Officials: Scant evidence that Clinton had malicious intent in handling of emails

[Mark III]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/federal-prosecutors-in-virginia-assisting-in-clinton-email-probe/2016/05/05/f0277faa-12f0-11e6-81b4-581a5c4c42df_story.html?tid=pm_world_pop_b



Officials: Scant evidence that Clinton had malicious intent in handling of emails
Prosecutors and FBI agents investigating Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal email server have so far found scant evidence that the leading Democratic presidential candidate intended to break classification rules, though they are still probing the case aggressively with an eye on interviewing Clinton herself, according to U.S. officials familiar with the matter.


FBI agents on the case have been joined by federal prosecutors from the same office that successfully prosecuted 9/11 conspirator Zacarias Moussaoui — and who would handle any Edward Snowden case, should he ever return to the country, according to the U.S. officials familiar with the matter. And in recent weeks, prosecutors from the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Eastern District of Virginia and their FBI counterparts have been interviewing top Clinton aides as they seek to bring the case to a close.


CNN reported (http://www.cnn.com/2016/05/05/politics/fbi-interviews-huma-abedin-clinton-aide/index.html) Thursday that longtime Clinton aide Huma Abedin was among those interviewed. A lawyer for Abedin did not immediately return an email seeking comment.


The involvement of the U.S. Attorney’s Office is not indicative that charges are imminent or even likely. One official said prosecutors are wrestling with the question of whether Clinton intended to violate the rules, and so far, the evidence seemed to indicate she did not.


But the investigation is not over, and if charges are brought, Clinton would face a team that is no stranger to high-profile cases involving classified material. Last year, for example, prosecutors in the district won a conviction of a former CIA officer (https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/jurors-tell-judge-they-cant-agree-in-cia-leak-trial-of-jeffrey-sterling/2015/01/26/db819f78-a57c-11e4-a7c2-03d37af98440_story.html) who was involved in a highly secretive operation to give faulty nuclear plans to Iran and accused of leaking details of the effort to a reporter.


The officials spoke on the condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the ongoing probe. An FBI spokesman and a spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Eastern District of Virginia declined to comment.


Clinton campaign spokesman Brian Fallon said in a statement: “From the start, Hillary Clinton has offered to answer any questions that would help the Justice Department complete its review, and we hope and expect that anyone else who is asked would do the same. We are confident the review will conclude that nothing inappropriate took place.”


The Justice Department has granted immunity to at least one former State Department staffer, Bryan Pagliano, who worked on Clinton’s private email server. There is no indication a grand jury has been convened in the case.


U.S. officials also dismissed claims by a Romanian hacker (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/05/04/romanian-hacker-guccifer-breached-clinton-server-it-was-easy.html) now facing federal charges in Virginia that he was able to breach Clinton’s personal email server. The officials said investigators have found no evidence to support the assertion by Marcel Lehel Lazar to Fox News and others, and they believed if he had accessed Clinton’s emails, he would have released them — as he did when he got into accounts of other high-profile people.





D.C.-area lawyers commonly refer to the Eastern District of Virginia as the “rocket docket” for the speed with which cases move through it. The U.S. Attorney’s Office there has about 300 lawyers and other employees working in Alexandria, Richmond, Norfolk and Newport News and has long had a reputation as one of the most important federal prosecutor shops in the country.


The State Department released 52,000 pages of Hillary Clinton’s emails as part of a court-ordered process. Here's what else we learned from the publicly released emails. (Monica Akhtar/The Washington Post)




The district is home to the CIA and the Pentagon, and its prosecutors often find themselves handling terrorism and national-security cases, including the Moussaoui trial.


The office is led by Dana Boente (https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/public-safety/veteran-prosecutor-takes-oath-to-lead-high-profile-us-attorney-office-in-virginia/2016/02/26/6ed28c54-dcc4-11e5-925f-1d10062cc82d_story.html), a veteran federal prosecutor who U.S. Attorney General Loretta E. Lynch earlier this year called one of the Justice Department’s “consummate utility players.” In addition to the prosecution of former Virginia governor Robert F. McDonnell (R), Boente also led the public corruption prosecutions of former congressman William J. Jefferson (D-La.) and of former New Orleans mayor Ray Nagin (D) while he was serving a brief stint leading the office in New Orleans.

[Mark III]

We are creeping to the end folks. The crazies won't have this topic to kick around anymore.

[Mark III]

If they don't determine intent, there will be no prosecution. If this story is accurate, this thing is all but over.

[hanger4]

If they don't determine intent, there will be no prosecution. If this story is accurate, this thing is all but over.

Why did she set up a secret email server ?? She intended to do something.

As SOS she knew she would be handling classified information. That's "Gross Negligence"

[Subdermal]

If they don't determine intent, there will be no prosecution. If this story is accurate, this thing is all but over.

Um...Wut?

You think intent to violate classification rules is necessary in order to prosecute?

:biglaugh:

You leftist hack.

[Mark III]

Why did she set up a secret email server ?? She intended to do something.

As SOS she knew she would be handling classified information. That's "Gross Negligence"

If you had read many of the expert articles that had been written about this (some of which I posted on this forum) over the past year, you would know that cases such as this are not prosecuted unless it is determined there was intent to mishandle classified information on the part of the official in question.

Unless they determine malicious intent on Clinton's part, which according to this story the FBI has not found, it's over. Just think of and lament all the hours of your life you wasted obsessing on this matter.

[Mark III]

Um...Wut?

You think intent to violate classification rules is necessary in order to prosecute?

:biglaugh:

You leftist hack.

It's not what I think, it's what numerous legal experts have said.

[hanger4]

If you had read many of the expert articles that had been written about this (some of which I posted on this forum) over the past year, you would know that cases such as this are not prosecuted unless it is determined there was intent to mishandle classified information on the part of the official in question.

Unless they determine malicious intent on Clinton's part, which according to this story the FBI has not found, it's over. Just think of and lament all the hours of your life you wasted obsessing on this matter.
She intentionally set up the secret email server. Why do you ignore that ??
http://lawnewz.com/politics/yes-hillary-clinton-did-commit-a-crime-and-she-should-be-charged/

BTW Mark III you and your link have made an excellent case of SOS incompetence.

[MisterVeritis]

If they don't determine intent, there will be no prosecution. If this story is accurate, this thing is all but over.Not true. She needs to have the state execute her for what she did to this nation.

[domer76]

Why did she set up a secret email server ?? She intended to do something.



She did it because she knew people like you would get your nuts all twisted in knots.

[Mark III]

Not true. She needs to have the state execute her for what she did to this nation.

Someone needs to reserve a rubber room for you.

