State Department probe of Clinton emails finds no deliberate mishandling of classified information

[Puigb]

Another Conservative conspiracy theory flushed down the toilet.

Perhaps they'll go back to looking for Obama's real birth certificate now. They're only been looking for it for like 10 years now

 

[US&THEM]

One thing I have noticed is the selective outrage when it comes to secure communications. The Mueller report specifically stated due to govt employees utilizing encrypted applications ie Whats app etc were utilized there were no records of official communications.

HRC investigation should have been presented to a grand jury.

 

[Port & Starboard]

This is true, but a civilian government worker wouldn't be criminally charged, which has been the accusation on part of Republicans with Clinton Derangement Syndrome for years.

Purposefully deleting emails to avoid prosecution..................they sure as hell would.

 

[apdst]

This is true, but a civilian government worker wouldn't be criminally charged, which has been the accusation on part of Republicans with Clinton Derangement Syndrome for years.

You don't think it's illegal for a government employee to destroy subpoenaed documents?

 

[W_Heisenberg]

Anyone that has ever worked in the civil service or military that claims there was no deliberate act involved here is simply a liar. If they are making that claim solely out of their idiotic mindless defense of their partisan ideology they are not only liars but hypocrites.

It has been proven by HRCs own word that many of the emails found on her private server were classified and there is literally no way for email to cross from NIPRNET to SIPRNET without a deliberate and intentional action involved. Its simply a fact. The only way to get from NIPR to SIPR is deliberate.

This is one of the statutes the FBI considered:

18 U.S. Code SS 1924 - Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

"knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both."

“Knowingly” usually refers to actual knowledge about the nature and consequences of the action; “willfully” usually refers to some amount of intent in performing the act itself.

A “knowing” element of a crime can be disputed by demonstrating an actual lack of knowledge regarding the nature or consequence of the action. For example, if someone unknowingly takes a forged bill as change during a transaction, then attempts to use it in a future transaction, if they did not actually know that the bill was forged, they have not “knowingly” passed a forged bill.

A “willful” element of a crime can be disputed by demonstrating a lack of intent to perform the act or (sometimes) to cause a specific outcome. For example, a driver who is distracted by their radio and looks away, then strikes a pedestrian did not “willfully” injure the pedestrian. They may have been reckless or negligent, but the act was not intentional.

What is the difference between 'knowingly' and 'willfully' in the context of US law? - Quora

It's not enough to just mishandle classified documents, the person doing the moving has to know the documents are classified. So with respect to 18 USD Code 1924, any prosecutor charging Clinton would have had to prove -- beyond a reasonable doubt -- they knew the stuff was classified when they sent or received the e-mails using Clinton's private e-mail server, and with respect to Clinton, they would have to prove SHE knew classified e-mails were being sent.

--

Also, there is a difference between this statute and military law. Military personnel is governed by UCMJ, and State Dept. officials are not subject to UCMJ, they are civilians.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

Purposefully deleting emails to avoid prosecution..................they sure as hell would.

What evidence do you have that Secretary Clinton ordered the deletion of any e-mails under subpoena?

You don't think it's illegal for a government employee to destroy subpoenaed documents?

The order from Secretary Clinton's assistant to destroy the e-mails occurred months before the documents were subpoenaed.

 

[Port & Starboard]

What evidence do you have that Secretary Clinton ordered the deletion of any e-mails under subpoena?



The order from Secretary Clinton's assistant to destroy the e-mails occurred months before the documents were subpoenaed.

Only a lemming would ask this. Are you a lemming?

 

[VanceMack]

This is one of the statutes the FBI considered:

18 U.S. Code SS 1924 - Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

"knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both."



What is the difference between 'knowingly' and 'willfully' in the context of US law? - Quora

It's not enough to just mishandle classified documents, the person doing the moving has to know the documents are classified. So with respect to 18 USD Code 1924, any prosecutor charging Clinton would have had to prove -- beyond a reasonable doubt -- they knew the stuff was classified when they sent or received the e-mails using Clinton's private e-mail server, and with respect to Clinton, they would have to prove SHE knew classified e-mails were being sent.

--

Also, there is a difference between this statute and military law. Military personnel is governed by UCMJ, and State Dept. officials are not subject to UCMJ, they are civilians.

As a civilian employee you are required to take annual COMSEC OPSEC and INFOSEC/IA training before you can even get a CAC, network access, and an email account. There is no way people that had access to classified networks dont know what classified documents are....and damn sure no way a former senator and secretary of state didnt know.

