Over 1,000 classified Clinton emails...agency misses court ordered release date

[Jroc]

More Clinton corruption...selling out to the Russians for cash.

Frank Giustra, founder of the Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership, speaks during the Clinton Global Initiative's 2015 Winter Meeting in New York February 10, 2015.

The basic facts: This story is about the sale of a controlling stake in a Canadian company called Uranium One to Rosatom, the Russian atomic energy agency. Because Uranium One controlled uranium mines in the United States, the sale had to be approved by the Committee on Foreign Investment In the United States (CFIUS), part of the executive branch.

A number of investors in Uranium One gave donations to the Clinton Foundation during the time the sale was being considered (between 2008 and 2010), in part through the participation of Frank Giustra, a Canadian mining magnate who was a large donor to the Foundation and who had controlled a company that eventually bought Uranium One (according to the Times, Giustra sold his interest in the company in 2007, before the Rosatom deal)

.

In addition, Bill Clinton was paid $500,000 in 2010 to give a speech to a Russian bank with ties to the Russian government. The U.S. government eventually approved the deal in 2010.

What's the allegation against Hillary Clinton? The reason this is a story is the potential that there was some quid pro quo involved: that in exchange for donations to the Clinton Foundation and/or the speech Bill Clinton gave in Russia, Hillary Clinton used her position as Secretary of State to make approval of this sale happen. It need not be explicit, but at the very least there has to be a connection between donations and official action that Clinton took.

What's the evidence for that allegation? There isn't any, at least not yet. The only evidence is timing: people who would benefit from the sale made donations to the foundation at around the same time the matter was before the government.

What's the evidence in Clinton's favor? Even if Clinton had wanted to make sure the sale was approved, it wouldn't have been possible for her to do it on her own. CFIUS is made up of not only the Secretary of State, but also the secretaries of Treasury, Justice, Homeland Security, Commerce, Defense, and Energy, as well as the heads of the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and the Office of Science and Technology Policy.

The truth about the Hillary Clinton-Russia-Uranium 'scandal'

 

[billyerock1991]

here is a prime example of nut jobs like Jroc grasping for straws ... there isn't any part of the law he posts that she violated ... jroc is thinking she violated classified documents so this law applies ... this law doesn't apply if it did the FBI would be all over her

 

[Jroc]

Translation...i support the leftist scum Hillary no matter what she does, because she is Hillary. She's a self serving liar and you support her corruption

and prime proof that idiots do exist ...I clearly stated you can't convict a person of a law after the fact ... the fact that you don't like hillary doesn't give you the right to make assumptions about me or her... state a fact thats based on truth not opinion...

the facts are she is an unethical liars ,who is under FBI investigation

and you have proof she is a unethical liar??? have you been watching the republicans say things then deny they said it??? all I've heard Hillary say on this subject that she didn't send classified documents to her private server... that none of her emails ever said they we classified on her server... she said the documents that said they were classified she said she sent them to the government server ... now tell us hows that being unethical

I just posted the statute she violated..one of them

Ok lets look at this law you posted

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, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, goes upon, enters, flies over, or otherwise obtains information concerning any vessel, aircraft, work of defense, navy yard, naval station, submarine base, fueling station, fort, battery, torpedo station, dockyard, canal, railroad, arsenal, camp, factory, mine, telegraph, telephone, wireless, or signal station, building, office, research laboratory or station or other place connected with the national defense owned or constructed, or in progress of construction by the United States or under the control of the United States, or of any of its officers, departments, or agencies, or within the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States, or any place in which any vessel, aircraft, arms, munitions, or other materials or instruments for use in time of war are being made, prepared, repaired, stored, or are the subject of research or development, under any contract or agreement with the United States, or any department or agency thereof, or with any person on behalf of the United States, or otherwise on behalf of the United States, or any prohibited place so designated by the President by proclamation in time of war or in case of national emergency in which anything for the use of the Army, Navy, or Air Force is being prepared or constructed or stored, information as to which prohibited place the President has determined would be prejudicial to the national defense; or

please point out what part of the law she violated by send private emails to her server ??? did she send it to some one who could have used it against us ??? no that didn't happen what part of this law are you saying she violated...

Are you for real? read it again, having the private sever alone violated that statute. Which is why she is being investigated

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

 

[billyerock1991]

More Clinton corruption...selling out to the Russians for cash.

Frank Giustra, founder of the Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership, speaks during the Clinton Global Initiative's 2015 Winter Meeting in New York February 10, 2015.

