But ABC loves linkbait.

This practice was and would likely have never been elevated to the spectacle that it is , until of course presidential politics got factored in. Condi and Colin must be breathing huge sighs of relief.

Mind posting the paragraph you pulled the line from? Thanks.

They need to be punished first or our entire justice system has proven itself a joke.

"if i didn't know today, what I didn't know back then!"

will be brutal

Not good for her.

They wouldn't have it was just nothing.

I always thought there would be a staffer willing to "Fall on a Sword" for Hillary over the email server. This report effectively eliminates that escape

besides the OP there are other thoughts in the thread.


http://www.democraticunderground.com/1280201770

Used to handle "Codes" overseas. Our government has a particularly clever method of reviewing practices

also if you look at her Senate assignments she was well aware of security needs. Hell, many of those senate hearings were closed for security reasons.

Intent is imaginary and poor defense like you said.

That is apparent from the facts and in the plain-language of the federal statute that prohibits "Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information", 18 U.S. Code § 793(e) and (f). This offense carries a potential penalty of ten years imprisonment.

That is apparent from the facts and in the plain-language of the federal statute that prohibits "Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information", 18 U.S. Code § 793(e) and (f). This offense carries a potential penalty of ten years imprisonment.

It's called a prima facie case: clear on the basis of known facts.

It's up to prosecutorial discretion by the US Attorney as to what charges may be filed and when. Nonetheless, Mrs. Clinton is clearly chargeable for violation of federal law. As of right now, the matter is under FBI investigation. This isn't just about violation of Departmental policy. clear on the basis of known facts.

Inconstant is rather a poor choice of words after reading the law. The OIG report is just the beginning which is why THE FBI IS DOING A CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION AFTER TALKING TO THE OIG.

The FBI will decide if there is enough evidence to indite, recommend or not recommend to indite based on the evidence to the Justice Dept and the Justice Dept will or will not prosecute. I would assume the FBI's investigation to much more thorough as they will be dealing with legal vs non-legal as opposed to the OIG who was focused on departmental infractions.

If there were clear departmental infractions then it's a good bet there's infractions of laws also but, like Sen Sanders could still pass Sec Clinton in pledged delegates, possible but not probable.

will be far tougher than State, which confines itself to departmental regulations and statutes without criminal effect.

The DOS report does find she violated numerous regulations dealing with information security and records retention, however. That is as far as this one goes, but it points to how the other agency report and the Bureau findings will find she violated federal laws by similarly mishandling classified materials. She's cooked, and the party needs to replace her and, I think, she will release her delegates at the Convention.

The whole thing is unfolding exactly as I've been saying it would.

Here's my wishful thinking: There will be a Democratic woman in the White House come January, but not the one you expect.

familiar with Kerry's determination and integrity.

That there is no specific serious CRIME involved, though, should finally begin to sink in to those hoping serious crimes would be found. The weaknesses in the communications system was also determined to be systemic and longstanding. If they had not been there would HRC have relied so heavily on her own system?

Time for honest brokers to speak out against the fantasy pushers.

That's the job of the FBI, which they are doing. This was an audit, that Hillary failed.

She handled it incorrectly, but, the system was a failure when she took office. That part is certain.

Still no crime, so far, and I don't know why anyone is HOPING there is one.

What steps were taken by our fighting leader champion progressive who gets things done to correct the failed system? Did she do anything other than set up that private mail server to circumvent FOIA requests?

Kerry is the first SOS to fix the system and adhere to the rules. He did it without fanfare or publicity or gratitude, as usual. That's who he is.

BTW - Had any SOS gone through 2 decades of having every aspect of their lives raked through, including their underwear drawers? Might contribute to one's view of 'privacy' protection, dontcha think?

Clintons, even acknowledging that I have criticized them harshly myself over the years, are still the most heavily scrutinized political figures in this nation's history.

Poor Hillary, having two decades of her life scrutinized to the point that she feels she is entitled to circumvent laws and regulations.

others prefer to ignore regarding the email issue because it doesn't fit the narrative they have most invested in themselves.

You may be certain that YOU would have handled things perfectly under the same circumstances, but, I doubt you or, even 99% of us would act scrupulously given the history of the communication systems at the State Dept and the immediate needs of those with the needs to move forward despite that system.

Easy to make perfect calls when you're not burdened with the responsibilities, eh? Or when YOU are the one who HASN'T been the target of more detailed scrutiny than your peers or anyone else in recent history, eh?

If Clintons were Republican standard-bearers, none of this would be an issue. IOKIYAR.

The narrative I'm invested in is that Hillary is being investigated for sending and storing classified communications on an unsecured, private server that was set up to circumvent FOIA requests.

They publish an internal review of what happened at State. They referred to case to the FBI for investigation. The FBI would determine whether or not a criminal act had occurred.

