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.
I hate to keep posing the same stuff, but the law requires classified information to be plainly marked.
18 U.S. Code § 798 The term “classified information” means information which, at the time of a violation of this section, is, for reasons of national security, specifically designated by a United States Government Agency for limited or restricted dissemination or distribution;
Notice that the law requires that classified material be specifically marked. There is an additional case of derivative works i.e. extracts from marked material. None of the emails Clinton received were marked as classified and so far none have been identified that were extracted from marketed classified sources. There is no law violation.
Try reading the SF 312. HRC signed it.
Quote:
3. I have been advised that the unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of classified information by me could cause damage or irreparable injury to the United States or could be used to advantage by a foreign nation. I hereby agree that I will never divulge classified information to anyone unless: (a) I have officially verified that the recipient has been properly authorized by the United States Government to receive it; or (b) I have been given prior written notice of authorization from the United States Government Department or Agency (hereinafter Department or Agency) responsible for the classification of information or last granting me a security clearance that such disclosure is permitted. I understand that if I am uncertain about the classification status of information, I am required to confirm from an authorized official that the information is unclassified before I may disclose it, except to a person as provided in (a) or (b), above. I further understand that I am obligated to comply with laws and regulations that prohibit the unauthorized disclosure of classified information.
4. I have been advised that any breach of this Agreement may result in the termination of any security clearances I hold; removal from any position of special confidence and trust requiring such clearances; or termination of my employment or other relationships with the Departments or Agencies that granted my security clearance or clearances. In addition, I have been advised that any unauthorized disclosure of classified information by me may constitute a violation, or violations, of United States criminal laws, including the provisions of sections 641, 793, 794, 798, *952 and 1924, title 18, United States Code; *the provisions of section 783(b}, title 50, United States Code; and the provisions of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982. I recognize that nothing in this Agreement constitutes a waiver by the United States of the right to prosecute me for any statutory violation.
Try reading it yourself and this time try bolding where it says that use of a private email server violates it. And feel free to cite the applicable law or regulation making use of a private server illegal.
And then you can explain how you know that 5 or more years ago, Hillary or any one else KNEW material not marked as classified was in fact classified.
Try reading it yourself and this time try bolding where it says that use of a private email server violates it. And feel free to cite the applicable law or regulation making use of a private server illegal.
And then you can explain how you know that 5 or more years ago, Hillary or any one else KNEW material not marked as classified was in fact classified.
Sure, no problem:
unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of classified information by me could cause damage or irreparable injury to the United States or could be used to advantage by a foreign nation.
She was successfully hacked three times that we know of. At least one hacker forwarded some of Hillary's emails with sensitive info all over the place. Experts in the field of security looked at her setup and pointed out many "amateur hour" vulnerabilities. I think that counts as "negligent handling." Did she have permission to move things onto her server? Since she was in such a rush to delete all of them, I'm betting the answer is no. There's your "unauthorized" part. At that level of operation, all data should be considered classified until they are specifically made otherwise.
We kinda know Hillary will get away with this and pretty much anything else she does. But you gotta be mighty stupid to move data and emails en masse to your own private server. That's the sort of think Snowden did. Snowden is an example of why the government is so nitpicky about it. Anyone could inadvertently or intentionally leak sensitive information by doing that sort of thing. Whether she broke the law or not -- I think she did -- Hillary's DIY server setup shows incredibly poor judgement. We have a right to expect better from a person seeking the office of President of the United States. Any other government employee would have been fired on the spot.
Try reading it yourself and this time try bolding where it says that use of a private email server violates it. And feel free to cite the applicable law or regulation making use of a private server illegal.
And then you can explain how you know that 5 or more years ago, Hillary or any one else KNEW material not marked as classified was in fact classified.
I've read this form more times than I care to count. Everyone with a clearance knows you're not supposed to have classified material on a personal server. Lol. Obviously you don't have one. It doesn't need to explicitly say "private email server", just like it doesn't need to say "external hard drive", "data disc" or anything else like that because she was verbally briefed on those items. If she decided to stare off into space or take a nap while it was going on, maybe she shouldn't have signed this form.
Just because information isn't marked classified doesn't magically make it unclassified. If someone prints me out some random notes they typed up and hand them to me at my job, I can look at the information and tell whether it's confidential/secret/top secret and be right 9/10 times. I'm a nobody compared to HRC, so you mean to tell me that the Secretary of State can't differentiate what's classified and what's not? Especially with data as sensitive as SAP? And it's totally fine? Hilarious.
unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of classified information by me could cause damage or irreparable injury to the United States or could be used to advantage by a foreign nation.
She was successfully hacked three times that we know of. At least one hacker forwarded some of Hillary's emails with sensitive info all over the place. Experts in the field of security looked at her setup and pointed out many "amateur hour" vulnerabilities. I think that counts as "negligent handling." Did she have permission to move things onto her server? Since she was in such a rush to delete all of them, I'm betting the answer is no. There's your "unauthorized" part. At that level of operation, all data should be considered classified until they are specifically made otherwise.
We kinda know Hillary will get away with this and pretty much anything else she does. But you gotta be mighty stupid to move data and emails en masse to your own private server. That's the sort of think Snowden did. Snowden is an example of why the government is so nitpicky about it. Anyone could inadvertently or intentionally leak sensitive information by doing that sort of thing. Whether she broke the law or not -- I think she did -- Hillary's DIY server setup shows incredibly poor judgement. We have a right to expect better from a person seeking the office of President of the United States. Any other government employee would have been fired on the spot.
You want to provide some documentation of this? And that means something that's from sources besides Breitbart and Rupert Murdoch.
I've read this form more times than I care to count. Everyone with a clearance knows you're not supposed to have classified material on a personal server. Lol. Obviously you don't have one. It doesn't need to explicitly say "private email server", just like it doesn't need to say "external hard drive", "data disc" or anything else like that because she was verbally briefed on those items. If she decided to stare off into space or take a nap while it was going on, maybe she shouldn't have signed this form.
Just because information isn't marked classified doesn't magically make it unclassified. If someone prints me out some random notes they typed up and hand them to me at my job, I can look at the information and tell whether it's confidential/secret/top secret and be right 9/10 times. I'm a nobody compared to HRC, so you mean to tell me that the Secretary of State can't differentiate what's classified and what's not? Especially with data as sensitive as SAP? And it's totally fine? Hilarious.
And just because someone looks at it 5 years later and out of an abundance of caution says well, yeah, I guess this could be classified doesn't magically make it classified and doesn't mean it was obvious at the time that it should have been.
And I guess Condie Rice and Colin Powell must have napped off too.
You want to provide some documentation of this? And that means something that's from sources besides Breitbart and Rupert Murdoch.
Ummm...they got it from the SF 312, that everyone signs in order to have access to classified information.
Quote:
Originally Posted by emm74
And just because someone looks at it 5 years later and out of an abundance of caution says well, yeah, I guess this could be classified doesn't magically make it classified and doesn't mean it was obvious at the time that it should have been.
And I guess Condie Rice and Colin Powell must have napped off too.
Where did you get this from? Stuff is over classified initially, and THEN it gets reviewed for more general release in the intelligence community. Again, I don't think you understand clearances or how classified information works.
I already stated I'm not defending those two. Comprehension is awesome.
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.
