Yes, Hillary Clinton broke the law

Dittohead not! said:

Then the Republicans better get their act together and nominate a candidate that they can all get behind and who is actually electable.

Click to expand...

I agree. Trump is a poo sammich with lemon icing. Looks good till you take a bite.

cpwill said:

Actually, they have. Hillary Clinton turns out not only to have received and stored classified information, but to have generated and sent classified emails, all over an unclassified network.

Click to expand...

MrT said:

The Petraeus Prosecutor addressed those points by noting that there is no information, at that time or at this time, to suggest that the information was considered classified AT THE TIME which they were sent, received, or stored. If you have any source to counter this discussion - let me know:



And then you have the pesky issue of proving that she KNOWINGLY sent, received, or stored classified information. Proving knowledge is one of the highest mens rea requirements in the criminal justice field and you would have to prove that claim beyond a reasonable doubt in order to convict Mrs. Clinton of any crime.

Click to expand...

I assume that you are taking the, "She was dumb as a bag of rocks" defense in that the Secretary of State, who works with the CIA more than any other agency, wouldn't know what classified information was if she saw it.

Executive Order 13526- Classified National Security Information
https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/executive-order-classified-national-security-information

(d) All original classification authorities must receive training in proper classification (including the avoidance of over-classification) and declassification as provided in this order and its implementing directives at least once a calendar year. Such training must include instruction on the proper safeguarding of classified information and on the sanctions in section 5.5 of this order that may be brought against an individual who fails to classify information properly or protect classified information from unauthorized disclosure. Original classification authorities who do not receive such mandatory training at least once within a calendar year shall have their classification authority suspended by the agency head or the senior agency official designated under section 5.4(d) of this order until such training has taken place. A waiver may be granted by the agency head, the deputy agency head, or the senior agency official if an individual is unable to receive such training due to unavoidable circumstances. Whenever a waiver is granted, the individual shall receive such training as soon as practicable.

Click to expand...

MrT said:

The Petraeus Prosecutor addressed those points by noting that there is no information, at that time or at this time, to suggest that the information was considered classified AT THE TIME which they were sent, received, or stored.

Click to expand...

And since then, we have discovered that yes, in fact, the information was classified at the time it was sent, received, and stored. In particular the notion that the SI/TK information wasn't classified when she got it is....

....well, it's laughable. It's like arguing that you were driving your car to work before it was finished being assembled at the factory.

If you have any source to counter this discussion - let me know:

Click to expand...

:shrug:

Hillary Email Born Classified
Dozens of Hillary Emails were Classified from the Start
Hillary's Emails included TOP SECRET//SI/TK//NOFORN material
Inspectors General of the IC and State: These emails were not retroactively classified by the State Department; rather, these emails contained classified information when they were generated

And then you have the pesky issue of proving that she KNOWINGLY sent, received, or stored classified information.

Click to expand...

Hillary Clinton knowingly emailed Foreign Government Information (FGI) material on her private email address, including to Sydney Blumenthal. State Department is the primary collector of FGI, which is always classified, as we wish to protect not only what people tell us in confidence, but the relationships that will allow them to tell us more in confidence in the future. As SECSTATE, Hillary would have been a major recipient of FGI, due to the Strategic Engagement portion of her job.

For Hillary Clinton to claim that she did not know that the FGI she put into those emails was classified would be an admission of stupefying incompetence. It would be comparable to a police officer attempting to get off of an unlawful shooting charge by arguing that he didn't know that the trigger was the part of the gun that made it shoot.

Proving knowledge is one of the highest mens rea requirements in the criminal justice field and you would have to prove that claim beyond a reasonable doubt in order to convict Mrs. Clinton of any crime.

Click to expand...

Hillary isn't going to get convicted, she won't even go to trial. An aide will be chosen to be sacrificed instead. But yes, she broke the law.

NonoBadDog said:

I assume that you are taking the, "She was dumb as a bag of rocks" defense in that the Secretary of State, who works with the CIA more than any other agency, wouldn't know what classified information was if she saw it.

