So Hillary-Deranged Wingers, How'd You Do For Your Twenty Million Dollars?

[bedowin62]

Office of the Press Secretary
For Immediate Release
December 29, 2009
Executive Order 13526- Classified National Security Information
This order prescribes a uniform system for classifying, safeguarding, and declassifying national security information, including information relating to defense against transnational terrorism.
. . .
(4) the original classification authority determines that the unauthorized disclosure of the information reasonably could be expected to result in damage to the national security, which includes defense against transnational terrorism, and the original classification authority is able to identify or describe the damage.
(b) If there is significant doubt about the need to classify information, it shall not be classified. This provision does not:
(1) amplify or modify the substantive criteria or procedures for classification; or
(2) create any substantive or procedural rights subject to judicial review.
(c) Classified information shall not be declassified automatically as a result of any unauthorized disclosure of identical or similar information.
(d) The unauthorized disclosure of foreign government information is presumed to cause damage to the national security.
C) 1950 Federal Records Act
44 U.S. Code § 3106 - Unlawful removal, destruction of records
https://www.law.cornell.edu/...

all you have done here is show us laws ... you haven't show any corralarion in any of these laws you think she violated ... so whats you're pointing out here is you can post a law here??? wonderful !!!! now show us where she violated it ... whaaaaaaaaaaaaat??? you can't

dude you're a freaking loser and a joke

i didnt just show laws; if you actually read it all you need to know is right there

it says EXACTLY HOW SHE BROKE THOSE LAWS

i could post the relevant parts again but i have already made my point


you're simply a coward that cant be moved by facts

and everybody here see it

 

[Theowl32]

Name one thing that any liberal has posted in this thread, or any other one that is an original thought and not some democrat liberal left wing moveon.org talking point.

They are so stupid that they think billary is innocent of everything. They still seemingly do not know or care that the NY Times leaked the emails and the obama administration let it out.

Then again the losers that vote democrat still do not know that the clintons were the ones that pushed the birth certificate issue and the obamas hate the clintons and the clintons hate the obamas.

They are still the morons mind you that do not know or care that clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act for WMDs and the clintons awarded Halliburton at least 4 no bid contracts in the 90s, while Cheney was an executive for the company.

We are so infested with these unreal sacks of brainwashed shit. I really honestly do not care that billary is going to be president. There is no "republican" that will be able to dig us out of the hole we are in. I would rather see it implode under a democrat.

It will implode too. Then again the left wing baboons will blame booooooosh. We know that, don't we?

 

[bedowin62]

hillary herself is using this excuse why she says she didnt to anything wrong

losers like you are trying to say the same thing here

HERE IS WHAT THE LAW ACTUALLY SAYS REGARDIING WHAT SHE ACTUALLY DID even though she'S TRYING TO SAY IT DIDNT VIOLATE THE LAW:



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)

 

[billyerock1991]

i gave you evidence showing it is a fact she violated the law
you cant rebut ANY of it with your own "facts"

that much is clear

keep trying loser......................

you haven't show us anything but law... you haven't shown any corralarion to these laws that you posted ... you just assume she violated them... if you're such a great knower of law, then you need to go to the FBI and point out your great knowledge of thess law ... then help them convict her ... so far they haven't done anything why that BS talking point of yours bedwetter ??? could it be she hasn't violated these laws that you posted here ??? could it be its all in your right wing nut job head ??? could that be it

 

[bedowin62]

HERE IS ANOTHER ITEM OF SOMETHING SHE ACTUALLY DID, that isnt excused by her VERSION of what the law says:

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.

