Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
they were not documents, they were emails that her aides sent back and forth to each other, some for as long as 2 years, on the state.gov email system which was also an UNCLASSIFIED email system, before they forwarded them to Hillary to get her in on the discussion of what they found out...their messages contained information that Syd Blumenthal had sent Hillary...when ever she got his information, she sent it to her top aides and they checked out the information he gave them as an outside source, to see if it was true and good information....many times her aides found that Syd's info was not good or good enough to count on or use as intel that was solid....but some times, even though all of syd's sources were outside of the government, his intel, turned out to be helpful and true.The problem with your conjecture, is that NOTHING was removed from it's proper place, no documents or plans were copied or removed and sent via email.Why?
Two things you have to prove to get a conviction - Actus Reus (the act) and mens rea (the mental intention). She fulfils the first criterion, not the second. Did you have the private server and emails? Absolutely. Did she intend for it to be hacked or used by others and did she think what she was doing would lead to others getting the info? No.
That aside, Title 18 USC 793 F1 part a says:
(a) Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States,
I don't, for a NY minute, believe she had any intention to cause injury to the US. She was SOS for crying out loud....that was the last thing she intended.
There is no (a) in F(1)
(f)
Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, 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, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information
Actually she's guilty of both F(1) and F(2), gross negligence, removal from it's proper place and delivering to persons not authorized to have said information, those being contract IT people who had no security clearance. Feel free to point where intent is a requirement.
Really, how did those top secret documents, that Comey said were born that way, find their way form a secure system to a nonsecure system, and storage in a unapproved facility? The hildabitch owned the unapproved system and storage facility. Did they appear magically or did someone move them?
These emails that had top secret classified information in them according to Comey, were Syd Blumenthal emails, that Hillary's aides were checking out to see if his intel could be used or was even true at all....those emails, of these aides and then finally Hillary, of discussions of what Blumenthal told them, turned out to be top secret classified, information, that our Intelligence agencies collected from their own sources. The State Dept argued with the Intelligence department over whether these emails of theirs should even be top secret as the intelligence departments said they were, because Hillary and her aides, got this info from Syd Blumenthal, a public source, who got the info from his outside/public sources and newspaper articles....
Nothing was taken from it's proper source, nothing was copied from it's proper/original source...he had nothing to charge her for, when it came to that...the info they had loose lips on, was info from Blumenthal, that they did not know at the time when they first started researching them, was Top secret....
Donald Trump says Hillary Clinton should go to jail
"Ocala, Florida (CNN)Donald Trump said Wednesday that Hillary Clinton "has to go to jail" because the scandal over her email server, comments that mark a major departure from the American political tradition.
The GOP nominee, firing up a large crowd of loyal supporters during a swing through Florida, also laid into the Democratic nominee over her health and seized on disclosures from hacked emails of her campaign chairman, John Podesta, released by Wikileaks."
I think Trump is getting a little carried away
Well let's look at that. Did she intend for anyone other than herself to see her emails, you're right she didn't. She set up her private server with the intent of keeping her communications off government servers where they wouldn't be subject to FOIA requests. That is a violation of federal records keeping laws, she had a requirement to CC government archivist on every work related email. She didn't, did she? You want intent, you can't get clearer intent than that. As part of that ongoing violation of law, classified information was moved to and stored on her server, she permitted it. Comey used the terms "extremely negligent" and "no reasonable person in her position", in relation to her email content. To me that say gross negligence, we already had intent to break the law by her having the server to begin with.
Did anyone see her email, YES. Comey clearly stated, in his presser, that people she was communicating with were hacked. The content that was hacked hasn't been disclosed, we may never know what was compromised. So to say nothing happened is naive.
Add to all this, there are a large numbers of former prosecutors and judges that are questioning why this wasn't presented to a grand jury. You have to admit that on it's face, the decision not to move forward appears to be a purely political decision, not a legal one. But when you see that the DOJ also refused to present Holders contempt of congress to a grand jury as they are REQUIRED to do by law, it smacks of a politicized DOJ serving the regime and not the people.
