Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

After months/years of "lock her up"...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • After months/years of "lock her up"...

    ...a three year investigation by the State Department into Clinton's use of a private email server found "no evidence of deliberate mishandling of classified information." As usual, the story, which was front and center for most of 2015-2016, merits minimal coverage.

    Of the 33,000 emails reviewed as part of the investigation, 588 violations were found, but on the sender's part, not Clinton's. 497 of these were not found to be due to anyone's direct fault. 38 people were reprimanded for the other 91 violations of policy, which did not rise to the level of "criminal." The violations go on their record and will be considered when applying for or renewing security clearances in the future. Basically, the findings affirm what Comey originally said: sloppy and negligent - but not criminal.

    I'm going to guess that there will still be reasons for many people (most notably, Trump's base) to hang on to their "she was guilty" positions and their "lock her up" chants, despite the findings of a Republican-driven investigation under a Republican administration. So much for "rule of law."
    The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

    I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

  • #2
    Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
    ...a three year investigation by the State Department into Clinton's use of a private email server found "no evidence of deliberate mishandling of classified information."
    "Deliberate mishandling" was never part of the law. "Sorry, officer, but I didn't deliberately run that red light!" Doesn't matter, you still broke the law.

    (Never mind the fact that Hillary's pleas of ignorance are literally unbelievable.)
    Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
    But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
    Than a fool in the eyes of God


    From "Fools Gold" by Petra

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
      "Deliberate mishandling" was never part of the law. "Sorry, officer, but I didn't deliberately run that red light!" Doesn't matter, you still broke the law.

      (Never mind the fact that Hillary's pleas of ignorance are literally unbelievable.)
      It's even worse than "sorry I didn't deliberately run the red light" --- persons who handle classified information take an oath to protect that information - a positive declaration - from even accidental or 'negligent' handling.

      Here's a copy of the "312" that persons with security clearances must sign.

      And, from that...

      3. I have been advised that the unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of classified information by me could cause damage or irreparable injury to the United States or could be used to advantage by a foreign nation. I hereby agree that I will never divulge classified information to anyone unless: (a) I have officially verified that the recipient has been properly authorized by the United States Government to receive it; or (b) I have been given prior written notice of authorization from the United States Government Department or Agency (hereinafter Department or Agency) responsible for the classification of information or last granting me a security clearance that such disclosure is permitted. I understand that if I am uncertain about the classification status of information, I am required to confirm from an authorized official that the information is unclassified before I may disclose it, except to a person as provided in (a) or (b), above. I further understand that I am obligated to comply with laws and regulations that prohibit the unauthorized disclosure of classified information.


      It's not just "I'll try to keep stuff secret" but "I'm responsible if I don't" - this "deliberate mishandling" stuff is a crock.
      "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
        "Deliberate mishandling" was never part of the law. "Sorry, officer, but I didn't deliberately run that red light!" Doesn't matter, you still broke the law.

        (Never mind the fact that Hillary's pleas of ignorance are literally unbelievable.)
        It would be almost unheard of to be prosecuted for clearly accidental mishandling of classified data. Typical responses are disciplinary action up to and including loss of the clearance and/or loss of employment. But generally there has to be clear criminal intent for there to be criminal consequences.

        Jim
        Last edited by oxmixmudd; 10-20-2019, 02:16 PM.
        He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

        "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
          It would be almost unheard of to be prosecuted for clearly accidental mishandling of classified data. Typical responses are disciplinary action up to and including loss of the clearance and/or loss of employment. But generally there has to be clear criminal intent for there to be criminal consequences.

          Jim
          MSNBC analyst: People have gone to jail over what Clinton did with email

          An MSNBC legal analyst noted Friday afternoon that the Obama administration has prosecuted people for mishandling of classified information similarly to how former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton may have, as news broke that the State Department found 22 emails containing top-secret information on Clinton's private server.

          "People do go to jail for mishandling classified information," Ari Melber said. "They have been prosecuted in the Obama administration for that."
          "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
            It's even worse than "sorry I didn't deliberately run the red light" --- persons who handle classified information take an oath to protect that information - a positive declaration - from even accidental or 'negligent' handling.

            Here's a copy of the "312" that persons with security clearances must sign.

            And, from that...

            3. I have been advised that the unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of classified information by me could cause damage or irreparable injury to the United States or could be used to advantage by a foreign nation. I hereby agree that I will never divulge classified information to anyone unless: (a) I have officially verified that the recipient has been properly authorized by the United States Government to receive it; or (b) I have been given prior written notice of authorization from the United States Government Department or Agency (hereinafter Department or Agency) responsible for the classification of information or last granting me a security clearance that such disclosure is permitted. I understand that if I am uncertain about the classification status of information, I am required to confirm from an authorized official that the information is unclassified before I may disclose it, except to a person as provided in (a) or (b), above. I further understand that I am obligated to comply with laws and regulations that prohibit the unauthorized disclosure of classified information.


            It's not just "I'll try to keep stuff secret" but "I'm responsible if I don't" - this "deliberate mishandling" stuff is a crock.
            Not really. There are consequences for negligence to be sure, and the potential exist for prosecution, but unless you are stealing information or exposing information intentionally, the consequences dont usually involve criminal prosecution.

            Jim
            He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

            "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
              Not really. There are consequences for negligence to be sure, and the potential exist for prosecution, but unless you are stealing information or exposing information intentionally, the consequences dont usually involve criminal prosecution.

              Jim
              See my previous post, please.
              "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                MSNBC analyst: People have gone to jail over what Clinton did with email

                An MSNBC legal analyst noted Friday afternoon that the Obama administration has prosecuted people for mishandling of classified information similarly to how former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton may have, as news broke that the State Department found 22 emails containing top-secret information on Clinton's private server.

