Posted on Jun 18, 2015
What level would you classify this information at?
3.28K
19
13
2
2
0
(a) National Security Information (hereinafter "classified information") shall be classified at one of the following three levels:
(1) "Top Secret" shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security.
(2) "Secret" shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause serious damage to the national security.
(3) "Confidential" shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause damage to the national security.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/06/17/clinton-used-personal-email-for-sensitive-libya-negotiations-documents-show/?intcmp=latestnews
(1) "Top Secret" shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security.
(2) "Secret" shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause serious damage to the national security.
(3) "Confidential" shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause damage to the national security.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/06/17/clinton-used-personal-email-for-sensitive-libya-negotiations-documents-show/?intcmp=latestnews
Posted in these groups: 
Hillary Clinton
Hillary Clinton
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 7
1
1
0
Now this is working under "old" definitions, but:
TS - Information which if divulged could result in the damage to the Nation
- The example that was used when I was in-briefed was Capabilities. If we would lose the Capability to do something again, it would be TS. Things like Satellites, Comsec, etc.
S - Information which if divulged could result in damage to "programs" or "assets"
- Almost everything.
C - Information which if divulged could result in damage to "operations"
- If the information only affected limited scope operations and likely expired immediately after a "battle" then it was likely Confidential.
So... that said, "if" there was classified, it is unlikely it was Confidential. She was at a level where that just didn't exist. It would either be Secret or TS.
Because of her position, we're talking damage to National Capability, which leans things heavily towards the TS side of things... however just because the information "would have been classified at that level" doesn't make it classified.
I know that is counter intuitive. In the open source world, there is sometimes "unclassified" (as in does not have a classification) which is readily available, which "if it were classified" it would be significantly higher.
The problem we run into is that Policy Makers aren't classifying authorities, yet they create classified by their very actions.
As an example, if the SecState sits down with the President and says "What would you think about setting up a No Fly in X?" is that classified or not classified? If classified, at what level? Now, if an aide tells the SecState that the CIA wants a No Fly there... it gets trickier.
TS - Information which if divulged could result in the damage to the Nation
- The example that was used when I was in-briefed was Capabilities. If we would lose the Capability to do something again, it would be TS. Things like Satellites, Comsec, etc.
S - Information which if divulged could result in damage to "programs" or "assets"
- Almost everything.
C - Information which if divulged could result in damage to "operations"
- If the information only affected limited scope operations and likely expired immediately after a "battle" then it was likely Confidential.
So... that said, "if" there was classified, it is unlikely it was Confidential. She was at a level where that just didn't exist. It would either be Secret or TS.
Because of her position, we're talking damage to National Capability, which leans things heavily towards the TS side of things... however just because the information "would have been classified at that level" doesn't make it classified.
I know that is counter intuitive. In the open source world, there is sometimes "unclassified" (as in does not have a classification) which is readily available, which "if it were classified" it would be significantly higher.
The problem we run into is that Policy Makers aren't classifying authorities, yet they create classified by their very actions.
As an example, if the SecState sits down with the President and says "What would you think about setting up a No Fly in X?" is that classified or not classified? If classified, at what level? Now, if an aide tells the SecState that the CIA wants a No Fly there... it gets trickier.
(1)
(0)
Suspended Profile
MSG Brad Sand . This is a tempest in a teapot . . . nothing classified that would cause imminent harm to national security . . . maybe UCLASS NOFORN if you like . . . but the suggestion anything in these emails will cost lives or damage national security is a big stretch. The standard many will suggest here would put almost the entire contents of the NY Times, Washington Post, and The Economist on the classified material disclosure list. Warmest, Sandy
MSG Brad Sand
1LT Sandy Annala
First, by destroying the information we are not even able to assess what was or not out there. If a private had done this they would be in deep trouble, and rightfully so.
Second, just being able to access the flow of correspondence is a breach of security, without being able to see the actual e-mails. The volume of e-mails, to whom, and when is something a would be a goldmine to foreign intelligence. As an example, how we track communication traffic...how we knew something was going to happen is September of 2001, and other times, but not sure what.
Last, she was fifth in line to the Presidency of the United States, a lawyer and knew the information was under subpoena and she destroyed it. This is not some computer tech, doing a scheduled cleaning. I understand you may like her stand on some issues but with anyone else you would be disgusted and realize it is criminal activity.
First, by destroying the information we are not even able to assess what was or not out there. If a private had done this they would be in deep trouble, and rightfully so.
Second, just being able to access the flow of correspondence is a breach of security, without being able to see the actual e-mails. The volume of e-mails, to whom, and when is something a would be a goldmine to foreign intelligence. As an example, how we track communication traffic...how we knew something was going to happen is September of 2001, and other times, but not sure what.
Last, she was fifth in line to the Presidency of the United States, a lawyer and knew the information was under subpoena and she destroyed it. This is not some computer tech, doing a scheduled cleaning. I understand you may like her stand on some issues but with anyone else you would be disgusted and realize it is criminal activity.
(0)
(0)
Suspended Profile
MSG Brad Sand. Do you have any idea how much USDOS / INR classified operations files, message traffic, communication gear, and keying material we destroyed without any specific authority in April 1975? I took personal responsibility for what seemed like the right thing to do under urgent circumstances. No one said boo about our efforts to destroy classified material at any time following our return stateside. Warmest Regards, Sandy
0
0
0
You need an "all of the above" button for all her emails including some sort of "business sensitive" which would require secure systems. Individual emails would have to be assessed against the standards.
Given her position, personal emails about yoga, etc. should be likewise encrypted. Not doing so classifies them in the "stupid" category.
Given her position, personal emails about yoga, etc. should be likewise encrypted. Not doing so classifies them in the "stupid" category.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google