Well let's look at that. Did she intend for anyone other than herself to see her emails, you're right she didn't. She set up her private server with the intent of keeping her communications off government servers where they wouldn't be subject to FOIA requests. That is a violation of federal records keeping laws, she had a requirement to CC government archivist on every work related email. She didn't, did she? You want intent, you can't get clearer intent than that. As part of that ongoing violation of law, classified information was moved to and stored on her server, she permitted it. Comey used the terms "extremely negligent" and "no reasonable person in her position", in relation to her email content. To me that say gross negligence, we already had intent to break the law by her having the server to begin with.
Did anyone see her email, YES. Comey clearly stated, in his presser, that people she was communicating with were hacked. The content that was hacked hasn't been disclosed, we may never know what was compromised. So to say nothing happened is naive.
Add to all this, there are a large numbers of former prosecutors and judges that are questioning why this wasn't presented to a grand jury. You have to admit that on it's face, the decision not to move forward appears to be a purely political decision, not a legal one. But when you see that the DOJ also refused to present Holders contempt of congress to a grand jury as they are REQUIRED to do by law, it smacks of a politicized DOJ serving the regime and not the people.
I actually don't have a problem if it was political. Why? Because a grand jury is convened, or a special prosecutor is appointed to look into Cheney and Bush and these so-called WMDs, then I think anything any politician does - short of shooting somebody in the street - pales in comparison.
Also, the right come across as massive hypocrites. They want Hillary jailed, hung drawn and quartered over something that MIGHT have happened with regard to US enemies getting info. Whereas they give a free pass to Bush and Cheney over WMD that not only have caused death and mayhem, but has lead to complete destabilisation of the ME.
At the end of the day, it seems that no harm came to anybody due to these emails.
real talkWhoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, 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, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—
Actually she's guilty of both F(1) and F(2), gross negligence, removal from it's proper place and delivering to persons not authorized to have said information, those being contract IT people who had no security clearance. Feel free to point where intent is a requirement.
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,
The bold part. That never happened..
Nice, you run out of reasonable arguments on the topic, so you deflect, good job regressive. You're dismissed.
Red:
Okay, well tell us. What specific piece of top secret information did Mrs. Clinton mishandle? Who lost their life/lives as a result of that piece of information's having allegedly been mishandled?
They won't say, it's classified.
Oh, I see. Well, perhaps "they" have at least noted that someone did get killed as a result of Mrs. Clinton's mishandling her email? I am just trying to get a clear story on just how serious the matter was....
You again reveal your misunderstanding of classified information. You believe that someone has to lose their life as the direct result of Hillary's compromised classified information. That is wrong. I was stating the known consequence of classified especially TS classified information falling into enemy hands. The FBI director stated the presence of TS information on her server. That is all that is needed in a prosecution.
You are making the same false argument that media does about Hillary's server being hacked or not. "There was no evidence that it was hacked so it's cool". Wrong. Whether the server was hacked or not or whether someone died or not as the result of Hillary's violation of classified information handling is NOT the point. Did anyone die as the result of the sailors photographs of the inside of a sub? Of course not. Did he go to jail for a year for photographing a classified Sub? You bet he did.
Red (see both "red" passages in the quoted comments above):
You are the one who asserted positively that, "People lose their lives because of it, for real,"...."it" being the mishandling of classified information. Accordingly, it appears you are the one who believes that.
Blue:
In determining whether to prosecute someone and gaining a conviction in a court of law, that there is no "beyond a reasonable doubt" evidence of actus and/or mens rea, as befits the requirements of the statue and precedents that one is to be charged with violating, is very much the point for why such a prosecution will fail.
It has NOTHING to do with my belief. You are lawyering and tap dancing around what you know yourself to be true. People have and do lose their lives due to mishandled or intercepted classified information. There were over 20 separate TS level emails on Clinton's private server.
Nice, you run out of reasonable arguments on the topic, so you deflect, good job regressive. You're dismissed.
My last post doesn't negate anything I've said. No mens rea. End of case.
