FBI Director will be holding a Press Conference at 11AM EST today

a reply to: Spiramirabilis

.... and there is the actual real-world concern that all this points to ... rather than another Clinton snipe-hunt.

The total lax nature of multiple govenrment systems that is readily apparent are ... incredible? unbelievable?

Apparently, the Russians, the Chinese, the Israelis ... just hack our systems whenever they wish!

I wish it were just about Clinton in a way.

Maybe she had the right idea to have a private server ...

a reply to: UKTruth

The Director of the FBI and all resources at the command of the FBI could not make the determination of "classified" on their own.

They had to send selected documents back into the bureaucracy to determine that.

What does that say about the nature of "classified"?

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: UKTruth

Correct, but it was not "up-classification". The information sent or received by Clinton included secret and top secret information at the time it was sent or received. Undeniable fact.

And she deleted hundreds of emails marked classified, and did not
turn them over as she swore under oath to Congress.

That is aka Perjury.

... and your evidence for that is? ....

She testified under oath that she had released all her emails. Some were found that she did not release. We could chalk it up to yet another mistake I guess. Perhaps it was just another case of her not being on top of things and showing how incompetent she was as a Secretary of State. Maybe everyone can just use 'I didn't realise I was breaking the law' as a defence from now on.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

The Director of the FBI and all resources at the command of the FBI could not make the determination of "classified" on their own.

They had to send selected documents back into the bureaucracy to determine that.

What does that say about the nature of "classified"?

I can't disagree that the whole process seems to be a mess. To do so would be bias because it clearly is. However I do expect a Secretary of State (probably more so than even the President) to be fully up to speed on what can and can't be sent out on private email addresses and servers that are more easily hacked. At the very least Clinton showed a remarkable lack of judgement and lack of competence in the job she was in.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: UKTruth

Correct, but it was not "up-classification". The information sent or received by Clinton included secret and top secret information at the time it was sent or received. Undeniable fact.

And she deleted hundreds of emails marked classified, and did not
turn them over as she swore under oath to Congress.

That is aka Perjury.

... and your evidence for that is? ....

She testified under oath that she had released all her emails. Some were found that she did not release. We could chalk it up to yet another mistake I guess. Perhaps it was just another case of her not being on top of things and showing how incompetent she was as a Secretary of State. Maybe everyone can just use 'I didn't realise I was breaking the law' as a defence form now on.

You're dissolving into political patter now.

Best of luck to you on that.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

Again, you turn a general statement to be about your imagined nemesis.

I am not the one here who is obsessed with Hillary Clinton.

A look at your posting history proves otherwise.

Smiley.

In any case, its going to be a tough go at it for you
Hillary supporters from here on out.

You have the only candidate ever that has been
exposed by the FBI to be unfit for service.

Carry on smiley.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: UKTruth

Correct, but it was not "up-classification". The information sent or received by Clinton included secret and top secret information at the time it was sent or received. Undeniable fact.

And she deleted hundreds of emails marked classified, and did not
turn them over as she swore under oath to Congress.

That is aka Perjury.

... and your evidence for that is? ....

She testified under oath that she had released all her emails. Some were found that she did not release. We could chalk it up to yet another mistake I guess. Perhaps it was just another case of her not being on top of things and showing how incompetent she was as a Secretary of State. Maybe everyone can just use 'I didn't realise I was breaking the law' as a defence form now on.

You're dissolving into political patter now.

Best of luck to you on that.

What?
She testified under oath that she had released all emails.
It is now clear that she didn't.
Clear enough?

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: UKTruth

Correct, but it was not "up-classification". The information sent or received by Clinton included secret and top secret information at the time it was sent or received. Undeniable fact.

And she deleted hundreds of emails marked classified, and did not
turn them over as she swore under oath to Congress.

That is aka Perjury.

... and your evidence for that is? ....

She testified under oath that she had released all her emails. Some were found that she did not release. We could chalk it up to yet another mistake I guess. Perhaps it was just another case of her not being on top of things and showing how incompetent she was as a Secretary of State. Maybe everyone can just use 'I didn't realise I was breaking the law' as a defence form now on.

You're dissolving into political patter now.

Best of luck to you on that.

The outrage and clutching of pearls on this site the last two days has been hilarious.

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

The Director of the FBI and all resources at the command of the FBI could not make the determination of "classified" on their own.

They had to send selected documents back into the bureaucracy to determine that.

What does that say about the nature of "classified"?

I can't disagree that the whole process seems to be a mess. To do so would be bias because it clearly is. However I do expect a Secretary of State (probably more so than even the President) to be fully up to speed on what can and can't be sent out on private email addresses and servers that are more easily hacked. At the very least Clinton showed a remarkable lack of judgement and lack of competence in the job she was in.

Why is she any more incompetent than the Director of the FBI? The Counterterrorism experts in the FBI?

Anyone who sent her emails? BS. You're merely adapting the standard right-wing mantra now.

It's not "incompetent" to enter into an established culture (the way communications are handled in the government) and try to work within it. Perhaps her choice to use a private email server was actually a recognition that the government systems were woefully broken?

/shrug

a reply to: Gryphon66

I wish it were just about Clinton in a way.