The basic facts: This story is about the sale of a controlling stake in a Canadian company called Uranium One to Rosatom, the Russian atomic energy agency. Because Uranium One controlled uranium mines in the United States, the sale had to be approved by the Committee on Foreign Investment In the United States (CFIUS), part of the executive branch.

A number of investors in Uranium One gave donations to the Clinton Foundation during the time the sale was being considered (between 2008 and 2010), in part through the participation of Frank Giustra, a Canadian mining magnate who was a large donor to the Foundation and who had controlled a company that eventually bought Uranium One (according to the Times, Giustra sold his interest in the company in 2007, before the Rosatom deal)

.

In addition, Bill Clinton was paid $500,000 in 2010 to give a speech to a Russian bank with ties to the Russian government. The U.S. government eventually approved the deal in 2010.

What's the allegation against Hillary Clinton? The reason this is a story is the potential that there was some quid pro quo involved: that in exchange for donations to the Clinton Foundation and/or the speech Bill Clinton gave in Russia, Hillary Clinton used her position as Secretary of State to make approval of this sale happen. It need not be explicit, but at the very least there has to be a connection between donations and official action that Clinton took.

What's the evidence for that allegation? There isn't any, at least not yet. The only evidence is timing: people who would benefit from the sale made donations to the foundation at around the same time the matter was before the government.

What's the evidence in Clinton's favor? Even if Clinton had wanted to make sure the sale was approved, it wouldn't have been possible for her to do it on her own. CFIUS is made up of not only the Secretary of State, but also the secretaries of Treasury, Justice, Homeland Security, Commerce, Defense, and Energy, as well as the heads of the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and the Office of Science and Technology Policy.

The truth about the Hillary Clinton-Russia-Uranium 'scandal'

you're one deranged individual ...why don't you take this tasty tidbit to the thread that deals with these words of wisdom ... maybe you can get a rise out of them ... this thread is about illegal emails so please try and stay on topic

 

[Jroc]

More Clinton corruption...selling out to the Russians for cash.

Frank Giustra, founder of the Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership, speaks during the Clinton Global Initiative's 2015 Winter Meeting in New York February 10, 2015.

The basic facts: This story is about the sale of a controlling stake in a Canadian company called Uranium One to Rosatom, the Russian atomic energy agency. Because Uranium One controlled uranium mines in the United States, the sale had to be approved by the Committee on Foreign Investment In the United States (CFIUS), part of the executive branch.

A number of investors in Uranium One gave donations to the Clinton Foundation during the time the sale was being considered (between 2008 and 2010), in part through the participation of Frank Giustra, a Canadian mining magnate who was a large donor to the Foundation and who had controlled a company that eventually bought Uranium One (according to the Times, Giustra sold his interest in the company in 2007, before the Rosatom deal)

.

In addition, Bill Clinton was paid $500,000 in 2010 to give a speech to a Russian bank with ties to the Russian government. The U.S. government eventually approved the deal in 2010.

What's the allegation against Hillary Clinton? The reason this is a story is the potential that there was some quid pro quo involved: that in exchange for donations to the Clinton Foundation and/or the speech Bill Clinton gave in Russia, Hillary Clinton used her position as Secretary of State to make approval of this sale happen. It need not be explicit, but at the very least there has to be a connection between donations and official action that Clinton took.

What's the evidence for that allegation? There isn't any, at least not yet. The only evidence is timing: people who would benefit from the sale made donations to the foundation at around the same time the matter was before the government.

What's the evidence in Clinton's favor? Even if Clinton had wanted to make sure the sale was approved, it wouldn't have been possible for her to do it on her own. CFIUS is made up of not only the Secretary of State, but also the secretaries of Treasury, Justice, Homeland Security, Commerce, Defense, and Energy, as well as the heads of the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and the Office of Science and Technology Policy.

The truth about the Hillary Clinton-Russia-Uranium 'scandal'

you're one deranged individual ...why don't you take this tasty tidbit to the thread that deals with these words of wisdom ... maybe you can get a rise out of them ... this thread is about illegal emails so please try and stay on topic

Corruption boy, and you can't even understand the statute i posted. Gross negligence equals prison time.

