Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Classified data that wasn't classified before it was classified liberal N proud Aug 2015 #1
Apparently it was already classified when it hit her server. Elmer S. E. Dump Aug 2015 #13
What does retroactively mean? liberal N proud Aug 2015 #25
Scenario... AnPak Aug 2015 #53
Darn, I wish I was as smart and articulate as you are. Elmer S. E. Dump Aug 2015 #58
From the dictionary Elmer S. E. Dump Aug 2015 #56
says the Clinton team, versus the Inspector General magical thyme Aug 2015 #16
That only works when you deal with information originated exclusively from with your own 24601 Aug 2015 #23
What was the word that the justice depth used? Oh yeah RETROACTIVELY liberal N proud Aug 2015 #24
because the State Dept retroactively stamped them 'classified' does not mean they didn't magical thyme Aug 2015 #79
How do you know they will be rectroactively classified at the time they were not classified? liberal N proud Aug 2015 #80
Huh? that makes no sense and is not what I (or the linked article) said magical thyme Aug 2015 #82
One of the emails was forwarded to her private server containing info on current troop movements TwilightGardener Aug 2015 #17
Of course they're going to take the rap. I said a while back that it appears her aides TwilightGardener Aug 2015 #2
Now you're starting to talk nonsense... Elmer S. E. Dump Aug 2015 #14
I often wonder how much of this has gone on with other individuals, not to HRC, but RKP5637 Aug 2015 #51
I'll bet many top officials are loose with classified info, but they're generally TwilightGardener Aug 2015 #60
It was certainly pretty brazen IMO. In my corporate life I would have been fired if I had put RKP5637 Aug 2015 #63
This is not really breaking news. hrmjustin Aug 2015 #3
What's new is the material suggesting her aides were responsible. candelista Aug 2015 #5
Fair enough but to me it is all a big nothing. hrmjustin Aug 2015 #12
Why would the person sending the email be ... JoePhilly Aug 2015 #28
It's always an aide awoke_in_2003 Aug 2015 #81
This is only the second LBN on this subject I have seen today. Of course I saw a few earlier this still_one Aug 2015 #26
Her having her own fucking mail server shows what a control freak she is snooper2 Aug 2015 #4
Would she use a private server as President? candelista Aug 2015 #6
Precisely. "I've gotta do a better job covering my shit next time"! nt 7962 Aug 2015 #7
That reminds me: When they asked Nixon what he learned from Watergate... candelista Aug 2015 #10
Thats right! Forgot about that. 7962 Aug 2015 #15
setting up the sacrificial staff members restorefreedom Aug 2015 #8
Don't count on it... AnPak Aug 2015 #57
what do you think will become of this? nt restorefreedom Aug 2015 #59
I think they will hold fast and wait for it to pass... AnPak Aug 2015 #67
i agree with you on the first part restorefreedom Aug 2015 #69
Here's the biggest problem I have with her nonsense: 7962 Aug 2015 #9
" " " MBS Aug 2015 #19
+10000 karynnj Aug 2015 #55
yes, really good point. MBS Aug 2015 #70
Yep. I could understand screwing up with SECRET jeff47 Aug 2015 #21
Yep we know daybranch Aug 2015 #33
That's right folks! Hillary is innocent! It's all (fill in the blank) fault! Elmer S. E. Dump Aug 2015 #11
It's outrageous to blame employees for following the boss's instructions in something like this. JDPriestly Aug 2015 #18
Well, legally it is their fault. jeff47 Aug 2015 #22
But in such a case the boss would be in trouble as well and might face the harshest penalty. n/t PoliticAverse Aug 2015 #30
As someone that's dealt with classified data tammywammy Aug 2015 #32
What if the receiver was your boss and you were following their instructions in the sending? PoliticAverse Aug 2015 #34
It's a hypothetical that'll never happen. tammywammy Aug 2015 #35
What if your boss explicitly told you to forward classified info to him? candelista Aug 2015 #36
Then actually doing it is still your fault. jeff47 Aug 2015 #37
Still your fault, but not only yours. candelista Aug 2015 #39
No, two separate crimes. jeff47 Aug 2015 #40
That's called "straining at a gnat." candelista Aug 2015 #42
No, I just don't think "I was just following orders" is an excuse for anything. jeff47 Aug 2015 #43
Dave, I read with patience your many repetitive posts about TS/SCI. candelista Aug 2015 #44
Who's Dave? jeff47 Aug 2015 #45
Jeff, Dave, Cliff...What's the difference? candelista Aug 2015 #61
At some point it is a conspiracy and all are equally responsible. JDPriestly Aug 2015 #49
Possible Felony Eugene Stoner Aug 2015 #20
Really, so in your infinite wisdom, your sage legal mind has come to that conclusion. Pray tell still_one Aug 2015 #27
The person who sends an email is not ... JoePhilly Aug 2015 #29
"receiving child pornography" is a crime. n/t PoliticAverse Aug 2015 #31
What part of Possible do you not understand? Eugene Stoner Aug 2015 #38
I only said POSSIBLE Eugene Stoner Aug 2015 #77
Jury Results: Cali_Democrat Aug 2015 #78
Here are some relevant sections of 18 U.S. Code § 793 candelista Aug 2015 #41
"any person not entitled to receive it" JDPriestly Aug 2015 #50
She sent material that was "born classified" to Sid Blumenthal, among others candelista Aug 2015 #74
What were HRC's violations of these sections? n/t GitRDun Aug 2015 #64
:) candelista Aug 2015 #73
Watching to see if the administration official's supposed comment to Bremmer gets walked back Babel_17 Aug 2015 #46
Huma and Cheryl taking the rap for what? Kingofalldems Aug 2015 #47
Fuck the republiCONs and their witch hunt madokie Aug 2015 #48
best response yet riversedge Aug 2015 #71
Oops. Who will take the rap for this? Kingofalldems Aug 2015 #52
This is the key part of this article: underthematrix Aug 2015 #54
You understand that you cannot deliberately glean classified info from the proper channels TwilightGardener Aug 2015 #62
Exactly,,,, Possibly a Felony level Federal crime Eugene Stoner Aug 2015 #65
Welcome to DU. 840high Aug 2015 #66
Welcome to you Eugene Stoner Aug 2015 #76
I think you missed my point and focus - content of article underthematrix Aug 2015 #68
A summary of classified info would ipfilter Aug 2015 #75
I agree with you. If the summary underthematrix Aug 2015 #83
I read medical records every day for my job forthemiddle Aug 2015 #84
She was duped again? Deadbeat Republicans Aug 2015 #72
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»U.S. Said to Probe How Cl...»Reply #57