It's never been about Clinton - in a way. Honor among thieves and all that

Not being one to support a whole lot of conspiracy theory myself - we still can't get around the fact that we live in as interesting a time as any Chinese curse could promise

International intrigue is a given - but, I have to wonder how much we can trust our own government servers with our own government employees - if you catch my drift

We aren't at this level of polarization for no good reason - and private servers might just serve a purpose sometimes

Funny how this all turned up in 2015

I think our democratic goose is cooked probably - since it depends on a kind of faith. I'm not sure how we restore or keep that faith now

I blame Nixon. Still :-)

I'm not sure the storybook version of our democracy ever existed anyway

a reply to: introvert

Watching the Hillary supporters fall to previously unknown
levels of low, defending her from "extreme carelessness" to
perjury. Hahaha they are left now to make jokes about
perjury to deflect.

She is disgraced.

a reply to: Gryphon66

Even if that were her reason for using her own server, wouldn't that in itself show intent to break USC 18 793(f)?

As a Johnson supporter for this year and outspoken libertarian, I definitely agree with you that this is only the tip of the ice berg. It's just this example shows how much a different standard a small group of people are held to because of their place in the corporatist oligarchy.

originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: introvert

Watching the Hillary supporters fall to previously unknown
levels of low, defending her from "extreme carelessness" to
perjury. Hahaha they are left now to make jokes about
perjury to deflect.

She is disgraced.

While you ignore the fact that you and the other Hillary bashers ignore the actual points of law and jurisprudence at every turn in your obsessive mania to "GET CLINTON"?

Keep dreaming. The American people will let you know if you're correct in November.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: UKTruth

The Director of the FBI and all resources at the command of the FBI could not make the determination of "classified" on their own.

They had to send selected documents back into the bureaucracy to determine that.

What does that say about the nature of "classified"?

I can't disagree that the whole process seems to be a mess. To do so would be bias because it clearly is. However I do expect a Secretary of State (probably more so than even the President) to be fully up to speed on what can and can't be sent out on private email addresses and servers that are more easily hacked. At the very least Clinton showed a remarkable lack of judgement and lack of competence in the job she was in.

Why is she any more incompetent than the Director of the FBI? The Counterterrorism experts in the FBI?

Anyone who sent her emails? BS. You're merely adapting the standard right-wing mantra now.

It's not "incompetent" to enter into an established culture (the way communications are handled in the government) and try to work within it. Perhaps her choice to use a private email server was actually a recognition that the government systems were woefully broken?

/shrug

It does not make it ok to be incompetent just because someone else is. It is a rather important job and it's not unreasonable to expect the Secretary of State to understand what is Top Secret and Secret information. I sure hope she is not 'extremely careless' with the nuclear codes when she is President.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: burntheships

originally posted by: UKTruth

Correct, but it was not "up-classification". The information sent or received by Clinton included secret and top secret information at the time it was sent or received. Undeniable fact.

And she deleted hundreds of emails marked classified, and did not
turn them over as she swore under oath to Congress.

That is aka Perjury.

... and your evidence for that is? ....

She testified under oath that she had released all her emails. Some were found that she did not release. We could chalk it up to yet another mistake I guess. Perhaps it was just another case of her not being on top of things and showing how incompetent she was as a Secretary of State. Maybe everyone can just use 'I didn't realise I was breaking the law' as a defence form now on.

You're dissolving into political patter now.

Best of luck to you on that.

The outrage and clutching of pearls on this site the last two days has been hilarious.

defending a law breaker is pretty low man. She broke laws but they arent going to prosecute because the DOJ would not do so even if they said they would follow the FBIs reccomendations.

originally posted by: SonOfThor
a reply to: Gryphon66

Even if that were her reason for using her own server, wouldn't that in itself show intent to break USC 18 793(f)?

As a Johnson supporter for this year and outspoken libertarian, I definitely agree with you that this is only the tip of the ice berg. It's just this example shows how much a different standard a small group of people are held to because of their place in the corporatist oligarchy.

The Espionage Act? First quesiton ... have you read it in full? 18 USC 793

These folks that are endlessly quoting (f) are neglecting to point out that (a) refers to intent.

As far as (f) actually goes, we'd have to adequately define "place of custody."

originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: introvert

Watching the Hillary supporters fall to previously unknown
levels of low, defending her from "extreme carelessness" to
perjury. Hahaha they are left now to make jokes about
perjury to deflect.

She is disgraced.

She was disgraced in the eyes of the Right Wingers long before now.

This is just something to focus their hatred on. But it didn't work out the way they planned.

a reply to: UKTruth

Your sole intention is to argue incompetency on a political basis.

I would argue that working within the system to actually accomplish things is perfectly competent.

a reply to: UKTruth

It is a rather important job and it's not unreasonable to expect the Secretary of State to understand what is Top Secret and Secret information.

There's your first clue

Hillary Clinton is a lot of things - but stupid ain't one of them

The FBI chose the word careless. Careless...but not criminal

Well, they had to say something

:-)

a reply to: Gryphon66

While you completely ignore the fact that the emails were CLASSIFIED at the time they were on her UNCLASSIFIED server.

Quit so desperately trying to sugar coat the massive pile of fecal material that Comey delivered to Hillary Clinton 2016 .... her "extreme carelessness" with classified information.... that is a classic definition of gross negligence no matter how you slice it.

Like Comey said anybody who did the same thing would face administrative actions...Hillary has not even faced any of those yet. And I stress yet because the State Department is going to have a massively hard time trying to justify allowing Hillary Clinton to continue to have an active clearance at this point.

There is no doubt 100% overwhelming proof positive that Hillary Clintons Security clearance should be cancelled immediately, never to the the light of day again.

Being trust worthy in the handling of classified information is a specific criteria for being granted / maintaining an active US security clearance and her actions have proven that she is totally incapable of that.

That was not a good report for Hillary Clinton....no matter how desperately you are trying to spin it into one.