And IF I'm a progressive does that mean you're the opposite? A regressive?
You said there were 8 email chains that contained top secret information without headers
why don't you tell the police officers in Baltimore and cases are tried due to public opinion, they'll get a big kick out of that. Now run along to your fantasy land, you appear to be too stupid to learn anything or even accept facts.
yeah why do they always talk about foreign politics hmmWhy don't they talk about politics? What people want to hear about: school, healthcare, crime, foreign politics, etc...
Clinton always talks about "Trump girls" and he always talks about how he would love to see her in jail!
Oh right, why did she set up the private system to begin with, do you think it was to avoid federal records keeping and FOIA laws? She had an obligation to CC a state dept archivist on every work relate email, she didn't do that, did she. The classified material was just part and parcel of an ongoing crime. Intent and foreknowledge is evident to anyone willing to see it.
Also you and your ilk thinking you're progressives just proves how delusional you really are. No one in the country is above the law, not even the hildabithch.
agreed she had an obligationOh right, why did she set up the private system to begin with, do you think it was to avoid federal records keeping and FOIA laws? She had an obligation to CC a state dept archivist on every work relate email, she didn't do that, did she. The classified material was just part and parcel of an ongoing crime. Intent and foreknowledge is evident to anyone willing to see it.
Also you and your ilk thinking you're progressives just proves how delusional you really are. No one in the country is above the law, not even the hildabithch.
She had an obligation, but as I said, no mens reas, no case, case closed.
As I said, until Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz are brought to account of WMD, you neocon whackos don't have a leg to stand on. No one in the country is above the law, not even Dumbya.
agreed she had an obligation
yeah definitely notagreed she had an obligation
But it's not the end of the world.
yeah she has an obligationOh right, why did she set up the private system to begin with, do you think it was to avoid federal records keeping and FOIA laws? She had an obligation to CC a state dept archivist on every work relate email, she didn't do that, did she. The classified material was just part and parcel of an ongoing crime. Intent and foreknowledge is evident to anyone willing to see it.
Also you and your ilk thinking you're progressives just proves how delusional you really are. No one in the country is above the law, not even the hildabithch.
She had an obligation, but as I said, no mens reas, no case, case closed.
As I said, until Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz are brought to account of WMD, you neocon whackos don't have a leg to stand on. No one in the country is above the law, not even Dumbya.
really?Red:
Okay, well tell us. What specific piece of top secret information did Mrs. Clinton mishandle? Who lost their life/lives as a result of that piece of information's having allegedly been mishandled?
They won't say, it's classified.
Oh, I see. Well, perhaps "they" have at least noted that someone did get killed as a result of Mrs. Clinton's mishandling her email? I am just trying to get a clear story on just how serious the matter was....
You again reveal your misunderstanding of classified information. You believe that someone has to lose their life as the direct result of Hillary's compromised classified information. That is wrong. I was stating the known consequence of classified especially TS classified information falling into enemy hands. The FBI director stated the presence of TS information on her server. That is all that is needed in a prosecution.
You are making the same false argument that media does about Hillary's server being hacked or not. "There was no evidence that it was hacked so it's cool". Wrong. Whether the server was hacked or not or whether someone died or not as the result of Hillary's violation of classified information handling is NOT the point. Did anyone die as the result of the sailors photographs of the inside of a sub? Of course not. Did he go to jail for a year for photographing a classified Sub? You bet he did.
Red (see both "red" passages in the quoted comments above):
You are the one who asserted positively that, "People lose their lives because of it, for real,"...."it" being the mishandling of classified information. Accordingly, it appears you are the one who believes that.
Blue:
In determining whether to prosecute someone and gaining a conviction in a court of law, that there is no "beyond a reasonable doubt" evidence of actus and/or mens rea, as befits the requirements of the statue and precedents that one is to be charged with violating, is very much the point for why such a prosecution will fail.
It has NOTHING to do with my belief. You are lawyering and tap dancing around what you know yourself to be true. People have and do lose their lives due to mishandled or intercepted classified information. There were over 20 separate TS level emails on Clinton's private server.
