1,600 Classified Emails With Dozens Designated “Secret” or “Top Secret/SAP.” — Obama Will Never Let Clinton Be Indicted or Charged Will Pardon Her — Trust — Issues — Turnout (TITs) — Will Determine Who Becomes Next President — Videos

Posted on February 20, 2016. Filed under: American History, Articles, Blogroll, Business, Communications, Computers, Crime, Crisis, Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), Elections, Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Federal Government, Foreign Policy, government spending, history, Law, liberty, Life, Links, media, National Security Agency (NSA), National Security Agency (NSA_, Newspapers, People, Philosophy, Photos, Political Correctness, Politics, Press, Radio, Rants, Raves, Talk Radio, Television, Terrorism, Video, War, Wealth, Weapons, Wisdom, Work, Writing | Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |

Project_1

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts

Pronk Pops Show 617: February 4, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 616: February 3, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 615: February 1, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 614: January 29, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 613: January 28, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 612: January 27, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 611: January 26, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 610: January 25, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 609: January 22, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 608: January 21, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 607: January 20, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 606: January 19, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 605: January 15, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 604: January 14, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 603: January 13, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 602: January 12, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 601: January 11, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 600: January 8, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 599: January 6, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 598: January 5, 2016

Pronk Pops Show 597: December 21, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 596: December 18, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 595: December 17, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 594: December 16, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 593: December 15, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 592: December 14, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 591: December 11, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 590: December 10, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 589: December 9, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 588: December 7, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 587: December 4, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 586: December 3, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 585: December 2, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 584: December 1, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 583: November 30, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 582: November 25, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 581: November 24, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 580: November 23, 2015  

Pronk Pops Show 579: November 20, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 578: November 19, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 577: November 18, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 576: November 17, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 575: November 16, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 574: November 13, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 573: November 12, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 572: November 11, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 571: November 9, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 570: November 6, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 569: November 5, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 568: November 4, 2015

Pronk Pops Show 567: November 3, 2015 

Pronk Pops Show 566: November 2, 2015

Story 2: 1,600 Classified Emails With Dozens Designated “Secret” or “Top Secret/SAP.” — Obama Will Never Let Clinton Be Indicted or Charged Will Pardon Her — Trust — Issues — Turnout (TITs) — Will Determine Who Becomes Next  President —  Videos

clinton untrustworthy Clinton-Emails hillary-and-obama

Former secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Tuesday, March 10, 2015 she used a private domain for her official work during her time at the State Department out of "convenience," but admitted in retrospect "it would have been better" to use multiple emails.

“I did not send nor receive anything that was classified at the time,” Clinton said at a campaign stop in Iowa.

“The fact remains Secretary Clinton is the only cabinet official to ever house and maintain a private server in her basement that contained all of her work and personal emails,” said Jeff Bechdel, America Rising PAC communications director, in a statement. “The security of that server and the risk it posed to national security is at the heart of the FBI’s ongoing investigation — not 12-year-old emails sent to Secretaries of past administrations.”

Clinton Says Email Probe ‘Very Much Like Benghazi;’ Republicans ‘Beat Up On Me’

State Dept. Dodges On Reports Of Seven Additional ‘Top Secret’ Clinton Emails

State Department declares Hillary Clinton emails secret

REP.Jordan, Clinton/Obamanation/Rice Benghazi Lied over an over again to get obamanation re elected

State Dept On Hillary Clinton Email: “Too Damaging To Release” – Special Report 1st Segment

Hillary Clinton’s Email was So Top Secret, It Can Never be Released, Even in Redacted Form!

EMAIL FALLOUT: State Department withholds ‘top secret’ Clinton memos; some ‘too damaging’ to release

State Department on Hillary Clinton Emails (C-SPAN)

US: ‘top secret’ emails on Hillary Clinton’s home server

State Department Classifies 22 Clinton Emails Top Secret

FBI found TOP SECRET info in Hillary emails, evidence enough to CHARGE Clinton says Monica Crowley

CNN Democratic Presidential Town Hall: Biggest Winner

 

How did ‘top secret’ emails end up on Hillary Clinton’s server?

George Stephanopoulos: “You know, you’ve said many times that the emails were not marked classified. The non-disclosure agreement you signed as secretary of state says that that’s really not that relevant. It says classified information is marked or unmarked classified and that all of you are trained to treat all of that sensitively and should know the difference.”

