Mike Pompeo 'Regularly' Used Personal Email While Director of CIA

[Bill the Cat]

Having spent 12 years working with classified documents, you are wrong.

The overall document has a classification. This is at the top of the page/on the cover sheet.

Then, individual paragraphs are classified based on the information the paragraph contains. So, for example, a document might be classified TS, with individual paragraphs marked (U), (C), (S), or (TS) based on the data within. So if the paragraph has a (C) in it, it's not a post-hoc classification, it means that this paragraph contained information classified at the confidential level. (confidential, secret, top secret).

There is no post-hoc, that is the classification at the time it was sent. This means that the paragraph was replied to or copy/pasted from one that was classified.

And that's provided the document or record creator complies with the applicable agency marking rules, which Sec. Clinton did not do when creating these emails on her private email system. Lack of proper marking is also a violation. At the very, VERY least, she should have had her clearance revoked when all of this came up.

[CivilDiscourse]

My understanding is that the paragraphs with those markings were not classified at the time the emails were sent (though the information had earlier been temporarily classified). (And there was no (s) or (ts), just (c)s.)

Also, the paragraph markings don't identify paragraphs as classified unless the document is classified, as identified at the top and bottom of each page.

Having spent 12 years working with classified documents, you are wrong.

The overall document has a classification. This is at the top of the page/on the cover sheet.

Then, individual paragraphs are classified based on the information the paragraph contains. So, for example, a document might be classified TS, with individual paragraphs marked (U), (C), (S), or (TS) based on the data within. So if the paragraph has a (C) in it, it's not a post-hoc classification, it means that this paragraph contained information classified at the confidential level. (confidential, secret, top secret).

There is no post-hoc, that is the classification at the time it was sent. This means that the paragraph was replied to or copy/pasted from one that was classified.

[Bill the Cat]

I used to think that was true, but it isn't. It turns out that knowingly introducing classified information to an unclassified network is a security violation, not a crime.

Source: https://www.grassley.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2019-10-17%20State%20Dept.%20to%20CEG%20-%20Classified%20Emails.pdf

The DoS definition of a security incident found in 12 FAM 550 reflects the framework set forth in E.O. 13526. Incidents are categorized as either violations or infractions based on the likelihood of unauthorized disclosure. An incident is categorized as a violation when it is "a knowing, willful, or negligent action that could reasonably be expected to result in the unauthorized disclosure of classified information." An incident is categorized as an infraction when it represents a failure to safeguard classified information but could not reasonably be expected to resu]t in an unauthorized disclosure of classified information. Any introduction of classified material to an un_classified information system or network that results in its transmission outside DoS control is categorized as a violation.

© Copyright Original Source

Sen Grassley is correct in that there is a violation. However, they are still illegal and carry punishments with their commission. 18 U.S. Code § 1924 says " 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 five years, or both."

[Stoic]

You do know you're replying to guy who does this for a living, right?

Cool. Then if I'm wrong, he can correct me.

More likely, he'll know enough about the subject to understand that I'm right.

[Bill the Cat]

And aren't certain communications considered classified by default even without explicit markings?

Yes.

[Mountain Man]

I used to think that was true, but it isn't. It turns out that knowingly introducing classified information to an unclassified network is a security violation, not a crime.

Source: https://www.grassley.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2019-10-17%20State%20Dept.%20to%20CEG%20-%20Classified%20Emails.pdf

The DoS definition of a security incident found in 12 FAM 550 reflects the framework set forth in E.O. 13526. Incidents are categorized as either violations or infractions based on the likelihood of unauthorized disclosure. An incident is categorized as a violation when it is "a knowing, willful, or negligent action that could reasonably be expected to result in the unauthorized disclosure of classified information." An incident is categorized as an infraction when it represents a failure to safeguard classified information but could not reasonably be expected to resu]t in an unauthorized disclosure of classified information. Any introduction of classified material to an un_classified information system or network that results in its transmission outside DoS control is categorized as a violation.

© Copyright Original Source

You do know you're replying to guy who does this for a living, right?

[Stoic]

Just a friendly reminder.....This is wrong.

There were paragraphs marked with paragraph markings (c) (s) (ts) that identified those paragraphs as classified.

My understanding is that the paragraphs with those markings were not classified at the time the emails were sent (though the information had earlier been temporarily classified). (And there was no (s) or (ts), just (c)s.)

Also, the paragraph markings don't identify paragraphs as classified unless the document is classified, as identified at the top and bottom of each page.