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

 

[billyerock1991]

and prime proof that idiots do exist ...I clearly stated you can't convict a person of a law after the fact ... the fact that you don't like hillary doesn't give you the right to make assumptions about me or her... state a fact thats based on truth not opinion...

the facts are she is an unethical liars ,who is under FBI investigation

and you have proof she is a unethical liar??? have you been watching the republicans say things then deny they said it??? all I've heard Hillary say on this subject that she didn't send classified documents to her private server... that none of her emails ever said they we classified on her server... she said the documents that said they were classified she said she sent them to the government server ... now tell us hows that being unethical

I just posted the statute she violated..one of them

Ok lets look at this law you posted

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, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, goes upon, enters, flies over, or otherwise obtains information concerning any vessel, aircraft, work of defense, navy yard, naval station, submarine base, fueling station, fort, battery, torpedo station, dockyard, canal, railroad, arsenal, camp, factory, mine, telegraph, telephone, wireless, or signal station, building, office, research laboratory or station or other place connected with the national defense owned or constructed, or in progress of construction by the United States or under the control of the United States, or of any of its officers, departments, or agencies, or within the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States, or any place in which any vessel, aircraft, arms, munitions, or other materials or instruments for use in time of war are being made, prepared, repaired, stored, or are the subject of research or development, under any contract or agreement with the United States, or any department or agency thereof, or with any person on behalf of the United States, or otherwise on behalf of the United States, or any prohibited place so designated by the President by proclamation in time of war or in case of national emergency in which anything for the use of the Army, Navy, or Air Force is being prepared or constructed or stored, information as to which prohibited place the President has determined would be prejudicial to the national defense; or

please point out what part of the law she violated by send private emails to her server ??? did she send it to some one who could have used it against us ??? no that didn't happen what part of this law are you saying she violated...

Are you for real? read it again, having the private sever alone violated that statute. Which is why she is being investigated

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

no it doesn't ... you have no idea what the law is saying ... on her server she didn't have any documents that apply to this document you are showing ... I've seen it before ... any one with the little bit of intellegents cans see she hasn't violated any part of this law ... the law is saying if your information is compromised then you will be held responsible ... her server was never compromised ... the fact that she use it made her responsible for anything getting out, the fact that nothing got out no crime has been committed nowhere in this law says she can't have a private server thats why there are new laws

 

[billyerock1991]

More Clinton corruption...selling out to the Russians for cash.

Frank Giustra, founder of the Clinton Giustra Enterprise Partnership, speaks during the Clinton Global Initiative's 2015 Winter Meeting in New York February 10, 2015.

The basic facts: This story is about the sale of a controlling stake in a Canadian company called Uranium One to Rosatom, the Russian atomic energy agency. Because Uranium One controlled uranium mines in the United States, the sale had to be approved by the Committee on Foreign Investment In the United States (CFIUS), part of the executive branch.

A number of investors in Uranium One gave donations to the Clinton Foundation during the time the sale was being considered (between 2008 and 2010), in part through the participation of Frank Giustra, a Canadian mining magnate who was a large donor to the Foundation and who had controlled a company that eventually bought Uranium One (according to the Times, Giustra sold his interest in the company in 2007, before the Rosatom deal)

.

In addition, Bill Clinton was paid $500,000 in 2010 to give a speech to a Russian bank with ties to the Russian government. The U.S. government eventually approved the deal in 2010.

What's the allegation against Hillary Clinton? The reason this is a story is the potential that there was some quid pro quo involved: that in exchange for donations to the Clinton Foundation and/or the speech Bill Clinton gave in Russia, Hillary Clinton used her position as Secretary of State to make approval of this sale happen. It need not be explicit, but at the very least there has to be a connection between donations and official action that Clinton took.

What's the evidence for that allegation? There isn't any, at least not yet. The only evidence is timing: people who would benefit from the sale made donations to the foundation at around the same time the matter was before the government.

What's the evidence in Clinton's favor? Even if Clinton had wanted to make sure the sale was approved, it wouldn't have been possible for her to do it on her own. CFIUS is made up of not only the Secretary of State, but also the secretaries of Treasury, Justice, Homeland Security, Commerce, Defense, and Energy, as well as the heads of the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and the Office of Science and Technology Policy.

The truth about the Hillary Clinton-Russia-Uranium 'scandal'

you're one deranged individual ...why don't you take this tasty tidbit to the thread that deals with these words of wisdom ... maybe you can get a rise out of them ... this thread is about illegal emails so please try and stay on topic

Corruption boy, and you can't even understand the statute i posted. Gross negligence equals prison time.

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

doing business with the Russians isn't illegal ... I don't care what you post ... now please take your words of wisdom to the appropriate board ...