Click to expand...

:shrug: Arguing that she is too stupid and incompetent to adequately carry out the duties of SECSTATE is really the only defense she has left.

cpwill said:

Actually, they have. Hillary Clinton turns out not only to have received and stored classified information, but to have generated and sent classified emails, all over an unclassified network.

Click to expand...

cpwill said:

:shrug: Arguing that she is too stupid and incompetent to adequately carry out the duties of SECSTATE is really the only defense she has left.

Click to expand...

Yeah, she backed herself into a corner but Regulations and Executive Orders rule that out. She can plead idiocy but it doesn't wash. I never let my privates off on that argument.

MMC said:

Oh wait :Oopsie That was before Classified information was found in Hillary's emails. Now they know there was. Which means that Attorney's statement at the time might have held up.

But now with reality.....it doesn't!

Click to expand...

Except the (now) classified emails were unmarked so she had no knowledge of their secrecy.

iguanaman said:

Except the (now) classified emails were unmarked so she had no knowledge of their secrecy.

Click to expand...

Stop trotting that out, I've ****stomped that notion at least 3 times in various articles. Go learn about classification and who has authority, then get back to me.

iguanaman said:

Except the (now) classified emails were unmarked so she had no knowledge of their secrecy.

Click to expand...

Only if she was utterly incompetent to the job does this excuse fly. See above.

Also, the emails were classified when sent, and she was the one who created and sent some of them.

humbolt said:

Bill was out this past weekend blaming the right (again) for her mess. I fail to see how in the hell the FBI and the IG suddenly became extensions of the GOP, and I also fail to see how the republicans engineered all the leaks of this stuff from the Obama administration. It must be a vast, vast conspiracy that includes much of the national democratic party and the independent investigative agencies of the US government. That's vast, I tell ya. Vast. I suspect they have their tendrils all the way into my refrigerator, because I was out of milk this morning and I could swear I still had some as recently as last night. Bastards.

Click to expand...

Its almost inspirational, isnt it? I mean...it takes a certain amount of...I dont know...maybe chutzpah is the right word...to claim that raping a woman, cheating with a woman for 12 years THEN being caught on tape asking her to lie under oath, sexually assaulting a woman on the day of her husbands funeral, carrying on an affair in the same house with your wife, lying about THAT under oath...can all be blamed on a vast right wing conspiracy. I dont know what is more fantastic...that they have the balls to claim it or that muppets believe it.

ThePlayDrive said:

It is true that the author is a former Attorney General. He is also, however, an extremely partisan conservative asshole writing for an extremely conservative tabloid magazine...so pardon me if I take his analysis with a grain of salt.

Click to expand...

Denial does not get rid of the fact that she is in major legal trouble and hopefully charges are pending any day. if they don't go after her or arrest her then
it is all political and Obama has ordered the DOJ to not do their job which in turn he should be charged with obstruction of justice.

I'm curious. Why are many of the same people who have already convicted Hillary Clinton also the people who vehemently argue that we shouldn't "rush to judgment" when accusations of racism, police brutality and rape are made?

Click to expand...

on racism is like crying Nazi anymore. it has lost it's meaning and people often cry racism in order to try and gain some moral high ground. if in fact anything major with racism has occurred then I expect the jury and court to handle it.

as for police brutality again that is why we have a court system. usually there is more than one side to the story and both sides need to be looked at to see if it actually occurred.
the same with rape.

we just don't take someone's word for it. the Duke case proved that. things need to be investigated and the facts sorted out.

cpwill said:

Only if she was utterly incompetent to the job does this excuse fly. See above.

Also, the emails were classified when sent, and she was the one who created and sent some of them.

Click to expand...

There is no evidence that any e-mails marked classified were received on her server and the "re-classified" e-mails were sent to her on unsecured Govt. servers so the "incompetence" was not hers either. There will be no charges because there is no crime.
http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/08/12/myths-and-facts-on-hillary-clintons-email-and-r/204913

iguanaman said:

Except the (now) classified emails were unmarked so she had no knowledge of their secrecy.