[MisterVeritis]

Someone needs to reserve a rubber room for you.I know the damage she has done. You, on the other hand, do not care. The state needs to execute her so the next criminal in a pantsuit does not think she can get away with it.

[Mark III]

She intentionally set up the secret email server. Why do you ignore that ??
http://lawnewz.com/politics/yes-hillary-clinton-did-commit-a-crime-and-she-should-be-charged/

BTW Mark III you and your link have made an excellent case of SOS incompetence.


The article you linked is contradicted by the Washington Post characterization of the FBI findings.

Your article says she should have known that some of the e-mails might be classified, according to the WAPO story the FBI says "scant" intent. They are not going to indict someone on scant.

I don't know what else to tell you.

[hanger4]

She did it because she knew people like you would get your nuts all twisted in knots.

It's apparent you can't answer or are afraid of the answer.

Why did HC set up a secret email server ??

[MisterVeritis]

The article you linked is contradicted by the Washington Post characterization of the FBI findings.

Your article says she should have known that some of the e-mails might be classified, according to the WAPO story the FBI says "scant" intent. They are not going to indict someone on scant.

I don't know what else to tell you.
Crooked Hillary was an original top secret classification authority. Do you understand what that means?

[domer76]

It's apparent you can't answer or are afraid of the answer.

Why did HC set up a secret email server ??

I don't know. Send her a letter with that question. I'm sure she'll notice the sender and give it all the respect it deserves.

[hanger4]

The article you linked is contradicted by the Washington Post characterization of the FBI findings.

Your article says she should have known that some of the e-mails might be classified, according to the WAPO story the FBI says "scant" intent. They are not going to indict someone on scant.

I don't know what else to tell you.
WaPo not telling the whole story while they shill for HC. Imagine that.

Mark III WaPo seems to be leading you to believe that as SOS Hillary had no idea she be handling classified information. Do you really believe that ??

[Mark III]

WaPo not telling the whole story while they shill for HC. Imagine that.

Mark III WaPo seems to be leading you to believe that as SOS Hillary had no idea she be handling classified information. Do you really believe that ??

The Justice Dept. does not prosecute people for mishandling classified information unless there was intent. The WAPO story says the FBI has not found such intent on the part of Hillary Clinton.

The sand is running out of your hour glass.

Maybe holding your breath and jumping up and down will help.

[Green Arrow]

Scant intent is still intent, but whatever. I've maintained from the start that there probably wasn't any serious wrongdoing, but it does indicate a serious flaw in judgment. Something prevalent in Hillary's career.

[del]

these hillary threads should have their own mensa chapter

[Subdermal]

I don't know. Send her a letter with that question. I'm sure she'll notice the sender and give it all the respect it deserves.

Typical leftist. I don't know, so...

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-kzC532_asX8/UH1kJ32HGuI/AAAAAAAAYqU/lMRbKONES90/s1600/008-funny-animal-gifs-shy-hedgehog.gif

[Mister D]

Scant intent is still intent, but whatever. I've maintained from the start that there probably wasn't any serious wrongdoing, but it does indicate a serious flaw in judgment. Something prevalent in Hillary's career.

Exactly. The damage has been done to whatever remained of her image after her personality got done with it.

[hanger4]

I don't know. Send her a letter with that question. I'm sure she'll notice the sender and give it all the respect it deserves.

That's ok, I'll let the lawyers and judge handle it.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/hillary-clinton-email-deposition-plan-222801

[hanger4]

The Justice Dept. does not prosecute people for mishandling classified information unless there was intent. The WAPO story says the FBI has not found such intent on the part of Hillary Clinton.

The sand is running out of your hour glass.

Maybe holding your breath and jumping up and down will help.

She INTENTIONALLY set a secret email server know she'd be handling classified information.

Why is that so hard to understand ??

[Common]

I said from the beginning that in the end Hillary will never been indicted or found guilty of a crime

[hanger4]

these hillary threads should have their own mensa chapter

Wouldn't matter, they'd still be over your head. :grin:

[Mark III]

She INTENTIONALLY set a secret email server know she'd be handling classified information.

Why is that so hard to understand ??

I'm sorry, you are confused. Hillary Clinton has repeatedly said that she did not handle classified information through e-mails. Which leads to the logical conclusion that she did not believe the e-mails in question were classified. This will all be explained to you one day after the investigation is complete, although probably not to your satisfaction.

[Mister D]

I'm sorry, you are confused. Hillary Clinton has repeatedly said that she did not handle classified information through e-mails. Which leads to the logical conclusion that she did not believe the e-mails in question were classified. This will all be explained to you one day after the investigation is complete, although probably not to your satisfaction.

A few more Clinton threads should do the trick.

[Mark III]

A few more Clinton threads should do the trick.

Talk to your nutty azz friends over here. They are the ones posting most of the Clinton threads. I am just the antidote.

[Mister D]

Talk to your nutty azz friends over here. They are the ones posting most of the Clinton threads. I am just the antidote.

Mark, you do great work. A few more threads and I'll be convinced! Hopefully, the Clinton Campaign compensates you fairly for your work.

[del]

Wouldn't matter, they'd still be over your head. :grin:

i'd compare you to a box of rocks, but i don't feel like apologizing to the rocks.

or the boxes

[hanger4]

The Justice Dept. does not prosecute people for mishandling classified information unless there was intent. The WAPO story says the FBI has not found such intent on the part of Hillary Clinton.

The sand is running out of your hour glass.

Maybe holding your breath and jumping up and down will help.

Sure they do.

"But when the Justice Department does pursue a case, it often relies on a statute that bars the unlawful removal and retention of classified documents. That low-level charge, meant for cases in which defendants improperly hold onto information that they know to be classified, carries a fine and maximum yearlong prison sentence and is reserved for people who have "really, really screwed up," Vladeck said."

http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2016-01-30/a-look-at-federal-cases-on-handling-classified-information

[Captain Obvious]

So it's just gross incompetence then?

Great...

[hanger4]

I'm sorry, you are confused. Hillary Clinton has repeatedly said that she did not handle classified information through e-mails. Which leads to the logical conclusion that she did not believe the e-mails in question were classified. This will all be explained to you one day after the investigation is complete, although probably not to your satisfaction.

Mark III she had a couple of emails classified as "Top Secert SAP" and a number of emails the State Dept won't even release redacted. And your trying to tell us "that she did not believe the e-mails in question were classified." Again you're making a wonderful case for incompetence.

[Beevee]

She INTENTIONALLY set a secret email server know she'd be handling classified information.

Why is that so hard to understand ??

Why does everyone ignore that everything that was classified on her server was retroactively classified?