 

[Jroc]

the facts are she is an unethical liars ,who is under FBI investigation

and you have proof she is a unethical liar??? have you been watching the republicans say things then deny they said it??? all I've heard Hillary say on this subject that she didn't send classified documents to her private server... that none of her emails ever said they we classified on her server... she said the documents that said they were classified she said she sent them to the government server ... now tell us hows that being unethical

I just posted the statute she violated..one of them

Ok lets look at this law you posted

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, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, goes upon, enters, flies over, or otherwise obtains information concerning any vessel, aircraft, work of defense, navy yard, naval station, submarine base, fueling station, fort, battery, torpedo station, dockyard, canal, railroad, arsenal, camp, factory, mine, telegraph, telephone, wireless, or signal station, building, office, research laboratory or station or other place connected with the national defense owned or constructed, or in progress of construction by the United States or under the control of the United States, or of any of its officers, departments, or agencies, or within the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States, or any place in which any vessel, aircraft, arms, munitions, or other materials or instruments for use in time of war are being made, prepared, repaired, stored, or are the subject of research or development, under any contract or agreement with the United States, or any department or agency thereof, or with any person on behalf of the United States, or otherwise on behalf of the United States, or any prohibited place so designated by the President by proclamation in time of war or in case of national emergency in which anything for the use of the Army, Navy, or Air Force is being prepared or constructed or stored, information as to which prohibited place the President has determined would be prejudicial to the national defense; or

please point out what part of the law she violated by send private emails to her server ??? did she send it to some one who could have used it against us ??? no that didn't happen what part of this law are you saying she violated...

Are you for real? read it again, having the private sever alone violated that statute. Which is why she is being investigated

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

no it doesn't ... you have no idea what the law is saying ... on her server she didn't have any documents that apply to this document you are showing ... I've seen it before ... any one with the little bit of intellegents cans see she hasn't violated any part of this law ... the law is saying if your information is compromised then you will be held responsible ... her server was never compromised ... the fact that she use it made her responsible for anything getting out, the fact that nothing got out no crime has been committed nowhere in this law says she can't have a private server thats why were are new laws

ok I see you have a reading comprehension problem...

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

 

[OKTexas]

Certainly if it were any kind of crime, she would have been charged ages ago, when the first of these supposedly classified emails were fist found?

Why hasn't she been? They are supposedly up to a thousand you all say....

How can the government hide this kind of alleged crime when it is in the paper daily and even keeping a running count of these supposed classified emails....?

Me thinks you guys should NOT keep your hopes up for the Orange suit....

The FBI is compiling more evidence with every release, the last release is scheduled for Jan, I'd say they will have it all wrapped up by Apr or early May.

Prediction: They will report that there were some minor infractions but nothing worth pursuing. Mrs. Clinton is too big to fail.

Ya never know.

 

[billyerock1991]

and prime proof that idiots do exist ...I clearly stated you can't convict a person of a law after the fact ... the fact that you don't like hillary doesn't give you the right to make assumptions about me or her... state a fact thats based on truth not opinion...

the facts are she is an unethical liars ,who is under FBI investigation

and you have proof she is a unethical liar??? have you been watching the republicans say things then deny they said it??? all I've heard Hillary say on this subject that she didn't send classified documents to her private server... that none of her emails ever said they we classified on her server... she said the documents that said they were classified she said she sent them to the government server ... now tell us hows that being unethical

she knew those statements were not true when she said them, That called lying, dingleberry.

nooooooooooo you're hoping they the statement she said wasn't true ... the fact that you have been beating this dead horse is funny at best ... go educate yourself on the law ... and in these matter... then come back and read your statements you'll start laughing then probably start crying cause I was right and you are so very wrong ... go look at the god damn law that was just pass in nov. 2014

the 2014 change was a state dept policy change, not a law. The laws regarding security and transmission of classified data have been on the books for years.

I held a top secret security clearance, I read the regs, all of them.

it seems you didn't understand what you read ...we have already established you have a comprehension problem... Ive asked you several time now what did she violate... so far you have come up with the most ridiculous remarks ... tell us what part of this law did she violated .. having a private server isn't part of this law.. so again show us what part of this law did she violate ...

 

[billyerock1991]

and you have proof she is a unethical liar??? have you been watching the republicans say things then deny they said it??? all I've heard Hillary say on this subject that she didn't send classified documents to her private server... that none of her emails ever said they we classified on her server... she said the documents that said they were classified she said she sent them to the government server ... now tell us hows that being unethical

