Breaking: 150 more Clinton Emails Have Classified Info.

Is interesting that people wants to dismiss corruption and disregard of established laws in order to pursue what they believe is lies

If we are to apply justice as the way was intended for the regular joes to those in power and running the nation we will lose almost every politician we know today, they will all be convicted of crimes of corruption, treason and whatever else they have violated.

We will end up with not politicians at all.

originally posted by: marg6043
Is interesting that people wants to dismiss corruption and disregard of established laws in order to pursue what they believe is lies

If we are to apply justice as the way was intended for the regular joes to those in power and running the nation we will lose almost every politician we know today, they will all be convicted of crimes of corruption, treason and whatever else they have violated.

We will end up with not politicians at all.

Bravo to that. Marg!

a reply to: introvert

Too bad really. That a seemingly intelligent person is ignoring obvious law breaking.

You want others to do your research, then you ignore it and spew your nonsense.

I don't know what single issue makes you a Hillary apologist. Maybe just the Party.

But, it is your narrow minded short sighted partisanship that is ruining my Country.

Hillary thinks she is above the law. Apparently, you think she is too.

Oh, tell us again how it's nothing like Petareus. What a liar.

originally posted by: russ212
All I can say is "wow you are blind"

The reason the policy is in place I'd to protect the files. It makes it easier to protect classified documents if they are already on a government secured server.

She is now the owner of now classified documents (illegally mind you) because she chose to use her own server. She would not be illegally in posses on of them if she hadn't done that.

She is now accountable for her actions.

If she had simply followed procedure she would not have had classified documents on an unsecured server.

a reply to: introvert

...AND her personal server became the property of the US Government and the American people...the minute she chose to use it exclusively for government business.
The fact that she illegally deleted ANY material on that server...AND then wiped it clean..means Hillary is guilty of willfull destruction of government property.

a reply to: IAMTAT

I tell you IAMTAT, everytime I read a story about our political figures in power and the ones that are given the right by the people to make laws, breaking them all the time when is not mercy for the regular joe, I shake my head, doesn't people realized that in our nation is only two group of people, the ones that the law can no touch and the ones that the law is mean to keep oppressed!

We as a nation can no keep living like this, eventually the fantasy that was created around political figures is going to implode, politicians are no idols or humans with divine abilities, they are humans like the rest of us and sadly with the power to become corrupted and get away with it.

a reply to: marg6043

Political corruption has been with us in every nation and every century. When their corruption actually endangers the people who put them power...the people MUST demand justice.

Hillary Clinton is blatantly 'compromised'...if she is elected President...EVERY hostile nation which has already hacked her unsecured personal server will be able to blackmail her...and, by extention, our country.

What's worse is...SHE KNOWS THIS...and only cares about securing her own power, feeding her own ego and rewarding her own insatiable greed...no matter what the security cost may be to the people who elected her.

How is this even debatable to some people?

a reply to: russ212

All I can say is "wow you are blind"

All I can say is "wow, did you do your homework before you formed an opinion?".

The reason the policy is in place I'd to protect the files. It makes it easier to protect classified documents if they are already on a government secured server.

Really? People whom have actually used the system would disagree.

"It's common" that people end up using unclassified systems to transmit classified information, said Jeffrey Smith, a former CIA general counsel who's now a partner at Arnold & Porter, where he often represents defendants suspected of misusing classified information.

"There are always these back channels," Smith explained. "It's inevitable, because the classified systems are often cumbersome and lots of people have access to the classified e-mails or cables." People who need quick guidance about a sensitive matter often pick up the phone or send a message on an open system. They shouldn't, but they do.

"It's common knowledge that the classified communications system is impossible and isn't used," said one former high-level Justice Department official. Several former prosecutors said flatly that such sloppy, unauthorized practices, although technically violations of law, wouldn't normally lead to criminal cases.

S ource

The transmission of now-classified information across Hillary Rodham Clinton's private email is consistent with a State Department culture in which diplomats routinely sent secret material on unsecured email during the past two administrations, according to documents reviewed by The Associated Press.

Clinton's use of a home server makes her case unique and has become an issue in her front-running campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination. But it's not clear whether the security breach would have been any less had she used department email. The department only systematically checks email for sensitive or classified material in response to a public records request.

Such slippage of classified information into regular email is "very common, actually," said Leslie McAdoo, a lawyer who frequently represents government officials and contractors in disputes over security clearances and classified information.

Source

Yes, she may have violated the law. A law that is consistently broken and is done so because it provided better reaction time, and the classified system is not any more secure than private correspondence. It's best to understand what you are talking about before you form an opinion, or try to push it on to others. Obviously, you are not informed on the issue.

a reply to: whyamIhere

Too bad really. That a seemingly intelligent person is ignoring obvious law breaking.