Rather like stating that the age of consent has been moved up to 25 and everyone having had sex under that age is guilty of child abuse, whether they knew the possibility of the law being changed, or not.

[del]

So it's just gross incompetence then?

Great...

teh problem is you and your ilk think that the rules apply to hillary.

silly rabbit

[Mark III]

Why does everyone ignore that everything that was classified on her server was retroactively classified?

Rather like stating that the age of consent has been moved up to 25 and everyone having had sex under that age is guilty of child abuse, whether they knew the possibility of the law being changed, or not.

Some people here are averse to reality.

[hanger4]

i'd compare you to a box of rocks, but i don't feel like apologizing to the rocks.

or the boxes

Way cool.

I wish I had snappy comparison to throw back at ya, but well ..... you offer nothing so ya get nothing.

[Common]

Ive seen it too many times to be idealistic about our justice system. Being guilty does not mean conviction. Big money, big influence do not get convicted.

Politicians and Judges all crawl out of the same hole. Chris Christy once a special prosecutor in the bush admin, was set loose on NJ to bust dirty politicians. He busted several all democrats of course. Now that hes gov judges have given his administration wins KNOWING they were unconstitutional or just dead wrong. Thats the way it is. Hillary wont get indicted, that does not mean she shouldnt or she isnt guilty

[hanger4]

Why does everyone ignore that everything that was classified on her server was retroactively classified?

Rather like stating that the age of consent has been moved up to 25 and everyone having had sex under that age is guilty of child abuse, whether they knew the possibility of the law being changed, or not.

non-disclosure agreement
https://www.google.com/search?safe=off&hl=en&q=clinton%20signed%20non%20disclosure%20agreement&spell=1&sa=X

[hanger4]

Some people here are averse to reality.

Indeed

non-disclosure agreement

[JDubya]

Not true. She needs to have the state execute her for what she did to this nation.

Is that another one of those "big thoughts" of yours?

No denying there's plenty of "big stupid" in them, that's for sure.

[del]

Way cool.

I wish I had snappy comparison to throw back at ya, but well ..... you offer nothing so ya get nothing.

fortunately, that's all you have in stock so it works out.

[domer76]

Typical leftist. I don't know, so...

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-kzC532_asX8/UH1kJ32HGuI/AAAAAAAAYqU/lMRbKONES90/s1600/008-funny-animal-gifs-shy-hedgehog.gif

You asked me a question. I said I didn't know why she did the server thing. You obviously don't either. Did that simple answer also go over your head?

[domer76]

That's ok, I'll let the lawyers and judge handle it.

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/05/hillary-clinton-email-deposition-plan-222801

Good. Does that mean you'll now STFU?

[AZ Jim]

Good. Does that mean you'll now STFU?I wish, but that will never happen, he is a popup pain in the ass.

[domer76]

I wish, but that will never happen, he is a popup pain in the ass.

There are a number of them

[Cletus]

If they don't determine intent, there will be no prosecution. If this story is accurate, this thing is all but over.

Intent is irrelevant. What matters is what she did, not how she felt about it.

[hanger4]

Good. Does that mean you'll now STFU?

Translation;

I have no rebutal to the facts presented so I don't want to talk about it.

[hanger4]

I wish, but that will never happen, he is a popup pain in the ass.

We have a runner !!

[MMC]

If they don't determine intent, there will be no prosecution. If this story is accurate, this thing is all but over.

Wrong.....with whats been reported. There needs to be no intent and or no motive.

[MMC]

I'm sorry, you are confused. Hillary Clinton has repeatedly said that she did not handle classified information through e-mails. Which leads to the logical conclusion that she did not believe the e-mails in question were classified. This will all be explained to you one day after the investigation is complete, although probably not to your satisfaction.

She lied.....and they have an email with Hillary telling Jake Sullivan to remove the markings to send unsecured.

[MisterVeritis]

Is that another one of those "big thoughts" of yours?

No denying there's plenty of "big stupid" in them, that's for sure.
Execute Hillary? It is a reasonable thought. She did damage to the United States that is incalculable and very long lived. She should be killed by the state as an example to others.

[Common Sense]

Execute Hillary? It is a reasonable thought. She did damage to the United States that is incalculable and very long lived. She should be killed by the state as an example to others.

I'm not sure if you've ever had a reasonable thought. This certainly isn't one.

[MisterVeritis]

I'm not sure if you've ever had a reasonable thought. This certainly isn't one.
All of my thoughts are reasonable. Crooked Hillary caused exceptionally grave damage to the United States. She deserves to die for what she did. It is the nation's responsibility to protect us from the likes of Crooked Hillary. If the Federal government will not protect us then why do we need the Federal Government?

Crooked Hillary is a domestic threat whose actions have increased our external threats. Try her. Convict her. Execute her.

[Common Sense]

All of my thoughts are reasonable. Crooked Hillary caused exceptionally grave damage to the United States. She deserves to die for what she did. It is the nation's responsibility to protect us from the likes of Crooked Hillary. If the Federal government will not protect us then why do we need the Federal Government?

Crooked Hillary is a domestic threat whose actions have increased our external threats. Try her. Convict her. Execute her.

Specifically what damage?

[MisterVeritis]

Specifically what damage?
Those compartmented top secret emails reportedly had the names of spies in foreign governments working for us. Our current spies were likely captured, tortured and murdered. And now no one will spy for the United States. In my opinion, this damage will last for several generations. This is exceptionally grave damage. Try her. Convict her. And execute here. Her execution and that alone will begin to repair the damage Crooked Hillary did to us.

[Common Sense]

Those compartmented top secret emails reportedly had the names of spies in foreign governments working for us. Our current spies were likely captured, tortured and murdered. And now no one will spy for the United States. In my opinion, this damage will last for several generations. This is exceptionally grave damage. Try her. Convict her. And execute here. Her execution and that alone will begin to repair the damage Crooked Hillary did to us.

Got any evidence of that? Anything?

[MisterVeritis]

Got any evidence of that? Anything?
I do not. But the FBI does.

[MMC]

Exactly. The damage has been done to whatever remained of her image after her personality got done with it.

:wink:


Why Hillary Clinton is unfit to be President......

With the mainstream media focused on Donald Trump's political antics, they have mostly ignored the question of whether Hillary Clinton is ethically fit to be president.

Not only is Clinton a documented liar, but she could make history as the first major-party candidate to face a federal criminal prosecution. Even without a prosecution, the damage that has been done to her public image may be beyond repair.

Whitewater. Travelgate. Chinagate. Monica Lewinsky. Gennifer Flowers. The Clinton Foundation. Benghazi. These are just a few of the scandals that have made the Clinton name synonymous with deceit and duplicity. But it is her use of a private email server and email account that have permanently branded Hillary Clinton as a liar.

