Hillary sent 'marked classified' info to nonsecure Abedin email account

originally posted by: SM2
no sense arguing with introvert on this. He (she) is a die hard Hillary drone. Hillary could be caught red handed eating the souls of unborn babies while embezzling cash and snorting coc aine off Huma's rear and Introvert would just want to discuss some mean things that Donald said while praising the heavens for such a wonderful candidate like Hillary

It has nothing to do with supporting Hillary.

The information wasn't classified at the time it was sent and couldn't be classified at the time it was sent because it came from the CF. By it's very nature it couldn't have discussed classified information. Because it wasn't government business (which is also why it couldn't be classified), it also couldn't have been part of circumventing an FOIA request.

The email was eventually classified on the date marked. My guess is that it's the FBI who classified it because it was part of their investigation into Hillary.

Really, this whole thing shows what a joke our classification system is because the practice of retroactively classifying documents is completely ummaintainable.

a reply to: Riffrafter

I believe I've addressed (read: decimated with actual facts) most of your posts related to intent and whether or not that is required by the statute or what Comey says vs. what the law says.

My posts have had nothing to do with intent. You brought that in to the discussion.

My posts were in regards to the actual topic of the OP and the confidential marking. It's not against a law to send that to anyone in an email if it was not property of or produced by and for the US government.

That you either cannot grasp or are avoiding it.

a reply to: Aazadan

Really, this whole thing shows what a joke our classification system is because the practice of retroactively classifying documents is completely ummaintainable.

Seems thousands of people have NO problems with handling classified info on a daily basis.
Hillary is just not one of them.

CF business or not hill was oca, just because she didnt do her job does not mean the job is not to be done.

a reply to: SM2

no sense arguing with introvert on this. He (she) is a die hard Hillary drone.

I do not support Clinton.

Hillary could be caught red handed eating the souls of unborn babies while embezzling cash and snorting coc aine off Huma's rear and Introvert would just want to discuss some mean things that Donald said while praising the heavens for such a wonderful candidate like Hillary

If she was caught doing those things, she should be in jail. And what does Trump have to do with this? I've not mentioned him once in this thread.

I understand it sucks when you cannot intelligently debate someone, but you could surely do better than this crap.

Try harder.

a reply to: shooterbrody

CF business or not hill was oca, just because she didnt do her job does not mean the job is not to be done.

If it was CF business, she would not classify it. The Executive Order that outlines classification requirements state specifically that the material must be created by or for the US government in order to classify.

the information is owned by, produced by or for, or is under the control of the United States Government

www.whitehouse.gov...

originally posted by: shooterbrody
Seems thousands of people have NO problems with handling classified info on a daily basis.
Hillary is just not one of them.

CF business or not hill was oca, just because she didnt do her job does not mean the job is not to be done.

Thousands of people also have the luxury of only being on the clock from 9 to 5 and always having a special facility to work out of. The SOS is often traveling, doesn't really have a mobile office, and needs to discuss high level subjects with a bunch of different people.

The job literally cannot be done within the restrictions of the classification system as we have it, and we've recognized as much with the President (who is more centralized) having the ability to officially declassify anything just by talking about it. This whole email mess, which seems to have also been an issue under Powell just shows that we need to rethink these procedures to make sense. The government has a very real problem with over classification.

In the case of the email being talked about in this thread though, it wasn't classified at the time it was sent. And as far as Hillary being a classification authority goes, that doesn't automatically mean that every bit of information she processes gets classified.

a reply to: Aazadan

No, but it does mean she should know what information needs to be classified, regardless of where it came from. If it is information coming from the Clinton Foundation pertaining to matters of state, and it is senstive information, then , by virtue of her being a classification authority, she should know that that information should be classified, the fact it was later classified proves that it should have been. So , which would you rather us think of your preferred candidate? Is she a criminal for circumventing FOIA laws and/or laws pertaining to classified material, along with a multitude of other laws? Or would you instead prefer that we believe she is impotentant and too stupid/scatter brained to properly do her job as Secretary of State ? Both should disqualify her as a serious presidential candidate.

a reply to: introvert

or is under control of the us government....

thanks for playing tho

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: introvert

or is under control of the us government....

thanks for playing tho

CF material would not be under control of the government, until the investigation began and they got their hands on it, correct?

So it wasn't classified until that point.