We all break laws, do we not? Who am I to judge, when if you look at the source material I provided above shows that it's common for those laws to be broken because the classified systems are not more secure and a waste of time in critical moments.

You want others to do your research, then you ignore it and spew your nonsense.

I did my own research, thanks anyway. Can you refute what I posted?

I don't know what single issue makes you a Hillary apologist. Maybe just the Party.

I've said many times that I do not support Hillary whatsoever, or the party for that matter. I like to deal with facts, and I take some satisfaction with engaging people in debate when it's obvious they have no facts supporting their stance. They are just anti-Clinton. I have yet to have one person provide any context that actually proves anything that is being claimed.

But, it is your narrow minded short sighted partisanship that is ruining my Country.

Your country? It's not just your country, comrade.

Hillary thinks she is above the law. Apparently, you think she is too.

No, I think there is very little meat to this issue because it's a widespread problem that prosecutors rarely take to court. You knew that right? You did your homework, right?

Oh, tell us again how it's nothing like Petareus. What a liar.

Potential criminal violations arise when officials knowingly disseminate documents marked as classified to unauthorized officials or on unclassified systems, or otherwise misuse classified materials. That happened in two cases involving former CIA directors that are cited as parallels for the Clinton e-mail issue, but are quite different. John Deutch was pardoned in 2001 for using an unsecured CIA computer at his home to improperly access classified material; he reportedly had been prepared to plead guilty to a misdemeanor. David Petraeus pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor in April for "knowingly" removing classified documents from authorized locations and retaining them at "unauthorized locations." Neither case fits the fact pattern with the Clinton e-mails.

S ource

Quit being lazy and do the damned work it takes to become informed. Continual spewing of rhetoric and fantasy does not convict a person when guilty and it does not educate people around you to do the same.

You are spreading disinformation and half truths.

It's obvious she is guilty! Let's just get this farce of a investigation done, have Hillary spin it, and obviously MSM and Obama admin will find someway to justify a slap on wrist at best! How anyone can rationalize for this psycho is beyond me!

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: yadboy

Pretty much does not stand up in the court of law. The goal is to convict her of something, correct? Where is the evidence and legal code to make that happen?

Everything else is just speculation.

Here you go smart guy!

Section 793 of the Penal Code, Subsection (f)

‘Whoever being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note or information relating to the national defense …

through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust or to be lost, stolen, abstracted or destroyed ...

She set the server up in her Barn! Hardly secure! Dozens of classified material where received into that server. For god's sake even the state dept techs didn't know she had the server their which is referenced in a email from Huma.

Does anyone really think she did not break the law in a big way???

Nothing in your last post proves anything except our government is corrupylt and our officials ignore laws and rules regularly. If i was in the FBI i would investigate those that made those statements.

a reply to: introvert

originally posted by: introvert

Yes, she may have violated the law. A law that is consistently broken and is done so because it provided better reaction time, and the classified system is not any more secure than private correspondence. It's best to understand what you are talking about before you form an opinion, or try to push it on to others. Obviously, you are not informed on the issue.

Yes, she may have violated the law is issue enough. I was born and raised in the US and was taught that people are equal and the law applies the same to all.

After living abroad for a long time in an overtly corrupt 3rd world nation I find that there are many people, especially politicians, that act and operate above the law, with impunity. This is what we have with Hillary Clinton. She violated the law, the same law that other "little people" have been fined / put on probation / and/or sentenced to long term jail time for "accidentally" sharing classified information. That, on top of Hillary Clinton trying to operate her own private system outside of government that handles sensitive state secrets without being secure or hardened should be more than enough to put her in jail.

I doubt anything will happen to her though, that's how corrupt things are.

originally posted by: sirlancelot

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: yadboy

Pretty much does not stand up in the court of law. The goal is to convict her of something, correct? Where is the evidence and legal code to make that happen?

Everything else is just speculation.

Here you go smart guy!

Section 793 of the Penal Code, Subsection (f)

‘Whoever being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note or information relating to the national defense …

through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust or to be lost, stolen, abstracted or destroyed ...

She set the server up in her Barn! Hardly secure! Dozens of classified material where received into that server. For god's sake even the state dept techs didn't know she had the server their which is referenced in a email from Huma.

Does anyone really think she did not break the law in a big way???

Deserves repeating:

For god's sake even the state dept techs didn't know she had the server their which is referenced in a email from Huma.

a reply to: IAMTAT

She is been compromised since she was just the first lady under her husband presidency., her personal scandals are not new she had them back then when she was the first lady, or people forgot that she is fond of Using the IRS and FBI to target political opponents under her husband presidency.

