Second GOP Congressman Admits Benghazi Committee Is All About Hillary Clinton

of course "it's all about Hillary" you mindless moron. those people didnt get themselves killed; State Department (hillary) ineptitude did.........................and they covered it up.
View attachment 52649

What about the 66 people killed during the Bush administration and the 318 killed during the Reagan administration. Was that a result of Hillary too?


nobody lied about those attacks

so typical of you idiot; to use a straw man


try again........................................
 
Was there someone else in charge of the State Department that they should have gone after instead of Hillary? Isn't the person in charge supposed to be responsible for what happens? Who else should they have gone after?
Hhhhhhhhhh, yes.....the CIA, military Intelligence, the NSA, Congress themselves for cutting funding....there were lots of things that could have, would have, and should have prevented this from happening, with a hindsight perspective, I suppose? Just like with 9/11 and every blind sided attack we've ever had....

BUT NONE, ABSOLUTELY NONE of these mishaps were criminal, as claimed by right wing posters.


but the funding wasnt cut. and if you could show it was you would have.

 
of course "it's all about Hillary" you mindless moron. those people didnt get themselves killed; State Department (hillary) ineptitude did.........................and they covered it up.
View attachment 52649

What about the 66 people killed during the Bush administration and the 318 killed during the Reagan administration. Was that a result of Hillary too?


nobody lied about those attacks

so typical of you idiot; to use a straw man


try again........................................

Nobody lied about Benghazi.
 
the following facts are from THE DAILY KOS

gee losers i hope that isnt too right-wing for ya!!


Hillary Rodham Clinton has committed a felony. That is apparent from the facts and in the plain-language of the federal statute that prohibits "Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information", 18 U.S. Code § 793(e) and (f). This offense carries a potential penalty of ten years imprisonment.
It's called a prima facie case: clear on the basis of known facts.
It's up to prosecutorial discretion by the US Attorney as to what charges may be filed and when. Nonetheless, Mrs. Clinton is clearly chargeable for violation of federal law. As of right now, the matter is under FBI investigation. This isn't just about violation of Departmental policy.
The facts:
 
NYT: F.B.I. Tracking Path of Classified Email From State Dept. to Hillary Clinton
http://www.nytimes.com/...
WASHINGTON — F.B.I. agents investigating Hillary Rodham Clinton’s private email server are seeking to determine who at the State Department passed highly classified information from secure networks to Mrs. Clinton’s personal account, according to law enforcement and diplomatic officials and others briefed on the investigation.
To track how the information flowed, agents will try to gain access to the email accounts of many State Department officials who worked there while Mrs. Clinton was secretary of state, the officials said. State Department employees apparently circulated the emails on unclassified systems in 2009 and 2011, and some were ultimately forwarded to Mrs. Clinton.
They were not marked as classified, the State Department has said, and it is unclear whether its employees knew the origin of the information.
F.B.I. is also trying to determine whether foreign powers, especially China or Russia, gained access to Mrs. Clinton’s private server, although at this point, any security breaches are speculation.
 
more from THE DAILY KOS:


Four para limit stops here. But, I will in all fairness stipulate that this article goes on to say that HRC is not at this point the target of the investigation. However, Reuters has since reported that her unsecured private server email system contained "presumed classified" materials. Hillary personally exchanged such presumed classified information with Sidney Blumenthal, and those communications were intercepted and publicly released by a Romanian hacker. http://www.aol.com/...
The fact that the email was not marked classified at the time does not excuse Mrs. Clinton. This is because information gathered from foreign government sources, a great deal of her email was so sourced, is presumed classified. Mrs Clinton received Departmental training on recognizing and handling classified materials. Presumed classified information is defined by Executive Order as "The unauthorized disclosure of foreign government information is presumed to cause damage to the national security." (see full text of that section of Executive Order 13526- Classified National Security Information, Sec. 1.1(4)(d), below)
 
Secretary Clinton was trained in handling of classified materials, and acknowledges that she understood them. By transmitting and receiving email correspondence that contained information gleaned from foreign government sources on an unauthorized, insecure system, she violated the law. This was not something she did unwittingly, and that the foreign government sourced material was not stamped classified is irrelevant.
On his last day in office, President Bill Clinton pardoned former CIA Director John Deutch who had committed similar violations. Deutch left the CIA on December 15, 1996 and soon after it was revealed that several of his laptop computers contained classified materials. In January 1997, the CIA began a formal security investigation of the matter. Senior management at CIA declined to fully pursue the security breach. Over two years after his departure, the matter was referred to the Department of Justice, where Attorney General Janet Reno declined prosecution. She did, however, recommend an investigation to determine whether Deutch should retain his security clearance.
 
