When the top secret information was communicated, it was not secret information. It was considered classified AFTER the fact. I'm not persuaded your ignorance is intentional, I think you're just ignorant.
Do you think Crooked Hillary likes Obama?
- Thread starter i am herdman
- Start date
When the top secret information was communicated, it was not secret information. It was considered classified AFTER the fact. I'm not persuaded your ignorance is intentional, I think you're just ignorant.
itndiesnt have to be marked. And it wouldn't be marked anyway because it wasn't on a secure state dept/gov server
If the emails were not marked as classified, then no mishandling of the emails happened.
Dear lord no one can be this fvxking dumb. You do know Hillary was trained to recognize classified info even if unmarked, at least she signed the paper work saying she was
Lol 429. I thought same thing. This moron thinks it has to have a red classified stamp on it. What a complete fool and left wing zealot
I don't care if she can walk on water and defeat thor in arm wrestling, if the emails were not marked classified there was no mishandling of them.
I notice you haven't answered the question.......What exact law has she broken and when was she charged with a crime. Do you require only one syllable words?
ok say we had a classified meeting. You then go out and email the details of said classified meeting, with no classified headings Is that mishandling classified info?
Say we had a non classified meeting. You then go out and email details of said non classified meeting, with no classified headings. Is that mishandling of non classified info?
Actually yes there is. Official govt business should not be conducted on private emails. There is no question of did she go against policy. She did and there could be criminal issues as well.
Actually, we are talking about LAWS, not POLICY. There will be no criminal charges for dealing in email that is not classified at the time hillary handled it.
Ok now I know you're intentionally being an ignorant ass hole. I'm done with you
How.is an ongoing attack.on a us embassy not classified. Good lord she was emailing her daughter details from a private email.
Yeah, lot of classified information here......
“Two of our officers were killed in Benghazi by an Al Queda-like group: The Ambassador, whom I handpicked and a young communications officer on temporary duty w a wife and two young children. Very hard day and I fear more of the same tomorrow. Let's try again later.”
I provided the State Dept manual about dealing with email. It clearly states that emails fall under the Federal Records Act.
Negative. The SBU info was reclassed as secret. The TS she had on her server was always TS. That's why 22 pieces were not, and cannot, be released publically.
I noticed you haven't answered the question...What exact law had the unibomber broken before being charged with a crime?
Info does not have to be marked classified to be deemed classified:
Question #3- How can I identify Classified National Security Information?
There are three basic tests which you can apply to determine whether a document contains classified information:
- The information should concern the national security of the U.S. government. If the document was created by a private organization or a state government agency, it may contain classified national security information only if the organization or agency was serving as an agent of the Federal Government. Defense contractors and research laboratories are obvious examples. Also, the information should not concern personal, private, or purely political issues. Over the decades many documents have been stamped “Confidential” not because they would damage national security if released, but to indicate some other type of sensitivity. When in doubt, though, consider the document as classified.
- There should be a classification marking on the top and bottom of every page of the document. Very old documents may have the markings only on the top of the first page. In more recent documents, individual paragraphs may also be marked with markings like “(S)” for Secret or “(C)” for Confidential.
- The document should not be marked as declassified. A declassification marking should look like an official stamp that indicates the name and office of the person who authorized the declassification action. A copy of a declassified document from the National Archives and Records Administration should include a marking that includes a project number starting with “NND” or “NW.”
- “Restricted Data” and “Formerly Restricted Data” markings. These designations refer to categories of classified information concerning nuclear weapons design and utilization. Despite the misleading nature of the phrase “Formerly Restricted Data,” documents with this marking remain sensitive and must be protected.
- Unmarked Classified National Security Information. Records of national security officials should be reviewed and handled carefully, as the classification marking requirements were not always executed on informal records such as handwritten notes. In all cases, it is the sensitivity of the information that determines classification. An unmarked, handwritten page can just as easily contain classified national security information as a document containing classification markings. When in doubt, treat handwritten notes concerning intelligence, military, diplomatic, or emergency planning matters as classified national security information.
Additionally:
Declassification
Government policies dictate that any piece of classified information is “owned” by the Executive agency which created it, even if the record itself is no longer (or never was) in the custody of that agency. Agencies determine the ongoing sensitivity of their information, or “equity,” and mandate its protection accordingly. Declassification is a determination that information would no longer damage national security if released, and no longer warrants withholding from the public.
The issue of multiple equities complicates the declassification process. The minutes of an interagency meeting, for example, can contain the equities of several agencies. Declassifying such a document requires the review and concurrence of all equity-holding agencies. Often these equities are not immediately discernible to non-specialists in declassification.
Declassification
Government policies dictate that any piece of classified information is “owned” by the Executive agency which created it, even if the record itself is no longer (or never was) in the custody of that agency. Agencies determine the ongoing sensitivity of their information, or “equity,” and mandate its protection accordingly. Declassification is a determination that information would no longer damage national security if released, and no longer warrants withholding from the public.
The issue of multiple equities complicates the declassification process. The minutes of an interagency meeting, for example, can contain the equities of several agencies. Declassifying such a document requires the review and concurrence of all equity-holding agencies. Often these equities are not immediately discernible to non-specialists in declassification.
