Latest Breaking News

Eugene Stoner

(66 posts)

76. Welcome to you

Reply to 840high (Reply #66)

Fri Aug 21, 2015, 12:01 PM

Aug 2015

I've been here longer than you (twice as long) but thanks for the warm welcome

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

84 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

U.S. Said to Probe How Classified Data Got on Hillary Clinton�s Server [View all] candelista Aug 2015 OP

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