It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Clinton signed non disclosure agreement as Secretary of State

page: 1
19
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:
+4 more 
posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 11:44 AM
link   
Well apparently Hillary Clinton knew she should be careful with classified information yet didn't take the responsibility seriously.
She also knew the penalty for violating the disclosure.

"A day after assuming office as secretary of state, Clinton signed a Sensitive Compartmented Information Nondisclosure Agreement that laid out criminal penalties for “any unauthorized disclosure” of classified information."

Jail time for Hillary?

Why would anybody be willing to trust her with the country's future?

freebeacon.com...
edit on 6-11-2015 by Bluntone22 because: Added link




posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 11:58 AM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22
You knew it, I knew it the whole world knows it. The only one that seems to of forgot was Frosty the hag.



posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22

What difference, at this point, does it make?



posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 12:04 PM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22
I don;t trust her with the country's future. But that article doesn't actually say what your OP says.

What did she disclose without authorization and to whom?



posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 12:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Bluntone22


Cheryl Mills, Clinton’s chief of staff at the State Department,
sent the email to the Clinton Foundation’s foreign policy director,
Amitabh Desai, on July 12, 2012.

freebeacon.com...

So classified information was sent to the Clinton Foundation.
Why ?
Because Bill was about to visit Africa on one of his famous
hide the money trips .
'We'll donate public foreign aid to your country ,
and you donate a percentage of that .... to the Clinton Foundation' /////
#$nod,wink,cough^%

The rabbit hole is deep , and dark !



posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 12:10 PM
link   
a reply to: radarloveguy

"Although the information was not marked classified by the State Department until this past summer, intelligence sources tell the Free Beacon that it would have been classified at the time Mills sent it because “foreign government information” is considered classified from inception."

Free Beacon


So, it was not marked as classified until this past summer but unnamed sources say that it would have been 'considered classidied'? That's a little flimsy. The email that was forwarded was originally sent to Hillary Clinton to an unclassified State Dept. email address.



edit on 6-11-2015 by reldra because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 12:12 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra


She failed to properly protect classified information. She basically left the keys in the ignition for anybody to steal. That's a violation of the non disclosure agreement and punishable by law.



posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 12:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: reldra


She failed to properly protect classified information. She basically left the keys in the ignition for anybody to steal. That's a violation of the non disclosure agreement and punishable by law.


How did she leave it where for anyone to steal?



posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 12:15 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

Unfortunateley when the fox is put in charge of the hen house,
there will be some unexplained feathers on the ground///

What difference, at this point, does it make? - eluhryh22



posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 12:18 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra


By sending information on her private email server that was not authorized to send sensitive documents.
Her private server lacked the security to protect the information making it easily obtainable to hackers.



posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 12:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: reldra


By sending information on her private email server that was not authorized to send sensitive documents.
Her private server lacked the security to protect the information making it easily obtainable to hackers.


It is not clear that it violated the NDA. I will bet $100 right now that she is not going to jail.



posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 12:24 PM
link   
The only difference that any of this makes at this point?

Anyone who thinks at this point that she is even remotely trustworthy enough to put her and her husband back in the White House is a complete moron.



posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 12:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: reldra

originally posted by: Bluntone22
a reply to: reldra


By sending information on her private email server that was not authorized to send sensitive documents.
Her private server lacked the security to protect the information making it easily obtainable to hackers.


It is not clear that it violated the NDA. I will bet $100 right now that she is not going to jail.



Lol...now that's a suckers bet!
I have no doubt she will not see a jail cell. We will never get the full story either.



posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 12:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: chiefsmom
The only difference that any of this makes at this point?

Anyone who thinks at this point that she is even remotely trustworthy enough to put her and her husband back in the White House is a complete moron.


Looks like she'll win then .
Morons appreciate a good con(vict)



posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 12:51 PM
link   
a reply to: reldra

There's legitimate questions with her e-mails when she was Secretary of State that are under a proper investigation, as she should be for this. While it wasn't illegal for her to use a private e-mail service or through a private server even for classified or sensitive information. What's at issue is that government officials are legally required to turn over all emails relating to or even just possibly relating to government business to, in her case, the State Department. There were an unknown number of emails that she should have turned over and didn't.

Another issue is that people without the proper security clearance had access to her server and her server was not properly secure, described as "amateur level". Investigations show that her server was accessed more than once from outside sources.



posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 01:08 PM
link   
All classified information should be carefully restricted to a "paper-and-file" handling level. If it is sensitive enough to label Classified then there shouldn't be a chance in the world that it could be hacked through the internet. If she wasn't given the information in question in the confidence of a Classified label on it then she should be free of accusations in that regard.



posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 02:03 PM
link   
If there's any justice left in the justice system she will be tried and convicted publicly.




I'll be over here holding my breath.....



posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 02:15 PM
link   
S&F for the post but I really think Hilliary could do an ISIS beheading video and get away with it. There's enough evidence of wrong doing over Benghazi and the email servers that the legal system ought to be able to put her away. But, she's wealthy, a politician and knows where the skeletons are buried. She'll never be charged with anything.



posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 02:21 PM
link   
This isn't some new, mind-blowing revelation. It's just fodder to keep people talking about the issue.

Let me know when they actually charge her with something. Otherwise it's just a waste of our time.
edit on 6-11-2015 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 6 2015 @ 02:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bluntone22
Well apparently Hillary Clinton knew she should be careful with classified information yet didn't take the responsibility seriously.
She also knew the penalty for violating the disclosure.

"A day after assuming office as secretary of state, Clinton signed a Sensitive Compartmented Information Nondisclosure Agreement that laid out criminal penalties for “any unauthorized disclosure” of classified information."

Jail time for Hillary?

Why would anybody be willing to trust her with the country's future?

freebeacon.com...


hidden by you, or simply not quoted by you from the original article from aug 14.....is this quote from the officials of the CIA....
The officials who spoke to the AP on condition of anonymity work in intelligence and other agencies. They wouldn't detail the contents of the emails because of ongoing questions about classification level. Clinton did not transmit the sensitive information herself, they said, and nothing in the emails she received makes clear reference to communications intercepts, confidential intelligence methods or any other form of sensitive sourcing.



new topics

top topics



 
19
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join