Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty Guilty

[Sawbonz 28257]

41 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Where the hell are you getting that Hillary did this?

Classified documents by law must have a header denoting the classification level. Documents with a classification header by law cannot be uploaded to private storage or email. She had documents in her storage and emails that were classified at the time she uploaded/sent them (this is in addition to many emails that had info in them that was determined retroactively to be classified). Therefore she or someone directed by her removed the headers prior to uploading/sending. And there were thousands of emails and e documents never turned over  

again it’s water under the dam but it was a bunch of horsehit and classic rules are for thee not for me hubris 

Edited June 13, 2023 by Sawbonz

[Sawbonz 28257]

15 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Yeah, that was a little eye-popping for me, too.  Seems kinda crime-y.  Why not prosecuted?

Yeah the mens rea did some really heavy lifting there that I don’t think would have been the case for you or me

[Disco Strangler 1916]

Tips for the press to avoid accepting (and passing along) gaslighting:

-why did you keep America’s secrets?

-can you assure that America’s secrets were not revealed to anyone?

-do you care about America’s military?  -do you care about America?  -why?

-why should voters ever trust you with our military’s secrets again?

[Rimbo 27093]

2 hours ago, The Dog said:

 

i don't get it

 

much like a neutered dog

[SaucyJack 3522]

2 hours ago, The Dog said:

 

 

9 minutes ago, Rimbo said:

i don't get it

 

much like a neutered dog

[WhatTheBuck 28943]

6 hours ago, deech said:

I will state this as someone who is as anti-Trump as they come:

Hillary's email server was unconscionable.  She knew exactly what she was doing and why she was doing it.  I believe her having the server was likely be a clear violation of the law, but I am no criminal law expert.  I believe there were enough articles written at the time of the various laws she would have violated in conducting government business like that on a private email server.

Bullshit. She talked to Colin Powell, he told her he’d used a private email server too. I hate to break it to you but Grandma Clinton isn’t the IT genius you think she is. She had her Blackberry and was comfortable using that and never upgraded to another phone. She really was using the same email for work and personal use. Ironically, she herself never got hacked. If you honestly think it was a nefarious plot on her part, then to what end? What actually happened? What got done, real actions in real life, that she accomplished without any of us knowing about her involvement because that cagey old broad used a private email server?

And no, it wasn’t against the law. Trump told Barr to lock her up. If there had been the slightest legal justification to charge her you can be damn sure they would’ve charged her. 

Jared, Ivanka, and others in the Trump administration also used private email servers. We knew about that while they were doing it. No one said shit about it other than pointing out the hypocrisy. Jared also used WhatsApp to exchange encrypted communications with MBS (at least) and we’ll never know what went on in those conversations. Maybe he passed on intelligence about disloyals amongst the Saudi royal family. Maybe he passed on the implicit go ahead to get rid of Khashoggi. I can think of some very credible real world possibilities there. And he’s got $2 Billion in investments from the Saudi Sovereign Wealth Fund to show for it. He knew exactly what he was doing. He was also the one trying to set up backchannel communications with the Russians that would be free from official oversight.

Seriously, if you believe all the bullshit the Republicans spew about Hillary then it’s a goddamn shame she wasn’t President because she’s the shrewdest political mastermind that ever walked the earth. All the shit they accuse her of and she pulled it off without leaving enough evidence to charge her with a single crime despite investigation after investigation after investigation. Oh, sure, she wasn’t smart enough to campaign in Michigan and Wisconsin and Rimbo will tell you that’s why she lost the election. But other than that she’s a murderess, she’s a network engineer, she runs a child sex ring, she does it all. She’s an evil genius in a pantsuit. 

[Rimbo 27093]

still don't get it

[Rimbo 27093]

Just now, WhatTheBuck said:

Bullshit. She talked to Colin Powell, he told her he’d used a private email server too. I hate to break it to you but Grandma Clinton isn’t the IT genius you think she is. She had her Blackberry and was comfortable using that and never upgraded to another phone. She really was using the same email for work and personal use. Ironically, she herself never got hacked. If you honestly think it was a nefarious plot on her part, then to what end? What actually happened? What got done, real actions in real life, that she accomplished without any of us knowing about her involvement because that cagey old broad used a private email server?

