Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Comney said in front of congress that only 3 emails were marked classified, all 3 marked incorrectly so that the person reading wouldnt have know n they were classified and that 2 of the 3 shouldnt have been marked so in the first place.
So at best, you are talking about her receiving 1 email, and worst 3. this seems like nitpicking.
Defending wrongful behavior is sad, represents a bad character and it's getting old.
Comney said in front of congress that only 3 emails were marked classified, all 3 marked incorrectly so that the person reading wouldnt have know n they were classified and that 2 of the 3 shouldnt have been marked so in the first place.
So at best, you are talking about her receiving 1 email, and worst 3. this seems like nitpicking.
Marked classified or not she should have known better. You can can argue she is a complete idiot or ignored protocol for her own selfish reasons. Take your pick, it's one or the other.
Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.
For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program levelwhen they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails).
None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.
Separately, it is important to say something about the marking of classified information. Only a very small number of the e-mails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information. But even if information is not marked “classified” in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.
Comney said in front of congress that only 3 emails were marked classified, all 3 marked incorrectly so that the person reading wouldnt have know n they were classified and that 2 of the 3 shouldnt have been marked so in the first place.
So at best, you are talking about her receiving 1 email, and worst 3. this seems like nitpicking.
According to the FBI, is was more like 110 classified emails.
"From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were “up-classified” to make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the e-mails were sent."
Compromised the security of the USA, because she is an incompetent clueless idiot, or she was ignoring the rules clearly in place, for her own criminal intent, to hide and have control, over government insight and the freedom of information act.
She's a serial unconscious liar.....she has no compunction not to lie, the truth and the lie are the same thing to Hillary...always lying to get what she wants. I think she needs treatment.
Every Secretary of State receives, handles and sends classified email. Normally it is done on a secure government server.
Clinton is asking the American people to believe that during her entire tenure as Secretary of State, that she never handled any classified emails.
If she never handled classified information then she wasn't doing her job. Why is it that all her predecessors received and sent top secret information but she didn't?
One issue I've not heard addressed is did she have an issued email address from the State Department? If she did, did she ever use it? Was that address somehow attached to her private server? Sounds trivial but I think there's merit to it in that intent exists perhaps.
Funny, you must have seen a different FBI directors press conference than I did.
What the FBI director confirmed is that she both sent and received classified information that would be classified at the SAP/Top secret level. This would include things like black ops, nuclear matters and NATO communications. SAP is need to know and may only be directly accessible from a handful of people.
Setting aside the legality of what she has done there is only two conclusion you can draw. She is either a complete idiot or potentially exposed information classified at the highest levels for her own selfish reasons. Which is it?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