And from other sources, we know that Clinton was told that her blackberry device was NOT secure. She had to leave her office, a secure SCIFF room, in order to access her e-mails on her device. All of her e-mails work and personal were kept together. AND she used a personal server. And we know that e-mails that were on that server or in her e-mail were classified because there is a report of this as well.

Even if she isn't indicted, her need to be "private", "secret", and "do as she wished" with regards to using her blackberry device, was more important than keeping classified information protected. AND in regards to abiding by her boss' demands to keep Bkumnethal away from SoS, she defied him completely for her own purposes.

From looking at the situation from the outside, it looks as if the Clintons, via the SoS and their NGO, were running and end around on Obama. Selling more weapons to "nefarious" groups than even the Bush admin. Pushing Obama to engage in a heavier hand and regime change in the ME. Using outside CIA/ NSA intel to make decisions around Obama. And making quite a bit of money thru the non-profit from shady countries and people.

She has proven over and over again why people don't and shouldn't trust her!

I don't see the criminal enterprise some of you are determined to see, and you see it no matter what the report is actually saying here.

From what I can tell and from what Clinton's IT professional Bryan Pagliano may or may not be saying as a result of his immunity from prosecution, Hillary very likely is -- like (Sandy) Berger and (David) Petraeus -- criminally responsible for the "mishandling of classified data". The conversation about what is, what is not, and/or what should be classified data or not is a word-definition distraction that nobody, not even the most sycophantic of Clinton supporters, is indulging in any longer.

As we know, people who are guilty of a crime are not always prosecuted for it in the American judicial system, and whether she is eventually indicted or not, whether misdemeanor or felony if so, is to be determined by the conclusions and recommendations of the FBI's investigation, director Comey, AG Lynch, and I suspect even Barack Obama himself.

(Insert "Law and Order"'s DUNH-DUNH sound effect here.)

Meh.

Last edited Wed May 25, 2016, 02:32 PM - Edit history (1)

If she is the one responsible for creating the rules can't she change them on her orders? Any way this is a whole bunch of nonsense just like Bernie said.

He did not say they were a bunch of nonsense.

Plus this has gone a lot further since then.

IG - Bad Hillary.

hold me. i'm skared.

Its a slap on the wrist.. nothing more.

I think she needs to explain why that was.

I agree with you on your point.

just like the previous two SOS! Evil!11!!

Meanwhile it has come out that Donald Trump ransacked the USA when the housing bubble burst and----he's just a savvy businessman.

It is not...they did it too. She just extended and perfected the work-around.

She was told not to because of security concerns but ignored those concerns. I'll ask the same thing I asked another person - are you saying it is ok that Hills broke the rules because some of her predecessors may have broken the rules?

End of the day this is about Hills' decision-making and her decision in this case was to ignore the rules because they were inconvenient for her. The State Department determined that she erred and should not have done what she did. The FBI will determine if she committed a crime.

now let's kill her candidacy before it's too late for that to appear on some impeachment articles

Get used to hearing "President Trump."

Hillary's misuse is many times more troublesome and she's running for the presidency.

"Hey, I'm not a crook, I'm just incompetent" is such a winning slogan.

Trump will take this and run wild...

I skimmed through the report...


There is nothing to see. Now, tell the MSM to actually read the report and report it back accurately!

Seems Clinton supporters don't care much about it.

when Chelsea Manning exposed criminal behavior by the powerful. Hillary's big middle finger to security concerns was for selfish reasons. Most Hillary supporters are pro Chelsea Manning prosecution, and Chelsea Manning got a 35 year sentence.

https://theintercept.com/2015/08/12/hillary-clinton-sanctity-protecting-classified-information/?comments=1#comments

Now that it's not just some fantasy republican scandal and people know it's a real issue. When the FBI makes a recommendation to indict, what will be her supporters excuse? Will we have to deal with her going to trial while she is the democrat nominee? Or will they wait until after November, after the election, to indict? It is a bunch of republicans pushing this investigation forward. It would be in their best interest to wait while the democrat party suffers major blows for choosing such a flawed candidate. And I don't put it past them to do something squirrely like that. I blame anyone who underestimated the situation for the problems we are going to face as a party come November.

Section 1236.22 of the 2009 National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) requirements states that:

“Agencies that allow employees to send and receive official electronic mail messages using a system not operated by the agency must ensure that Federal records sent or received on such systems are preserved in the appropriate agency record keeping system.”

18 U.S. Code § 2071 - Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally

...(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map, book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed Forces of the United States.

The inspector general has rejected allegations of bias, noting that the scope of the review encompasses secretaries of both parties and that it was undertaken at the direction of Clinton’s Democratic successor, Kerry. The report includes interviews with Kerry and Powell and former secretaries Madeleine Albright and Condoleezza Rice, but it says that Clinton declined to be interviewed. The inspector general, Steve Linick, was appointed by President Obama and has served since 2013.

Patience.

but wants to lead a nation of 300 million people. Laughable if not so sad.