I just posted the statute she violated..one of them

Ok lets look at this law you posted

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, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, goes upon, enters, flies over, or otherwise obtains information concerning any vessel, aircraft, work of defense, navy yard, naval station, submarine base, fueling station, fort, battery, torpedo station, dockyard, canal, railroad, arsenal, camp, factory, mine, telegraph, telephone, wireless, or signal station, building, office, research laboratory or station or other place connected with the national defense owned or constructed, or in progress of construction by the United States or under the control of the United States, or of any of its officers, departments, or agencies, or within the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States, or any place in which any vessel, aircraft, arms, munitions, or other materials or instruments for use in time of war are being made, prepared, repaired, stored, or are the subject of research or development, under any contract or agreement with the United States, or any department or agency thereof, or with any person on behalf of the United States, or otherwise on behalf of the United States, or any prohibited place so designated by the President by proclamation in time of war or in case of national emergency in which anything for the use of the Army, Navy, or Air Force is being prepared or constructed or stored, information as to which prohibited place the President has determined would be prejudicial to the national defense; or

please point out what part of the law she violated by send private emails to her server ??? did she send it to some one who could have used it against us ??? no that didn't happen what part of this law are you saying she violated...

Are you for real? read it again, having the private sever alone violated that statute. Which is why she is being investigated

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

no it doesn't ... you have no idea what the law is saying ... on her server she didn't have any documents that apply to this document you are showing ... I've seen it before ... any one with the little bit of intellegents cans see she hasn't violated any part of this law ... the law is saying if your information is compromised then you will be held responsible ... her server was never compromised ... the fact that she use it made her responsible for anything getting out, the fact that nothing got out no crime has been committed nowhere in this law says she can't have a private server thats why were are new laws

ok I see you have a reading comprehension problem...

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

did this happen ??? did any of it get removed from its proper place or custody no it did not ... it went to her private server... at the time of this law no law said you couldn't use a private server ... thats where you failed here ... so it appears it its you that has a comprehension problem ... for some reason you can't show us here in this law that says you can't use a private server ... please show us where it says that ... I'll wait for your words of wisdom ...

 

[OKTexas]

OVER 1,000 classified documents mis-handled, illegally sent/received/stored, destroyed, perjury, etc.... I just do not see how this can all be made to go away without criminal charges or some legal repercussions....or an Obama pen/phone pardon. Anythi g short of it all going away, though, damages her chances of winning in 2016.

No matter what, she has already proven she can't be trusted with classified / our national security. Even her own staff, at the very least, has described her as 'often confused' and 'technology challenged' .... just what we need as President.

It goes away like this, launch an investigation, float out stories about how the law was broken, and make it stretch out over a couple of months. This allows the political operatives to denounce those questioning the ethics of what she did and to put doubt into people's head. It also allows for people to just get tired of hearing about the story.

Then those doing the investigation report their is nothing that raises to the level of being charged with a crime. Then the political operatives crow about how it was all nothing more then a witch hunt. So it goes from being a political negative to a political positive and this is what is going to happen with Mrs. Clinton. Mark my words and i hope by May you are throwing them back in my face, but I seriously doubt that will happen.

It helps if the political operatives find someone else on the other side who has done something similar thus diluting the situation with BS. But that is not really required just icing on the cake.

you sure do like to make shit up ... the courts made the release dates, not clinton ... nor does she have any access to any of the emails being released, the courts have to determine if they are classified that she was ordered to release ... she was ordered to show 55,000 emails ... she has given 45,000 emails so far none of them were consider classified when she receive them ... and who cares if you mark your words, your words are nothing more then a conservatives hating a dam/liberal thats it ... all you allegations here are just that allegations or opinion ... what you think it is compared to your biased opinion base on your opinion of dems/liberals not what is reality

First your a liar, several were said to have been born classified. Second the law says it doesn't matter if it was done by intent or neglect, she still has criminal liability. So keep slinging your propaganda, we all see it for what it is, lies.

 

[billyerock1991]

still waiting were does it say you can't use a private server you with your great knowledge

 

[OKTexas]

What a bunch of gibberish...

More than 1,200 Clinton emails now deemed classified

I think you need to sharpen your comprehension skills ... the article has said the have been reclassified as classified ... you can't hold some one for violating a law after the fact ... it just doesn't work that way ... thats like giving a person a ticket for speeding when they are doing the speed limit ... the tell them well the speed limit goes down tomorrow so you get to have this ticket today ... it just doesn't work that way ... Idiot!!! just because you don't like Dems/liberals you don't get to change the law the next day and hold them for it ...

Get it through your dumb ass head, she wasn't supposed to have that server, using it for state dept business. Just because they weren't marked classified at the time, doesn't mean they should be put on a private server, If you're discussing classified information, those emails are classified ..Marked that way or not

again you are quoting the law after the fact .. in 2012 they passed legislation that you have to use government servers ... prior to that you didn't have to use government servers it was kind of left up in the air ... so again you are convicting her over currant law

If you discuss classified information, its classified. No need to wait for some bureaucrat, who hasn't even seen those emails, to dedicate them classified. You lack common sense. That's quite common with you leftist

only in a simpleton's mind.