                "People do go to jail for mishandling classified information," Ari Melber said. "They have been prosecuted in the Obama administration for that."
                That doesnt mean that is a typical response. And I would bet there was a significant and clear knowledge they were acting outside protocols and procedures in the cases that were prosecuted. That is, they didn't just accidentally take their phone into a SCIF and wind up in jail.

                I am not sure the full set of conditions or precedent with the Clinton server in that as I understand it this was not an unusual thing. And that may well be why this would not be prosecuted. If there was an established and historical precedent of standing up such servers, then one would be hard pressed to single her out in a court of law.

                Jim
                Last edited by oxmixmudd; 10-20-2019, 02:29 PM.
                He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

                "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                  That doesnt mean that is a typical response.
                  Never said it did. But it also shows that there are others who go to jail -- how much more responsible should a SecOfState be?

                  And I would bet there was a significant and clear knowledge they were acting outside protocols and procedures in the cases that were prosecuted.

                  I am not sure the full set of conditions or precedent with the Clinton server in that as I understand it this was not an unusual thing. And that may well be why this would not be prosecuted. If there was an established and historical precedent of standing up such servers, then one would be hard pressed to single her out in a court of law.

                  Jim
                  It's not prosecuted because of who she is, Jim. And Comey changing the standard to require an element of "intent" where none exists in the law.

                  10 Times People Were Punished For FAR Less Than What Hillary Clinton Did
                  Last edited by Cow Poke; 10-20-2019, 02:32 PM.
                  "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Does this investigation include the 30000 emails Bleachbitted? If not, than it has zero meaning.
                    Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by demi-conservative View Post
                      Does this investigation include the 30000 emails Bleachbitted? If not, than it has zero meaning.
                      I believe that's the first time I have ever seen the word "Bleachbitted".
                      "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by demi-conservative View Post
                        Does this investigation include the 30000 emails Bleachbitted? If not, than it has zero meaning.
                        If the investigation focuses on the emails that Clinton handed over willingly but not the ones that were withheld (30000 Bleachbitted), it's obviously incomplete.
                        Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                          It would be almost unheard of to be prosecuted for clearly accidental mishandling of classified data. Typical responses are disciplinary action up to and including loss of the clearance and/or loss of employment. But generally there has to be clear criminal intent for there to be criminal consequences.

                          Jim
                          What about when Hillary instructed aides on how to remove "Classified" headers off of documents before sending them so they wouldn't be noticed.

                          I'm always still in trouble again

                          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                            It's even worse than "sorry I didn't deliberately run the red light" --- persons who handle classified information take an oath to protect that information - a positive declaration - from even accidental or 'negligent' handling.
                            Which is why I said, "Never mind the fact that Hillary's pleas of ignorance are literally unbelievable."
                            Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                            But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                            Than a fool in the eyes of God


                            From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                              MSNBC analyst: People have gone to jail over what Clinton did with email

                              An MSNBC legal analyst noted Friday afternoon that the Obama administration has prosecuted people for mishandling of classified information similarly to how former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton may have, as news broke that the State Department found 22 emails containing top-secret information on Clinton's private server.

                              "People do go to jail for mishandling classified information," Ari Melber said. "They have been prosecuted in the Obama administration for that."
                              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                              See my previous post, please.

                              That would be this article:

                              MSNBC analyst: People have gone to jail over what Clinton did with email
                              by Becket Adams
                              January 29, 2016 08:07 PM
                              An MSNBC legal analyst noted Friday afternoon that the Obama administration has prosecuted people for mishandling of classified information similarly to how former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton may have, as news broke that the State Department found 22 emails containing top-secret information on Clinton's private server.

                              "People do go to jail for mishandling classified information," Ari Melber said. "They have been prosecuted in the Obama administration for that."

                              The Washington Examiner didn't do any reporting here. They're leaching from another media source, MSNBC, and not even directly. From the hat tip, it's taken from another leach, the Washington Free Beacon:

                              MSNBC on Clinton: Obama Admin Has Sent People to Jail for Mishandling Classified Information

                              From there, Mr. Adams revised the headline to amp up the fringe bait, copied the Youtube link from the WFB, paraphrased, googled up a tweet from Hillary's PR puke and linked it, then hit post.

                              Notice immediately that the headline has been modified, and indeed that the revision, "what Clinton did with email," isn't supported in the text of the Examiner article, in the WFB article attached to the headline, or indeed, in the MSNBC interview, in which the legal analyst follows up immediately with a statement that "no one has any evidence that Hillary was the originator of any of the material that gets that legal level," and that Hillary's people claimed at the time — now backed up by the o/p — that she was never more than the recipient, or something close to that.

                              So what comes from backtracking the article is a talking head saying mishandling classified information has been prosecuted, which is true, not that Hillary's mishandling has been prosecuted when done by others, which, according to Comey's presser, was not the case.


                              This is not journalism. It's not even work. There's no effort here. Mr. Adams isn't trying to inform. He's watching his google alerts, leaching another leach, second-hand twisting mainstream truth into a fringe lie, creating propaganda by definition, and low quality at that.

                              As fringe propaganda, even MM's stuff is better than this.


                              This isn't acceptable, preacher. Lots of folks doing this I'd pass right on by, but you know better. I've seen you look cross-eyed at sources, even more mainstream conservative voices, like the WSJ, for instance, if only from years back. Can't remember seeing you do so recently, though. Posting this stuff as if you were taking it seriously — and who knows, maybe you are, but I won't believe it without a full confession — makes me think you're just trolling.

                              To which I say, there's enough and more than enough partisan hacks cluttering the web with half-truths. They don't need the help of Baptist preachers.


                              Or in another, better sense, maybe they do.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X