The Hillary Clinton email-server scandal likely has to take down at least one other person. I am assuming that if there are any classified documents that have made their way on to the unclassified internet & that the message was sent by or sent to someone else. I am assuming that Hillary Clinton did not commit self-spillage. That means that anyone pushing this story is helping to get at least one other person fired and unable to work for the government.
Why is a better question? What do we really gain? Is it worth the collateral damage to be certain of Hillary Clinton making a mistake that many in federal employees make? Do we need to know she is fallible? Or do we need to take down a diplomat for spillage?
I want to be clear about my terminology. Data spillage is the transfer of classified or sensitive information to unaccredited or unauthorized systems, individuals, applications, or media. According to : https://www.nsa.gov/ia/_files/factsheets/Final_Data_Spill.pdf . That is what I refer to as spillage. I think that what happened is an incident of spillage. Not some grand conspiracy to hurt or defraud the government in any way.
Also for ease of typing I keep saying Republican. First because I think most of the people who are pushing this scandal are Republican either registered or in ideology. I acknowledge that not all are. They could be part of any party including the Democratic. I acknowledge I am not fully addressing the width and breadth of the opposition. But for my own speedy typing, non-inventiveness and laziness; my sides are Republican vs. Hillary Clinton in this particular post.
Most likely there is no Top Secret data that got out. I think that news agencies have been saying / reporting Top Secret to make things seem more salacious. It is likely only secret level or sensitive information that has spilled. The amount of people who have top secret access is very small compared to the number who have secret access. Making it much more difficult.
This is by design. The scrutiny of top secret access is more rigorous to begin with. The application is longer and more intrusive. They ask more invasive questions. The FBI [whom the Republicans are also impugning again after the birther non-sense] interview more contacts. The clearance level is for 5 years as opposed to 10 with top secret. It is a higher standard. So it would be worse if that is the infringement. As is; I don’t think it was even secret. It was probably just sensitive; NOW, and when it happened was unclassified.
Moreover; most secret domains that the United States uses will not allow you to send to unclassified email address. I say most not all. It is possible just not probable. Spillage does occur. Mistake occur. It is always taken seriously. I think it should be. I take it seriously. I am not saying it shouldn’t be.
But I do question why this is major news. This happens and isn’t news. Should we as a nation always be told when it happens? Should we know all the participants?
That is what I am truly asking here. Who are they going to find was a part of this spillage? What will the Republicans do when they find this out?
Also, this is something that all future federal servants should keep in mind. Hillary Clinton should have had premonition. Some form of pre-cognition that would have helped her foresee this reclassification of information. So anyone else who serves federally must be wary of the Republicans who want them to have these X Men like powers.
Not sure that is in the job description of the Secretary of State. But since the information was not either classified or sensitive when it was sent but is now, what else could have helped Hillary Clinton?
That I know of; no one lost their job over the Edward Snowden leak other than Snowden himself. Same with the Bradley Manning leak although Chelsea Manning is enjoying 3 hots and cot courtesy of the military prison system. What I am saying is I don’t know of anyone else losing their job. Ironic with the whistle blower protections. Anyway, I acknowledge I could be wrong about that. My focus is the collateral damage of the situation.
In this instance; will the Republicans who are calling for Hillary Clinton’s head also do the same over the diplomat who either sent or received the data? Are they advocating for the collateral damage. Will they be upfront about the fact that they are trying to ruin careers?
I doubt it.
The McLaughlin Report that aired locally on 16 August 2015; asked if Hillary Clinton will lose her security clearance over this issue. A few people said yes. Which means whomever is on the other end of it has to as well. Also, it means that any other government employee with an incident of spillage needs to lose their clearance as well.
I am sure all these repubilcans never make a mistake. However some other people do. And when they do; I don’t think we just pull a clearance.
Lest anyone say this post is in favor of any one of the two major parties; let it be known that I am for the dismantling of the two party system in favor of a five party national system along with many other regional parties. The continuance of a two party system insures that the people are rarely truly represented in any level of government: local, state, or national.
I mean does anyone really believe that Mike Huckabee, Lindsey Graham and Donald Trump have that much in common? Does anyone think that behind closed doors they are all laughing and enjoying each other’s company and/or ideas? If not; why are they in the same party?
It is just a reality that other parties outside Democrat and Republican do not get coverage. They aren’t taken seriously. So potential candidates via for only two parties. Then those two parties can bicker without actually making any changes. They can blame and finger point. But without a real and viable alternative; the “regular people” have nowhere else to go. With the money and number of ideas out there; “regular people” need more ways to express themselves. A or B is not accurately representing the populace.
We as Americans should demand more. But I think the media has convinced the majority of Americans that more parties won’t work. Which is ridiculous. The dominance of Coke and Pepsi doesn’t stop contenders like Dr. Pepper and Snapple. We as Americans need more options. I mean there are 17 people vying for the Republican nomination. Why? Why not have other parties instead?
And the same can be said for the 7 people vying for the Democratic nomination. I mean the biggest thing I see out of Bernie Sanders run is that one; he is listed as independent in the Senate [ so why run as a Democrat?] but should probably be a Socialist [not a slight in any way just a classification]. The excitement around his speeches shows clearly the media is wrong and “regular people” do listen to many different types of political voices.
The two party system is not helping move the United States forward. We need to be open not just to a third party but to a fourth and fifth as well. Those parties exist. A true Libertarian party that would not include anyone who has R by their name. U.S. Constitutional. Green. Communist [yes that is a real party here in the US]. And many others. I would much prefer to see more people from those parties get coverage.
I doubt highly the bigger media markets [NBC, CBS, ABC, Fox, CNN and the like of their ilk] will cover anyone outside of the Republican or Democratic party. Which is sad. But this is off topic so I digress.
I want to see what the end result is. Will this take down other people? How will the diplomatic community react? Will we see less people go into the diplomatic service? Is the lasting effect worth the initial reactions?
[Reviewing this post; I probably should have split this into two posts but I am letting my stream of consciousness stand]