The only emails of concern are emails that are Classified TOP SECRET and SECRET....

Those involve national security and are handled on a specific server in the State department and all agencies.

They are not kept on the dot gov email system that all gvt employees work with, but a separate system where only those with CLEARANCE can access them and a much more SECURE system than the .gov system.

Clinton so far, has been accused and reviewedof having two emails that had TOP SECRET info in them that the IG initially thought were Top Secret when she received them.

One, it was found out that the info was not TOP SECRET info when she received the email about it, it had not even been classified yet so the email sender also got info from public sources, and the other one, it was determined that this supposed TOP SECRET info was also out there and known in Public sources too.

On this last batch of thousand(s) emails released, there is 1 that was classified as SECRET after the fact....but i have not heard more on that one yet.

Calling these thousand emails 'classified' as if it is something important and critical to our National security just because through procedure, a name is blacked out or a phone number is blacked out is utterly ridiculous and FOOLISH....

even docs and emails classified as UNCLASSIFIED, can have info on them that is not pertinent to understanding the email discussion, but will be blacked out. SBU, sensitive but unclassified.

So, as I have mentioned before, this supposed COUNT of CLASSIFIED emails of Hillary's is all FAUX HYPE driven by the uninformed media rags.

Every single one of those emails with black outs of names or addresses or small little unimportant things that are unnecessary for the public to know, will be blacked out and they ALL could be simply SBU's, UNCLASSIFIED docs or emails.

SECRET and TOP SECRET are the only emails that involve National security.

So her violations of federal records keeping laws don't matter in your book?

 

[OKTexas]

Get it through your dumb ass head, she wasn't supposed to have that server, using it for state dept business. Just because they weren't marked classified at the time, doesn't mean they should be put on a private server, If you're discussing classified information, those emails are classified ..Marked that way or not

again you are quoting the law after the fact .. in 2012 they passed legislation that you have to use government servers ... prior to that you didn't have to use government servers it was kind of left up in the air ... so again you are convicting her over currant law

If you discuss classified information, its classified. No need to wait for some bureaucrat, who hasn't even seen those emails, to dedicate them classified. You lack common sense. That's quite common with you leftist

only in a simpleton's mind.

The only emails of concern are emails that are Classified TOP SECRET and SECRET....

Those involve national security and are handled on a specific server in the State department and all agencies.

They are not kept on the dot gov email system that all gvt employees work with, but a separate system where only those with CLEARANCE can access them and a much more SECURE system than the .gov system.

Clinton so far, has been accused and reviewedof having two emails that had TOP SECRET info in them that the IG initially thought were Top Secret when she received them.

One, it was found out that the info was not TOP SECRET info when she received the email about it, it had not even been classified yet so the email sender also got info from public sources, and the other one, it was determined that this supposed TOP SECRET info was also out there and known in Public sources too.

On this last batch of thousand(s) emails released, there is 1 that was classified as SECRET after the fact....but i have not heard more on that one yet.

Calling these thousand emails 'classified' as if it is something important and critical to our National security just because through procedure, a name is blacked out or a phone number is blacked out is utterly ridiculous and FOOLISH....

even docs and emails classified as UNCLASSIFIED, can have info on them that is not pertinent to understanding the email discussion, but will be blacked out. SBU, sensitive but unclassified.

So, as I have mentioned before, this supposed COUNT of CLASSIFIED emails of Hillary's is all FAUX HYPE driven by the uninformed media rags.

Every single one of those emails with black outs of names or addresses or small little unimportant things that are unnecessary for the public to know, will be blacked out and they ALL could be simply SBU's, UNCLASSIFIED docs or emails.

SECRET and TOP SECRET are the only emails that involve National security.

it only takes one violation to constitute a crime. If you or I released one piece of secret or top secret data, we would be charged and jailed.

Please explain why you think those laws don't apply to Hillary Clinton.

The law does apply to her, and this is why she has NOT been charged with anything.

The law states she has to INTENTIONALLY give info marked TOP SECRET to someone, like Petraeus did, he gave marked top secret info to his mistress.

Never had a clearance have you. Simply having classified information outside secure systems is a violation of law and it doesn't matter if it was done by intent or neglect. The FBI is looking at her for negligence.