The scandal is simple to understand. It raises questions about her motives behind setting up a private server and judgment as secretary of state. Since she held her first press conference almost a year ago to address the matter, the scandal has dogged the Clinton campaign. From lying about why she created a homebrew server to the classified information that was found on it, Clinton has lied to the American people and played them for fools.

Voters distrust Clinton with good reason. She has repeatedly looked them in the eye and told baldfaced lies. But it is the callousness and ease with which she lies that should be more troubling. Despite the murders of four Americans at the hands of terrorists while serving as secretary of state, Clinton claimed we "didn't lose a single person" in Libya under her watch. She has even had the gall to call one of the victims' mothers a liar, even though we know it was Clinton who lied about the cause of the Benghazi terrorist attack.

At a time of increased national-security threats, Americans should not have to worry about the honesty and integrity of their president. When voters head to the polls this November, they should take pause and consider not just the candidates' policy platforms and experience but also whether they are ethically fit to be president of the United States.....snip~.

http://www.lowellsun.com/news/ci_29719568/why-hillary-clinton-is-unfit-be-president#ixzz44nPaekPd

[Common Sense]

I do not. But the FBI does.

What, did your insider sources tell you?

[Quicksilver]

Execute Hillary? It is a reasonable thought. She did damage to the United States that is incalculable and very long lived. She should be killed by the state as an example to others.

I almost hate to ask... but please tell us what incalculable damage was done... and please be specific listing concrete FACTS.. not your speculation.

[MisterVeritis]

What, did your insider sources tell you?
:-)
Be cute if you wish. It will change nothing. The damage has already been done.

[MisterVeritis]

I almost hate to ask... but please tell us what incalculable damage was done... and please be specific listing concrete FACTS.. not your speculation.Do try to keep up. If you can.

[Common Sense]

This and Benghazi are so blatantly partisan it's almost a joke.

I'm no huge fan of Clinton, but there has been a concerted effort to discredit her. The woman and her staff used a server because the US govt technology is outdated. There is little evidence that she was malicious in her actions. It's not as if she raped a bunch of kids and paid them off or started a war that has killed thousands. She used a different email account.

[Common Sense]

:-)
Be cute if you wish. It will change nothing. The damage has already been done.

Again, specifically what damage? Do you have any links or facts? Or should we just take your word for it?

[MisterVeritis]

Again, specifically what damage? Do you have any links or facts? Or should we just take your word for it?
A wise person would take my word for it. But you may do as you wish.

[MisterVeritis]

This and Benghazi are so blatantly partisan it's almost a joke.

I'm no huge fan of Clinton, but there has been a concerted effort to discredit her. The woman and her staff used a server because the US govt technology is outdated. There is little evidence that she was malicious in her actions. It's not as if she raped a bunch of kids and paid them off or started a war that has killed thousands. She used a different email account.
She divulged extraordinarily sensitive information. All of our enemies and friends have the information that passed through her homemade server.

[MisterVeritis]

This and Benghazi are so blatantly partisan it's almost a joke.

I'm no huge fan of Clinton, but there has been a concerted effort to discredit her. The woman and her staff used a server because the US govt technology is outdated. There is little evidence that she was malicious in her actions. It's not as if she raped a bunch of kids and paid them off or started a war that has killed thousands. She used a different email account.
Clearly the (in)Justice Department is a partisan tool. Now, I suppose the FBI is as well.

[MMC]

Those compartmented top secret emails reportedly had the names of spies in foreign governments working for us. Our current spies were likely captured, tortured and murdered. And now no one will spy for the United States. In my opinion, this damage will last for several generations. This is exceptionally grave damage. Try her. Convict her. And execute here. Her execution and that alone will begin to repair the damage Crooked Hillary did to us.


Due to the Chinese hacking the Office of the OPM in the State Dept. We had to shut down any operations and had to get our people out of China. That is what else Hillary has caused. Years of operations being set up and put in place. But now her and her Team of miscreants have increased the Risk of harm to all our clandestine people. Put at Risk whole operations and having cost us money and as well as put the lives of snitches and any foreigners working for us at great peril. Including their families too.

Safehouses and the people who trust us and work with us.

We don't even know how many operations will need to be shut down or our people needing to be pulled.....until after the fact.



Hillary’s emails included CIA officers’ names, report says (http://nypost.com/2016/02/01/hillary-clinton-voters-dont-care-about-my-emails/)


Hillary Clinton’s e-mails included the names of CIA officers serving overseas and foreigners who are on the spy agency’s payroll — potentially endangering their lives, it was reported Monday.
“It’s a death sentence,” a senior intelligence-community official told the Observer. “If we’re lucky, only [foreign] agents, not our officers, will get killed because of this.”

The paper said the intelligence community is in panic mode trying to determine which agents may have been compromised.

CIA officials assume foreign agencies intercepted unencrypted e-mails stored on Clinton’s home server while she was secretary of state.

“I’ll spend the rest of my career trying to figure out what classified information was in those [deleted ­e-mails],” said a Pentagon counterintelligence official. “Everybody is mad as hell.

On Monday, she dismissed the controversy as Republican-fueled politics and said voters don’t care.

“I can tell you that is not on the minds of the literally thousands of people that I’ve seen in the last few weeks. I’m glad it isn’t,” she told CNN from Iowa.

“The facts are the facts, and no matter how much selective leaking or anonymous sourcing . . . that goes on, what people want to know is what I can do to be the best possible president for them and their families.”

“The worst part is that Moscow and Beijing have that information, but the intelligence community maybe never will.”.....snip~

http://nypost.com/2016/02/01/hillary-clinton-voters-dont-care-about-my-emails/

[Common Sense]

A wise person would take my word for it. But you may do as you wish.

LOL...I'm sorry, but a wise person doesn't take some random stranger on the internets word for it. Is that what you did? Maybe that was your mistake in the first place.

[Common Sense]

Clearly the (in)Justice Department is a partisan tool. Now, I suppose the FBI is as well.

Sorry, what charges have been filed?

[MisterVeritis]

Due to the Chinese hacking the Office of the OPM in the State Dept. We had to shut down any operations and had to get our people out of China. That is what else Hillary has caused. Years of operations being set up and put in place. But now her and her Team of miscreants have increased the Risk of harm to all our clandestine people. Put at Risk whole operations and having cost us money and as well as put the lives of snitches and any foreigners working for us at great peril. Including their families too.

