FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private Email S

[Fishking]

Re: FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private Ema

Lol what a load of malarky.

If someone else took classified info, stripped the markings, and emailed it to her, then THEY are the ones who committed the crime, not Hillary.

It's entirely possible that no markings were stripped and, at the very least, she would still be guilty of improper handling of classified information by her constantly receiving and processing it without immediately reporting it to the properly clear IT people.

You do realize that people can be given classified briefs, or have access to classified information, and then they can then walk around talking about it, making notes later, or in this case, emails without there ever being markings involved in that exchange/interaction?

 

[Absentglare]

Re: FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private Ema

Both are criminal, the sender of the email and the provider of an unauthorized file server used illegally to receive classified documents. No question Hillary has committed felonies. The question is whether or not she will be indicted and our government is certainly corrupt enough not to allow that to happen.

The law requires that Hillary was knowingly doing so for it to be considered criminal.

 

[Absentglare]

Re: FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private Ema

It's entirely possible that no markings were stripped and, at the very least, she would still be guilty of improper handling of classified information by her constantly receiving and processing it without immediately reporting it to the properly clear IT people.

You do realize that people can be given classified briefs, or have access to classified information, and then they can then walk around talking about it, making notes later, or in this case, emails without there ever being markings involved in that exchange/interaction?

Of course.

And this problem you allude to is in no way limited to Hillary.

Using an unclassified @state.gov address isn't a solution.

 

[fmw]

Re: FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private Ema

The law requires that Hillary was knowingly doing so for it to be considered criminal.

Not so. She originated classified documents on her server. Having the private server is criminally illegal all by itself. You are suggesting she didn't know about the private server? The FBI currently has 147 agents on the case. Perhaps you think they are doing this because there is nothing there? I think most politicians are criminals. But few are so consistently so over such a long period of time as Hillary.

 

[finebead]

Re: FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private Ema

Oh...there are multiple violations. First, you can't use a private server for government work because everything is supposed to be on record.

It is NOT illegal to use a private server for government work. If you believe it is, show proof.

"To complement the official State Department computer in my office, I installed a laptop computer on a private line," Powell wrote. "My personal email account on the laptop allowed me direct access to anyone online. I started shooting emails to my principal assistants, to individual ambassadors, and increasingly to my foreign-minister colleagues who like me were trying to bring their ministries in the 186,000 miles per second world."

An aide to Powell confirmed his use of this personal email account in a statement to Politico.

"He sent emails to his staff generally via their State Department email addresses," the statement said. "These emails should be on the State Department computers."

So, Powell was on email, but it was through a private, not government email account.

Clinton says John Kerry was the first secretary of state to rely on a government email account | PolitiFact



The Bush II administration used private RNC email, in violation of the Presidential Records Act:

The House Oversight committee in an interim staff report, released on June 18, 2007:

At least eighty-eight Republican National Committee email accounts were granted to senior Bush administration officials, not "just a handful" as previously reported by the White House spokesperson Dana Perino in March 2007. Her estimate was later revised to "about fifty." Officials with accounts included: Karl Rove, the President’s senior advisor; Andrew Card, the former White House Chief of Staff; Ken Mehlman, the former White House Director of Political Affairs; and many other officials in the Office of Political Affairs, the Office of Communications, and the Office of the Vice President.

The RNC has 140,216 emails sent or received by Karl Rove. Over half of these emails (75,374) were sent to or received from individuals using official ".gov" email accounts. Other users of RNC email accounts include former Director of Political Affairs Sara Taylor (66,018 emails) and Deputy Director of Political Affairs Scott Jennings (35,198 emails). These email accounts were used by White House officials for official purposes, such as communicating with federal agencies about federal appointments and policies.

Of the 88 White House officials who received RNC email accounts, the RNC has preserved no emails for 51 officials.

There is evidence that the Office of White House Counsel under Alberto Gonzales may have known that White House officials were using RNC email accounts for official business, but took no action to preserve these presidential records.

