Clinton instructed an aide to remove the classification marking from information, a federal offense

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 08, 2016 10:19 PM GMT
    http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/smoking-gun-email-suggests-hillary-committed-a-crime/

    "The latest batch of Hillary Clinton emails released by the State Department early Friday contain what may be the smoking gun that forces the Justice Department to charge the former secretary of state with a crime, according to former federal prosecutor Joseph diGenova.

    “This is gigantic,” said diGenova. “She caused to be removed a classified marking and then had it transmitted in an unencrypted manner. That is a felony. The removal of the classified marking is a federal crime. It is the same thing to order someone to do it as if she had done it herself.”

    On the June 17, 2011, email chain with senior State Department adviser Jake Sullivan, Clinton apparently asked Sullivan to change the marking on classified information so that it is no longer flagged as classified.
    "
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 08, 2016 10:33 PM GMT
    If that's true, she's toast.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2016 12:31 AM GMT
    Don't get your hopes up. How many crimes have the Clintons committed, and how many times have they stood trial for their crimes?

    Maybe the Clintons suffer paying large civil judgements to victims, or get impeached/disbarred. But that's so seldom, considering how many other victims ended up in a dumpster, or otherwise dead or missing. An outrage, but their pal Ted Kennedy murdered a young, innocent woman, and didn't even face arrest. These are the people that liberals inflict upon America.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2016 12:50 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    S2Ki saidDon't get your hopes up. How many crimes have the Clintons committed, and how many times have they stood trial for their crimes?

    Maybe the Clintons suffer paying large civil judgements to victims, or get impeached/disbarred. But that's so seldom, considering how many other victims ended up in a dumpster, or otherwise dead or missing. An outrage, but their pal Ted Kennedy murdered a young, innocent woman, and didn't even face arrest. These are the people that liberals inflict upon America.


    That's got to be what Hillary keeps saying to herself: "Barack will protect me!"

    Especially, if she has something on him.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2016 1:00 AM GMT


    If you know anything about, 'handling classified material' and its procedures, you should already know that sending anything, by fax is considered unclassified material, in normal circumstances.

    The ONLY, and I mean ONLY way a document sent by fax could be considered classified material is if the area(s), the fax sending and fax receiving stations, are already in a closed or classified area, within the same space


    If the document was faxed from a known classified area or station, to a fax station outside of the classified area, then this WOULD BE a violation of the handling procedure and should be reported to the area security officer

    If the document was faxed from a known unclassified area or station, to a fax station inside of the classified area, then this WOULD NOT BE a violation of the handling procedure and should not be reported to the area security officer



  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    Jan 09, 2016 1:12 AM GMT
    don't worry, the cultural Marxists running the Democratic party will just exonerate her.

    why? well, just because
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2016 1:29 AM GMT
    southbeach1500 said
    ELNathB said

    If you know anything about, 'handling classified material' and its procedures, you should already know that sending anything, by fax is considered unclassified material, in normal circumstances.

    The ONLY, and I mean ONLY way a document sent by fax could be considered classified material is if the area(s), the fax sending and fax receiving stations, are already in a closed or classified area, within the same space


    If the document was faxed from a known classified area or station, to a fax station outside of the classified area, then this WOULD BE a violation of the handling procedure and should be reported to the area security officer

    If the document was faxed from a known unclassified area or station, to a fax station inside of the classified area, then this WOULD NOT BE a violation of the handling procedure and should not be reported to the area security officer





    And "turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading" means?





    The email above, I assume sent by phone, mentions nothing about any specific classified document(s). There is no identifiable information on anything 'leaked' in this email. If anything, 'secure fax' reminds the person receiving the email to follow classified material procedures when using electronic equipment

    Further, from this email, we don't know the level of classification. A document can be sensitive but still remain unclassified. Its possible the document spoken about had a confidential classification, which is the lowest security with unclassified status.

    "Turn into nonpaper" sounds like the instruction was to transfer the paper document into an electronic one (such as thumb drive or CD disk) and "no identifying heading" sounds like the person was instructed to not label the media. There are separate procedures for marking, or not, electronic forms of classified data, again, depends on the sensitivity level, that we cant discern from this email


    Republicans are pulling at straws, trying to find something damit!, once again icon_rolleyes.gif

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2016 1:42 AM GMT

    icon_rolleyes.gif

    MDI0ZTI4NjliMSMvdXdCa3ZzOW5wLS11ZTR2aDdX
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2016 3:12 AM GMT
    ELNathB saidRepublicans are pulling at straws, trying to find something damit!, once again icon_rolleyes.gif

    Nope. Removing classification headings is a felony.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2016 5:17 AM GMT
    socalfitness said
    ELNathB saidRepublicans are pulling at straws, trying to find something damit!, once again icon_rolleyes.gif

    Nope. Removing classification headings is a felony.




    "declassifying" a document is not a felony icon_rolleyes.gif


    Executive Order 13526
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Executive_Order_13526

    Executive Order 13526 was issued on December 29, 2009 by United States President Barack Obama.[1] It is the latest in a series of executive orders from US Presidents outlining how classified information should be handled. It revokes and replaces the previous Executive Orders in effect for this, which were EO 12958 and EO 13292

    A significant provision of EO 13526 is the creation of the National Declassification Center. The major focus is the idea that information should become declassified systematically as soon as practicable. Specific time limits are mentioned for different kinds of information, but there is also the provision that information that still needs to be classified can stay classified. Mechanisms are outlined for periodic reevaluation of the need to classify information, even if the result of the evaluation is to keep the information classified.