Using IRS and FBI

Covering for Bills sexual misdeeds.

Then the Clinton foundation scandals and the disappearing millions, I am sure she can use her money vanishing techniques in the white house as a president.

Next the Whitewater to Travelgate and the mysterious death of people around the Clintons.

The controversy about missing furniture in the White house after the Clintons presidential term.

Filegate: FBI files on GOP enemies

Hillary’s ‘Muslim Brotherhood princess’

Vin Fosters death in 93

Chinagate and Emailgate

‘Landing under sniper fire’ in Bosnia

Hillary's 'missing' law firm billing records

Pardongate: Hillary Senate contributions

Hillary's cash cows and 9,987 percent profit

Clinton body count: 'You find dead people'

Hillary's radical pal, Saul Alinsky

Hillary laughs about defending child rapist

Hill ca$hes in: Iranian fundraising

Benghazi: 4 American lives lost

Peter Franklin Paul: Another Hillary friend goes to prison

Gift-gate

She will be the best president this nation will have, she is a master magician in political matters and corruption

www.wnd.com...

originally posted by: russ212
Nothing in your last post proves anything except our government is corrupylt and our officials ignore laws and rules regularly. If i was in the FBI i would investigate those that made those statements.

a reply to: introvert

What I have proven is that the classified system of communication is not as secure as has been stated and that this is common practice.

I've also proven that you didn't do your homework on the issue before coming to a set opinion.

a reply to: Philippines

We don't know what classified information was in those emails. In one of the links I provided earlier it was stated that an entire email was deemed classified because the email was discussing a newspaper article on drones.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: whyamIhere

Too bad really. That a seemingly intelligent person is ignoring obvious law breaking.

We all break laws, do we not? Who am I to judge, when if you look at the source material I provided above shows that it's common for those laws to be broken because the classified systems are not more secure and a waste of time in critical moments.

You want others to do your research, then you ignore it and spew your nonsense.

I did my own research, thanks anyway. Can you refute what I posted?

I don't know what single issue makes you a Hillary apologist. Maybe just the Party.

I've said many times that I do not support Hillary whatsoever, or the party for that matter. I like to deal with facts, and I take some satisfaction with engaging people in debate when it's obvious they have no facts supporting their stance. They are just anti-Clinton. I have yet to have one person provide any context that actually proves anything that is being claimed.

But, it is your narrow minded short sighted partisanship that is ruining my Country.

Your country? It's not just your country, comrade.

Hillary thinks she is above the law. Apparently, you think she is too.

No, I think there is very little meat to this issue because it's a widespread problem that prosecutors rarely take to court. You knew that right? You did your homework, right?

Oh, tell us again how it's nothing like Petareus. What a liar.

Potential criminal violations arise when officials knowingly disseminate documents marked as classified to unauthorized officials or on unclassified systems, or otherwise misuse classified materials. That happened in two cases involving former CIA directors that are cited as parallels for the Clinton e-mail issue, but are quite different. John Deutch was pardoned in 2001 for using an unsecured CIA computer at his home to improperly access classified material; he reportedly had been prepared to plead guilty to a misdemeanor. David Petraeus pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor in April for "knowingly" removing classified documents from authorized locations and retaining them at "unauthorized locations." Neither case fits the fact pattern with the Clinton e-mails.

S ource

Quit being lazy and do the damned work it takes to become informed. Continual spewing of rhetoric and fantasy does not convict a person when guilty and it does not educate people around you to do the same.

You are spreading disinformation and half truths.

So your answer is....Well, other people were doing it too...Wrong again.

Really ? Show me a single person in the United States Government with their own Server.

Wait, you can't ? Then quit trying to dig up obscure cases to prove your point.

This is unprecedented. To have your own server. Then to just wipe it clean.

She belongs in prison. She openly sold us out for a little donation.

Nobody, and I mean nobody has ever acted like this with sensitive material.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Philippines

We don't know what classified information was in those emails. In one of the links I provided earlier it was stated that an entire email was deemed classified because the email was discussing a newspaper article on drones.

Of course we don't know what classified information was/is in these emails, they have been sanitized before release, and even before then Clinton was allowed to erase emails at will before handing over her private server.

Wow, an email deemed classified because of a public newspaper discussing drones. How does that make sense?

You have proven absolutely nothing except you are a corruption apologists.

a reply to: introvert

a reply to: whyamIhere

Show me a single person in the United States Government with their own Server.

Wait, you can't ?

Plenty of people have personal servers. I have one. I'm sure there are many in the government that do as well.

Nobody, and I mean nobody has ever acted like this with sensitive material.

It happens all the time. That is why the sources I provided stated quite clearly that this is normal and is rarely prosecuted.