And no, it wasn’t against the law. Trump told Barr to lock her up. If there had been the slightest legal justification to charge her you can be damn sure they would’ve charged her. 

Jared, Ivanka, and others in the Trump administration also used private email servers. We knew about that while they were doing it. No one said shit about it other than pointing out the hypocrisy. Jared also used WhatsApp to exchange encrypted communications with MBS (at least) and we’ll never know what went on in those conversations. Maybe he passed on intelligence about disloyals amongst the Saudi royal family. Maybe he passed on the implicit go ahead to get rid of Khashoggi. I can think of some very credible real world possibilities there. And he’s got $2 Billion in investments from the Saudi Sovereign Wealth Fund to show for it. He knew exactly what he was doing. He was also the one trying to set up backchannel communications with the Russians that would be free from official oversight.

Seriously, if you believe all the bullshit the Republicans spew about Hillary then it’s a goddamn shame she wasn’t President because she’s the shrewdest political mastermind that ever walked the earth. All the shit they accuse her of and she pulled it off without leaving enough evidence to charge her with a single crime despite investigation after investigation after investigation. Oh, sure, she wasn’t smart enough to campaign in Michigan and Wisconsin and Rimbo will tell you that’s why she lost the election. But other than that she’s a murderess, she’s a network engineer, she runs a child sex ring, she does it all. She’s an evil genius in a pantsuit. 

Well. Maybe not EVERY word, but...

1. it was definitely illegal

2. She wasn't hacked, you say? Umm... yeah, that's unlikely.

[tx 3 putt 78803]

14 minutes ago, SaucyJack said:

 

Between my pillow guy and don jr, it’s Christmas Eve for Miami coke dealers 

[Sawbonz 28257]

39 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Bullshit. She talked to Colin Powell, he told her he’d used a private email server too. I hate to break it to you but Grandma Clinton isn’t the IT genius you think she is. She had her Blackberry and was comfortable using that and never upgraded to another phone. She really was using the same email for work and personal use. Ironically, she herself never got hacked. If you honestly think it was a nefarious plot on her part, then to what end? What actually happened? What got done, real actions in real life, that she accomplished without any of us knowing about her involvement because that cagey old broad used a private email server?

And no, it wasn’t against the law. Trump told Barr to lock her up. If there had been the slightest legal justification to charge her you can be damn sure they would’ve charged her. 

Jared, Ivanka, and others in the Trump administration also used private email servers. We knew about that while they were doing it. No one said shit about it other than pointing out the hypocrisy. Jared also used WhatsApp to exchange encrypted communications with MBS (at least) and we’ll never know what went on in those conversations. Maybe he passed on intelligence about disloyals amongst the Saudi royal family. Maybe he passed on the implicit go ahead to get rid of Khashoggi. I can think of some very credible real world possibilities there. And he’s got $2 Billion in investments from the Saudi Sovereign Wealth Fund to show for it. He knew exactly what he was doing. He was also the one trying to set up backchannel communications with the Russians that would be free from official oversight.

Seriously, if you believe all the bullshit the Republicans spew about Hillary then it’s a goddamn shame she wasn’t President because she’s the shrewdest political mastermind that ever walked the earth. All the shit they accuse her of and she pulled it off without leaving enough evidence to charge her with a single crime despite investigation after investigation after investigation. Oh, sure, she wasn’t smart enough to campaign in Michigan and Wisconsin and Rimbo will tell you that’s why she lost the election. But other than that she’s a murderess, she’s a network engineer, she runs a child sex ring, she does it all. She’s an evil genius in a pantsuit. 

Comey said he imputed mens rea into the statute when deciding not to prosecute when the statute didn’t call for it. 

[Biff Tannen 46219]

Enough about her damned emails! /feelthebern

[TwiceHorn 32121]

33 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Comey said he imputed mens rea into the statute when deciding not to prosecute when the statute didn’t call for it. 

There's sort of an ongoing "controversy" about whether federal criminal statutes should have an implicit mens rea, when many of them do not have an express one.