The evidence obtained by the Committee indicates that White House officials used their RNC email accounts in a manner that circumvented these requirements. At this point in the investigation, it is not possible to determine precisely how many presidential records may have been destroyed by the RNC. Given the heavy reliance by White House officials on RNC email accounts, the high rank of the White House officials involved, and the large quantity of missing emails, the potential violation of the Presidential Records Act may be extensive.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_White_House_email_controversy

Secondly, there was the mishandling of classified information in thousands of emails. This has been documented as fact.

Will she ever be held accountable for anything? Probably not.

Exactly what constituted the mishandling. The state dept. has only withheld a very few, now deemed Top Secret, and has stated they were not Top Secret when Clinton sent them, which is what she has said.

"We can confirm that later today, as part of our monthly FOIA productions of former Secretary Clinton's emails, the State Department will be denying in full seven email chains, found in 22 documents representing 37 pages. The documents are being upgraded at the request of the intelligence community because they contain a category of top secret information," State Department spokesman John Kirby said. "These documents were not marked classified at the time they were sent."

22 Hillary Clinton Emails Dubbed Top Secret : NPR

Where is your proof?

 

[Absentglare]

Re: FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private Ema

Not so. She originated classified documents on her server. Having the private server is criminally illegal all by itself. You are suggesting she didn't know about the private server? The FBI currently has 147 agents on the case. Perhaps you think they are doing this because there is nothing there? I think most politicians are criminals. But few are so consistently so over such a long period of time as Hillary.

This is just babbling partisan nonsense.

If she originated the document from her server, it wasn't really classified or do you just have no idea what the word means ?

The use of the server wasn't illegal in any way, shape, or form. Her predecessors used their private emails, too, and those servers weren't always maintained privately.

 

[Port & Starboard]

Re: FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private Ema

The law requires that Hillary was knowingly doing so for it to be considered criminal.

A lowly seaman on a ship knows better to lay classified paperwork around, or sending classified info through unsecured emails.. A lowly Department Of Defense worker knows better than lay classified paperwork laying around, or sending classified info through emails.

Are you saying that the Secretary Of State doesn't know the difference?

 

[fmw]

Re: FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private Ema

This is just babbling partisan nonsense.

I'm not partisan.

If she originated the document from her server, it wasn't really classified or do you just have no idea what the word means ?

It was if the information involved was information the government would want to keep secret. It doesn't have to be marked classified. It is classified because of its content. That's how it works.

The use of the server wasn't illegal in any way, shape, or form. Her predecessors used their private emails, too, and those servers weren't always maintained privately.

It is absolutely illegal for a person with a security clearance in the federal government to use anything but a government email address for government business. If others did it, it was illegal for them as well. Do two wrongs now finally make a right?

 

[Absentglare]

FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private...

A lowly seaman on a ship knows better to lay classified paperwork around, or sending classified info through unsecured emails.. A lowly Department Of Defense worker knows better than lay classified paperwork laying around, or sending classified info through emails.

Are you saying that the Secretary Of State doesn't know the difference?

What ?

The server isn't relevant.

Having unclassified documents sent from an official @state.gov address is just as illegal. There is no problem around simply using a private server. At the time, it was legal. Her predecessors did the same thing in using personal accounts for public business.

 

[Absentglare]

Re: FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private Ema

I'm not partisan.



It was if the information involved was information the government would want to keep secret. It doesn't have to be marked classified. It is classified because of its content. That's how it works.



It is absolutely illegal for a person with a security clearance in the federal government to use anything but a government email address for government business. If others did it, it was illegal for them as well. Do two wrongs now finally make a right?

I didn't say you were partisan.

The attacks on Hillary are. Otherwise, we'd be clamoring for the imprisonment of virtually all government officials who ever corresponded on potentially classified information rather than just Hillary.

It's not magically classified because of content. That's a circular definition: "it's classified because it's classified." It's a bull**** response.

It may be illegal now for a secretary of state to use a private email address. It wasn't then. Or do you think we should also imprison the multitude of government employees who have done this ?

