special confidence and trust requiring such access as well as the termination of my employment or any other relationships with any Department or Agency that provides me with access to SCI.”
Paragraph 2 of the NDA requires the signatory to acknowledge that she received, “a security indoctrination concerning the nature and protection of classified information including the procedures to be followed when ascertaining whether other persons to whom you contemplate disclosing this information have been approved for access to it.”
As a condition of access to Top Secret and above classified information, Hillary was required to verbally attest to her understanding of and willingness to comply with the procedures of her NDA, which had to be signed as a condition of her access to Top Secret information.
Incidentally, Top Secret is the classification reserved for “information the unauthorized disclosure of which would cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security.” Because of its sensitivity, “Classified information may be processed by automated systems but only by those systems which have been approved for such use.” This definition excludes Hillary’s server.
Hillary’s lawyers will argue that her activities and server did not constitute what the law requires “a knowing, willful or negligent unauthorized use or disclosure” because she could not have known that the data in question was classified as it included no markings of classification.
Section 2001.45 of the Information Security Oversight Office, Doctrine No. 1, requires that classified information “be transmitted and received in an authorized manner that facilitates detection of tampering and precludes inadvertent access.”
And 18 US Code, Section 1924 (a) states that “Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.”
http://headlinesurfer.com/content/415100-proof-hillarys-guilt
Ratickle
Founding Member / Super Moderator
A couple of other names pop up in the Panama Papers, including those of a few well-known associates of Hillary Clinton: longtime Democratic Party fixers John and Tony Podesta and Clinton sycophant Sydney Blumenthal. And why not? Hillary Clinton has been up to her neck in crony deals from the very beginning. All the way back in 1978, for example, she indulged a sudden mania for trading cattle futures, from which she made just shy of $100,000 in less than a year—a lot more money back then than it is now, and a whole lot for a young couple like the Clintons. She has shown no interest in commodities trading since, which is surprising considering how successful she was at it. But maybe not so surprising when you consider that her trades back then were made under the guidance of an attorney who worked for a large company that just happened to be regulated by her husband. Gee, that almost looks like a bribe.
That's the kind of thing that's all over the Panama Papers, and it's what Hillary Clinton has been doing forever. It's how the Clintons suddenly made $100 million in the first few years after leaving the White House, with nothing to offer the business world but their political connections. It's why the Clinton Foundation got massive donations from Russian businessmen with deals that required State Department approval.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opini...hillary-clinton-can’t-be-president/ar-BBrwLPl
That's the kind of thing that's all over the Panama Papers, and it's what Hillary Clinton has been doing forever. It's how the Clintons suddenly made $100 million in the first few years after leaving the White House, with nothing to offer the business world but their political connections. It's why the Clinton Foundation got massive donations from Russian businessmen with deals that required State Department approval.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opini...hillary-clinton-can’t-be-president/ar-BBrwLPl
Ratickle
Founding Member / Super Moderator
Interesting News Video
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/hillary-clinton-ties-emerge-in-panama-papers/vp-BBrrLLZ
A billionaire and a Russia-controlled bank named in the Panama Papers have links to Hillary Clinton through two separate lobbying efforts — one through a Clinton-connected lobbying firm and another through Sidney Blumenthal. Clinton is linked to Sberbank, Russia’s largest bank, through Podesta Group, a lobbying firm co-founded by Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta and his brother, Tony Podesta, a major Clinton bundler. According to the Washington Free Beacon, which first reported the connection, Sberbank registered with the Podesta Group last month to lobby on issues related to economic sanctions against Russia and on stock and bond trading for its U.S. clients.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/hillary-clinton-ties-emerge-in-panama-papers/vp-BBrrLLZ
A billionaire and a Russia-controlled bank named in the Panama Papers have links to Hillary Clinton through two separate lobbying efforts — one through a Clinton-connected lobbying firm and another through Sidney Blumenthal. Clinton is linked to Sberbank, Russia’s largest bank, through Podesta Group, a lobbying firm co-founded by Clinton’s campaign chairman John Podesta and his brother, Tony Podesta, a major Clinton bundler. According to the Washington Free Beacon, which first reported the connection, Sberbank registered with the Podesta Group last month to lobby on issues related to economic sanctions against Russia and on stock and bond trading for its U.S. clients.
Ratickle
Founding Member / Super Moderator
More than one-third of the groups that paid Hillary Clinton to speak are government contractors, an AP review found.
The AP's review of federal records, regulatory filings and correspondence showed that almost all the 82 corporations, trade associations and other groups that paid for or sponsored Clinton's speeches have actively sought to sway the government — lobbying, bidding for contracts, commenting on federal policy and in some cases contacting State Department officials or Clinton herself during her tenure as secretary of state.
Entire Article: http://www.usnews.com/news/business...d-for-clinton-speeches-have-us-govt-interests
The AP's review of federal records, regulatory filings and correspondence showed that almost all the 82 corporations, trade associations and other groups that paid for or sponsored Clinton's speeches have actively sought to sway the government — lobbying, bidding for contracts, commenting on federal policy and in some cases contacting State Department officials or Clinton herself during her tenure as secretary of state.
Entire Article: http://www.usnews.com/news/business...d-for-clinton-speeches-have-us-govt-interests
Similar threads