 

[poweRob]

No one claimed she was. Do you have a point? Or are you just here to join Rob in meaningless retorts

Really? Here's you implying the other state department employees weren't guilty... but Hillary is definitely guilty.

I dont know anyone who argued that State Department employees mishandled classified info, the argument was that Hillary did. And someone who fell for the mass collusion hoax really has no business calling anyone other than himself a conspiracy nut.

So, exactly who do you think was emailing her then that isn't a state department employee?

 

[W_Heisenberg]

Only a lemming would ask this. Are you a lemming?

Well, it's not about what I think, it's about what a prosecutor could prove beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury.

So, you seem to suggest you have evidence that Secretary Clinton ordered the deletion of e-mails under subpoena.

Show us the evidence then.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

As a civilian employee you are required to take annual COMSEC OPSEC and INFOSEC/IA training before you can even get a CAC, network access, and an email account. There is no way people that had access to classified networks dont know what classified documents are....and damn sure no way a former senator and secretary of state didnt know.

This is a copy of the summary of the report:

https://www.grassley.senate.gov/sit...17 State Dept. to CEG - Classified Emails.pdf

Read page 8, the last paragraph:

"While there were some instances of classified information being inappropriately introduced into an unclassified system in furtherance of expedience, by and large, 'the individuals interviewed were aware of security policies and did their best to implement them in their operations. Correspondence with the Secretary is inherently sensitive, and is therefore open for broad interpretation as to classification, particularly with respect to Foreign Government Information. Instances of classified information being deliberately transmitted via unclassified email were the rare exception and resulted in adjudicated security violations. There was no persuasive evidence of systemic, deliberate mishandling of classified information."

--

With respect to the FBI's investigation in 2016:

The FBI had found the vast majority of the e-mails, something like 99.64% of them were unclassified, and 0.36% of them were classified, and of that 0.36% only a handful had any classified markings on them. There were something like 2,100 e-mails that were later classified.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

No one claimed she was. Do you have a point? Or are you just here to join Rob in meaningless retorts

With respect to any potential criminal charges for Clinton, or this idea that the FBI mishandled her case, it's important the State Dept. did not find persuasive evidence of systemic, deliberate mishandling of classified information because Clinton received the e-mails State Dept. officials sent, and State Dept. officials received the e-mails Clinton sent.

 

[American]

This is one of the statutes the FBI considered:

18 U.S. Code SS 1924 - Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material | U.S. Code | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

"knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both."



What is the difference between 'knowingly' and 'willfully' in the context of US law? - Quora

It's not enough to just mishandle classified documents, the person doing the moving has to know the documents are classified. So with respect to 18 USD Code 1924, any prosecutor charging Clinton would have had to prove -- beyond a reasonable doubt -- they knew the stuff was classified when they sent or received the e-mails using Clinton's private e-mail server, and with respect to Clinton, they would have to prove SHE knew classified e-mails were being sent.

--

Also, there is a difference between this statute and military law. Military personnel is governed by UCMJ, and State Dept. officials are not subject to UCMJ, they are civilians.

Someone at Hillary's level would know. They had satellite photos of North Korea on her server. Those photos would first be processed and classified (and marked) by professionals BEFORE going to officials like Hillary for viewing. Clearly you're another one that knows nothing about the handling of classified documents.

Sent from Hillary's private email server.

 

[Obscurity]

Total waste of time as is ****ing usual with the maga idiots and their canaries in coal mines.

 

[VanceMack]

This is a copy of the summary of the report:

https://www.grassley.senate.gov/sit...17 State Dept. to CEG - Classified Emails.pdf

Read page 8, the last paragraph:

"While there were some instances of classified information being inappropriately introduced into an unclassified system in furtherance of expedience, by and large, 'the individuals interviewed were aware of security policies and did their best to implement them in their operations. Correspondence with the Secretary is inherently sensitive, and is therefore open for broad interpretation as to classification, particularly with respect to Foreign Government Information. Instances of classified information being deliberately transmitted via unclassified email were the rare exception and resulted in adjudicated security violations. There was no persuasive evidence of systemic, deliberate mishandling of classified information."

--

With respect to the FBI's investigation in 2016:

The FBI had found the vast majority of the e-mails, something like 99.64% of them were unclassified, and 0.36% of them were classified, and of that 0.36% only a handful had any classified markings on them. There were something like 2,100 e-mails that were later classified.

"While there were some instances of classified information being inappropriately introduced into an unclassified system in furtherance of expedience, by and large, 'the individuals interviewed were aware of security policies and did their best to implement them in their operations."