 

[bedowin62]

i gave you evidence showing it is a fact she violated the law
you cant rebut ANY of it with your own "facts"

that much is clear

keep trying loser......................

you haven't show us anything but law... you haven't shown any corralarion to these laws that you posted ... you just assume she violated them... if you're such a great knower of law, then you need to go to the FBI and point out your great knowledge of thess law ... then help them convict her ... so far they haven't done anything why that BS talking point of yours bedwetter ??? could it be she hasn't violated these laws that you posted here ??? could it be its all in your right wing nut job head ??? could that be it

i'm showing it RIGHT NOW even as you turn yourself into a laughable idiot pretending you dont see it!!

lol

 

[billyerock1991]

Name one thing that any liberal has posted in this thread, or any other one that is an original thought and not some democrat liberal left wing moveon.org talking point.

They are so stupid that they think billary is innocent of everything. They still seemingly do not know or care that the NY Times leaked the emails and the obama administration let it out.

Then again the losers that vote democrat still do not know that the clintons were the ones that pushed the birth certificate issue and the obamas hate the clintons and the clintons hate the obamas.

They are still the morons mind you that do not know or care that clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act for WMDs and the clintons awarded Halliburton at least 4 no bid contracts in the 90s, while Cheney was an executive for the company.

We are so infested with these unreal sacks of brainwashed shit. I really honestly do not care that billary is going to be president. There is no "republican" that will be able to dig us out of the hole we are in. I would rather see it implode under a democrat.

It will implode too. Then again the left wing baboons will blame booooooosh. We know that, don't we?

ok this is what I saw when I watched the entire benghazi hearing ... she never said

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)

didn't hold water in the hearings and it doesn't hold water here

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Seriously bubba? Are you off your meds again?

Ad hom, no factual rebuttal, how regressivecrat of ya.

Dah!! You said.....

1. The hildabeasts state dept violated federal law concerning the consulate security.

2. More than 2,000 felonious national security violations by the hildabeast.

Which, in the absence of any sort of documentation is nothing more than an appeal to ignorance.....and then you accuse ME of having nothing factual. You can go now bubba

US law requires certain security arrangement and physical structures for a State Dept facility. If a facility doesn't meet the legal requirements, the Sec of State must sign a waiver of those requirements, they cannot delegate that responsibility by law. The hildabeast failed to provide the required waiver, but allowed the consulate to operate anyways. All that was admitted in the hearings.

We also know for a fact the hildabeast had a minimum of 400 sensitive and classified documents on her unsecured server, just having those documents outside of approved containers is a felony for EACH document. The law says it doesn't matter if this was done intentionally or by neglect.

Also having the server stored in an unsecured locations, like her basement, the bathroom closet in CO, the cloud base backup service and her lawyers office, are once again felony violations for EACH document. That gives us a total of 2,000 felony violations at this point.

Then you add another 1,200 violations by the FACT that the people at Platte River Tech, the company that did the cloud base backups and her lawyer had access to those documents without proper clearances. Once again these laws do not differentiate between intent and neglect. If my math is correct that is 3,800 individual felony violations so I was being kind in just saying 2,000.

BTW, I didn't get into the obstruction of justice when she told Platte River not to back up all her emails or the perjury she committed by signing the affidavit to the Federal Judge that she had turned over all work related emails when in fact she hadn't.

So your challenge grasshopper is to prove she had no classified documents on her server, keeping in mind that the law doesn't care if she intended to have them or had them through neglect.

It’s interesting how you provide these narratives and present it as the truth and the whole truth, without any attempt to verify it or document it. I have to wonder if it’s laziness or the fact that you really don’t have a credible source for this dribble. Here is some actual information with source documentation:

Congress blocked Benghazi embassy securityCongress blocked Benghazi embassy security

As the Republicans are attacking Hillary Clinton fearing that she may run for president, they seem to overlook the truth. A major fact that they ignore is that the State Department (under Clinton) had asked for additional funding needed to improve security for U.S. embassies.

Congress denied the request. The House of Representatives controls the purse strings and is controlled by Republicans.

GOP Rep: I ‘Absolutely’ Voted To Cut Funding For Embassy Security GOP Rep: I ‘Absolutely’ Voted To Cut Funding For Embassy Security by Ben ArmbrusterView attachment 53476 Oct 10, 2012 12:20pm (Selected excerpts)

Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) said today that he voted to cut funding for U.S. embassy security…….

