From the Observer.com:
EmailGate and the Mystery of the Missing GAMMA
by John R. Schindler
Hillary Clinton’s ‘unclassified’ email included highly classified NSA information—why didn’t the FBI mention this fact?
Why? In my opinion FBI Director James Comey surrendered his veracity, his honesty and his oath when he recommended no indictment against Hillary Rodham Clinton. Truthfully, I can only hope that Comey sleeps but only a few hours every night, if even those. Go here for my opinion on Comey’s resultant Hillary protectivism.
Last week’s Federal Bureau of Investigation release of materials relating to their investigation of Hillary Clinton has reignited the political firestorm surrounding EmailGate. How the Democratic nominee mishandled her emails while she was secretary of state is again front-page news, which is bad news for Hillary. Particularly because the FBI’s data dump demonstrates clearly that Clinton is either dumb or dishonest—and perhaps both.
I say: both.
Hillary’s professed inability to even recognize classified information, thinking the “C” (for Confidential) meant alphabetical order, will now enter the pantheon of laughable Clinton infamy, alongside her husband’s debating the meaning of “is” while under oath.
Right along with wiping her server, “like with a cloth or something.”
The FBI examined 81 Clinton email chains, determining that they included classified information relating to the CIA, the FBI, the Pentagon, NSA, and the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency or NGA. In other words, Hillary compromised classified materials representing the full range of American espionage: human intelligence or HUMINT from CIA, signals intelligence or SIGINT from NSA, and imagery intelligence or IMINT from NGA.
Of those 81 classified email chains, the FBI assessed that 37 of them included Secret information while eight included Top Secret information. Worse, seven email chains included Special Access Program or SAP information, which is tightly protected by the Intelligence Community and shared on a restricted, need-to-know basis only.
Now again, with that in mind, remember that Comey recommended no indictment for Hillary Rodham Clinton though a navy sailor will be spending a year in prison for taking six photos inside the submarine USS Alexandria in 2009 when it was in Groton, Connecticut. The photos were on a phone that was found at a waste transfer station in Connecticut. One year in prison.
Keep reading. It gets better.
Three more email chains contained Sensitive Compartmented Information or SCI, which was almost certainly SIGINT from NSA. SCI always requires special protection and handling. In fact, you’re only allowed to access it inside a specially-built Sensitive Compartmented Information Facility, a SCIF (pronounced “skiff”) in spy-speak. Any exposure of SCI brings severe penalties—at least if you’re not named Clinton.
It’s nice to see the FBI finally confirm just how much highly classified information got exposed here, but I reported this many months ago from Intelligence Community sources, including that Hillary’s “unclassified” emails included Top Secret SAP information from CIA and Top Secret SCI information from NSA.
John Schindler then makes the point.
Which leads to a troubling matter: What the FBI did not mention in its big data dump on EmailGate.
This then brings up the question of Sidney Blumenthal and his email to Secretary of State Hillary regarding Sudan in 2011
Not to mention that, in terms of verbiage and format, Blumenthal’s email read exactly like classified NSA reporting, as anybody acquainted with our SIGINT would immediately recognize. As one veteran agency official told me back in January, Blumenthal’s email was NSA information with “at least 90 percent confidence.”
So: information acquired from the NSA was encapsulated in that email to Clinton. The NSA even said Blumenthal’s Sudan email contained information from four different agency SIGINT reports, all classified Top Secret/SCI.
At least one of those reports was issued under the GAMMA compartment, which is an NSA handling caveat that is applied to extraordinarily sensitive information (for instance, decrypted conversations between top foreign leadership, as this was). GAMMA is properly viewed as a SIGINT Special Access Program, or SAP, several of which Clinton compromised in another series of her “unclassified” emails.
All on Hillary’s server. A private server funded by you and me, the American Taxpayer. A server which existed to keep Hillary’s machinations secret and therefore avoiding scrutiny, FOIA requests, responsibility and accountability. A server through which she could also quietly run Clinton Foundation information and dealings.
“It’s word-for-word, verbatim copying,” an agency official of them explained. “In one case, an entire paragraph was lifted from an NSA report” that was classified Top Secret/SCI. To add to the mystery, Sid emailed Hillary his “personal” assessment on Sudan only hours after some of those classified NSA reports were issued.
So, there is unequivocally no doubt that NSA information was run through emails to Hillary’s server. Then Schindler again hits it out of the ball park:
Somehow Sid Blumenthal—who in 2011 was not working for the U.S. government in any capacity and had not held security clearances in a decade—was reading above-top-secret NSA reports just hours after they appeared in tightly restricted GAMMA channels.
Emails sent to Hillary’s private server — information of which was hacked by Guccifer and others, likely sent to Russia and China — by a non-government person with no vetting for any form of security whatsoever.
The term GAMMA never appears in the paperwork the Bureau released last week.
Why not? Schindler writes:
Not admitting that above-top-secret NSA information was compromised only furthers the Clintonian cover-up at this point.
The American Taxpayer needs to know, and needs to realize there’s an excellent chance that Blumenthal will be in the Hillary White House if she wins.
Here’s one other thing we know: the NSA itself was hacked. Likely by Russians.
Are these two events connected?
Did one yield the other?