5 ms·

The original source is not an FBI report and you are completely misinformed. An unknown blog which contains nothing but right-wing hit pieces claims to have ano

The original source is not an FBI report and you are completely misinformed. An unknown blog which contains nothing but right-wing hit pieces claims to have anonymous sources in the State Department. Until I hear this quote echoed by professional journalists with the integrity to verify their sources, I will take it with the grain of salt it deserves.

rfrank 10y ago
"completely misinformed" https://vault.fbi.gov/hillary-r.-clinton/hillary-r.-clinton-part-02-of-04/view https://vault.fbi.gov/hillary-r.-clinton/hillary-r.-clinton-... "“Clinton could not recall a specific process for nominating a target for a drone strike and recalled much debate pertaining to the concurrence process. Clinton knew there was a role for DOD, State and the CIA but could not provide specifics as to what it was. Due to a disagreement between these agencies, Clinton recalled having many discussions related to nominating an individual for a drone strike. When Clinton exchanged classified information pertaining to the drone program internally at State, it was in her office or on a secure call. When Clinton exchanged classified information pertaining to the drone program externally it was at the White House. Clinton never had a concern with how classified information pertaining to the drone program was handled.”"
- etjossem 10y ago
  She's Secretary of State, and parts of the State Department would like to have a say in whether drone strikes are approved. She attests that no formalized process was in place. This is not news to anyone who has been following the situation. I do not see the name Julian Assange in the above report.
  - rfrank 10y ago
    Is the only way for you find the claim she said the above statement true that someone produce a recording of the meeting at State where they were discussing droning people? Strikes me as an unreasonable bar, but hey, do you. Think recordings of everything HRC says would be wise, given her security practices?
    - etjossem 10y ago
      I fully expect the State Department to enter into conversations with DOD about formalizing the process for authorizing a drone strike, since the process is currently dangerously discretionary. Again, that's not news. If the source and quote about Assange are real, they should go to the Washington Post or another reputable outlet with it. Even FOX News hasn't picked this up. It is very easy to conclude this is a fabrication until someone with a better reputation for journalistic integrity runs it.
      - rfrank 10y ago
        Are you skipping the, "...Clinton recalled having many discussions related to nominating an individual for a drone strike." portion of the quote on purpose? That's not "formalizing the process for authorizing a drone strike," it's, "choosing targets for a drone strike." If your standard for whether or not a story has happened is mainstream news coverage, then you and I perceive the world in extremely different ways.
        etjossem 10y ago
        > It's, "choosing targets for a drone strike." We're talking about the State Department wanting a voice in how we handle people with names like Bin Laden. It does not surprise me at all that they would like to be present for those conversations instead of allowing DOD to act unilaterally. Again, where are you getting names like Julian Assange? > If your standard for whether or not a story has happened is mainstream news coverage, then you and I perceive the world in extremely different ways. Mainstream isn't a curse word. It means they have something to lose by screwing up badly at journalism. True Pundit can print anything it wants. If it comes out that they literally made it up, they can reopen the blog tomorrow under a new name. It is an unknown and untrusted outlet for news. Given the blog's obvious purpose as a serial hit piece against Clinton, it has no more credibility than a blog I spin up tonight called "Bad Stuff I Think Trump Did."
        rfrank 10y ago
        "We're talking about..." We're also talking about what they were talking about at the time, which includes who specifically to shoot missiles at from a drone. People with names like Obama say people with names like al-Awlaki, among others. People with names like Clinton say people with names like Assange, among others. I get the name Assange from the allegations of State Department employees. Mainstream also means collusion with Democrats. Want me to link the several hundred correspondence between reporters and various DNC/HRC campaign staff that have been leaked in the last couple weeks? Or do you actually believe that's a real thing even though it's not heavily reported on?

rfrank 10y ago

"completely misinformed" https://vault.fbi.gov/hillary-r.-clinton/hillary-r.-clinton-part-02-of-04/view https://vault.fbi.gov/hillary-r.-clinton/hillary-r.-clinton-... "“Clinton could not recall a specific process for nominating a target for a drone strike and recalled much debate pertaining to the concurrence process. Clinton knew there was a role for DOD, State and the CIA but could not provide specifics as to what it was. Due to a disagreement between these agencies, Clinton recalled having many discussions related to nominating an individual for a drone strike. When Clinton exchanged classified information pertaining to the drone program internally at State, it was in her office or on a secure call. When Clinton exchanged classified information pertaining to the drone program externally it was at the White House. Clinton never had a concern with how classified information pertaining to the drone program was handled.”"

etjossem 10y ago
She's Secretary of State, and parts of the State Department would like to have a say in whether drone strikes are approved. She attests that no formalized process was in place. This is not news to anyone who has been following the situation. I do not see the name Julian Assange in the above report.
- rfrank 10y ago
  Is the only way for you find the claim she said the above statement true that someone produce a recording of the meeting at State where they were discussing droning people? Strikes me as an unreasonable bar, but hey, do you. Think recordings of everything HRC says would be wise, given her security practices?
  - etjossem 10y ago
    I fully expect the State Department to enter into conversations with DOD about formalizing the process for authorizing a drone strike, since the process is currently dangerously discretionary. Again, that's not news. If the source and quote about Assange are real, they should go to the Washington Post or another reputable outlet with it. Even FOX News hasn't picked this up. It is very easy to conclude this is a fabrication until someone with a better reputation for journalistic integrity runs it.
    - rfrank 10y ago
      Are you skipping the, "...Clinton recalled having many discussions related to nominating an individual for a drone strike." portion of the quote on purpose? That's not "formalizing the process for authorizing a drone strike," it's, "choosing targets for a drone strike." If your standard for whether or not a story has happened is mainstream news coverage, then you and I perceive the world in extremely different ways.
      - etjossem 10y ago
        > It's, "choosing targets for a drone strike." We're talking about the State Department wanting a voice in how we handle people with names like Bin Laden. It does not surprise me at all that they would like to be present for those conversations instead of allowing DOD to act unilaterally. Again, where are you getting names like Julian Assange? > If your standard for whether or not a story has happened is mainstream news coverage, then you and I perceive the world in extremely different ways. Mainstream isn't a curse word. It means they have something to lose by screwing up badly at journalism. True Pundit can print anything it wants. If it comes out that they literally made it up, they can reopen the blog tomorrow under a new name. It is an unknown and untrusted outlet for news. Given the blog's obvious purpose as a serial hit piece against Clinton, it has no more credibility than a blog I spin up tonight called "Bad Stuff I Think Trump Did."
        rfrank 10y ago
        "We're talking about..." We're also talking about what they were talking about at the time, which includes who specifically to shoot missiles at from a drone. People with names like Obama say people with names like al-Awlaki, among others. People with names like Clinton say people with names like Assange, among others. I get the name Assange from the allegations of State Department employees. Mainstream also means collusion with Democrats. Want me to link the several hundred correspondence between reporters and various DNC/HRC campaign staff that have been leaked in the last couple weeks? Or do you actually believe that's a real thing even though it's not heavily reported on?