Republicans and their allies have been trying to politicize the attack — which killed four Americans, including the U.S. Ambassador to Libya — suggesting, without evidence, the Obama administration may have ignored intelligence that the attack was imminent, didn’t properly secure the Benghazi compound and is now trying to cover it up.


But hidden beneath the GOP campaign is the fact that House Republicans voted to cut nearly $300 million from the U.S. embassy security budget. When asked if he voted to cut the funds this morning on CNN, Chaffetz said, “Absolutely“:

As for the emails....that was nailed perfectly in posts 438, 462 and others

if you were a MAN ( LOL) you could show where any ACTUAL FUNDING was ACTUALLY cut at THAT compound AT THE TIME IT HAPPENED OR PRIOR TO IT HAPPENING

but you cant, and you wont; BECAUSE you cant

If I were a man?? Seriously? You have to resort to attacking my manhood. Please stop embarrassing yourself and wipe the spit off your chin.

 

[bedowin62]

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.

again presumed is all the LAW REQUIRES

 

[bedowin62]

Name one thing that any liberal has posted in this thread, or any other one that is an original thought and not some democrat liberal left wing moveon.org talking point.

They are so stupid that they think billary is innocent of everything. They still seemingly do not know or care that the NY Times leaked the emails and the obama administration let it out.

Then again the losers that vote democrat still do not know that the clintons were the ones that pushed the birth certificate issue and the obamas hate the clintons and the clintons hate the obamas.

They are still the morons mind you that do not know or care that clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act for WMDs and the clintons awarded Halliburton at least 4 no bid contracts in the 90s, while Cheney was an executive for the company.

We are so infested with these unreal sacks of brainwashed shit. I really honestly do not care that billary is going to be president. There is no "republican" that will be able to dig us out of the hole we are in. I would rather see it implode under a democrat.

It will implode too. Then again the left wing baboons will blame booooooosh. We know that, don't we?

ok this is what I saw when I watched the entire benghazi hearing ... she never said

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)

didn't hold water in the hearings and it doesn't hold water here

THE HEARINGS?


LMAO

that's what the investigation is for dullard

try again!

you're saying it doesnt hold water, with NOTHING TO BACK IT UP, doesnt make it so


keep trying................

 

[Theowl32]

Name one thing that any liberal has posted in this thread, or any other one that is an original thought and not some democrat liberal left wing moveon.org talking point.

They are so stupid that they think billary is innocent of everything. They still seemingly do not know or care that the NY Times leaked the emails and the obama administration let it out.

Then again the losers that vote democrat still do not know that the clintons were the ones that pushed the birth certificate issue and the obamas hate the clintons and the clintons hate the obamas.

They are still the morons mind you that do not know or care that clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act for WMDs and the clintons awarded Halliburton at least 4 no bid contracts in the 90s, while Cheney was an executive for the company.

We are so infested with these unreal sacks of brainwashed shit. I really honestly do not care that billary is going to be president. There is no "republican" that will be able to dig us out of the hole we are in. I would rather see it implode under a democrat.

It will implode too. Then again the left wing baboons will blame booooooosh. We know that, don't we?

ok this is what I saw when I watched the entire benghazi hearing ... she never said

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)

didn't hold water in the hearings and it doesn't hold water here

What, did she apologize for then?

Oh fuck you.

 

[bedowin62]

Ad hom, no factual rebuttal, how regressivecrat of ya.

Dah!! You said.....

1. The hildabeasts state dept violated federal law concerning the consulate security.

2. More than 2,000 felonious national security violations by the hildabeast.

Which, in the absence of any sort of documentation is nothing more than an appeal to ignorance.....and then you accuse ME of having nothing factual. You can go now bubba

US law requires certain security arrangement and physical structures for a State Dept facility. If a facility doesn't meet the legal requirements, the Sec of State must sign a waiver of those requirements, they cannot delegate that responsibility by law. The hildabeast failed to provide the required waiver, but allowed the consulate to operate anyways. All that was admitted in the hearings.