My records were compromised in that hack. My entire life up to age 62 was compromised. Every important detail of my life up to age 42 was in the compromised files. Every place I have ever lived. Every important number, Names and birth dates of every relative. Everything. All of the raw data was compromised. So if a neighbor said something bad about me, true or not, it was in my file.

I will not bore you with the details of what has happened since.

[MisterVeritis]

Sorry, what charges have been filed?
I suppose we will have to wait to see what the FBI does. Now you already know that, don't you? Of course you do.

Why pretend that Crooked Hillary has done nothing wrong?

[MisterVeritis]

LOL...I'm sorry, but a wise person doesn't take some random stranger on the internets word for it. Is that what you did? Maybe that was your mistake in the first place.
I am no random stranger. And you are no wise person.

[Common Sense]

I am no random stranger. And you are no wise person.

You're a random stranger to me. I'm wise enough not to take a rando at their word.

[MisterVeritis]

You're a random stranger to me. I'm wise enough not to take a rando at their word.
It works for me.

[MMC]

This and Benghazi are so blatantly partisan it's almost a joke.

I'm no huge fan of Clinton, but there has been a concerted effort to discredit her. The woman and her staff used a server because the US govt technology is outdated. There is little evidence that she was malicious in her actions. It's not as if she raped a bunch of kids and paid them off or started a war that has killed thousands. She used a different email account.

Like she didn't discredit herself with repeated lying over the matter. No they used an off grid server to avoid accountability and transparency. To avoid Congressional oversight, In House Oversight, and to conduct Clinton Foundation business.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Cu3SLTOCAE

Msnbc host Lawrence O’Donnell rips Hillary Clinton for lying about turning over all of her State Department related emails and for having a private email server while Secretary of State.....snip~

[Quicksilver]

A wise person would take my word for it. But you may do as you wish.


:rofl: That's what I thought..... You got nuttin'

[MMC]

You're a random stranger to me. I'm wise enough not to take a rando at their word.

Well.....there is a link up now. So its not like it wasn't in the knowing.

[Quicksilver]

She divulged extraordinarily sensitive information. All of our enemies and friends have the information that passed through her homemade server.


She did? When..? What specifically? and is there concrete PROOF of that?

[MisterVeritis]

:rofl: That's what I thought..... You got nuttin'
I have my wits. That is what distinguishes me from you.

If it makes you feel better about Crooked Hillary who am I to stand in your way?

[MisterVeritis]

She did? When..? What specifically? and is there concrete PROOF of that?
Of course there is proof. There always is.

[MMC]

She did? When..? What specifically? and is there concrete PROOF of that?


Yes she did.....where have you been? :rollseyes: She outed a DSGE Operative in Libya. Yes there is proof as The Romanian hacker took snapshots of her emails with Sidney Blumenthal. Over Sensitive material concerning Libya, Algeria, and Tunisia.

Try googling up Guccifer and the snapshots of the emails.

[Quicksilver]

Of course there is proof. There always is.

Well... then prove it. If you cannot then you are nothing but a partisan hack puking out the nonsense bouncing around your echo chamber.

[Quicksilver]

Yes she did.....where have you been? :rollseyes: She outed a DSGE Operative in Libya. Yes there is proof as The Romanian hacker took snapshots of her emails with Sidney Blumenthal. Over Sensitive material concerning Libya, Algeria, and Tunisia.

Try googling up Guccifer and the snapshots of the emails.


OOOOHHHHHH GUCCIFER!!! Now it makes sense... :rofl:

[Mark III]

A wise person would take my word for it. But you may do as you wish.

You are more or less spamming this forum. Is there an ignore function here?

[HoneyBadger]

If they don't determine intent, there will be no prosecution. If this story is accurate, this thing is all but over.

Intent doesn't matter, unless they're trying to add more charges. Improper handling of classified material is a violation of federal law, regardless of "intent".

[MMC]

OOOOHHHHHH GUCCIFER!!! Now it makes sense... :rofl:



http://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=OIP.M661a2e3a8b4e0bec693e0cb80daae580o0&w=200&h=299&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0&r=0

So you admit that you can google him up and see Blumenthal and Hillary's emails, Right. The emails are whats important and who they are from.

Now lets see you deflect without the pads? I own the slapshot. Just sayin. :grin:

[Crepitus]

I know the damage she has done. You, on the other hand, do not care. The state needs to execute her so the next criminal in a pantsuit does not think she can get away with it.
Oh be serious!

You don't know diddly shit.

You prove it here daily.

[Quicksilver]

Intent doesn't matter, unless they're trying to add more charges. Improper handling of classified material is a violation of federal law, regardless of "intent".

You are incorrect... From the Espionage Act..


To convey information with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the armed forces of the United States (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_armed_forces) or to promote the success of its enemies. This was punishable by death or by imprisonment for not more than 30 years or both.
To convey false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies when the United States is at war, to cause or attempt to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or to willfully obstruct the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States. This was punishable by a maximum fine of $10,000 or by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or both.

[MisterVeritis]

Well... then prove it. If you cannot then you are nothing but a partisan hack puking out the nonsense bouncing around your echo chamber.
Don't be silly. I spent a significant part of my adult life in the intelligence field. I would recommend trial, conviction and execution for anyone who did this kind of damage to the United States.

And you would gleefully reject it for Crooked Hillary solely because she is Crooked Hillary. Given those circumstances isn't it far more likely that you are the hack?

[Quicksilver]

http://tse1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=OIP.M661a2e3a8b4e0bec693e0cb80daae580o0&w=200&h=299&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0&r=0

So you admit that you can google him up and see Blumenthal and Hillary's emails, Right. The emails are whats important and who they are from.

Now lets see you deflect without the pads? I own the slapshot. Just sayin. :grin:

Nonsense....

[MisterVeritis]

Oh be serious!

You don't know diddly $#@!.

You prove it here daily.
I know far more than I share here.

[MisterVeritis]

You are more or less spamming this forum. Is there an ignore function here?
You are always free to ignore me. Others will read my responses to your messages so it works out well for both of us.

[Quicksilver]

Don't be silly. I spent a significant part of my adult life in the intelligence field. I would recommend trial, conviction and execution for anyone who did this kind of damage to the United States.

And you would gleefully reject it for Crooked Hillary solely because she is Crooked Hillary. Given those circumstances isn't it far more likely that you are the hack?

You must have flunked intelligence 101..... You go to trial AFTER you determine a crime has been committed.. If no one can find a crime and charge a person with something... you seriously believe we take them to trial? I have asked you over and over for specifics of a crime committed.. and you cannot... so your credibility AND your intelligence is in question.

[MMC]

You are incorrect... From the Espionage Act..