But, quick research indicates two statutes were under consideration, 18 USC 1924, and 793, the Trump statute.

1924 provides:

Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both.

So, 1924 and 793 have fairly similar intent requirements, that are "specific."  To convict, you would have had to prove that Hildawg knew that sending docs in an insecure email would remove them from their authorized locations and that it was her intention that they be retained there, i.e. the insecure server.

That certainly happened, and she intended to engage in the course of action that resulted in those occurrences (that satisfies a "general intent"), but proving that she knew it and intended it, and was not merely reckless or negligent about that outcome would have made it difficult to secure a conviction, absent some pretty damning proof.  The kind of proof Smith dug up on Trump.

One of the more disturbing aspects of the investigation was the destruction of 30,000 allegedly personal emails during the investigation.  There was a semi-plausible explanation of unintentionality that probably avoided an obstruction charge, unlike Trump.

Edited June 13, 2023 by TwiceHorn

[Bama Chick 28596]

Jesus Christ.

Y’all going of on a both sides “but her emails” tangent to project an air of level headed reasonableness while discussing Trump’s actual federal indictments is absolute buffoonery.

It doesn’t make you seem unbiased and fair nor does it make your rightful criticisms of Trump more justified because you believe it somehow proves your impartiality.

All it does is telegraph your attempt to justify your former Republicaness and the fact that you’re still under the influence of the 30 years long right wing hate campaign against her.

Anyone who brings her up in the context of Trump’s criminality is not a serious person.

She’s got fuck all to do with this.

[TwiceHorn 32121]

5 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Jesus Christ.

Y’all going of on a both sides “but her emails” tangent to project an air of level headed reasonableness while discussing Trump’s actual federal indictments is absolute buffoonery.

It doesn’t make you seem unbiased and fair nor does it make your rightful criticisms of Trump more justified because you believe it somehow proves your impartiality.

All it does is telegraph your attempt to justify your former Republicaness and the fact that you’re still under the influence of the 30 years long right wing hate campaign against her.

Anyone who brings her up in the context of Trump’s criminality is not a serious person.

She’s got fuck all to do with this.

The point is that others are bringing it up, so let's take a look at what really are the differences.

I am personally using it to explain why proof of intent is so important to securing convictions of crimes like these and just because "you" think Trump is a criminal asshole, no matter how correct you may be, does not satisfy the burden of proof in a court of law.

[Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand 13644]

Similar to a 2016 poll of GOP voters that showed 75 percent believed Obama wasn't an American citizen or they weren't sure, 87 percent of Trump voters believed Hillary was involved in Vince Foster's death or weren't sure.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/half-of-georgia-trump-voters-think-hillary-murdered-vince-foster-poll-trolls-find

Hillary: Aw hamburgers! I sure made a mess this time!

[Gatorubet 30807]

1 hour ago, Rimbo said:

Well. Maybe not EVERY word, but...

1. it was definitely illegal

2. She wasn't hacked, you say? Umm... yeah, that's unlikely.

What does Trump’s justice department and the FBI know anyway?

[RomaVicta 30661]

When can we get into the Pentagon Papers, huh? 

[Hermanator 7716]

1 hour ago, RomaVicta said:

When can we get into the Pentagon Papers, huh? 

So.... Y'all hear we got aliens?

[Neonmoon 38130]

 

[Sawbonz 28257]

6 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

under the influence of the 30 years long right wing hate campaign against her.

This is straight up bullshit. She was a deeply flawed candidate full of hubris. Of course that has nothing to do with a trump’s crimes, but it was brought up here and if people are going to try to make it seem like it was nothing they are going to be rightfully called out. Comey all but said she was not charged because of who she was (SOS not Hillary Clinton). Just as Mueller said the same about charging POTUS. Many of us don’t like it. A valid logical equivalency is not “both sides”

[wildcat09 29601]

6 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

Jesus Christ.

Y’all going of on a both sides “but her emails” tangent to project an air of level headed reasonableness while discussing Trump’s actual federal indictments is absolute buffoonery.