    Previous Executive Orders covering national classified information:
    Executive Order 10290 (September 24, 1951; Harry S. Truman)
    Executive Order 10501 (November 5, 1953; Dwight D. Eisenhower)
    Executive Order 11652 (March 8, 1972; Richard Nixon)
    Executive Order 12065 (June 28, 1978; Jimmy Carter)
    Executive Order 12356 (April 2, 1982; Ronald Reagan)
    Executive Order 12958 (April 17, 1995; Bill Clinton)
    Executive Order 13292 (March 21, 2003; George W. Bush)


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2016 11:01 AM GMT
    ELNathB said
    socalfitness said
    ELNathB saidRepublicans are pulling at straws, trying to find something damit!, once again icon_rolleyes.gif

    Nope. Removing classification headings is a felony.


    "declassifying" a document is not a felony icon_rolleyes.gif

    You don't understand. The process of declassifying can only be legally performed by an organization or entity with appropriate authority. Specifically, the State Department does not have the authority to declassify a CIA document. It should also be obvious that the process is not just telling an aide to remove the markings. Anyone who has had a security clearance and has handled classified material knows what she did is a felony.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2016 11:24 AM GMT
    socalfitness saidAnyone who has had a security clearance and has handled classified material knows what she did is a felony.


    Nobody "knows" anything of the sort. It is scant information, upon which no sensible person would base such a conclusion.
  • Hypertrophile

    Posts: 1021

    Jan 09, 2016 2:02 PM GMT
    The EO states that agency heads have classification authority, and anyone who classified a piece of information is also authorized to declassify it.

    I haven't seen yet any information regarding the document referenced in the emails. Someone said it was from the CIA but I haven't seen that reported anywhere yet. We don't know if the document in question was actually classified information and what it was designated. What we do know is that it contained talking points. Doesn't seem like it's particularly sensitive information.

    It was also reported that Sullivan, the person sending the information, was reluctant to comply with the secretary's request. Where do they get that? Not from the emails in the report.

    Some key details are needed before anyone can make any conclusions: What is the information in the document (all we know is "talking points"), where is it from, was it ever actually classified, what was its classification, and who originally classified it?

    I think this is not going to go the way some of you hope.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2016 2:17 PM GMT
    Hypertrophile saidThe EO states that agency heads have classification authority, and anyone who classified a piece of information is also authorized to declassify it.

    I haven't seen yet any information regarding the document that was declassified. Someone said it was from the CIA but I haven't seen that reported anywhere yet. We don't know if the document in question was actually classified information and what it was designated. What we do know is that it contained talking points. Doesn't seem like it's particularly sensitive information.

    Some key details are needed before anyone can make any conclusions: What is the information in the document, where is it from, what was its classification, and who originally classified it?

    I think this is not going to go the way some of you hope.

    Reports from those who have seen the emails indicate well over 1000 were classified. Reports also that many of these documents originated from the intelligence community. Aside from this particular correspondence, the overall evidence is overwhelming. I don't think this will be going the way you would hope.
  • Hypertrophile

    Posts: 1021

    Jan 09, 2016 2:37 PM GMT
    Sorry, I don't "hope" it goes one way or the other, except wherever the truth takes it.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2016 3:48 PM GMT
    Hypertrophile saidThe EO states that agency heads have classification authority, and anyone who classified a piece of information is also authorized to declassify it.

    I haven't seen yet any information regarding the document referenced in the emails. Someone said it was from the CIA but I haven't seen that reported anywhere yet. We don't know if the document in question was actually classified information and what it was designated. What we do know is that it contained talking points. Doesn't seem like it's particularly sensitive information.

    It was also reported that Sullivan, the person sending the information, was reluctant to comply with the secretary's request. Where do they get that? Not from the emails in the report.

    Some key details are needed before anyone can make any conclusions: What is the information in the document (all we know is "talking points"), where is it from, was it ever actually classified, what was its classification, and who originally classified it?

    I think this is not going to go the way some of you hope.


    I can't imagine the CIA would originate a classified document entitled "Talking Points" for external distribution ("talking" isn't something they encourage when it comes to their intel). It sounds more like some sort of State Department press briefing summary.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2016 5:07 PM GMT
    southbeach1500 saidWhat's also interesting is that the mere existence of the private email server in and of itself is more than enough evidence that she committed thousands of felonies (each email = 1 felony).

    We'll see (apparently soon) what the FBI says.

    And shows she conspired ahead of time.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2016 9:22 PM GMT
    socalfitness said
    ELNathB said
    socalfitness said
    ELNathB saidRepublicans are pulling at straws, trying to find something damit!, once again icon_rolleyes.gif

    Nope. Removing classification headings is a felony.


    "declassifying" a document is not a felony icon_rolleyes.gif

    You don't understand. The process of declassifying can only be legally performed by an organization or entity with appropriate authority. Specifically, the State Department does not have the authority to declassify a CIA document. It should also be obvious that the process is not just telling an aide to remove the markings. Anyone who has had a security clearance and has handled classified material knows what she did is a felony.




    Who said this was a CIA document? Quit making stuff up and or Faux News spinning icon_rolleyes.gif

    I believe 'the CFR rule' is, any member of the incumbent presidents state staff or cabinet is authorized to declassify documents, that is members that fall under the executive branch which includes the Dept of Defense, The Cabinet Departments, Independent Agencies, Government Corporations, and regulatory agencies (like the EPA)

    What IS clear is that members of congress (legislative branch) do not have authorization to declassify. This lack of authority is probably pissing off the republican controlled house and senate, while trying to discredit those who are authorized under the much hated, current executive branch icon_rolleyes.gif





  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2016 10:09 PM GMT
    We don't know if this particular document is CIA. It's clear however that Dept of State does not have the authority to declassify a document from a different agency. What we do know is she planned for the server and it contained over a thousand classified documents. At a minimum, this one email indicates her general attitude towards handling sensitive information.