We also know for a fact the hildabeast had a minimum of 400 sensitive and classified documents on her unsecured server, just having those documents outside of approved containers is a felony for EACH document. The law says it doesn't matter if this was done intentionally or by neglect.

Also having the server stored in an unsecured locations, like her basement, the bathroom closet in CO, the cloud base backup service and her lawyers office, are once again felony violations for EACH document. That gives us a total of 2,000 felony violations at this point.

Then you add another 1,200 violations by the FACT that the people at Platte River Tech, the company that did the cloud base backups and her lawyer had access to those documents without proper clearances. Once again these laws do not differentiate between intent and neglect. If my math is correct that is 3,800 individual felony violations so I was being kind in just saying 2,000.

BTW, I didn't get into the obstruction of justice when she told Platte River not to back up all her emails or the perjury she committed by signing the affidavit to the Federal Judge that she had turned over all work related emails when in fact she hadn't.

So your challenge grasshopper is to prove she had no classified documents on her server, keeping in mind that the law doesn't care if she intended to have them or had them through neglect.

It’s interesting how you provide these narratives and present it as the truth and the whole truth, without any attempt to verify it or document it. I have to wonder if it’s laziness or the fact that you really don’t have a credible source for this dribble. Here is some actual information with source documentation:

Congress blocked Benghazi embassy securityCongress blocked Benghazi embassy security

As the Republicans are attacking Hillary Clinton fearing that she may run for president, they seem to overlook the truth. A major fact that they ignore is that the State Department (under Clinton) had asked for additional funding needed to improve security for U.S. embassies.

Congress denied the request. The House of Representatives controls the purse strings and is controlled by Republicans.

GOP Rep: I ‘Absolutely’ Voted To Cut Funding For Embassy Security GOP Rep: I ‘Absolutely’ Voted To Cut Funding For Embassy Security by Ben ArmbrusterView attachment 53476 Oct 10, 2012 12:20pm (Selected excerpts)

Rep. Jason Chaffetz (R-UT) said today that he voted to cut funding for U.S. embassy security…….

Republicans and their allies have been trying to politicize the attack — which killed four Americans, including the U.S. Ambassador to Libya — suggesting, without evidence, the Obama administration may have ignored intelligence that the attack was imminent, didn’t properly secure the Benghazi compound and is now trying to cover it up.


But hidden beneath the GOP campaign is the fact that House Republicans voted to cut nearly $300 million from the U.S. embassy security budget. When asked if he voted to cut the funds this morning on CNN, Chaffetz said, “Absolutely“:

As for the emails....that was nailed perfectly in posts 438, 462 and others

if you were a MAN ( LOL) you could show where any ACTUAL FUNDING was ACTUALLY cut at THAT compound AT THE TIME IT HAPPENED OR PRIOR TO IT HAPPENING

but you cant, and you wont; BECAUSE you cant

If I were a man?? Seriously? You have to resort to attacking my manhood. Please stop embarrassing yourself and wipe the spit off your chin.

you and your buddy are the ones embarrassing yourselves

 

[Vigilante]

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.

again presumed is all the LAW REQUIRES

 

[bedowin62]

keep making fools of yourselves denying facts left-wing nutjobs

only you think you dont look stupid!!

