Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

Showing Original Post only (View all)


(8,541 posts)
Wed Jun 8, 2016, 04:40 PM Jun 2016

Experts: Clinton emails could have compromised CIA names [View all]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by George II (a host of the Latest Breaking News forum).

Source: AP

The names of CIA personnel could have been compromised not only by hackers who may have penetrated Hillary Clinton's private computer server or the State Department system, but also by the release itself of tens of thousands of her emails, security experts say.

At least 47 of the emails contain the notation "B3 CIA PERS/ORG," which indicates the material referred to CIA personnel or matters related to the agency. And because both Clinton's server and the State Department systems were vulnerable to hacking, the perpetrators could have those original emails, and now the publicly released, redacted versions showing exactly which sections refer to CIA personnel.

"Start with the entirely plausible view that foreign intelligence services discovered and rifled Hillary Clinton's server," said Stewart Baker, a Washington lawyer who spent more than three years as an assistant secretary of the Homeland Security Department and is former legal counsel for the National Security Agency.

Read more: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/1a737240cf144c728b45ef64e181f19d/experts-clinton-emails-could-have-compromised-cia-names#

AP confirms what's obvious based on those codes. It should also be noted that the FBI officially confirmed that they recovered files from Hillary's server and considers it evidence.
103 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
How many went to jail over releasing Plame's name? And that action really was a crime. tonyt53 Jun 2016 #1
How is my desperation showing? NWCorona Jun 2016 #3
They don't care about the law; just winning! Chasstev365 Jun 2016 #5
innueundo and desperation. disgusting MariaThinks Jun 2016 #6
Hillary was cleared about her emails: these " experts" are GOP hacks lewebley3 Jun 2016 #8
cleared by whom? Jack Bone Jun 2016 #56
How long do you think we'll be waiting for a link? nt Chezboo Jun 2016 #89
Actually, only ONE hack Maeve Jun 2016 #100
They broke the law so everyone else gets a freebie? TipTok Jun 2016 #16
Let's see. Looks like about 7 more days. Kingofalldems Jun 2016 #44
In 7 days the Truth will still be allowed on DU askeptic Jun 2016 #65
Never a denial... TipTok Jun 2016 #68
Denial of what? Kingofalldems Jun 2016 #73
Actually - your desperation is showing. 840high Jun 2016 #22
The fact that you think any of that is OK disgusts me. peace13 Jun 2016 #30
...!100++++ 840high Jun 2016 #96
This is exactly what I was about say vdogg Jun 2016 #31
Scooter Libby. So at least one did. notadmblnd Jun 2016 #36
Libby went to jail. 7962 Jun 2016 #49
That was yesterday's talking point.....click and refresh Segami Jun 2016 #51
hardly, just blatantly gross hypocrisy stupidicus Jun 2016 #70
No one was convicted of leaking her name, but someone hughee99 Jun 2016 #75
That's OK because Cheney, Rove were involved in Valerie Plame & they weren't punished Chasstev365 Jun 2016 #2
You are comparing Hillary’s actions to Cheney and you say I'm the fool NWCorona Jun 2016 #7
I'm not comparing them at all Chasstev365 Jun 2016 #9
Ok I'm sorry for taking that wrong and I agree NWCorona Jun 2016 #14
No is not excused necessary: Hillary was cleared: the was no clarity to the rules lewebley3 Jun 2016 #17
Valerie Plame is going to be working for Hillary: She trusts Hillary lewebley3 Jun 2016 #15
Comparing Clinton to Cheney? HooptieWagon Jun 2016 #62
You're twisting my meaning and you know it! Chasstev365 Jun 2016 #67
Believe me, there will be more to come about this. Duval Jun 2016 #4
No this is over except for a political attack on Hillary that has not worked. lewebley3 Jun 2016 #10
I'll call the FBI and tell them it's over. 840high Jun 2016 #24
HA!! 7962 Jun 2016 #54
The Rethugs demanded the release of her emails under the FOIA. They wanted pnwmom Jun 2016 #11
Yes and I agree that they are abusing the FOIA in the hope to find something. NWCorona Jun 2016 #18
not LBN - could have/may have is analysis and opiniion not news. AP? the reviled enemy AP lol nt msongs Jun 2016 #12
This news broke today on AP today and within the 12hr guideline. NWCorona Jun 2016 #23
It's not news metroins Jun 2016 #60
Which means absolutely zilch... TipTok Jun 2016 #91
Oh, I'm sorry metroins Jun 2016 #92
No worries... Just addressing some false information... TipTok Jun 2016 #98
This OP is bs innuendo metroins Jun 2016 #101