 

[Port & Starboard]

Re: FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private...

What ?

The server isn't relevant.

Having unclassified documents sent from an official @state.gov address is just as illegal. There is no problem around simply using a private server. At the time, it was legal. Her predecessors did the same thing in using personal accounts for public business.

No.

The Federal Records Act requires agencies hold onto official communications, including all work-related emails, and government employees cannot destroy or remove relevant records.
FOIA is designed to "improve public access to agency records and information."

The NARA regulations dictate how records should be created and maintained. They stress that materials must be maintained "by the agency," that they should be "readily found" and that the records must "make possible a proper scrutiny by the Congress."

Section 1924 of Title 18 has to do with deletion and retention of classified documents. "Knowingly" removing or housing classified information at an "unauthorized location" is subject to a fine or a year in prison.

 

[Napoleon]

Re: FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private...

No.

The Federal Records Act requires agencies hold onto official communications, including all work-related emails, and government employees cannot destroy or remove relevant records.
FOIA is designed to "improve public access to agency records and information."

The NARA regulations dictate how records should be created and maintained. They stress that materials must be maintained "by the agency," that they should be "readily found" and that the records must "make possible a proper scrutiny by the Congress."

Section 1924 of Title 18 has to do with deletion and retention of classified documents. "Knowingly" removing or housing classified information at an "unauthorized location" is subject to a fine or a year in prison.

You can't knowingly remove or house classified documents that are not classified.

 

[Absentglare]

Re: FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private...

No.

The Federal Records Act requires agencies hold onto official communications, including all work-related emails, and government employees cannot destroy or remove relevant records.
FOIA is designed to "improve public access to agency records and information."

The NARA regulations dictate how records should be created and maintained. They stress that materials must be maintained "by the agency," that they should be "readily found" and that the records must "make possible a proper scrutiny by the Congress."

Section 1924 of Title 18 has to do with deletion and retention of classified documents. "Knowingly" removing or housing classified information at an "unauthorized location" is subject to a fine or a year in prison.

Oh, you make it so easy !!

All she has to do is provide records. Note that she was often emailing people with state dept emails so they already had records of almost all correspondence already. Also note that she provided all requested records.

Second, you're right, if you can't prove "knowingly" then there's no case to be made.

 

[Port & Starboard]

Re: FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private...

Oh, you make it so easy !!

All she has to do is provide records. Note that she was often emailing people with state dept emails so they already had records of almost all correspondence already. Also note that she provided all requested records.

Second, you're right, if you can't prove "knowingly" then there's no case to be made.

You cannot destroy any email regardless of who else might have sent or received it.

She did not provide the records of the deleted emails. I do not know where you got that from.

 

[Absentglare]

Re: FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private...

You cannot destroy any email regardless of who else might have sent or received it.

She did not provide the records of the deleted emails. I do not know where you got that from.

Why would she have to provide records of her private correspondence ?

Is that what we got from Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Powell when they were justifying our invasion of Iraq ? 4,500 Americans were lost in that war; and we found out afterwards that we were sold lies to compel us to war.

Did we get access to all of their private correspondence in that investigation ?

 

[Port & Starboard]

Re: FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private...

Why would she have to provide records of her private correspondence ?

Is that what we got from Rumsfeld, Cheney, and Powell when they were justifying our invasion of Iraq ? 4,500 Americans were lost in that war; and we found out afterwards that we were sold lies to compel us to war.

Did we get access to all of their private correspondence in that investigation ?

Stick to the issue of Hillary. She used the server for government emails which made the entire server hard drive fair game to investigators. Now we all know that Top Secret emails were on that server, raises doubts even further about her credibility. We will all know soon enough.

 

[Absentglare]

Re: FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private...

Stick to the issue of Hillary. She used the server for government emails which made the entire server hard drive fair game to investigators. Now we all know that Top Secret emails were on that server, raises doubts even further about her credibility. We will all know soon enough.

And they have her hard drive.

And she hasn't even been hit by an indictment.