 

[OKTexas]

still waiting were does it say you can't use a private server you with your great knowledge

You can't use ANY unsecured system to handle classified information, her sever was NOT certified to handle such information and it wasn't kept in an area certified for storage of the information. Add to that she allowed private vendors, one being Platte River Tech, access to the server and the information on it, they didn't have the necessary clearance to have that access. These are known facts that you idiots keep refusing to believe. She violated security laws and the only question that remains is will she be held accountable. She also violated federal records keeping laws, but that's fairly minor in comparison.

 

[Jroc]

I just posted the statute she violated..one of them

Ok lets look at this law you posted

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, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, goes upon, enters, flies over, or otherwise obtains information concerning any vessel, aircraft, work of defense, navy yard, naval station, submarine base, fueling station, fort, battery, torpedo station, dockyard, canal, railroad, arsenal, camp, factory, mine, telegraph, telephone, wireless, or signal station, building, office, research laboratory or station or other place connected with the national defense owned or constructed, or in progress of construction by the United States or under the control of the United States, or of any of its officers, departments, or agencies, or within the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States, or any place in which any vessel, aircraft, arms, munitions, or other materials or instruments for use in time of war are being made, prepared, repaired, stored, or are the subject of research or development, under any contract or agreement with the United States, or any department or agency thereof, or with any person on behalf of the United States, or otherwise on behalf of the United States, or any prohibited place so designated by the President by proclamation in time of war or in case of national emergency in which anything for the use of the Army, Navy, or Air Force is being prepared or constructed or stored, information as to which prohibited place the President has determined would be prejudicial to the national defense; or

please point out what part of the law she violated by send private emails to her server ??? did she send it to some one who could have used it against us ??? no that didn't happen what part of this law are you saying she violated...

Are you for real? read it again, having the private sever alone violated that statute. Which is why she is being investigated

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

no it doesn't ... you have no idea what the law is saying ... on her server she didn't have any documents that apply to this document you are showing ... I've seen it before ... any one with the little bit of intellegents cans see she hasn't violated any part of this law ... the law is saying if your information is compromised then you will be held responsible ... her server was never compromised ... the fact that she use it made her responsible for anything getting out, the fact that nothing got out no crime has been committed nowhere in this law says she can't have a private server thats why were are new laws

ok I see you have a reading comprehension problem...

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

did this happen ??? did any of it get removed from its proper place or custody no it did not ... it went to her private server... at the time of this law no law said you couldn't use a private server ... thats where you failed here ... so it appears it its you that has a comprehension problem ... for some reason you can't show us here in this law that says you can't use a private server ... please show us where it says that ... I'll wait for your words of wisdom ...

WTF? Her private server is an 'improper place of custody" ..Boy you're dense

 

[easyt65]

OVER 1,000 classified documents mis-handled, illegally sent/received/stored, destroyed, perjury, etc.... I just do not see how this can all be made to go away without criminal charges or some legal repercussions....or an Obama pen/phone pardon. Anythi g short of it all going away, though, damages her chances of winning in 2016.

No matter what, she has already proven she can't be trusted with classified / our national security. Even her own staff, at the very least, has described her as 'often confused' and 'technology challenged' .... just what we need as President.

It goes away like this, launch an investigation, float out stories about how the law was broken, and make it stretch out over a couple of months. This allows the political operatives to denounce those questioning the ethics of what she did and to put doubt into people's head. It also allows for people to just get tired of hearing about the story.

Then those doing the investigation report their is nothing that raises to the level of being charged with a crime. Then the political operatives crow about how it was all nothing more then a witch hunt. So it goes from being a political negative to a political positive and this is what is going to happen with Mrs. Clinton. Mark my words and i hope by May you are throwing them back in my face, but I seriously doubt that will happen.

It helps if the political operatives find someone else on the other side who has done something similar thus diluting the situation with BS. But that is not really required just icing on the cake.

you sure do like to make shit up ... the courts made the release dates, not clinton ... nor does she have any access to any of the emails being released, the courts have to determine if they are classified that she was ordered to release ... she was ordered to show 55,000 emails ... she has given 45,000 emails so far none of them were consider classified when she receive them ... and who cares if you mark your words, your words are nothing more then a conservatives hating a dam/liberal thats it ... all you allegations here are just that allegations or opinion ... what you think it is compared to your biased opinion base on your opinion of dems/liberals not what is reality

First your a liar, several were said to have been born classified. Second the law says it doesn't matter if it was done by intent or neglect, she still has criminal liability. So keep slinging your propaganda, we all see it for what it is, lies.

