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.
Remember intent is not required for it to be a criminal act under the statute. Gross negligence also applies. And to say that our Secretary of State wasn't grossly negligent in sending this info/email to a non-secure account *from* a non-secure server is ludicrous and one helluva indictment to her intelligence and judgement for someone in such an important position.
The choices that intelligent voters are left with regarding her are that she's either a criminal or she's incompetent.
originally posted by: butcherguy
originally posted by: xuenchen
LOL
I see the tired old meme of "not classified at the time" has been resurrected.
I guess they figure that they have used that concocted excuse for a while and everyone will have forgot about it.
originally posted by: introvert
originally posted by: butcherguy
originally posted by: xuenchen
LOL
I see the tired old meme of "not classified at the time" has been resurrected.
I guess they figure that they have used that concocted excuse for a while and everyone will have forgot about it.
Or it happens to be true. The document in question was not classified at the time it was sent/received.
Why is that so hard to understand?
The classification authorities never saw the emails until after they were exposed and released to the public.
"retro" classification is targeting classified material at the time sent.
And of course, we really don't know if any original markings were stripped off the "original" emails do we?
originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Grimpachi
It's not classified. Corporations, charities and many other groups use headers like that in their correspondence. If it was a classified government document, it would of had specific markings.
Confidential
This is the lowest classification level of information obtained by the government. It is defined as information that would "damage" national security if publicly disclosed, again, without the proper authorization
Now, even if we remove that classification from the debate, she was still knowingly using this arrangement to purposefully evade the FOIA laws.
originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Riffrafter
Remember intent is not required for it to be a criminal act under the statute. Gross negligence also applies. And to say that our Secretary of State wasn't grossly negligent in sending this info/email to a non-secure account *from* a non-secure server is ludicrous and one helluva indictment to her intelligence and judgement for someone in such an important position.
Again, if it was not government classified documents, how can she be accused of breaking any law?
The choices that intelligent voters are left with regarding her are that she's either a criminal or she's incompetent.
If they cannot understand the difference between government classified documents and confidential info for an organization, then perhaps they are not so intelligent.
originally posted by: introvert
originally posted by: butcherguy
originally posted by: xuenchen
LOL
I see the tired old meme of "not classified at the time" has been resurrected.
I guess they figure that they have used that concocted excuse for a while and everyone will have forgot about it.
Or it happens to be true. The document in question was not classified at the time it was sent/received.
Why is that so hard to understand?
It isn't about "they" It's a matter of law.
And for a final time - intent is not required. The legal standard is gross negligence.
Guaranteed now. I know a little about how these things work and this is now totally out of any her control. We all should get some popcorn as it's going be great political theater.
originally posted by: windword
a reply to: butcherguy
I don't think the declassification date has anything to do with the guilt or innocence of Hillary Clinton and/or her aides. The date in which the document was classified has everything to do with whether or not a classified was sent at the time in question.
In this case, the document was "Classified" 4 years after it was sent.
That's not the debate here. Not to mention, you are wrong. Intent is required, as is noted in the FBI's determination. It's called mens rea.
First off - mens rea is almost always used in court as a way of determining knowledge and or competency of the accused. Either for insanity defenses or if the accused is a minor child or suffers some other mental handicap
Secondly - read the statute. Intent is *NOT* required which is why so many people were up in arms the first time when Comey let her slide. He applied a different standard to her than for others. Now with the new evidence he cannot ignore this any longer, hence his letter to Congress.
As far as "grasping the concept" - You should be careful who you try and match knowledge/creds with Introvert. Especially on ATS. There are a lot of really smart, really knowledgeable people here. And you never know who's on the other side of that Avatar...
originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: SM2
Confidential
This is the lowest classification level of information obtained by the government. It is defined as information that would "damage" national security if publicly disclosed, again, without the proper authorization
That is also used by corporations and organizations to note documents or info that may be sensitive. That does not mean it was a government classified document.
Why are you guys having this much trouble comprehending?
Now, even if we remove that classification from the debate, she was still knowingly using this arrangement to purposefully evade the FOIA laws.
If it was CF info, it is not bound by the FOIA laws.
Well it was not an organization or corporation, it was the Secretary of State for United States of America
As to your second remark, well which is it? Is it classified or not?
originally posted by: introvert
originally posted by: windword
a reply to: butcherguy
I don't think the declassification date has anything to do with the guilt or innocence of Hillary Clinton and/or her aides. The date in which the document was classified has everything to do with whether or not a classified was sent at the time in question.
In this case, the document was "Classified" 4 years after it was sent.
Declassification dates are decided upon the origination date of the document. That means its declassified when it was created, not when it was classified.
Veiled threats from an internet cowboy do not scare me. I don't care whom you are, you have no clue what you are talking about. Did you even watch Comey's testimony in which he laid all of this out for us?
And it appears I have many more clues than you. But keep it up. This is getting entertaining.
originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Riffrafter
And it appears I have many more clues than you. But keep it up. This is getting entertaining.
Apparently not. You are failing to grasp the simplest of concepts.
That's about as entertaining as licking a window. But if that's your thing, who am I to judge?