On his last day in office, President Bill Clinton pardoned former CIA Director John Deutch who had committed similar violations. Deutch left the CIA on December 15, 1996 and soon after it was revealed that several of his laptop computers contained classified materials. In January 1997, the CIA began a formal security investigation of the matter. Senior management at CIA declined to fully pursue the security breach. Over two years after his departure, the matter was referred to the Department of Justice, where Attorney General Janet Reno declined prosecution. She did, however, recommend an investigation to determine whether Deutch should retain his security clearance.
All Deutch did was to take some classified material home with him to work on his unsecured personal laptops that were connected to his home commercial internet. In other words, pretty much what Hillary did on a much larger scale.
 
daily kos:

Other, lesser, federal officials have been recently prosecuted for downloading classified materials onto private servers or media and taking them home, and they were charged even though the materials was never publicly released and they had no intention to do so or to harm the United States. Links in thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com
 
Applicable statutes and Executive Order:
1) 18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information

Full copy of this Section of the 1917 Espionage Act is below. It has been claimed that Hillary did not violate the law because she didn't intend to injure the U.S. or aid a foreign power. However, that purpose is not required to convict under this Subsections (e) and (f) of this statute.
Subsections (a)-(d) and (g)(conspiracy) reference and require intent to injure the United States. The plain-language of Subsection (e) and particularly (f) are different:
The difference is this phrase that references purpose in the first three subsections; "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, Note: "is to be used"
The language in (e) is close but omits reference to purpose to injure: "he possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation". The word intent is not there. Note: "could be used"
 
Finally, the offense specified at (f) requires not willful action, simply a negligent action:
(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—
 
The differences between Sections (e) and (f) and the various other offenses covered in Section 793 comes down to the element of intent to injure the US or act to the advantage of a foreign power. These are not requisite elements of the offenses covered under these sections of the Espionage Act.
 
you cant and wont show that funding for THAT EMBASSY was ACTUALLY cut regardless of a vote to cut anything

yes loon take that as a challenge
 
anyway back to the DAILY KOS:



1950 Federal Records Act
44 U.S. Code § 3106 - Unlawful removal, destruction of records
https://www.law.cornell.edu/...
Current through Pub. L. 114-38. (See Public Laws for the current Congress.)
The head of each Federal agency shall notify the Archivist of any actual, impending, or threatened unlawful removal, defacing, alteration, or destruction of records in the custody of the agency of which he is the head that shall come to his attention, and with the assistance of the Archivist shall initiate action through the Attorney General for the recovery of records he knows or has reason to believe have been unlawfully removed from his agency, or from another Federal agency whose records have been transferred to his legal custody. In any case in which the head of the agency does not initiate an action for such recovery or other redress within a reasonable period of time after being notified of any such unlawful action, the Archivist shall request the Attorney General to initiate such an action, and shall notify the Congress when such a request has been made.
 
That law requires heads of agencies -- no exception for DOS -- to preserve and turn over all official correspondence and records to the National Archives. She didn't do that until confronted after a Romanian hacker leaked Hillary's email correspondence with Blumenthal. Those emails were clearly official not private. HRC admits to destroying at least 30,000 emails she deemed private and turned over approximately 30,000 her lawyers found to be public documents. However, a number of other emails have subsequently been turned over and analysed by news agencies. Reuters reported that a number of them to contain presumed classified information
 
Hillary had also failed to provide these records to meet a FOIA request and Congressional Committee subpoena, which violates other federal laws.
Those emails and many like them were most recently found to contain "presumed classified" materials about US communications with foreign governments. That was a violation of Executive Orders, and possibly the 1917 Espionage Act that criminalizes private retention or mishandling of classified materials.
 
Intent to injure the U.S. or aid a foreign power is not required under Sec 793 (e) and (f). The mere fact of unauthorized removal or destruction of materials the official should have known were classified are all that is required for conviction under these parts of the Espionage Act. Hillary should have known.
 
Removal is obvious from the fact that she ran her private server out of her own house. There have been several recent convictions under these provisions of lower-ranking officials, as well as the forced retirement and referral to the Justice Department of CIA Director John Deutch for taking home classified materials on his personal laptop and connecting to the internet.
We know that she sent and exchanged presumed classified materials with Syd Blumenthal. Read the Reuter article linked. Bluementhal's email with Hillary on her server was intercepted and published by a Romanian hacker. That's how this whole thing came to light.
 
Sorry, she's done herself in, and has no one else to blame except some overzealous aides and risk-seeking lawyers.
Potential Prosecution:
At this point, the FBI is investigating the server and network history before a decision is made whether to proceed with prosecution and what charges to seek from a federal Grand Jury.
The facts are clear that she was operating her own private server and that "presumed" classified materials were shared on that unsecured device. The FBI won't come out and say she's the target until a series of decisions have been made. That Biden is signalling he's readying his candidacy tells me that probable cause exists and the system has already been found to have been breached. In fact, we know that a Romanian hacker obtained email containing presumed classified information between Blumenthal and Hillary, and that she responded to him. We also know that she was trained not to do anything like this, she acknowledges that, but she went ahead and continued to did it anyway.
This is serious, not a pseudo-scandal.
 

Forum List

Back
Top