1st, you're full of shit.
- The FBI and MEDIA - not me - is reporting that Hillary's emails contain over 1,000 instances of classified information. I will gladly take rhe FBI's and Media's word rather than your amateurish, partisan opinion.

2ndly, dumbass, Information does NOT need to be MARKED 'TS/SCI' to be classified in nature, which means passing such information is STILL negligence (under the Espionage Act) or a down-right crime!

If you weren't so partisan and/or stupid you might bot know this. Having been responsible for and having handled classified information for almost 30 years now, it is paiful to watch / listen to dumbasses such as yourself, who have NEVER dealt with classified information, trying to explain to anyone else what is and what is not legal in the defense of Hillary. EVERYONE who has such experience knows it has ALREADY been proven that Hillary DID violate rules, regulations, and the law and that any of US -'regular citizens' - having been caught doing what we are still finding out she did would already, at the least, have had our security clearances stripped - NEVER to be returned, and at the most be in jail right now!

But you arm-chair, inexperienced, ignorant Hillary knob-polishers contunue to spout your 'NCS / Law and Order'-earned legal knowledge in trying to defend/excuse away Hillay's crimes. Just know that the real experts are laughing at your ass every time you do.

 

[OKTexas]

still waiting were does it say you can't use a private server you with your great knowledge

You can't put classified or sensitive information on ANY system that is not certified to handle it, or store that system in an area not certified as a repository and last but certainly not least, is you can't allow people access to the system for service or maintenance unless they have the necessary clearances. Had she done all that, this would not be an issue.

 

[OKTexas]

OVER 1,000 classified documents mis-handled, illegally sent/received/stored, destroyed, perjury, etc.... I just do not see how this can all be made to go away without criminal charges or some legal repercussions....or an Obama pen/phone pardon. Anythi g short of it all going away, though, damages her chances of winning in 2016.

No matter what, she has already proven she can't be trusted with classified / our national security. Even her own staff, at the very least, has described her as 'often confused' and 'technology challenged' .... just what we need as President.

It goes away like this, launch an investigation, float out stories about how the law was broken, and make it stretch out over a couple of months. This allows the political operatives to denounce those questioning the ethics of what she did and to put doubt into people's head. It also allows for people to just get tired of hearing about the story.

Then those doing the investigation report their is nothing that raises to the level of being charged with a crime. Then the political operatives crow about how it was all nothing more then a witch hunt. So it goes from being a political negative to a political positive and this is what is going to happen with Mrs. Clinton. Mark my words and i hope by May you are throwing them back in my face, but I seriously doubt that will happen.

It helps if the political operatives find someone else on the other side who has done something similar thus diluting the situation with BS. But that is not really required just icing on the cake.

you sure do like to make shit up ... the courts made the release dates, not clinton ... nor does she have any access to any of the emails being released, the courts have to determine if they are classified that she was ordered to release ... she was ordered to show 55,000 emails ... she has given 45,000 emails so far none of them were consider classified when she receive them ... and who cares if you mark your words, your words are nothing more then a conservatives hating a dam/liberal thats it ... all you allegations here are just that allegations or opinion ... what you think it is compared to your biased opinion base on your opinion of dems/liberals not what is reality

First your a liar, several were said to have been born classified. Second the law says it doesn't matter if it was done by intent or neglect, she still has criminal liability. So keep slinging your propaganda, we all see it for what it is, lies.

1st, you're full of shit.
- The FBI and MEDIA - not me - is reporting that Hillary's emails contain over 1,000 instances of classified information. I will gladly take rhe FBI's and Media's word rather than your amateurish, partisan opinion.

2ndly, dumbass, Information does NOT need to be MARKED 'TS/SCI' to be classified in nature, which means passing such information is STILL negligence (under the Espionage Act) or a down-right crime!

If you weren't so partisan and/or stupid you might bot know this. Having been responsible for and having handled classified information for almost 30 years now, it is paiful to watch / listen to dumbasses such as yourself, who have NEVER dealt with classified information, trying to explain to anyone else what is and what is not legal in the defense of Hillary. EVERYONE who has such experience knows it has ALREADY been proven that Hillary DID violate rules, regulations, and the law and that any of US -'regular citizens' - having been caught doing what we are still finding out she did would already, at the least, have had our security clearances stripped - NEVER to be returned, and at the most be in jail right now!

But you arm-chair, inexperienced, ignorant Hillary knob-polishers contunue to spout your 'NCS / Law and Order'-earned legal knowledge in trying to defend/excuse away Hillay's crimes. Just know that the real experts are laughing at your ass every time you do.

Me thinks you replied to the wrong post there bubba.