And as I've already stated, violation of that act must be proven as willfull and unlawfull.
As far as what we have been told, not a single email was marked classified when it was sent or received by hillary.
I've provided government guidance about mishandling sensitive information. It's black and white that Hillary was in violation. You're providing an opinion.
So:
The rules regarding the handling of classified information apply to communications designated as secret at that time . If documents that aren’t deemed classified, and aren’t handled through a SCIF when they are created or initially transmitted, are later, in retrospect, deemed secret, the classification is new—and however the record was handled in the past is irrelevant.
In all cases, it is the sensitivity of the information that determines classification. An unmarked, handwritten page can just as easily contain classified national security information as a document containing classification markings.
The issue of multiple equities complicates the declassification process. The minutes of an interagency meeting, for example, can contain the equities of several agencies. Declassifying such a document requires the review and concurrence of all equity-holding agencies.
The rules regarding the handling of classified information apply to communications designated as secret at that time . If documents that aren’t deemed classified, and aren’t handled through a SCIF when they are created or initially transmitted, are later, in retrospect, deemed secret, the classification is new—and however the record was handled in the past is irrelevant.
In all cases, it is the sensitivity of the information that determines classification.
The rules regarding the handling of classified information apply to communications designated as secret at that time . If documents that aren’t deemed classified, and aren’t handled through a SCIF when they are created or initially transmitted, are later, in retrospect, deemed secret, the classification is new—and however the record was handled in the past is irrelevant.
Since you don't understand, the "sensitivity" changes when new information makes the original determination of classification obsolete.
The emails released so far don’t have labels marking them classified when sent, which supports Clinton’s argument.
The fact that no emails on her personal server were marked as classified suggests that she generally was doing her classified business on the secure government servers dedicated to that purpose.
Negative.
Although some former secretaries of state occasionally used personal emails for official business, Clinton is the only one who never once used an @state.gov email address in the era of email. Some have questioned whether that practice violated rules regulating email use, transparency, records management or security.
The day after Clinton's news conference, the New York Times reported, quoting a former State Department official, that it "seemed unlikely" that Clinton didn't email at least something classified.
"A former senior State Department official who served before the Obama administration said that although it was hard to be certain, it seemed unlikely that classified information could be kept out of the more than 30,000 emails that Mrs. Clinton's staff identified as involving government business.
" 'I would assume that more than 50 percent of what the secretary of state dealt with was classified,' said the former official, who would speak only on the condition of anonymity because he did not want to seem ungracious to Mrs. Clinton. 'Was every single email of the secretary of state completely unclassified? Maybe, but it's hard to imagine.' "[/QUOTE]
There is such a level of intellectual dishonesty going on over her private server setup it's almost like her supporters want her to have the ability to simply do whatever she wants without repercussion. CBS news ran a story about her two days ago implying that Hillary "Over the last few months [she] misstated key facts about her use of private email & her own server for work as secretary of state".
It was noted on here the only thing Hillary supporters have to point to for her qualifications for the job is her time as the Sec of State & now the State Department's recent report has shit all over that. It's also shit all over her, ahem - "misstating of keys facts" she been going around spewing for months.
Watch as Team Hillary tries desperately to focus this on email & not the server. There's a strategy behind it & it's part of the intellectual dishonesty her supporters are engaging in. After the IG's report, Chuck Todd on MSNBC finally admitted that one of those missing emails that just recently turned up proved the setup of a private server wasn't a convenience issue (something that has been widely discussed since the beginning) & that the only explanation was to avoid document requirements & FOIA requests.
It was noted on here the only thing Hillary supporters have to point to for her qualifications for the job is her time as the Sec of State & now the State Department's recent report has shit all over that. It's also shit all over her, ahem - "misstating of keys facts" she been going around spewing for months.
Watch as Team Hillary tries desperately to focus this on email & not the server. There's a strategy behind it & it's part of the intellectual dishonesty her supporters are engaging in. After the IG's report, Chuck Todd on MSNBC finally admitted that one of those missing emails that just recently turned up proved the setup of a private server wasn't a convenience issue (something that has been widely discussed since the beginning) & that the only explanation was to avoid document requirements & FOIA requests.
"The fact that no emails on her personal server were marked as classified suggests that she generally was doing her classified business on the secure government servers dedicated to that purpose."
I took this to mean she could view emails on the secure government servers.
Emails Originated With State Department Employees And Were Forwarded To Clinton
Emails Originated From "Unclassified .Gov Email System
I took this to mean she could view emails on the secure government servers.
Emails Originated With State Department Employees And Were Forwarded To Clinton
Emails Originated From "Unclassified .Gov Email System
You can't just forward a classified email from a secure system to an insecure one. The fact that there are top secret and special access program info mean someone took that info off of a secure server and put it into a non secure email system.
The classified material in Hillary's email was not classified when she sent or received it. According to everything I've read, the classification of the emails was upgraded due to NEW circumstances and would have been upgraded regardless of what server would have been used.