Hillary Clinton: “Well of course and that’s exactly what I did. I take classified information very seriously. You know, you can’t get information off the classified system in the State Department to put on an unclassified system, no matter what that system is. We were very specific about that. And when you receive information, of course, there has to be some markings, some indication that someone down the chain thought that this was classified and that was not the case.”

— exchange on ABC’s “This Week,” Jan. 31, 2016

Many readers continue to ask questions about Hillary Clinton’s private email setup and whether she mishandled classified information. We have looked at this issue in the past, but the reader interest spiked again after the revelation that seven email chains contained “top secret” information and would not be released.

As the saga has dragged on, Clinton’s terminology has become ever more nuanced. When she first discussed her private-email arrangement in detail last March, her staff distributed a Q&A that flatly stated that no classified material was sent or received by Clinton at her private email address. Now she says the emails were not marked classified: “When you receive information, of course, there has to be some markings, some indication that someone down the chain thought that this was classified and that was not the case.”

In the ABC News interview, she cited the opinion of Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), the ranking member of the Intelligence Committee: “There is no classified marked information on those emails, sent or received by me. Dianne Feinstein, the ranking member of the intelligence committee, who’s had a chance to review them, has said that this email chain did not originate with me and that there were no classification markings.” (Feinstein did release such a statement.)

So what’s going on here?

The Facts

The nondisclosure agreement

Clinton did sign a Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement, in which she pledged to safeguard classified information whether “marked or unmarked classified information, including oral communications,” as defined by Executive Order 12958.

Interestingly, in that executive order, the secretary of state is given the authority to classify and declassify information at the “top secret” level. In other words, Clinton had presidential authority to decide what State Department information was classified or not.

“It is not simply that she would ‘know the difference’ between classified and unclassified information — it was up to her to make the original determination,” said Steven Aftergood, director of the project on government secrecy at the Federation of American Scientists. “This authority, however, did not extend to information generated by other agencies, such as CIA.”

(Note: A number of readers have asked about an email in which Clinton asked to have classified markings removed regarding some talking points, and have it emailed unsecured. In theory, under the executive order, she had the authority to declassify the material, since it originated in the State Department. However, a congressional official said the indications are the material ultimately was transmitted appropriately.)

Classified and unclassified systems

The State Department has both classified and unclassified systems — known informally as the “high side” and the “low side.” The classified system has tight controls, often housed in what is known as a Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility (SCIF); it is not possible to “cut and paste” from the classified system into the unclassified system. Instead, one would have to extract the information from the classified system and then reenter it manually into the unclassified system. Thus far, no one has alleged that happened.

Instead, congressional aides say, the concern centers on the fact that secret information was revealed as part of an email exchange. In at least one case, the discussion started with an aide forwarding a newspaper article; then in subsequent exchanges, aides revealed sensitive details as they discussed (for instance) the shortcomings of that public report. Ultimately the email chain ended up in Clinton’s email box. If the email chain was released, some intelligence officials believe, it would confirm aspects of a secret program.

Clinton’s private email system was designed to deal with the unclassified communications, similar to the unclassified state.gov email account. Clinton claims it was for convenience; others suspect it was to prevent reporters or political opponents from easily obtaining her emails through the Freedom of Information Act.

“The use of a home server was the original problem that spawned all of these continuing concerns,” Aftergood said. “Everything that the secretary of state does or says is potentially sensitive, even if it is unclassified, and so it ought to have been protected accordingly. The home server also complicates or undermines records management and document preservation. It was a mistake.”

Clinton’s private email system was discovered when the House Select Committee on Benghazi sought her emails at the time of the 2012 attacks and initially was told none could be found. Ironically, if Clinton had operated from a state.gov account, the inquiry would have ended once the Benghazi emails were turned over. Instead, Clinton has been forced to turn over all of her work-related emails for public release — precisely the situation she presumably had hoped to avoid.

The ‘top secret’ communications

So how could information sent on an unclassified system turn out to be “top secret”? The answer is easy — when State Department officials review it in response to a request for public release.

“State’s upgrading process is retroactive,” said one congressional aide. “It’s not a sign of wrongdoing but rather the normal process used by State under all administrations before unclassified documents are made public (usually via FOIA). Often an unclassified email will be retroactively classified to protect foreign and diplomatic communications, for example.”

Yet for intelligence officials, the Clinton controversy has exposed serious shortcomings in how the State Department handles sensitive communications, another congressional aide said. In the view of intelligence officials, State Department officials have been sending highly sensitive information on the unclassified system — with the expectation that if a FOIA request is made, department officials could then redact the emails and prevent any classified information from becoming public.