To convey information with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the armed forces of the United States (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_armed_forces) or to promote the success of its enemies. This was punishable by death or by imprisonment for not more than 30 years or both.
To convey false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies when the United States is at war, to cause or attempt to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or to willfully obstruct the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States. This was punishable by a maximum fine of $10,000 or by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or both.



That won't work for 18 US 2071.



18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally.....

(a)Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.

(b)Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.....snip~

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2071

Hillary willfully and unlawfully.....conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document, or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.....and that's just the first sentence.

[MisterVeritis]

You must have flunked intelligence 101..... You go to trial AFTER you determine a crime has been committed.. If no one can find a crime and charge a person with something... you seriously believe we take them to trial? I have asked you over and over for specifics of a crime committed.. and you cannot... so your credibility AND your intelligence is in question.
Actually, I set the class record for the highest score ever achieved in my signals intelligence course. I was first in my class in tactical intelligence operations.

Intelligence gathering and analysis has nothing to do with crime. Crooked Hillary set up her home grown server to cover her crimes. While committing them she also revealed significant, extremely sensitive data about intelligence operations. It is the kind of information that leads to executions of our spies and the semi-permanent loss of intelligence sources.

A difference between us is that I know what I am talking about.

[MMC]

Nonsense....

Really.....then come up with the link. As the only one talking any nonsense.....is you.

[MMC]

Actually, I set the class record for the highest score ever achieved in my signals intelligence course. I was first in my class in tactical intelligence operations.

Intelligence gathering and analysis has nothing to do with crime. Crooked Hillary set up her home grown server to cover her crimes. While committing them she also revealed significant, extremely sensitive data about intelligence operations. It is the kind of information that leads to executions of our spies and the semi-permanent loss of intelligence sources.

A difference between us is that I know what I am talking about.


Then we had BO peep trying to give Hillary some cover and failed badly. BO said she was careless. That would confirm gross negligence.




Obama on Hillary’s Email Intent
The President offers a public defense with legal implications.....


Hold on there, big fella. That is one loaded apologia. A more scrupulous President would have begged off the question by claiming that he can’t comment on an ongoing investigation in a department he supervises. So saying anything was bad enough.

But even more notable was Mr. Obama’s use of the word “intentionally” regarding Mrs. Clinton’s actions. As a lawyer, the President knows that intent is often crucial to determining criminal liability. And he went out of his way—twice—to suggest that what Mrs. Clinton did wasn’t intentional but was mere “carelessness, in terms of managing emails.”

Why would Mr. Obama discuss the emails in those terms? He certainly isn’t helping Attorney General Loretta Lynch or FBI Director James Comey, who must decide how to assess Mrs. Clinton’s actions. If they now decide not to prosecute based on a judgment that Mrs. Clinton was merely careless, President Obama has opened them up to reasonable criticism that they were publicly steered by his comments.

Mr. Obama was at pains to “guarantee” to Fox’s Mr. Wallace that there will be “no political influence” from the White House over the email probe. But if you’re trying to send a message to the FBI or Justice, it’s probably shrewder to do it publicly by apologizing for Mrs. Clinton’s “carelessness” than it is to say something specific in a private meeting that could leak to the press. Mr. Obama can say he never said a word to either one, while those two take the heat if they give Mrs. Clinton a legal pass.

Our own view of the public email evidence is that Mrs. Clinton’s actions go far beyond mere “carelessness.” She knew she was setting up a private server in violation of State Department policy, she did it deliberately to prevent her emails from becoming public if she ran for President, and she knew classified information was bound to travel over that server.

As former Attorney General Michael Mukasey has written on these pages, “gross negligence” in handling classified information related to national defense is enough for criminal liability. That Mr. Obama would issue such a public defense, and use such legally potent words, suggests that there’s more culpability than he cares to admit.

http://archive.is/7bGxv

[hanger4]

You are incorrect... From the Espionage Act..


To convey information with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the armed forces of the United States (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_armed_forces) or to promote the success of its enemies. This was punishable by death or by imprisonment for not more than 30 years or both.
To convey false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States or to promote the success of its enemies when the United States is at war, to cause or attempt to cause insubordination, disloyalty, mutiny, refusal of duty, in the military or naval forces of the United States, or to willfully obstruct the recruiting or enlistment service of the United States. This was punishable by a maximum fine of $10,000 or by imprisonment for not more than 20 years or both.

Why'd you leave out this part ??

18 U.S.C. Section 793(f)

Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document. . .relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed

[hanger4]

This and Benghazi are so blatantly partisan it's almost a joke.

I'm no huge fan of Clinton, but there has been a concerted effort to discredit her. The woman and her staff used a server because the US govt technology is outdated. There is little evidence that she was malicious in her actions. It's not as if she raped a bunch of kids and paid them off or started a war that has killed thousands. She used a different email account.

You left out the secret part of her email server.

How convenient.

[MMC]

Why'd you leave out this part ??

18 U.S.C. Section 793(f)

Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document. . .relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed

I was just looking for that and found it....takes a bit to go thru the living years. Just sayin. :grin:

But I did hook him with 18 US 2071. :wink:



Ronald J. Sievert 6:48 p.m. EDT April 4, 2016

Law makes clear DOJ should prosecute Clinton for mishandling 'national defense information,' classified or not.

Since the beginning of the Clinton email scandal, the nation has been subjected to a political and criminal defense generated smokescreen. The Clinton campaign has attempted to make the public believe that she is not guilty of anything because the information on her very unprotected server was not “marked as classified” or “classified at the time.”

The applicable statute, 18 USC 793, however, does not even once mention the word “classified.” The focus is on “information respecting the national defense” that potentially “could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation.” 793 (f) specifically makes it a crime for anyone “entrusted with … any document ... or information relating to the national defense … through gross negligence (to permit) the same to be removed from its proper place of custody.” A jury (not a Democrat or Republican political administration) is, of course, the best body to determine gross negligence on the facts of this case.


http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/04/04/hillary-clinton-email-scandal-legal-definition-national-defense-information-classification-column/82446130/?csp=opinion

[hanger4]

I was just looking for that and found it....takes a bit to go thru the living years. Just sayin. :grin:

But I did hook him with 18 US 2071. :wink:



Ronald J. Sievert 6:48 p.m. EDT April 4, 2016

Law makes clear DOJ should prosecute Clinton for mishandling 'national defense information,' classified or not.

Since the beginning of the Clinton email scandal, the nation has been subjected to a political and criminal defense generated smokescreen. The Clinton campaign has attempted to make the public believe that she is not guilty of anything because the information on her very unprotected server was not “marked as classified” or “classified at the time.”