 

[billyerock1991]

i gave you evidence showing it is a fact she violated the law
you cant rebut ANY of it with your own "facts"

that much is clear

keep trying loser......................

you haven't show us anything but law... you haven't shown any corralarion to these laws that you posted ... you just assume she violated them... if you're such a great knower of law, then you need to go to the FBI and point out your great knowledge of thess law ... then help them convict her ... so far they haven't done anything why that BS talking point of yours bedwetter ??? could it be she hasn't violated these laws that you posted here ??? could it be its all in your right wing nut job head ??? could that be it

i'm showing it RIGHT NOW even as you turn yourself into a laughable idiot pretending you dont see it!!

lol

what you are showing here was taken up in the hearings what your artical is saying here

i gave you evidence showing it is a fact she violated the law
you cant rebut ANY of it with your own "facts"

that much is clear



keep trying loser......................

you haven't show us anything but law... you haven't shown any corralarion to these laws that you posted ... you just assume she violated them... if you're such a great knower of law, then you need to go to the FBI and point out your great knowledge of thess law ... then help them convict her ... so far they haven't done anything why that BS talking point of yours bedwetter ??? could it be she hasn't violated these laws that you posted here ??? could it be its all in your right wing nut job head ??? could that be it

i'm showing it RIGHT NOW even as you turn yourself into a laughable idiot pretending you dont see it!!

lol

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.

your sources not mine ... the are looking at employees, not hillary... they have stated that they were not marked classified and they were hillarys emails if you read a little better ..if you had better comprehension skills you wouldn't look the fool

 

[billyerock1991]

keep making fools of yourselves denying facts left-wing nutjobs

only you think you dont look stupid!!

you're doing find right her all by your little self ...

 

[bedowin62]

look at these pathetic crybabies denying facts put RIGHT IN THEIR FACES!!

lol

 

[billyerock1991]

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

they have to show negligents actions ... they haven't been able to show that ... you still haven't a leg to stand on... just because you quote a law that you think she might have violated doesn't make it so ... its called proof !!!! so far they haven't any proof ... just nut jobs like you thinking she did

 

[bedowin62]

i gave you evidence showing it is a fact she violated the law
you cant rebut ANY of it with your own "facts"

that much is clear

keep trying loser......................

you haven't show us anything but law... you haven't shown any corralarion to these laws that you posted ... you just assume she violated them... if you're such a great knower of law, then you need to go to the FBI and point out your great knowledge of thess law ... then help them convict her ... so far they haven't done anything why that BS talking point of yours bedwetter ??? could it be she hasn't violated these laws that you posted here ??? could it be its all in your right wing nut job head ??? could that be it

i'm showing it RIGHT NOW even as you turn yourself into a laughable idiot pretending you dont see it!!

lol

what you are showing here was taken up in the hearings what your artical is saying here

i gave you evidence showing it is a fact she violated the law
you cant rebut ANY of it with your own "facts"

that much is clear



keep trying loser......................

you haven't show us anything but law... you haven't shown any corralarion to these laws that you posted ... you just assume she violated them... if you're such a great knower of law, then you need to go to the FBI and point out your great knowledge of thess law ... then help them convict her ... so far they haven't done anything why that BS talking point of yours bedwetter ??? could it be she hasn't violated these laws that you posted here ??? could it be its all in your right wing nut job head ??? could that be it

i'm showing it RIGHT NOW even as you turn yourself into a laughable idiot pretending you dont see it!!

lol

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.

your sources not mine ... the are looking at employees, not hillary... they have stated that they were not marked classified and they were hillarys emails if you read a little better ..if you had better comprehension skills you wouldn't look the fool

you look so pathetic right now.

yes MY OWN SOURCES DO SAY THAT.

then they set about telling you exactly how she DID violate those laws

and THAT is what you have exactly no rebuttal to. because you REALLY ARE A COWARD, and you have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING THAT REBUTS THE FACTS THERE

 

[bedowin62]

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

they have to show negligents actions ... they haven't been able to show that ... you still haven't a leg to stand on... just because you quote a law that you think she might have violated doesn't make it so ... its called proof !!!! so far they haven't any proof ... just nut jobs like you thinking she did

YAWN

um yes she was negligent. and this is from facts THAT ARE ALREADY KNOWN

PATHETIC LOSER!1 LOL

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.