In other words, at State, the basis for classification appeared to rest more with FOIA than the president’s executive order — which some intelligence officials believe is backward.

Indeed, when State released the first batch of Clinton emails, some in the intelligence community were upset at what had not been redacted in a pair of released emails. As a result, other members of the intelligence community demanded a seat at the table as future redaction determinations were made.

The various intelligence agencies since have been arguing about what should be disclosed, with at least seven email chains (22 separate emails) — and possibly more — labeled as unfit for any public disclosure. Rep. Chris Stewart (R-Utah), a member of the House Intelligence Committee who says he has reviewed the emails, told Fox News on Feb. 3 that the emails “do reveal classified methods, they do reveal classified sources, and they do reveal human assets.” Other sources who have viewed the emails do not describe the emails as strongly, though one official said Clinton’s aides might have put their security clearances at risk.

Different government agencies often may disagree about the level of classification. One good example are the memoirs of former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice and former vice president Richard B. Cheney. Both discussed a policy debate over North Korea. Cheney mentioned traces of enriched uranium on materials obtained from North Korea — which had beenreported years earlier in The Washington Post — after receiving clearance to do so from the CIA. But to her frustration, Rice was not able to mention the uranium, though she wanted to, because the State Department refused to give her clearance — even though the information was already in the public domain.

In one famous case, journalist James Bamford in 1978 received 250 pages of previously classified documents regarding a Justice Department probe of illegal wiretapping performed by the National Security Agency. Two years later, the NSA convinced a new attorney general that the information should be reclassified. The government then demanded that Bamford return the documents or face prosecution. (He published the information anyway and no charges were brought.)

Update: NBC News reported that the State Department Inspector General concluded that classified information also had been transmitted over the personal email accounts of Clinton’s predecessors, Condoleezza Rice and Colin L. Powell.

Markings

Finally, we come to Clinton’s excuse — that none of the emails were marked classified. This is a bit of a red herring. Anything marked classified could not be sent through an unclassified system — and officials are supposed to know enough about the sensitivity of communications to recognize material that could be considered classified under the executive order.

The executive order, for instance, says all foreign government information should be presumed to cause damage if disclosed without authorization. In reviewing Clinton’s emails, for instance, the State Department redacted every page of a private communication to Clinton from then-British Foreign Secretary David Miliband.

“It is entirely possible for previously unclassified information to be redesignated as classified, as long as it has not already been officially released to the public,” Aftergood noted. “It is also true that the question of public disclosure can drive a decision to classify information that had not been classified up to that point.”

The Pinocchio Test

Clinton is in a pickle here, largely of her own making.

The emails in question were sent on an unclassified system — as they would have been if she had followed standard protocol and used a state.gov account. Under State Department practice, a request for public release of her emails would have been subject to the same classification discussion currently underway. Any “top secret” communications would have been withheld.

However, if she did not have a private server, intelligence officials now would not be scrutinizing every single Clinton email for possible public release. That has heightened the scrutiny of what should not be disclosed — and what was discussed in the unclassified system in the first place.

The State Department’s unclassified system is not perfect — the Russians have hacked it — but Clinton’s home server was outside official control or supervision. Moreover, unlike state.gov, it did not have dedicated government security personnel responsible for it.

Clinton said, “When you receive information, of course, there has to be some markings, some indication that someone down the chain thought that this was classified and that was not the case.” But that’s only half of the story. Even without markings, officials are supposed to recognize that information passed through an unclassified system might be deemed as classified and should take steps to protect it.

The Clinton campaign has argued that some intelligence officials are now engaged in a game of overclassification. That could well be the case; it’s impossible to know without access to emails that may not be released for years. But this debate would not even be taking place without the decision to set up the private server in the first place.

Two Pinocchios

 

(About our rating scale)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/02/04/how-did-top-secret-emails-end-up-on-hillary-clintons-server/

FBI contacts Colin Powell as part of email probe

State Department finding of classified emails sent to other secretaries could give Clinton new cover

Former Secretary of State Colin Powell said the FBI has contacted him about his use of personal email when he was the nation’s top diplomat, as a review conducted by the State Department inspector general concluded that Powell and former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice both received classified information through private email accounts.

The revelation that the State Department now believes both Rice and Powell received sensitive information via private accounts could give former secretary Hillary Clinton a new line of defense as she tries to dampen the controversy over classified information found on her own private email server.