The applicable statute, 18 USC 793, however, does not even once mention the word “classified.” The focus is on “information respecting the national defense” that potentially “could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation.” 793 (f) specifically makes it a crime for anyone “entrusted with … any document ... or information relating to the national defense … through gross negligence (to permit) the same to be removed from its proper place of custody.” A jury (not a Democrat or Republican political administration) is, of course, the best body to determine gross negligence on the facts of this case.


http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/04/04/hillary-clinton-email-scandal-legal-definition-national-defense-information-classification-column/82446130/?csp=opinion

Yea, that "proper place of custody" part is another hitch for HC. I have yet to read or watch anywhere someone explain how HC's personal secret off the .gov grid email server can be construed as a "proper place of custody".

[MMC]

You left out the secret part of her email server.

How convenient.

The leftness around here isn't doing so well with Hillary's Email and Private server scandal.....are they? http://www.debatepolitics.com/images/smilies/New_Smilies/think.gif..... http://politirant.com/Smileys/oldrant/evil6.gif


The courts have held repeatedly (http://www.dodig.mil/programs/whistleblower/2010_1206_CRS_Criminal_Prohibitions_Defense_Inform ation.pdf) that “national defense information” includes closely held military, foreign policy and intelligence information and that evidence that the information is classified (https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/R41404.pdf) is not necessary for a prosecution. Evidence that the information was upon later review found to be classified, however, as is the case with approximately 2,000 Clinton messages (http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/hillary-clinton-emails-top-secret-219988), is of course one kind of proof that the information met the test of “national defense information” in the first place. (See U.S. v. Rosen and Weissman (http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/jbalkin/telecom/unitedstatesvrosen.pdf), 445 F. Supp. 2d 602 (E.D. Va. 2006) pertaining to a different provision but containing a good summary of law on national defense information and classified information.) The fact that the information does not have to be “marked classified” at the time only makes sense because sometimes, as in the case of the Clinton case and other 793 cases, the information is originated and distributed before any security officer can perform a review and put a classification mark on it.

So why has this not been discussed in the television and print media? Why has Clinton not been grilled by her interviewers as to whether her emails contained national defense information that could harm the U.S.? Why has everyone bought into the “marked classified” rabbit trail? One suspects that many reporters and commentators have not bothered to read the actual law or are hesitant to blow the central defense of the Clinton campaign out of the water.....snip~

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/04/04/hillary-clinton-email-scandal-legal-definition-national-defense-information-classification-column/82446130/?csp=opinion

[MMC]

Yea, that "proper place of custody" part is another hitch for HC. I have yet to read or watch anywhere someone explain how HC's personal secret off the .gov grid email server can be construed as a "proper place of custody".

Especially after ODNI didn't approve any of her tech for her server. Then there are the breaches that she or her people gave up to Guccifer, and the others.


Clinton server may have been breached in 2009.....


Information pieced together from Hillary Clinton's trove of released email suggests that her request for a secure Blackberry may have followed an intrusion into her system during a trip to Asia, according to an analysis by a former Homeland Security official.

"There now seems to be a very real probability that Hillary Clinton rushed to install an encryption certificate in March 2009 because the U.S. intelligence community caught another country reading Clinton's unencrypted messages during her February 16-21, 2009, trip to China, Indonesia, Japan, and S. Korea," wrote Stewart Baker, a former assistant secretary for policy at the Department of Homeland Security, in a column for the Washington Post.

That request came months after Clinton began using the private server stored in the basement of her home, a fact just revealed last month. The timing, Baker notes, calls into question why Clinton suddenly felt a seemingly-spontaneous need to heighten security.

A staff memo describing a March 11, 2009 meeting at the State Department may have shed light on the issue. Baker recounted that "her attention was drawn to a sentence that indicates we [the diplomatic security office] have intelligence concerning … vulnerability during her recent trip to Asia."

"Eighteen days later, Clinton's server acquires a digital certificate supporting TLS encryption, closing the biggest security hole in her server," Baker recounts. "Did our agencies see Clinton's unencrypted messages transiting foreign networks? Did they spot foreign agencies intercepting those messages? It's hard to say, but either answer is bad, and the quick addition of encryption to the server suggests that Clinton saw it that way too."....snip~

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/clinton-server-may-have-been-breached-in-2009/article/2587663?custom_click=rss

[domer76]

Translation;

I have no rebutal to the facts presented so I don't want to talk about it.

The facts are that, other than the investigation, nothing has transpired so far. So, instead of presenting us with your endless and useless bitching, why don't you spare us, STFU and let things run their course?

[domer76]

Those compartmented top secret emails reportedly had the names of spies in foreign governments working for us. Our current spies were likely captured, tortured and murdered. And now no one will spy for the United States. In my opinion, this damage will last for several generations. This is exceptionally grave damage. Try her. Convict her. And execute here. Her execution and that alone will begin to repair the damage Crooked Hillary did to us.

"likely"

[Quicksilver]

The leftness around here isn't doing so well with Hillary's Email and Private server scandal.....are they? http://www.debatepolitics.com/images/smilies/New_Smilies/think.gif..... http://politirant.com/Smileys/oldrant/evil6.gif


The courts have held repeatedly (http://www.dodig.mil/programs/whistleblower/2010_1206_CRS_Criminal_Prohibitions_Defense_Inform ation.pdf) that “national defense information” includes closely held military, foreign policy and intelligence information and that evidence that the information is classified (https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/secrecy/R41404.pdf) is not necessary for a prosecution. Evidence that the information was upon later review found to be classified, however, as is the case with approximately 2,000 Clinton messages (http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/hillary-clinton-emails-top-secret-219988), is of course one kind of proof that the information met the test of “national defense information” in the first place. (See U.S. v. Rosen and Weissman (http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/jbalkin/telecom/unitedstatesvrosen.pdf), 445 F. Supp. 2d 602 (E.D. Va. 2006) pertaining to a different provision but containing a good summary of law on national defense information and classified information.) The fact that the information does not have to be “marked classified” at the time only makes sense because sometimes, as in the case of the Clinton case and other 793 cases, the information is originated and distributed before any security officer can perform a review and put a classification mark on it.

So why has this not been discussed in the television and print media? Why has Clinton not been grilled by her interviewers as to whether her emails contained national defense information that could harm the U.S.? Why has everyone bought into the “marked classified” rabbit trail? One suspects that many reporters and commentators have not bothered to read the actual law or are hesitant to blow the central defense of the Clinton campaign out of the water.....snip~

http://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2016/04/04/hillary-clinton-email-scandal-legal-definition-national-defense-information-classification-column/82446130/?csp=opinion

You can quote and link all you please... The fact remains.. There has been no indictment.. NOR has the FBI said what if any "evidence" was found... So until that point.. all you have is your wet dreams to hang on to. In the meantime.. as I've said "you got nuttin'"

[MisterVeritis]

"likely"
Yes. Likely. What do you think hostile foreign governments would do to their officials spying for the US?

