Latest Breaking News

getagrip_already

(17,802 posts)

11. no, they didn't...

Tue Nov 10, 2015, 04:19 PM

Nov 2015

They found information which was later used in a classified report. The report came out AFTER the emails were exchanged.

That doesn't make it classified. It may be identicle to information that later became classified, but it doesn't automatically classify the information in the email.

It would be no different on a state.gov server. If information which has become classified is found on a non-classified system, it has to be treated as classified from that point on. That is called spillage. But in and of itself it is not going to get anyone fired unless it was intentional.

The FBI is looking for a petreaus problem (sharing information you know to be classified, that you shouldn't even have, with third parties). It doesn't exist but they have to be sure.

Get a grip folks.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

45 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

FBI steps up interviews in Clinton email probe [View all] Halliburton Nov 2015 OP

Interesting. This comes 4 days after confirmation the IC found "secret" classified info on server leveymg Nov 2015 #1

The only drip, drip, is the drip, drip of the GOP scams going down the drain! Fred Sanders Nov 2015 #7

An exclamation point - must be true! Actually, the GOP are HRC's main ally leveymg Nov 2015 #8

You forgot the sarcasm emoticon! Fred Sanders Nov 2015 #9

Message auto-removed Name removed Nov 2015 #15

The ongoing never ending GOP-led investigations of something continue? Wow! Stop the presses! Fred Sanders Nov 2015 #36

Anyone on the left who supports this garbage has no credibility at all randys1 Nov 2015 #27

Seems like we have our own version of a hybrid of the tea party, complete with poll denying, etc. Fred Sanders Nov 2015 #37

I think Sanders clarified 2pooped2pop Nov 2015 #38

no, they didn't... getagrip_already Nov 2015 #11

Helps if you read the entire article. The material was found classified to Secret. leveymg Nov 2015 #16

it helps if you don't take politico reports as gospel.. getagrip_already Nov 2015 #24

but Politico just recently reported that her emails did not contain highly classified info nt antigop Nov 2015 #14

They have been reclassified to Secret from Top Secret. Still classified. Still illegal to store or leveymg Nov 2015 #18

OK, thanks. nt antigop Nov 2015 #22

still wrong... getagrip_already Nov 2015 #28

Presumed classified materials are always classified as created. She knew because she was trained in leveymg Nov 2015 #31

OK if it leads in the right direction HassleCat Nov 2015 #2

I disagree that having your own server was common practice among government officials. merrily Nov 2015 #3

Yeah, it was probably a lot safer then the state dept server... getagrip_already Nov 2015 #12

Thanks, but not really relevant to my post and, as my prior post said, I don't merrily Nov 2015 #29

you said you don't agree that a server and an email account are the same... getagrip_already Nov 2015 #30

Third time: no interest in discussing (tho my silence should not be interpreted as agreement with merrily Nov 2015 #32

LOL Washington Examiner Hack rewrites DURHAM D Nov 2015 #4

Do you have information that the FBI is not conducting a Clinton email probe? totodeinhere Nov 2015 #6

There would be a lot of "shouting". virtualobserver Nov 2015 #26

K & R. Probe continues, interesting. appalachiablue Nov 2015 #5

Message auto-removed Name removed Nov 2015 #17

You don't know what I think and your assumption is just that. Have a good one. appalachiablue Nov 2015 #20

Now that is interesting Android3.14 Nov 2015 #10

but Politico just recently reported that her emails did not contain highly classified info antigop Nov 2015 #13

Reclassified to Secret from Top Secret. Still illegal to have on a private server. See 16 above leveymg Nov 2015 #19

thanks. nt antigop Nov 2015 #23

nope - that's not the law... getagrip_already Nov 2015 #25

I did look it up. leveymg Nov 2015 #33

I am more aware than you know.. getagrip_already Nov 2015 #42

The willful intent to violate the statute is obvious as is negligence be leveymg Nov 2015 #43

There is a very powerful case against her. Francois9 Nov 2015 #44

That pressure will be coming from within the IC which includes leveymg Nov 2015 #45

This OP is missing something ... JoePhilly Nov 2015 #21

Apparently, the FBI disagrees with you on that visual metaphor. leveymg Nov 2015 #34

Just because the horse's corpse moves when you hit it ... JoePhilly Nov 2015 #35

The fact the horse's corpse has not moved in a year and when beaten does not mean it is dead! Fred Sanders Nov 2015 #39

Pure guessing by someone without any involvement with the FBI inspectors. SunSeeker Nov 2015 #40

Message auto-removed Name removed Nov 2015 #41