It doesn’t make you seem unbiased and fair nor does it make your rightful criticisms of Trump more justified because you believe it somehow proves your impartiality.

All it does is telegraph your attempt to justify your former Republicaness and the fact that you’re still under the influence of the 30 years long right wing hate campaign against her.

Anyone who brings her up in the context of Trump’s criminality is not a serious person.

She’s got fuck all to do with this.

I don’t really want to continue the tangent, but need to be clear that sawbonz is straight making shit up to complain about Hillary.

[Captainant 28613]

6 hours ago, TwiceHorn said:

The point is that others are bringing it up, so let's take a look at what really are the differences.

I am personally using it to explain why proof of intent is so important to securing convictions of crimes like these and just because "you" think Trump is a criminal asshole, no matter how correct you may be, does not satisfy the burden of proof in a court of law.

I don't know why you're posturing and gesturing as if we didn't have fucking transcripts of trump saying the he needs to keep moving the boxes to keep them hidden. 

GAWRSH! If only there was some way to disambiguate why he did that....

I'm not saying you're wrong, but it certainly gives the appearance of you posturing that trump is just a victim

[TwiceHorn 32121]

8 minutes ago, Captainant said:

I don't know why you're posturing and gesturing as if we didn't have fucking transcripts of trump saying the he needs to keep moving the boxes to keep them hidden. 

GAWRSH! If only there was some way to disambiguate why he did that....

I'm not saying you're wrong, but it certainly gives the appearance of you posturing that trump is just a victim

 

What in the fuck are you talking about?  You really, actually see what I write in here as a defense of Trump?  Are you brain damaged?

You are one of the goofballs that was pooh poohing necessary evidence of Trump's intent and the time needed to gather it.

King of substituting your own beliefs and rage for admissible evidence.

There was no evidence of Hilary's intent, unlike Trump.

Edited June 13, 2023 by TwiceHorn

[Eastwood 4394]

7 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

Jesus Christ.

Y’all going of on a both sides “but her emails” tangent to project an air of level headed reasonableness while discussing Trump’s actual federal indictments is absolute buffoonery.

It doesn’t make you seem unbiased and fair nor does it make your rightful criticisms of Trump more justified because you believe it somehow proves your impartiality.

All it does is telegraph your attempt to justify your former Republicaness and the fact that you’re still under the influence of the 30 years long right wing hate campaign against her.

Anyone who brings her up in the context of Trump’s criminality is not a serious person.

She’s got fuck all to do with this.

That’s not it in the slightest. It’s merely pointing out that Hillary mishandled classified docs in a manner that was criminally investigated and she probably got away with one because she knew how to play it. The difference is that she didn’t do it to hold onto some of the country’s vital secrets to share with anybody she wanted to impress, she did it out of pure “rules for thee, not for me” hubris that a large chunk of America was so sick and tired of. 
 

People are so eager to waive it off as “everybody did it, so it’s no big deal” that they’re leaning on the fact that she got the idea from Colin Powell. Is that who you want her taking transparency tips from? One of the architects of the Iraq invasion?

[TwiceHorn 32121]

8 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Bullshit. She talked to Colin Powell, he told her he’d used a private email server too. I hate to break it to you but Grandma Clinton isn’t the IT genius you think she is. She had her Blackberry and was comfortable using that and never upgraded to another phone. She really was using the same email for work and personal use. Ironically, she herself never got hacked. If you honestly think it was a nefarious plot on her part, then to what end? What actually happened? What got done, real actions in real life, that she accomplished without any of us knowing about her involvement because that cagey old broad used a private email server?

And no, it wasn’t against the law. Trump told Barr to lock her up. If there had been the slightest legal justification to charge her you can be damn sure they would’ve charged her. 

Jared, Ivanka, and others in the Trump administration also used private email servers. We knew about that while they were doing it. No one said shit about it other than pointing out the hypocrisy. Jared also used WhatsApp to exchange encrypted communications with MBS (at least) and we’ll never know what went on in those conversations. Maybe he passed on intelligence about disloyals amongst the Saudi royal family. Maybe he passed on the implicit go ahead to get rid of Khashoggi. I can think of some very credible real world possibilities there. And he’s got $2 Billion in investments from the Saudi Sovereign Wealth Fund to show for it. He knew exactly what he was doing. He was also the one trying to set up backchannel communications with the Russians that would be free from official oversight.