The State Department inquiry identified 10 messages sent to Rice’s immediate staff that were classified and two sent to Powell, according to Rep. Elijah Cummings of Maryland, the ranking member on the House Oversight and Benghazi committees.

The emails, Cummings said, appear to have no classification markings, and it is still unclear if the content of the emails was or should have been considered classified when the emails were originally written and sent.

In an interview with POLITICO Thursday. Powell vigorously disputed the sensitivity of the information sent to him through personal email, but he acknowledged the law enforcement interest in his email routine.

“The FBI has come to us,” Powell said. Two FBI agents visited Powell late last year for a discussion an aide described as a casual conversation about email practices during his term as secretary from 2001 to 2005.

Powell said the pair of messages State is now calling classified had come from two different U.S. ambassadors abroad.

“They’re fairly innocuous and very benign and neither ambassador classified them at the time. They were merely information memos sent to State.gov,” Powell said. “My executive assistants thought they should send them to me on my personal email. I found that personally acceptable. That’s why I bought all those computers in the first place.”

Powell seemed exasperated by State’s latest claim. The agency has designated the two messages “Confidential,” which is the lowest tier of classification.

“Now, 11 or 12 years later, as part of a whole process of reviewing things somebody in the department says, ‘Well, they’re classified.’ My response to that is no they were not,” Powell said. ” You can say your judgment is they should have been classified but at the time they were not classified.

Clinton’s presidential campaign said the news and Powell’s reaction reinforces their view that Clinton’s messages are being overclassified and that the retroactive judgments to do that are unfair.

“We agree with Sec. Powell that his emails are being overclassified & they should be released along [with] Hillary’s,” Clinton campaign chair John Podesta said on Twitter.

Campaign spokesman Brian Fallon said that the disclosures about Powell and Rice’s emails reveal the controversy over purportedly classified information on Clinton’s emails is “bogus.”

“This is a major development. In fact, I would go as far as to say it’s a game changer,” Fallon said on MSNBC. “You have a government bureaucracy that has an excessive treatment of what should be considered classified information and now we’re finding that the same agency that has been looking into Hillary Clinton’s emails and having that excessive definition of what should be treated as classified is making the same judgment about Hillary Clinton’s predecessors…We think that any fair minded person if they judge the contents would see that this is overreach — this is excessive classification.”

But conservative groups disputed that, saying Clinton’s situation was significantly different than Powell’s. They also pointed to the sheer volume of classified documents that passed through Clinton’s server, and noted that some classifications reached higher, more sensitive levels, including “top secret.”

“The fact remains Secretary Clinton is the only cabinet official to ever house and maintain a private server in her basement that contained all of her work and personal emails,” said Jeff Bechdel, America Rising PAC communications director, in a statement. “The security of that server and the risk it posed to national security is at the heart of the FBI’s ongoing investigation — not 12-year-old emails sent to Secretaries of past administrations.”

Rice has maintained she did not use email during her tenure as secretary. The messages sent to her apparently were emailed to her close aides. NBC News, which first reported State’s conclusions said the ten messages sent to her are a mix of information classified at the “Confidential” level and the “Secret” level, which is the middle tier of classification.

An aide to Rice, Georgia Godfrey, said the messages in question did not contain intelligence reports but solely diplomatic exchanges.

“She did not use email as Secretary nor have a personal email account. My understanding is that the report is in reference to emails sent to her assistant reporting diplomatic conversations and they contained no intelligence information,” Godfrey said in a statement.

Godfrey told POLITICO Rice had not been contacted by the FBI.

More than 1,600 of Clinton’s messages have been deemed classified — although they were not marked that way when sent. Dozens have now been designated “Secret” or “Top Secret.”

Cummings, a longtime defender of Clinton, held up the new information about the former secretaries as proof that the email controversy surrounding the 2016 Democratic frontrunner was overplayed. He blasted Republicans for trying to use the issue to hurt Clinton in the polls.

“My concern has been that Republicans are spending millions of taxpayer dollars singling out Secretary Clinton because she is running for President — often leaking inaccurate information — while at the same time disregarding the actions of Republican Secretaries of State,” Cummings said. “Based on this new revelation, it is clear that the Republican investigations are nothing more than a transparent political attempt to use taxpayer funds to target the Democratic candidate for President,”

Cummings indicated he has requested copies of the emails.

Rep. Eliot Engel, Ranking Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said the news proves that use of private email is a systematic problem in government — not just a Clinton problem.