Click to expand...

Doesn't matter whether the emails were marked or not. Moreover that doesn't help her being an originator of Classified Information.



She also sent classified information to Sidney Blumenthal, a former Clinton White House operative banned by the Obama White House. An analysis by The Federalist of e-mails released by the State Department late Monday shows that scores of e-mails sent by Clinton contained highly confidential national security information from the beginning, even if they weren’t marked by a classification authority until later.

That is because under federal law, information is classified by nature, not by marking. As a result, federal classification authorities deemed that the information was classified the very second it originated, even if it was not marked as such until August 27, 2015. Also worthy of note is the fact that Hillary’s message is the only content in the entire document that is redacted and marked as classified. This means that she was not merely a helpless, passive recipient of classified national security information; she was the originator. And not only did she intentionally originate the classified information, she intentionally disseminated it via an unsecured, unsanctioned private e-mail server.

Hillary Clinton’s campaign team has repeatedly tried to dodge responsibility for her distribution of classified information by claiming the information was not marked at the time. However, the nature of Hillary’s secret, off-books private e-mail scheme made it impossible for government authorities to mark as classified any information that originated on Hillary’s private server, since they had no access to it. In fact, one of the newly released e-mails shows that the agency’s IT department had no knowledge of her private e-mail address and server scheme......snip~

Hillary Intentionally Originated, Distributed Classified Material

cpwill said:

:shrug: Arguing that she is too stupid and incompetent to adequately carry out the duties of SECSTATE is really the only defense she has left.

Click to expand...

But the office of president is a lot easier, right? It must be. Just look at the last few occupiers of that position.

MMC said:

Doesn't matter whether the emails were marked or not. Moreover that doesn't help her being an originator of Classified Information.



She also sent classified information to Sidney Blumenthal, a former Clinton White House operative banned by the Obama White House. An analysis by The Federalist of e-mails released by the State Department late Monday shows that scores of e-mails sent by Clinton contained highly confidential national security information from the beginning, even if they weren’t marked by a classification authority until later.

That is because under federal law, information is classified by nature, not by marking. As a result, federal classification authorities deemed that the information was classified the very second it originated, even if it was not marked as such until August 27, 2015. Also worthy of note is the fact that Hillary’s message is the only content in the entire document that is redacted and marked as classified. This means that she was not merely a helpless, passive recipient of classified national security information; she was the originator. And not only did she intentionally originate the classified information, she intentionally disseminated it via an unsecured, unsanctioned private e-mail server.

Hillary Clinton’s campaign team has repeatedly tried to dodge responsibility for her distribution of classified information by claiming the information was not marked at the time. However, the nature of Hillary’s secret, off-books private e-mail scheme made it impossible for government authorities to mark as classified any information that originated on Hillary’s private server, since they had no access to it. In fact, one of the newly released e-mails shows that the agency’s IT department had no knowledge of her private e-mail address and server scheme......snip~

Hillary Intentionally Originated, Distributed Classified Material

Click to expand...

The (now) "top secret" emails were sent to her from State dept. employees on unsecured servers. That is what is being investigated.

"The State Department takes seriously its obligations to protect sensitive information, holding its employees to a high standard of compliance with regulations and procedures.

"The Intelligence Community has recommended that portions of two of the four emails identified by the Intelligence Community's Inspector General should be upgraded to the Top Secret level. Department employees circulated these emails on unclassified systems in 2009 and 2011 and ultimately some were forwarded to Secretary Clinton. They were not marked as classified.

"These emails have not been released to the public. While we work with the Director of National Intelligence to resolve whether, in fact, this material is actually classified, we are taking steps to ensure the information is protected and stored appropriately."

Click to expand...

http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/08/12/myths-and-facts-on-hillary-clintons-email-and-r/204913

iguanaman said:

The (now) "top secret" emails were sent to her from State dept. employees on unsecured servers. That is what is being investigated.

http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/08/12/myths-and-facts-on-hillary-clintons-email-and-r/204913

Click to expand...