Seriously, if you believe all the bullshit the Republicans spew about Hillary then it’s a goddamn shame she wasn’t President because she’s the shrewdest political mastermind that ever walked the earth. All the shit they accuse her of and she pulled it off without leaving enough evidence to charge her with a single crime despite investigation after investigation after investigation. Oh, sure, she wasn’t smart enough to campaign in Michigan and Wisconsin and Rimbo will tell you that’s why she lost the election. But other than that she’s a murderess, she’s a network engineer, she runs a child sex ring, she does it all. She’s an evil genius in a pantsuit. 

It just occurred to me that, although not as disingenuous as "but Hunter" and "but her emails," the "Colin Powell did it too" and "so did Jared and Ivanka" is also whataboutism.

I'm not poking at you, specifically, but it still suffers the flaw of arguing away from the issue "at bar."

What about this and what about that may well be valid criticisms of the system, or at least discussion points, but as to the specifics of a single case, something of a rhetorical distraction.

Like, to some extent, we do have a "two tiered justice system," but not in the way the GQP argues.  Even if they were right on that, it still does not address the guilt or innocence of Donald J. Trump.

[TwiceHorn 32121]

20 minutes ago, Eastwood said:

That’s not it in the slightest. It’s merely pointing out that Hillary mishandled classified docs in a manner that was criminally investigated and she probably got away with one because she knew how to play it. The difference is that she didn’t do it to hold onto some of the country’s vital secrets to share with anybody she wanted to impress, she did it out of pure “rules for thee, not for me” hubris that a large chunk of America was so sick and tired of. 
 

People are so eager to waive it off as “everybody did it, so it’s no big deal” that they’re leaning on the fact that she got the idea from Colin Powell. Is that who you want her taking transparency tips from? One of the architects of the Iraq invasion?

I'm not sure I'd agree that she "knew how to play it."  I'm not a big Hillary fan, but my opinion of her does not extend so far as to think she did it with the requisite intent, whether the evidence of it exists or not.  And even if I did, I'd be substituting my opinion for evidence, and you need that pesky ol' evidence to bring a criminal case.

I do agree that her "hubris" caused the problem, and, for that matter, so did Trump's.  But their respective "hubris" are so different in terms of malignancy and dangerousness, and the fact that Donald was so proud of himself for doing this that he ran his mouth to people shores up that conclusion.

If Hillary is irrelevant to Trump, which she mostly is, then Powell is irrelevant to Hillary.

Edited June 13, 2023 by TwiceHorn

[wildcat09 29601]

Here's one of dozens of fact checks of Hillary's claim that none of her emails were marked as classified:

Quote

The Justice Department investigation of classified documents found at former president Donald Trump’s Mar-a-Lago Club has brought inevitable comparisons to the controversy over Hillary Clinton’s private email server that she used while secretary of state. The FBI investigation into her emails arguably tipped the close 2016 presidential election to Trump.

During the contest between Trump and Clinton, we wrote 16 fact checks on the email issue, frequently awarding Pinocchios to Clinton for legalistic parsing. But in light of the Trump investigation, Clinton is trying to draw a distinction between Trump’s current travails and the probe that targeted her.

It’s worth reviewing what we know now about the emails that Clinton received on her private server. After FBI Director James B. Comey in 2016 announced there would be no criminal charges brought against Clinton, congressional hearings and several more investigations that received little media attention revealed new details that, to some extent, mitigates what Comey said at the time.

As shown in an FBI photo of some of the documents seized from Trump, many have clear markings indicating they contained highly sensitive classified information. Clinton, in her tweet, suggests none of her emails were marked classified. That’s technically correct. Whether those emails contained classified information was a major focus of the investigation, but a review of the recent investigations, including new information obtained by the Fact Checker, shows Clinton has good reason for making a distinction with Trump.