You just proved intent.

 

[W_Heisenberg]

Someone at Hillary's level would know.

We already know that a few of the e-mails contained classified information, and were marked as classified.

The problem with trying to prove Clinton knowingly and willfully did this is that the vast majority of the e-mails do not contain classified information.

So, when I say vast majority, I mean 99.64% of the 30,000 e-mails contained no classified information at the time they were sent or received..and of the 0.36% classified e-mails the vast majority of those classified e-mails were not marked as classified...that's a big deal.

The fact that the vast majority of the e-mails do not contain classified information is a big clue that Clinton did not intend to use the server for classified information.

Because of that fact, we can conclude that the inclusion of classified information on that server was clearly an accident.

They had satellite photos of North Korea on her server. Those photos would first be processed and classified (and marked) by professionals BEFORE going to officials like Hillary for viewing. Clearly you're another one that knows nothing about the handling of classified documents.

Try again...

WASHINGTON (AP) — Neither of the two emails sent to Hillary Rodham Clinton now labeled by intelligence agencies as “top secret” contained information that would jump out to experts as particularly sensitive, according to several government officials.

...

One of the now “top secret” emails included a discussion of a U.S. drone strike, part of a covert program that is widely known and discussed. A second conversation could have improperly referred to highly classified material, but it also could have reflected information collected independently, U.S. officials who have reviewed the correspondence told The Associated Press.

On Monday, the inspector general for the 17 spy agencies that make up what is known as the intelligence community told Congress that two of 40 emails, in a random sample of 30,000 messages that Clinton gave the State Department for review, contained information deemed “Top Secret,” one of the government’s highest levels of classification.

While neither of the emails was marked classified at the time they were sent, they have since been slapped with a “TK” marking, for “Talent Keyhole,” suggesting material obtained by spy satellites. And they also were marked “NOFORN,” meaning information that can only be shared with Americans with security clearances.

The two emails got those markings after consultations with the CIA and other agencies where the material originated, officials said. Some officials said they believed the designations were a stretch — a knee-jerk move in a bureaucracy rife with over-classification.

The officials who spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity work in intelligence and other agencies. They wouldn’t detail the full contents of the emails because of ongoing questions about classification level.

In a four-page fact sheet that accompanied a letter to Clinton supporters, Clinton spokeswoman Jennifer Palmieri stressed that Clinton was permitted to use her own email account as a government employee and that the same process concerning classification reviews would still be taking place had she used the standard “state.gov” email account used by most department employees. The State Department, meanwhile, stressed that it wasn’t clear if the material at issue ought to be considered classified at all.

AP EXCLUSIVE: Top secret Clinton emails include drone talk

Clinton didn’t transmit the sensitive information herself, they said, and nothing in the emails she received makes direct reference to communications intercepts, confidential intelligence methods or any other form of sensitive sourcing.

AP: Top secret Clinton emails include drone talk | PBS NewsHour

 

[W_Heisenberg]

"While there were some instances of classified information being inappropriately introduced into an unclassified system in furtherance of expedience, by and large, 'the individuals interviewed were aware of security policies and did their best to implement them in their operations."

You just proved intent.

...with respect to a few instances, yes, and it looks like those state dept. employee(s) were punished for it too:

"Instances of classified information being deliberately transmitted via unclassified email were the rare exception and resulted in adjudicated security violations. There was no persuasive evidence of systemic, deliberate mishandling of classified information."

This is exculpatory information with respect to charging Clinton and anyone else with a crime. It appears the vast majority of the information transmitted was not classified, and the majority of the people who used or interacted with the system did NOT deliberately transmit classified information.

If this were bad news for Clinton it would say, "Nearly everyone who used the system deliberately transmitted classified information." That would be bad. This is the opposite of that.

So, what's your problem with Clinton? Do you still think they should..."Lock Her Up!!!!"?

Why are you guys still hung up on this? Why do you guys still accuse Comey of erring when he announced that the FBI would not recommend prosecution.

In the words of Mulvaney...get over it.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Another Conservative conspiracy theory flushed down the toilet.

Perhaps they'll go back to looking for Obama's real birth certificate now. They're only been looking for it for like 10 years now

Hog WASH!!

All that that so-called "report" did was **P*R*O*V*E** that the conspiracy was able to hush things up.

What is REALLY needed now is an investigation into the investigation to find out how the conspiracy was able to hush things up.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Really? Here's you implying the other state department employees weren't guilty... but Hillary is definitely guilty.



So, exactly who do you think was emailing her then that isn't a state department employee?