Thanks for playing though.

a reply to: Aazadan

Thousands of people also have the luxury of only being on the clock from 9 to 5 and always having a special facility to work out of. The SOS is often traveling, doesn't really have a mobile office, and needs to discuss high level subjects with a bunch of different people. The job literally cannot be done within the restrictions of the classification system as we have it, and we've recognized as much with the President (who is more centralized) having the ability to officially declassify anything just by talking about it. This whole email mess, which seems to have also been an issue under Powell just shows that we need to rethink these procedures to make sense. The government has a very real problem with over classification.

Which is why there are rules for what devices can be used, where, and when.
If one were inclined to ask I have no doubt our spooks could arrange secure communications no matter the circumstances.

Even if that were hills argument, which it has not been, it would still be a moot point. The law is still the same.

a reply to: introvert

When the SOS obtained said info it became classified.
you keep forgetting that part.

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: stosh64

World News Daily is the banned one. Not World Net Daily.

Thanks for the clarification IIB.

A handy list would be nice. Do you know of one?

originally posted by: SM2
No, but it does mean she should know what information needs to be classified, regardless of where it came from. If it is information coming from the Clinton Foundation pertaining to matters of state, and it is senstive information, then , by virtue of her being a classification authority, she should know that that information should be classified, the fact it was later classified proves that it should have been.

Not necessarily true. Classification cascades downward, and ultimately all information that's even related to a subject gets classified. That's why screwdrivers for aircraft construction are classified because they're ultimately related to a classified aircraft. Something can later be classified, which related to this email, and that in turn requires this email to be classified. This also introduces the practical issue of knowing what was in emails to find/classify them in the first place.

More likely, this was classified because the FBI investigation was classified, and once the FBI got ahold of this email it was classified due to it's relationship to the investigation rather than any actual material inside of it.

originally posted by: shooterbrody
If one were inclined to ask I have no doubt our spooks could arrange secure communications no matter the circumstances.

They cannot.

Even if that were hills argument, which it has not been, it would still be a moot point. The law is still the same.

That's why the law requires intent. Simply sending information isn't enough if you're in that type of position.

a reply to: Aazadan

Lol our spooks line up secure comms all the time, and in the worst of situations. Hill just chose not to ask. It was more convenient for her to use no secure comms.

Yeah lots of intent will be found on the docs sent for destruction. I can't believe ANYONE thought these docs would not re appear.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Riffrafter

I believe I've addressed (read: decimated with actual facts) most of your posts related to intent and whether or not that is required by the statute or what Comey says vs. what the law says.

My posts have had nothing to do with intent. You brought that in to the discussion.

My posts were in regards to the actual topic of the OP and the confidential marking. It's not against a law to send that to anyone in an email if it was not property of or produced by and for the US government.

That you either cannot grasp or are avoiding it.

Thanks for clarifying - I see where you're coming from now.

My response would be - what difference does a single email make in the bigger picture? The bigger picture is the reason we are all participating in these threads anyway.

HRC is cooked and the unraveling pace will continue to quicken as it always does.

So in essence - sure, one can win the pedantic battle but lose the *much* larger war. Point taken. But for me - not having her in any kind of gov't office just based on her past behavior is enough.

Problem is - I hate Trump too.

I wish she would drop out of the race so the DNC can put Bernie in her place as the democratic nominee as per their own rules. I'd vote for him in a heartbeat...

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: introvert

When the SOS obtained said info it became classified.
you keep forgetting that part.

No, it did not.

The material had to be created for or by the US government and they had no control over it, until the investigation began.

a reply to: introvert

untrue
the sos was sent that info, which then became property of the us govt(anything sensitive her buddy was sending her)
the sos should have excersized oca
the sos did not

just because she refused to do her job does not mean the job did not get done

comey will not be able to ignore the basic facts this time
with access to all the emails intent will be shown
along with obstruction, destruction ect...

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: introvert

untrue
the sos was sent that info, which then became property of the us govt(anything sensitive her buddy was sending her)
the sos should have excersized oca
the sos did not

just because she refused to do her job does not mean the job did not get done

comey will not be able to ignore the basic facts this time
with access to all the emails intent will be shown
along with obstruction, destruction ect...

If the SOS randomly classified data being used by the private sector just because they were sent an email with that information in it, every large business in the US would grind to a halt.

a reply to: Aazadan

nothing random about the info she was sent

nice try tho