I'd rather wait till investigation is DONE MFM008 Jun 2016 #13
No he wouldn't! Peachhead22 Jun 2016 #52
For those of you who didn't know what louis-t Jun 2016 #19
I thought you guys hated the AP. Aren't they some kind of Hillary shills? TwilightZone Jun 2016 #20
I've never bad mouthed the AP. I've only questioned their motives of their announcement NWCorona Jun 2016 #25
If it's their content, you should probably provide a link to the source. TwilightZone Jun 2016 #28
I've updated the op with the link. Sorry about that. NWCorona Jun 2016 #33
Link please. ReRe Jun 2016 #21
Dang sorry about that! And thanks for the heads up!!! NWCorona Jun 2016 #27
Two Big Problems videohead5 Jun 2016 #26
My answers NWCorona Jun 2016 #32
He is a terrible liar. Such shame upon a nation. yourpaljoey Jun 2016 #94
Another story about nothing. SunSeeker Jun 2016 #29
And all the same problems would have occurred if she'd used a .gov account. pnwmom Jun 2016 #34
And this would have been nothing if she used a government account. NWCorona Jun 2016 #41
No, the same situation would have occurred. They would have seen the exact same emails -- pnwmom Jun 2016 #46
What proof do you have of her using a terminal in the sciff at her residence? NWCorona Jun 2016 #55
Here: pnwmom Jun 2016 #82
I appreciate the links but they don't tell me much. NWCorona Jun 2016 #90
Yes, whether the same situation would have occurred relies on... thesquanderer Jun 2016 #72
They know that the .gov system was hacked. They have said that there is no evidence pnwmom Jun 2016 #83
semantic interpretation. thesquanderer Jun 2016 #87
My point remains. The problem isn't with whether she used a private server or pnwmom Jun 2016 #88
The emails are small cake compared to accepting money, through her foundation, from saudi royals DemMomma4Sanders Jun 2016 #37
Ding Ding Ding: We have a winner! Chasstev365 Jun 2016 #40
Not to mention the Saudi's are directly connected to 9/11 phazed0 Jun 2016 #42
The money did not go to her, it went to charities to help the poor. nt SunSeeker Jun 2016 #43
She donates to the foundation. She doesn't get any funds "through" the Foundation. n/t pnwmom Jun 2016 #47
Bullcrap DemMomma4Sanders Jun 2016 #59
None of them get paid any salaries, so I don't know why you included the salary info. pnwmom Jun 2016 #64
I only get four paragraphs for the excerpt but I'm open to debate that with you if you'd like nt NWCorona Jun 2016 #38
Yes, you got the irony right. thesquanderer Jun 2016 #69
There's an awful lot of "could" in this post vdogg Jun 2016 #35
I think that's because no one is privy to what the FBI knows. NWCorona Jun 2016 #39
It is unconscionable to push right wing talking points on DU. SunSeeker Jun 2016 #45
First, I didn't say that they have evidence of wrongdoing NWCorona Jun 2016 #48
You implied it with you assertion that FBI said there is "evidence," so stop playing coy. SunSeeker Jun 2016 #57
You should look up the pdf. of the court filing the FBI just made. NWCorona Jun 2016 #58
There is no there there. SunSeeker Jun 2016 #61
I'll be just fine after the 16th NWCorona Jun 2016 #63
"or the State Department system" - This is just more partisan "speculation." PSPS Jun 2016 #50
We'll just hear the same responses to this. And NOTHING WILL HAPPEN. 7962 Jun 2016 #53
re: "the FBI officially confirmed that they recovered files from Hillary's server" thesquanderer Jun 2016 #66
The pdf of the court filing on Monday specifically mentioned materials gathered from NWCorona Jun 2016 #71
AP giveth, AP taketh away AntiBank Jun 2016 #74
SO WHAT? libodem Jun 2016 #76
This appears to be the kind of of post PDittie Jun 2016 #77
"Could have" well let's not find out and just run with speculation Ohioblue22 Jun 2016 #78
A fricken joke.. these experts are clueless when they give an actual traitor like Darth Cheney gohuskies Jun 2016 #79
So the FBI considers her "recovered files" as "evidence"... Herman4747 Jun 2016 #80
Coulda, woulda, shoulda... ReRe Jun 2016 #81
The marks don't only indicate agents creeksneakers2 Jun 2016 #84
Stewart Baker was on Cruz's national security team - not an impartial observer Justice Jun 2016 #85
Oh don't spoil the celebration. chapdrum Jun 2016 #86
enough emails mehrrh Jun 2016 #93
stewart Baker - Federalist and Bushie!! asiliveandbreathe Jun 2016 #95
At this stage I would say it would be inappropriate for anyone to endorse her Rosa Luxemburg Jun 2016 #97
AP uses GOP donor as sole source for this story Maeve Jun 2016 #99
Could and May are not WhiteTara Jun 2016 #102
Locking as opinion, not Latest Breaking News George II Jun 2016 #103
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Experts: Clinton emails c...