Brock and Media Matters were debunked once they discovered Hillary was the originator of classified information.



We learned earlier this week that Clinton did in fact store classified information from at least five different intelligence agencies on her private server, which by the way, is illegal.

The Clinton campaign, and Hillary Clinton herself, have consistently argued Clinton is in the clear because she "didn't send or receive any information that was classified at the time." They make this argument to avoid legal issues with keeping classified information on an unsecure, non-government email server but fail to acknowledge how reckless the practice was. The information Clinton kept on a private server was sensitive enough to either be classified at the time or eventually classified. The information in question clearly should have been kept on a government server for national security purposes, classified or not. Clinton's deliberate decision to use personal email to conduct State Department business was extremely reckless and clearly shows Clinton's lack of regard for protecting highly sensitive information.....snip~

FBI Investigating Hillary Clinton's Use of Private Email To Send and Receive Classified Information - Katie Pavlich


FBI looking into security of Clinton private email account: Washington Post.....


The FBI has begun looking into the security of Hillary Clinton’s private email setup, contacting in the past week a Denver-based technology firm that helped manage the unusual system, the Washington Post reported on Tuesday, citing two government officials.

The FBI last week also contacted Clinton's lawyer, David Kendall, with questions about the security of a thumb drive in his possession that contains copies of work emails Clinton sent during her time as secretary of state, the Post said.

"The government is seeking assurance about the storage of those materials. We are actively cooperating," Kendall said in a statement......snip~

FBI looking into security of Clinton private email account: Washington Post - Yahoo News


The government knows Kendall doesn't have the Security Clearance, nor was the server encrypted to protect Top Secret Information.

iguanaman said:

There is no evidence that any e-mails marked classified were received on her server

Click to expand...

Which is irrelevant. Claiming that an email containing classified information isn't classified if it isn't marked so is like claiming that money that you stole from the bank ceases to be stolen as soon as you put it in a bag that is not marked "stolen money".

the "re-classified" e-mails were sent to her on unsecured Govt. servers so the "incompetence" was not hers either.

Click to expand...

There were no "re-classified" emails because they were never unclassified. They were always classified emails, sent over unclass networks

There will be no charges because there is no crime.

Click to expand...

:shrug: there has indeed.

iguanaman said:

The (now) "top secret" emails were sent to her from State dept. employees on unsecured servers. That is what is being investigated.

http://mediamatters.org/research/2015/08/12/myths-and-facts-on-hillary-clintons-email-and-r/204913

Click to expand...

And when she read them, when did she bring to the attention of security their classified nature, because as Sec State and THE SMARTEST WOMAN IN THE WHOLE ****ING UNIVERSE, SHE SHOULD HAVE ****ING KNOWN THE INFORMATION WAS CLASSIFIED. GOT IT NOW????

American said:

And when she read them, when did she bring to the attention of security their classified nature, because as Sec State and THE SMARTEST WOMAN IN THE WHOLE ****ING UNIVERSE, SHE SHOULD HAVE ****ING KNOWN THE INFORMATION WAS CLASSIFIED. GOT IT NOW????

Click to expand...

Sort of like how GW Bush SHOULD HAVE ****ING KNOWN THERE WERE NO WMD'S IN IRAQ....Right? How many died because of Clinton's "mistake"? The State Dept. did not even know they were classified at the time and they were sent to her on unsecure Govt. servers too. That is what is being investigated by the way. Why State employees were sending Hillary "classified" emails on a unsecured network.

MickeyW said:

It's all laid out in detail here, for all the Hillary supporters to get their heads on straight for a change.....or........to continue to deny that Hillary has committed criminal acts against the US.

The author, a former Virginia Atty. General, compares the offenses to David Petraeus...........

"Simply put, Mrs. Clinton is already in just as bad — or worse — of a legal situation than Petraeus faced."