 

What Comey said
At a July 5, 2016, news conference, Comey said: “From the group of 30,000 emails returned to the State Department, 110 emails in 52 email chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received.” He added that out of “thousands of emails we found that were not among those produced to State, agencies have concluded that three of those were classified at the time they were sent or received, one at the Secret level and two at the Confidential level.” Separately, he said 2,000 additional emails were “up-classified” so redactions could be made to make them suitable for public disclosure.

This statement has generally been translated in news reports as the FBI determining that 113 emails contained classified information.

Referring to seven email chains that concerned issues classified at the “Top Secret/Special Access Program” level, Comey said: “There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation.”

The classification dispute
Note that Comey said this assessment was “determined by the owning agency.” That meant an intelligence agency, such as the CIA, had decided information in the email was classified, even if the email itself had not been marked classified. As the Fact Checker disclosed in 2016, intelligence officials believed there were serious shortcomings in how the State Department handled sensitive communications.

The State Department has both classified and unclassified systems — known informally as the “high side” and the “low side.” The classified system has tight controls, often housed in what is known as a sensitive compartmented information facility (SCIF); it is not possible to “cut and paste” from the classified system into the unclassified system. Clinton’s private email system was designed to deal with the unclassified communications, similar to the unclassified state.gov email account.

But sometimes classified information seeped into email exchanges. In one instance, a State Department official forwarded a newspaper article; then in subsequent exchanges, aides revealed sensitive details of a secret program as they discussed the shortcomings of that public report. Ultimately, the email chain ended up in Clinton’s inbox.

“The senders used unclassified emails because of ‘operational tempo,’ that is, the need to get information quickly to senior State Department officials at times when the recipients lacked access to classified systems,” said a nearly 600-page Justice Department inspector general report released in June 2018 that critically examined Comey’s decision to announce the results of the Clinton probe himself. “To accomplish this, senders often refrained from using specific classified facts or terms in emails and worded emails carefully in an attempt to avoid transmitting classified information.”

Many of the emails in question were sent late at night or on weekends, the report said. One prosecutor who worked on the case told the IG: “The problem was the State Department was so screwed up in the way they treated classified information that if you wanted to prosecute Hillary Clinton, you would have had to prosecute 150 State Department people.”

“There was no evidence that the senders or former Secretary Clinton believed or were aware at the time that the emails contained classified information,” the Justice IG report said. “The emails in question were sent to other government officials in furtherance of the senders’ official duties. There was no evidence that the senders or former Secretary Clinton intended that classified information be sent to unauthorized recipients, or that they intentionally sought to store classified information on unauthorized systems.”

David Kendall, an attorney for Clinton, told the Fact Checker: “The State Department personnel who originated the emails did not think their content merited classification, and not a single one of the over 33,000 emails bore classification markings.”

The emails with classified markings
In his news conference, Comey said “three of those were classified at the time they were sent or received.” At the time, he said one was marked “secret” and two “confidential,” but at a congressional hearing two days later, he said all were marked “confidential,” the lowest form of classification. Moreover, he acknowledged that markings — a (C) — were contained in the body of the text and, contrary to standard practice, there was no header at the top alerting someone that this was classified material. He told lawmakers that without a header, it was “a reasonable inference” that this material was not classified.

The emails concerned proposed talking points for Clinton when she called a foreign leader. The State Department later said the (C) markings should have been removed as a matter of course once Clinton decided to place the call but through “human error,” they had not been deleted. In her FBI interview, Clinton said she did not know what (C) meant and “speculated it was a reference to paragraphs ranked in alphabetical order.” The IG report said the FBI missed the (C) markings until late in the investigation.

In her Twitter thread, Clinton said, “Comey admitted he was wrong after he claimed I had classified emails” — a reference to his remarks at the congressional hearing.

“When he testified before the House Oversight Committee, he was forced to concede the markings he pointed to were ambiguous, did not comply with federal classification guidelines, and did not contain proper classification markings,” Kendall said.

Comey did not respond to a request for comment.

The Trump State Department investigations
During the Trump administration, two more investigations were conducted of the Clinton emails — first when Rex Tillerson was secretary of state and then again when Mike Pompeo was the chief diplomat.