[domer76]

Yes. Likely. What do you think hostile foreign governments would do to their officials spying for the US?

Probably "likely" them to death.

[MMC]

You can quote and link all you please... The fact remains.. There has been no indictment.. NOR has the FBI said what if any "evidence" was found... So until that point.. all you have is your wet dreams to hang on to. In the meantime.. as I've said "you got nuttin'"


The only one that has nothing.....is you. As you can't refute nor debunk any of what I put up. But I will be merciful.....and give you a little clue. You aren't the only one and over several political sites. None of the leftness can get around what Hillary has stated out of her own mouth and then been called on it. Not by the Repubs......by the MS Media, the State Dept itself, the IC, and a couple of Judges.

Did she say she had deleted emails but they were all personal? Did the FBI say they re-covered some emails and they are work related? Does the FBI want to know HOW and WHY Classified Material got onto her server? Did she say she didn't send or receive any classified emails?

Did they find an email with Hillary telling Jake Sullivan to remove markings to send that email unsecured? Did Hillary say she turned over all of her work related emails to the State Dept under penalty of perjury? Did they catch Hillary lying by not having the Sidney Blumenthal Emails?

The fact remains that FBI investigation isn't over.....is it a fact that the FBI has now expanded its Investigation to Include Corruption?

Is it a fact that she still has 3 IG investigations of In House oversight taking place?

So you hope and dream that nothing comes of it and that BO peep and his DOJ won't indict.

One thing is clear.....anyone else would already have been indicted for the exact same things she did.

http://media.townhall.com/Townhall/Car/b/holb_c14101120160506120100.jpg

[MisterVeritis]

Probably "likely" them to death.
The "to death" part is right.

[Beevee]

non-disclosure agreement
https://www.google.com/search?safe=off&hl=en&q=clinton signed non disclosure agreement&spell=1&sa=X

What does that have to do with retroactive reclassification?

[MMC]

What does that have to do with retroactive reclassification?


What do you think it has to do with Originating Classified material?

[MisterVeritis]

What does that have to do with retroactive reclassification?The top secret emails were not retroactively reclassified. The information was always top secret. Information requiring protection does not change its status if someone fails to mark it. Crooked Hillary was a top secret original classification authority. She was required to know what was and was not classified. A spy's name and position will never be unclassified. Crooked Hillary is a liar. She did all of this to cover her other crimes involving selling influence and access to her presumed future position as the President of the United States.

[hanger4]

What does that have to do with retroactive reclassification?
You didn't read or research anything did you ??

From the non discloser agreement;

"I understand that it is my responsibility to consult with appropriate management authorities in the Department … in order to ensure that I know whether information or material within my knowledge or control that I have reason to believe might be SCI,”

According to government security experts, the type of information that receives a TS/SCI designation is sensitive enough that most senior government officials would immediately recognize it as such.

That's "Gross Negligence" via incompetence at the very least.

[maineman]

That's "Gross Negligence" via incompetence at the very least.

in your opinion. When the DOJ comes back and clears her, will you finally STFU about this dead horse you've been beating?

[MMC]

The top secret emails were not retroactively reclassified. The information was always top secret. Information requiring protection does not change its status if someone fails to mark it. Crooked Hillary was a top secret original classification authority. She was required to know what was and was not classified. A spy's name and position will never be unclassified. Crooked Hillary is a liar. She did all of this to cover her other crimes involving selling influence and access to her presumed future position as the President of the United States.


Another good piece of the puzzle. She was denied by the Intelligence Community to have a Blackberry phone. She ignored their warnings and got one and used it anyways.

Which then the DSO finds out on her Trip to Asia that she was breached. Aka a Vulnerability took place with Her.

Then 18 days later she runs out and gets an encryption for her private server. But its not enough security. Which thats when its discovered her IT guy Pagliano and River Platte Works didn't get any approval from ODNI for the system.

[MMC]

in your opinion. When the DOJ comes back and clears her, will you finally STFU about this dead horse you've been beating?

He is in with the majority.....even BO peep said She was careless. Gross negligence counts that she might not even knew what she was doing. One time an accident. Several times.....its willful.

[maineman]

He is in with the majority.....even BO peep said She was careless. Gross negligence counts that she might not even knew what she was doing. One time an accident. Several times.....its willful.

but you didn't answer the question.

[hanger4]

in your opinion. When the DOJ comes back and clears her, will you finally STFU about this dead horse you've been beating?

The "Gross Negligence" is certainly my opinion. The incompetence is clear. As SOS she knew she'd be handling classified information and her personal email server is certainly not a "proper place of custody".

[maineman]

The "Gross Negligence" is certainly my opinion. The incompetence is clear. As SOS she knew she'd be handling classified information and her personal email server is certainly not a "proper place of custody".

why can't you just answer the fucking question?

[hanger4]

why can't you just answer the fucking question?

Meaning will I STFU, sure when you stop spouting debunked memes.

[MMC]

but you didn't answer the question.

Because the flip side to your coin is something happens and causes her to lose that chance for the Presidency. Which then you know what that means then, Right?

[maineman]

Because the flip side to your coin is something happens and causes her to lose that chance for the Presidency. Which then you know what that means then, Right?

if something does happen, she will drop out of the race and Bernie will be the nominee. easy peasy.

[maineman]

Meaning will I STFU, sure when you stop spouting debunked memes.

meaning... IF the DOJ does not indict her, will you THEN STFU about this issue? You'll still have the Benghazi dead horse to whip.....

[Peter1469]

First the FBI doesn't talk about open investigations. So the "news" has no idea what evidence there is.

Second, malicious intent is not an element of the possible offenses that she may have committed. Another hint that the "news" is making up the news.

[MMC]

First the FBI doesn't talk about open investigations. So the "news" has no idea what evidence there is.

Second, malicious intent is not an element of the possible offenses that she may have committed. Another hint that the "news" is making up the news.


Team Screw up and her pals in the media are just trying to give cover, and deflect.


http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/62416-Hillary-Gets-Guccifered?p=1542474#post1542474

[hanger4]

meaning... IF the DOJ does not indict her, will you THEN STFU about this issue? You'll still have the Benghazi dead horse to whip.....

Boooooy howdy. The Hillary-bots sho-nuff don't wanna talk bout HC's email kerfuffel. At least 3 times today I've been told to STFU.

I laughed