Yes, Hillary Clinton broke the law | New York Post

Click to expand...

as soon as you said "former Virginia Atty. General" I had to check who it was and yes, sure enough it's good ol' Ken Cuccinelli. he is arguably the most ridiculous, biased, politically motivated atty. general I have ever heard of. I'm not going to read his take on it because he has no credibility - in fact I'd trust him less on the topic than most of the conservative posters on this forum, and that is saying a lot.

iguanaman said:

Sort of like how GW Bush SHOULD HAVE ****ING KNOWN THERE WERE NO WMD'S IN IRAQ....Right? How many died because of Clinton's mistake?

Click to expand...

Your argument is weak so you divert to "Bush did it." That is a really lame argument. It really shows that you are backed into a corner. "When in a hole interject "Bush" diversion and quote "Media Matters". :lamo:hitsfan::aliens3:

cpwill said:

Which is irrelevant. Claiming that an email containing classified information isn't classified if it isn't marked so is like claiming that money that you stole from the bank ceases to be stolen as soon as you put it in a bag that is not marked "stolen money".



There were no "re-classified" emails because they were never unclassified. They were always classified emails, sent over unclass networks



:shrug: there has indeed.

Click to expand...

Hillary did not commit a crime by receiving emails. If there was a crime it was committed by the person that sent it. Even a child could understand that. Sorry but this is going to go nowhere. The public will just chalk it up to another "Benghazi" witch hunt.

NonoBadDog said:

Your argument is weak so you divert to "Bush did it." That is a really lame argument. It really shows that you are backed into a corner. "When in a hole interject "Bush" diversion and quote "Media Matters". :lamo:hitsfan::aliens3:

Click to expand...

So you reserve the incompetent excuse for Republicans only........OK, that's fair they certainly need it the most.
But you have a problem when you think someone can commit a crime by RECEIVING an email. The sender would be the only defendant in that case if there even was one. Just like Benghazi, you have nothing.

iguanaman said:

Hillary did not commit a crime by receiving emails. If there was a crime it was committed by the person that sent it. Even a child could understand that. Sorry but this is going to go nowhere. The public will just chalk it up to another "Benghazi" witch hunt.

Click to expand...

:roll: You must not have been keeping up with the public lately.


Another day, another factual revelation that shows former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has been less than honest with the American people. At some point, it becomes tiresome to ask the same question over and over again. But Clinton leaves us no choice. How many times must she be caught lying before the current presidential campaign has come to an end?

Clinton had maintained, and in fact swore, that she had turned over all work-related emails from the private server she chose to use, in contravention of government secrecy and transparency laws. As it turns out, even this claim was untrue.

Clinton's reputation for dishonesty now precedes her. The Democratic primary has become a waiting game: How many Democratic voters are willing to believe their own eyes, and how soon before that number becomes insurmountable for her? If she does win the presidency, it will only be by persuading a very large segment of people who already believe her to be a liar. When American parents teach their children to tell the truth, they may someday use this story to illustrate why......snip~

Could Hillary please start getting her lies straight? | Washington Examiner

VanceMack said:

Its almost inspirational, isn't it? I mean...it takes a certain amount of...I dont know...maybe chutzpah is the right word...to claim that raping a woman, cheating with a woman for 12 years THEN being caught on tape asking her to lie under oath, sexually assaulting a woman on the day of her husbands funeral, carrying on an affair in the same house with your wife, lying about THAT under oath...can all be blamed on a vast right wing conspiracy.

I dont know what is more fantastic...that they have the balls to claim it or that muppets believe it.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I'm going with the muppets. The fact that the Clintons can claim any such crap at all comes from their certainty that these muppets exist and will respond with, "Yeah. Damn straight. Let's make signs and bumper stickers. Brock will write an op-ed."

bg85 said:

as soon as you said "former Virginia Atty. General" I had to check who it was and yes, sure enough it's good ol' Ken Cuccinelli. he is arguably the most ridiculous, biased, politically motivated atty. general I have ever heard of. I'm not going to read his take on it because he has no credibility - in fact I'd trust him less on the topic than most of the conservative posters on this forum, and that is saying a lot.

Click to expand...

Ohhh, Ken has less credibility than Holder or obozo? LMFAO!!!!

:lamo:lamo:lamo