So i wouldn't hold my breath or assume guilt based on heavily redacted emails and rumors from "unnamed sources" and retired federal agents.

 

[Fishking]

Re: FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private Ema

Of course.

And this problem you allude to is in no way limited to Hillary.

Using an unclassified @state.gov address isn't a solution.

I never said it was a solution. Those are two different problems using @state.gov is simply a measure that's in place to makes sure that all official business is being recorded for transparency purposes. Classified information would still not be authorized on that email. I also never stated that it was limited to Hillary. She was but one of many involved in the problem.

 

[Fishking]

Re: FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private Ema

The law requires that Hillary was knowingly doing so for it to be considered criminal.

No, that only increases the severity and number of things you can get charged for. There are all kinds of laws out there that you'll still get charged and convicted for, whether ignorant of them or not. Additionally, you're supposed to receive training just to handle and have access to classified information so the ignorance claim loses some credibility.

 

[Absentglare]

Re: FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private Ema

I never said it was a solution. Those are two different problems using @state.gov is simply a measure that's in place to makes sure that all official business is being recorded for transparency purposes. Classified information would still not be authorized on that email. I also never stated that it was limited to Hillary. She was but one of many involved in the problem.

That problem has already been explicitly resolved by a change in law. It makes little sense to hold people accountable to a law that did not exist when they were in violation of said law.

 

[Absentglare]

Re: FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private Ema

No, that only increases the severity and number of things you can get charged for. There are all kinds of laws out there that you'll still get charged and convicted for, whether ignorant of them or not. Additionally, you're supposed to receive training just to handle and have access to classified information so the ignorance claim loses some credibility.

Sure but redacted emails hardly serve as unquestionable proof to the public.

 

[Fishking]

Re: FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private Ema

Sure but redacted emails hardly serve as unquestionable proof to the public.

Unless you're going to assert a vast and expansive conspiracy among all the intelligence experts that have analyzed the data, I think we're safe in what has been made public so far.

 

[FieldTheorist]

Re: FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private Ema

And........still nothing to pin on Hillary.

I largely agree with this. Come back to me when people have something solid on her.

 

[Fishking]

Re: FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private Ema

Exactly what constituted the mishandling. The state dept. has only withheld a very few, now deemed Top Secret, and has stated they were not Top Secret when Clinton sent them, which is what she has said.

Where is your proof?

*sigh*...markings have absolutely nothing to do with whether the information is classified. Anyone who knows and has worked at a practical level on this type of thing knows this. It's very, very, basic.

Again, a lot of management level individuals don't have a very good grasp on it because they feel entitled to access due to their position. I can't tell you the number of times I've had to stop a an officer (the higher the rank the worse it seemed) that they couldn't pull out a notebook and pen to take notes when receiving a brief and be able to take the notebook out of the secured environment.

-edit- You have to hold these people's hands, for this type of stuff. They are like children.

 

[Gimmesometruth]

Re: FBI Reveals New Details About Its Probe Into Hillary Clinton's Use of Private Ema

Are you serious? I can't believe I have to tell you something that's been public knowledge for more than a decade.

Wilson portrayed himself as some kind of credible CIA operative who was "in the know" in his oped's, specially selected by the CIA to go undercover at the request of the VP's office... rather than being someone who was not "in the know", not a trained agent, and someone who only got the gig because his CIA wife recommended him.

Wilson's oped's painted the president as a liar based on the famous 16 words he said in his 2003 SOTU, which the WH knew when this all started, and we all know now, Wilson's report to the CIA actually supported, not refuted.

No, I know the rw spin, the problem will always be that the WH was wrong about the yellowcake, Joe was vindicated when he said that there was no there there.

But you still have not answered the question, how was outing his wife a means to discredit Joe? It was done as revenge by the VP office, but how was it supposed to discredit her husband?

Besides, he was an ambassador, with old connections in Niger, he was never clandestine, he wasn't cloak and dagger material....if anything she was, but you still haven't explained how exposing a long time and successful CIA agent was supposed to make HIM look bad.