“The truth couldn’t be plainer: the private-email problem is not a Hillary Clinton problem,” he said in a statement. “It’s a government-wide problem that’s existed since the advent of email itself. The manner in which sensitive information is dealt with just hasn’t kept up with advancements in technology. And that’s the problem we should be focused on.”

The State inspector general has been reviewing the email practices of the five previous Secretaries of State. In a letter sent to Undersecretary of State for Management Patrick Kennedy and shared Wednesday with Congress, the internal watchdog office expressed concerns that additional classified information may still reside on State’s unclassified archive of email messages.

State Department spokesman John Kirby declined to elaborate on the inspector general’s findings but confirmed receiving the report.

“We’re in receipt of a letter from the IG regarding sensitive information….We’ll respond accordingly,” Kirby said. “Obviously, we take the protection of sensitive information very seriously.”

Powell also noted some ways his situation was different from Clinton’s, for example, that he used a commercial email account. “I had no private server, no private domain. I did not take [any messages] anywhere when I left the department,” he said.

Clinton’s messages resided on a private server that was kept mainly at her family home in Chappaqua, N.Y. She turned over about 30,000 such messages to the State Department at its request in late 2014 and discarded another roughly 32,000 messages deemed personal.

Powell did say that he believes the debate over Clinton’s emails is being colored by her presidential run.

“You know the politics,” he said.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/fbi-colin-powell-email-probe-218748#ixzz3zEiTumTX

 

WaPo/ABC poll: Hillary’s relative trustworthiness down to 36% … among Democrats

JANUARY 27, 2016 BY ED MORRISSEY

Update: I had not noticed that this poll, unlike others from WaPo/ABC and others, posed this question as a relative measure between the two candidates rather than a standalone measure. I’ve edited the headline and the post to better reflect that. Thanks to Twitter follower Cleentonnfor pointing it out.

Edited post follows:

Less than four in ten Democrats think of Hillary Clinton as honest and trustworthy compared to her main challenger for the Democratic nomination, according to the latest Washington Post/ABC News poll. Her honesty numbers fell six points in three months, allowing Bernie Sanders to get within twenty points of her for the first time in this series. However, Sanders falls short on other personal characteristics, such as … better personality? Talk about a burn:

Clinton’s single greatest vulnerability has worsened in this poll, produced for ABC by Langer Research Associates: Sanders now leads by 12 points, 48-36 percent, in being seen as more honest and trustworthy, vs. 6 points last month and an even split in October. Should Clinton emerge as the nominee, it’s an issue the Republican candidate likely will repeat at every chance.

Further, the candidates are virtually even, 47-43 percent, Clinton-Sanders, on who “is closer to you on the issues,” down from a 17-point Clinton lead just last month. And it’s close (Clinton +7) on who’d do a better job “bringing needed change to Washington.”

On the issues, though, Hillary is blowing Sanders out of the water. She enjoys double-digit gaps in every policy area except for regulating banks, which Sanders only carries with a 48/42 plurality. Hillary gets 58/30 on who has the better personality, which suggests that fewer Democrats are “feeling the Bern” than his coverage suggests.

The honest/trustworthy indicator may be an indirect indicator of a lowered ability to inspire turnout, though:

hillary-honest-chart

When only slightly more than a third of your own party considers you honest and trustworthy as compared to a career Congressional backbencher, don’t expect a wave of excitement to sweep through the base when Election Night arrives.

ABC covers the national results in its report this morning, but national results mean very little at this stage. It’s the state results that matter for the horse race, and the opening races look like they are going Bernie’s way:

 

Quinnipiac’s poll of the Iowa caucus puts Sanders ahead by four with five days left. Younger voters are driving Bernmentum:

With strong support from men, very liberal and younger voters, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders takes 49 percent of Iowa likely Democratic Caucus participants, with 45 percent for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and 4 percent for former Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.

This is virtually unchanged from results of a January 12 survey by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University showing Sanders at 49 percent, with 44 percent for Clinton and 4 percent for O’Malley. …

Likely Democratic Caucus participants 18 to 44 years old back Sanders over Clinton 78 – 21 percent. Clinton is ahead 53 – 39 percent among voters 45 to 64 years old and 71 – 21 percent among voters over 65 years old.