Have no fear, the US Code is about to be amended by the addition of

It shall be a first class felony to be Hillary Rodham Clinton and the punishment shall be that she be locked up.
​

If the US Code is not specifically amended to add that crime then Mr. Trump will issue a "Presidential Decree" that it shall be so interpreted and applied.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Someone at Hillary's level would know. They had satellite photos of North Korea on her server. Those photos would first be processed and classified (and marked) by professionals BEFORE going to officials like Hillary for viewing. Clearly you're another one that knows nothing about the handling of classified documents.

Sent from Hillary's private email server.

Did you know that I have satellite photos of the DPRK on my computer?

Would you like to have copies of them?

The ones on my computer are NOT marked "Top Secret", "Secret", "Confidential", or NoForn" (although I cannot guarantee that the US government has NOT attached one, or more, of those classifications to identical images).

 

[apdst]

This is a copy of the summary of the report:

https://www.grassley.senate.gov/sit...17 State Dept. to CEG - Classified Emails.pdf

Read page 8, the last paragraph:

"While there were some instances of classified information being inappropriately introduced into an unclassified system in furtherance of expedience, by and large, 'the individuals interviewed were aware of security policies and did their best to implement them in their operations. Correspondence with the Secretary is inherently sensitive, and is therefore open for broad interpretation as to classification, particularly with respect to Foreign Government Information. Instances of classified information being deliberately transmitted via unclassified email were the rare exception and resulted in adjudicated security violations. There was no persuasive evidence of systemic, deliberate mishandling of classified information."

--

With respect to the FBI's investigation in 2016:

The FBI had found the vast majority of the e-mails, something like 99.64% of them were unclassified, and 0.36% of them were classified, and of that 0.36% only a handful had any classified markings on them. There were something like 2,100 e-mails that were later classified.

One document is enough to make it a crime.

 

[Atomic Kid]

Someone at Hillary's level would know. They had satellite photos of North Korea on her server. Those photos would first be processed and classified (and marked) by professionals BEFORE going to officials like Hillary for viewing. Clearly you're another one that knows nothing about the handling of classified documents.

Sent from Hillary's private email server.

You mean photos that were subsequently published in the mass media? Great point! :roll:

 

[dcsports]

One document is enough to make it a crime.

The part I find interesting is that there's no question what happened - the choice is between deliberate (and criminal) and utterly incompetent. Democrat's keep cheering that despite decades of experience handling classified information, Hillary was just reckless and incompetent. Woo hoo!

 

[Atomic Kid]

The part I find interesting is that there's no question what happened - the choice is between deliberate (and criminal) and utterly incompetent. Democrat's keep cheering that despite decades of experience handling classified information, Hillary was just reckless and incompetent. Woo hoo!

What I find interesting. Well...maybe amusing. Is that you apparently don't get is that you can't have it both ways. And while we're on the subject of reckless and incompetent how then would you characterize Trump inviting the Russians into the Oval Office and revealing to them a highly placed and classified source that had been entrusted to us by a foreign ally for safekeeping?

 

[charliebrown]

This from the current State Department. Oh wells...

State Department probe of Clinton emails finds no deliberate mishandling of classified information


A multiyear State Department probe of emails that were sent to former secretary of state Hillary Clinton’s private computer server concluded there was no systemic or deliberate mishandling of classified information by department employees, according to a report submitted to Congress this month.

The report appears to represent a final and anticlimactic chapter in a controversy that overshadowed the 2016 presidential campaign and exposed Clinton to fierce criticism that she later cited as a major factor in her loss to President Trump.​

Don't worry conspiracy nuts... there are plenty other lies you can and are peddling. Maybe push for more Benghazi hearings?

Starting a separate server for all email commerce as a public official absolutely broke agency and government policy. (ABOVE THE LAW)
Deleting all emails associate with the job of public office absolutely broke agency and government policy(ABOVE THE LAW)

I can see why people were weary of voting for Clinton. I personally felt she was above the law and could easily break every law in the world and the government would not investigate her. Donald Trump would be a president that would be constantly watched by the media and the congress and I could live with that.

The fact that you have been investigating and spying on that man since he was a candidate actually gave me more security and confidence that he would not be capable of breaking the law without paying for it.

I wonder if I am going to go thru this same thought process next year. HUM, Trump has been investigated for anything and everything he has done for the past five years and Joe Biden gets a pass for letting his family reap amazing profits because he was the VP of the country.

I am begging each and every DEM on this site to pick anyone but Joe Biden for the DEM nominee. He is not the most electable person on that stage.