[Stoic]

Transmitting classified information via non-classified networks is illegal.

I used to think that was true, but it isn't. It turns out that knowingly introducing classified information to an unclassified network is a security violation, not a crime.

Source: https://www.grassley.senate.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2019-10-17%20State%20Dept.%20to%20CEG%20-%20Classified%20Emails.pdf

The DoS definition of a security incident found in 12 FAM 550 reflects the framework set forth in E.O. 13526. Incidents are categorized as either violations or infractions based on the likelihood of unauthorized disclosure. An incident is categorized as a violation when it is "a knowing, willful, or negligent action that could reasonably be expected to result in the unauthorized disclosure of classified information." An incident is categorized as an infraction when it represents a failure to safeguard classified information but could not reasonably be expected to resu]t in an unauthorized disclosure of classified information. Any introduction of classified material to an un_classified information system or network that results in its transmission outside DoS control is categorized as a violation.

© Copyright Original Source

[Ronson]

It depends on the nature of the emails, and whether or not he was authorized to use that account for non-classified communication.

The thing that liberals love to forget is that the reason Hillary's email server is such a big deal is because, first of all, it was secret; secondly, it was unsecure and basically wide open to any foreign government who wanted to login and take a peek; and third, she used the server for sending and receiving classified information.

So unless all or some of that also applies to Pompeo, there is no analogous circumstance here.

And she destroyed its contents when an inquiry was launched.

[CivilDiscourse]

And aren't certain communications considered classified by default even without explicit markings?

It's not "certain communications" it's simply a fact. Markings don't create classification, they label it. To use a clear example, if the menu, preparation, ingredients, and guests of the presidents meals is a classified topic, then any communication about that topic, by those with knowledge of the topic, is classified, whether appropriately marked or not. I know that largely lines up with what you said, but it's different. It's never classified because someone slapped a a label on it, it's classified because its classified, and then someone labels it to highlight the classification.

[Hypatia_Alexandria]

It's called work. And my bills don't get paid by tracking down every book and scholar you cite. So, I decided after my assessment was over to let it go. You'll never convince me and I'll never convince you. I know what I have read and studied, and it doesn't align with what you believe. So, I'm dropping this sidecar.

You are correct. I was just teasing you!

Transmitting classified information via non-classified networks is illegal. Transmitting unclassified information isn't, unless it can be aggregated with other unclassified material into something that rises to the level of secret. Nothing Pompeo has been accused of in the OP remotely rises to the level of secret information.

Oh so that is the difference as far as anyone knows? Thank you.

[Mountain Man]

False.

Source: https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2016/jul/06/hillary-clinton/fbi-findings-tear-holes-hillary-clintons-email-def/

In total, the investigation found 110 emails in 52 email chains containing information that was classified at the time it was sent or received. Eight chains contained top secret information, the highest level of classification, 36 chains contained secret information, and the remaining eight contained confidential information. Most of these emails, however, did not contain markings clearly delineating their status.

© Copyright Original Source

And aren't certain communications considered classified by default even without explicit markings?

[Mountain Man]

Just a friendly reminder.....This is wrong.

There were paragraphs marked with paragraph markings (c) (s) (ts) that identified those paragraphs as classified.

Also, Hillary instructed her staff on how to identify and remove classified markings from emails before forwarding them.

[Bill the Cat]

Well I recall a convenient exit.

It's called work. And my bills don't get paid by tracking down every book and scholar you cite. So, I decided after my assessment was over to let it go. You'll never convince me and I'll never convince you. I know what I have read and studied, and it doesn't align with what you believe. So, I'm dropping this sidecar.

In what respects? Why is one acceptable and the other not?

Transmitting classified information via non-classified networks is illegal. Transmitting unclassified information isn't, unless it can be aggregated with other unclassified material into something that rises to the level of secret. Nothing Pompeo has been accused of in the OP remotely rises to the level of secret information.

[Bill the Cat]

Just a friendly reminder there were no at-the-time classified secrets on Clinton's email server.

False.

Source: https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2016/jul/06/hillary-clinton/fbi-findings-tear-holes-hillary-clintons-email-def/

In total, the investigation found 110 emails in 52 email chains containing information that was classified at the time it was sent or received. Eight chains contained top secret information, the highest level of classification, 36 chains contained secret information, and the remaining eight contained confidential information. Most of these emails, however, did not contain markings clearly delineating their status.

© Copyright Original Source