On thing to watch will be how many of these Sanders voters actually make it to the caucuses. The split between veterans and rookies is much more dramatic for Democrats than it was for Republicans in yesterday’s Q-poll, although among both parties rookies account for about a third of the LV sample. Sanders leads among first-time likely caucus goers 72/26, while Hillary leads among those who have caucused before at 54/38. Sanders had better have a great ground organization to get those voters to the caucuses, or his goose is cooked in Iowa.

http://hotair.com/archives/2016/01/27/wapoabc-poll-hillarys-trustworthiness-down-to-36-among-democrats/

6 in 10 American Voters Do Not Trust Hillary Clinton

Plurality would be ‘embarrassed’ if she won 2016 election
BY:
December 22, 2015

Nearly six in 10 American voters do not trust Hillary Clinton as the former secretary of state’s private email use continues to undergo scrutiny from the FBI.

Fifty-nine percent of U.S. voters rate Clinton as not honest and trustworthy, compared with 35 percent who believe the opposite, according to a Quinnipiac University pollreleased Tuesday.

Clinton is not trusted by nearly one-fifth of likely Democratic primary voters and 72 percent of independent voters.

The same survey also found that a plurality of American voters would be embarrassed if Hillary Clinton were elected president in 2016. Specifically, 35 percent would be embarrassed by her election, while a slightly smaller share of 33 percent would be proud. Twenty-nine percent would feel neither way if Clinton prevailed in the presidential election.

Those embarrassed by a hypothetical Clinton election include five percent of Democrats and 32 percent of independent voters.

The poll also produced another negative favorable rating for Clinton, who has witnessed her favorable and honesty scores drop since it was revealed that she exclusively used private email to conduct government business while working in the Obama administration.

Currently, 51 percent of American voters view Clinton negatively–including 59 percent of independents–whereas 43 percent have a positive opinion of the Democratic candidate. Alternatively, Clinton’s competitor for the nomination, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I., Vt.), is viewed positively by a plurality of voters.

Half of American voters also do not believe that Clinton cares about their needs and problems, while 46 percent think that she does. Individuals in all age brackets are more likely than not to say that Clinton does not care about their needs, save those belonging to the youngest sector of 18-34 year olds. A plurality of those in Clinton’s own age bracket–65 and up–do not think she cares about their problems.

Fifty-five percent of U.S. voters also do not think that Clinton shares their values.

Currently, the former secretary of state leads Sanders 61 to 30 percent among likely Democratic primary voters for the nomination, though nearly four in 10 Democrats who support Clinton say they might change their minds before heading to the polls.

The survey was conducted between Dec. 16 and 20 following reports that an intelligence community review confirmed that two emails held on Clinton’s private server contained “top secret” information at the time they were sent. The review’s findings pushed back on objections from the Clinton campaign and the State Department.

The FBI has been investigating Clinton’s use of personal email since the intelligence community inspector general concluded that the emails were top secret. The bureau has reportedly expanded its probe and is looking at possible criminal code violations.

http://freebeacon.com/politics/6-in-10-american-voters-do-not-trust-hillary-clinton/

Clinton: I did not send or get classified emails on private account

The Pronk Pops Show Podcasts Portfolio

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 617-

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 608-616

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 599-607

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 590-598

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 585- 589

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 575-584

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 565-574

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 556-564

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 546-555

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 538-545

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 532-537

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 526-531

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 519-525

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 510-518

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 500-509

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 490-499

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 480-489

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 473-479

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 464-472

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 455-463

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 447-454

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 439-446

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 431-438

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 422-430

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 414-421

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 408-413

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 400-407

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 391-399

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 383-390

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 376-382

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 369-375

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 360-368

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 354-359

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 346-353

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 338-345

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 328-337

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 319-327

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 307-318

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 296-306

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 287-295

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 277-286

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 264-276

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 250-263

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 236-249

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 222-235

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 211-221

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 202-210

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 194-201

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 184-193

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 174-183

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 165-173

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 158-164

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 151-157

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 143-150

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 135-142

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 131-134

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 124-130

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 121-123

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 118-120

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 113 -117

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Show 112

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 108-111

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 106-108

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 104-105

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 101-103

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 98-100

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 94-97

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 93

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 92

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 91

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 88-90

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 84-87

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 79-83

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 74-78

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 71-73

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 68-70

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 65-67

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 62-64

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 58-61

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 55-57

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 52-54

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 49-51

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 45-48

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 41-44

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 38-40

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 34-37

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 30-33

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 27-29

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 17-26

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 16-22

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 10-15

Listen To Pronk Pops Podcast or Download Shows 01-09

com/watch?v=zw3p2E9gziM]</p>


Make a Comment

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Liked it here?
Why not try sites on the blogroll...

%d bloggers like this: