quote:

ORIGINAL: enslaver
Some precedents, an Army General and a CIA director, like Hillary(ABOVE THE LAW), you had better believe that if a lowly secretary had done the same thing with the same material she`d be locked away now.

• A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  
• Personal Responsibility
  
• Help for the truly needy
  
• Limited Government
  
• Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)
  

quote:

Asked on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” the laws that may have been broken with regard to classified information on Clinton’s personal email server, which she used as the nation’s top diplomat, Mukasey said, “there are a couple of them.” He then went on to list four.

“There’s one that says you can’t put classified information in a non-classified setting. There’s one that says you can’t expose national secrets through gross negligence. Then there’s one that says you can’t destroy government information and one that says you can’t obstruct justice,” the former attorney general said.

“A holiday assortment,” Mukasey added.

But while noting he doesn’t have access to any of the evidence in the case against Clinton, Mukasey said there’s one thing in particular that “troubles” him the most, and that is the way in which the information got from the “secret” government network to Clinton’s personal, unclassfied email server.

“So what happened is someone took it off there, and either transcribed it or summarized it and then put it on her server,” Mukasey said. “That’s very troubling.”

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: enslaver
Some precedents, an Army General and a CIA director, like Hillary(ABOVE THE LAW), you had better believe that if a lowly secretary had done the same thing with the same material she`d be locked away now.

Other SoS's used private email servers, too. I don't recall if Condoleeza Rice did, but Colin Powell did.

It's not the use of a private email server that is the problem. She's allowed to do that. It's the use of the private server for classified documents that's the problem.

It's been shown that there were (maybe still are, who knows?) emails with classified materials stored on her private server, that weren't classified at the time. While the use of that server may not have been the wisest move, documents that were classified after being on her server are not evidence of any wrongdoing.

There are still questions remaining about other emails and classified materials. Those questions need to be sorted out, and I don't think it's looking good for Hillary on that front. I believe, at the very least, she's proven herself to be a liar, and perjured herself.

quote:

Team Clinton seized on this report yesterday, claiming it was an email scandal "game-changer" that shifts the terrain of a controversy that has plagued Hillary's campaign for months. It is, and does, nothing of the sort, for reasons we'll address in a moment...

(1) Yesterday evening, Hillary said, "I never sent or received any classified material," without her (legally irrelevant) "marked" caveat. This is a flat falsehood. It is an established fact that she personally sent and received classified material. The State Department's review has discovered more than 1,600 classified emails on her server thus far, with another batch still outstanding -- to say nothing of the 32,000 messages she unilaterally deleted, some of which we now know did pertain to official business.

(2) She also blames this controversy on the issue of retroactive classification, which Powell complains about, too. This gripe may apply to some of Hillary's emails, and to both of Powell's, but Hillary is being deeply disingenuous here. The nonpartisan IC Inspector General has determined that a number of her classified emails were absolutely classified at the time they originated, including top secret and beyond-top-secret intelligence. There was nothing "retroactive" about these classifications. News organizations have also confirmed that scores of her emails were, in fact, classified at the time. It was her duty to identify and protect highly sensitive information, regardless of markings, a responsibility she acknowledged and swore to uphold upon assuming office:

(3) "See? Condi and Colin did it, too!" relies on a thoroughly bogus equivalency. Above all else, neither Rice nor Powell set up and used a recklessly unsecure private emails server on which they conducted all of their official business, against "clear cut rules" implemented in 2005....Beyond her exclusive use of an improper and unsecure server, Sec. Clinton was personally and specifically warned about the vulnerability of her email scheme in 2011, when a State Department security expert sounded the alarm over foreign hackers seeking to infiltrate US secrets by targeting high-ranking officials' private emails. Mrs. Clinton carried on with her arrangement anyway.

In summary, Hillary Clinton's server is the scandal. It's possible that Rice's aides and Sec. Powell may have acted improperly (though the email rules were set forth after Powell left office). They may have been sloppy with a small number of low-level classified information on an ad hoc basis. The rules and laws pertaining to the US government's data security must be followed. By everyone. But Clinton mishandled hundreds upon hundreds of classified emails, which held state secrets at the highest classification levels. In fact, just this week, the State Department deemed another seven Clinton emails too sensitive to release in any form, even with redactions, bringing that total to 29. Intelligence officials who've seen some of the documents in question say they betray operational intelligence, the leakage of which puts covert missions and lives at risk. A former NSA official has intelligence community sources who say Clinton's emails included the true identities of CIA operatives and assets, including foreign nationals working for the agency.

...unlike Powell and Rice, Hillary has consistently lied about this scandal. Her smug assertion that the (twice expanded) FBI investigation won't go anywhere amounts to waving a red flag in front of career investigators and intelligence officials, who are reportedly fuming over her irresponsible, and likely criminal, conduct. Remember, the probe reportedly entails more than just her email misconduct, Gen. David Petraeus was charged for classified intelligence spillage that was far more limited and contained, and a former US Attorney General says there's already sufficient evidence to justify an indictment. Clinton seems confident that her political power and privilege will shield her from accountability in the end, sending a less-than-subtle message to the Justice Department, which has already been influenced by two public White House statements. [http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2016/02/01/hillary-emails-latest-n2112080]

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

the truth hurts---another reason why liberals want conservatives to shut up.

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

FR

In defense of Petraeus, his girlfriend had Top Secret clearance, which can't be said for Blumenthal, or any of Clinton's aides.

There's a reason 147 FBI agents are investigating this, and it's NOT due to partisan politics.

quote:

ORIGINAL: enslaver

Some precedents, an Army General and a CIA director, like Hillary(ABOVE THE LAW), you had better believe that if a lowly secretary had done the same thing with the same material she`d be locked away now.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

quote:

ORIGINAL: enslaver
Some precedents, an Army General and a CIA director, like Hillary(ABOVE THE LAW), you had better believe that if a lowly secretary had done the same thing with the same material she`d be locked away now.

Other SoS's used private email servers, too. I don't recall if Condoleeza Rice did, but Colin Powell did.

It's not the use of a private email server that is the problem. She's allowed to do that. It's the use of the private server for classified documents that's the problem.

It's been shown that there were (maybe still are, who knows?) emails with classified materials stored on her private server, that weren't classified at the time. While the use of that server may not have been the wisest move, documents that were classified after being on her server are not evidence of any wrongdoing.

There are still questions remaining about other emails and classified materials. Those questions need to be sorted out, and I don't think it's looking good for Hillary on that front. I believe, at the very least, she's proven herself to be a liar, and perjured herself.

since you mentioned other secretaries of state, this seems worth posting again:

quote:

Team Clinton seized on this report yesterday, claiming it was an email scandal "game-changer" that shifts the terrain of a controversy that has plagued Hillary's campaign for months. It is, and does, nothing of the sort, for reasons we'll address in a moment...

(1) Yesterday evening, Hillary said, "I never sent or received any classified material," without her (legally irrelevant) "marked" caveat. This is a flat falsehood. It is an established fact that she personally sent and received classified material. The State Department's review has discovered more than 1,600 classified emails on her server thus far, with another batch still outstanding -- to say nothing of the 32,000 messages she unilaterally deleted, some of which we now know did pertain to official business.

(2) She also blames this controversy on the issue of retroactive classification, which Powell complains about, too. This gripe may apply to some of Hillary's emails, and to both of Powell's, but Hillary is being deeply disingenuous here. The nonpartisan IC Inspector General has determined that a number of her classified emails were absolutely classified at the time they originated, including top secret and beyond-top-secret intelligence. There was nothing "retroactive" about these classifications. News organizations have also confirmed that scores of her emails were, in fact, classified at the time. It was her duty to identify and protect highly sensitive information, regardless of markings, a responsibility she acknowledged and swore to uphold upon assuming office:

(3) "See? Condi and Colin did it, too!" relies on a thoroughly bogus equivalency. Above all else, neither Rice nor Powell set up and used a recklessly unsecure private emails server on which they conducted all of their official business, against "clear cut rules" implemented in 2005....Beyond her exclusive use of an improper and unsecure server, Sec. Clinton was personally and specifically warned about the vulnerability of her email scheme in 2011, when a State Department security expert sounded the alarm over foreign hackers seeking to infiltrate US secrets by targeting high-ranking officials' private emails. Mrs. Clinton carried on with her arrangement anyway.

In summary, Hillary Clinton's server is the scandal. It's possible that Rice's aides and Sec. Powell may have acted improperly (though the email rules were set forth after Powell left office). They may have been sloppy with a small number of low-level classified information on an ad hoc basis. The rules and laws pertaining to the US government's data security must be followed. By everyone. But Clinton mishandled hundreds upon hundreds of classified emails, which held state secrets at the highest classification levels. In fact, just this week, the State Department deemed another seven Clinton emails too sensitive to release in any form, even with redactions, bringing that total to 29. Intelligence officials who've seen some of the documents in question say they betray operational intelligence, the leakage of which puts covert missions and lives at risk. A former NSA official has intelligence community sources who say Clinton's emails included the true identities of CIA operatives and assets, including foreign nationals working for the agency.

...unlike Powell and Rice, Hillary has consistently lied about this scandal. Her smug assertion that the (twice expanded) FBI investigation won't go anywhere amounts to waving a red flag in front of career investigators and intelligence officials, who are reportedly fuming over her irresponsible, and likely criminal, conduct. Remember, the probe reportedly entails more than just her email misconduct, Gen. David Petraeus was charged for classified intelligence spillage that was far more limited and contained, and a former US Attorney General says there's already sufficient evidence to justify an indictment. Clinton seems confident that her political power and privilege will shield her from accountability in the end, sending a less-than-subtle message to the Justice Department, which has already been influenced by two public White House statements. [http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2016/02/01/hillary-emails-latest-n2112080]

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx


ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri

I believe, at the very least, she's proven herself to be a liar, and perjured herself.

Could you give us a list of politicians who have not?

quote:

ORIGINAL: subrob1967

FR

In defense of Petraeus, his girlfriend had Top Secret clearance, which can't be said for Blumenthal, or any of Clinton's aides.

There's a reason 147 FBI agents are investigating this, and it's NOT due to partisan politics.