Kendall said that during the Tillerson investigation, he was told “that there was cause to believe she had been responsible for 41 mishandlings of classified information (both infractions and violations) — 40 related to particular emails and one related to the use of a private email server itself.” That’s lower than the 110 emails cited by Comey, but he said it’s possible each email chain might be considered a security infraction. Comey had referred to 52 email chains.

“At the end of the process, on June 29, 2017, the Tillerson State Department agreed there was no classified material in the 40 emails cited, but found that her use of a personal email server itself was a security violation, without respect to any particular email,” Kendall said, providing a copy of the June 29, 2017, letter sent by State saying Clinton had “no individual culpability” for the email security violations.

“Though not publicized at the time, these findings were not surprising, since both the Secretary and her State Department colleagues based their emails on the work the Department was doing and did not believe any of the emails contained classified information,” Kendall said. “The Secretary and her colleagues knew how to use (and did) State’s high-side secure system for transmitting classified information and properly marked such communications when appropriate.”

The second investigation started in 2019. Kendall said he was informed State “suspected” Clinton was responsible for “12 classified spillages” based on emails that had not been among the earlier incidents that were investigated. Perhaps it’s a coincidence, but the total number of security incidents investigated by State — 52 — matches the 52 email chains mentioned by Comey.

The unclassified version of the Diplomatic Security investigation that was publicly released notes that “a typical security violation involves premarked classified information discovered contemporaneously with the incident. None of the emails at issue in this review were marked as classified.”

“Again, we presented evidence refuting each of these allegations,” Kendall said. “We were completely successful and were notified on Oct. 7, 2019, that the Department had found the Secretary did not ‘bear any individual culpability’ for these 12 alleged incidents, although again this result was not announced publicly.” He provided a copy of the State Department letter, dated Aug. 22, 2019.

The unclassified version of the probe says it found “91 valid violations attributable to 38 individuals” but does not mention names.

The report was critical of Clinton’s decision to have a private server — “it added an increased degree of risk of compromise as a private system lacks the network monitoring and intrusion detection capabilities of State Department networks.” But the report concluded: “Instances of classified information being deliberately transmitted via unclassified email were the rare exception and resulted in adjudicated security violations. There was no persuasive evidence of systemic, deliberate mishandling of classified information.”

In other words, both State Department probes under Trump knocked Clinton for maintaining a private server for State Department communications — but did not hold her responsible for mishandling classified information.

Few things have been investigated more thoroughly by government and law enforcement agencies and the media than Hillary's email use. All reports are pretty consistent that Hillary and other State Department officials emailed about some information they probably should've known was classified, a lot more information that wasn't classified at the time but was later classified, and sometimes emailed kinda vaguely talking around things they knew to be classified (but without stating the actual classified information), to get work done remotely.

It's not remotely what sawbonz thinks, as if they were deliberately attaching classified documents to their emails but stripping out all of the "CLASSIFIED" markings beforehand. That would have been extremely criminal! If they'd been doing shit like that, they absolutely should have and would have been prosecuted for it. I don't know where he got that, whether from some bullshit Brietbart article or if he just made it up in his head because he misunderstood how classification works, but it's not anywhere close to what actually happened. 

[TwiceHorn 32121]

2 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Here's one of dozens of fact checks of Hillary's claim that none of her emails were marked as classified:

Few things have been investigated more thoroughly by government and law enforcement agencies and the media than Hillary's email use. All reports are pretty consistent that Hillary and other State Department officials emailed about some information they probably should've known was classified, a lot more information that wasn't classified at the time but was later classified, and sometimes emailed kinda vaguely talking around things they knew to be classified (but without stating the actual classified information), to get work done remotely.

It's not remotely what sawbonz thinks, as if they were deliberately attaching classified documents to their emails but stripping out all of the "CLASSIFIED" markings beforehand. That would have been extremely criminal! If they'd been doing shit like that, they absolutely should have and would have been prosecuted for it. I don't know where he got that, whether from some bullshit Brietbart article or if he just made it up in his head because he misunderstood how classification works, but it's not anywhere close to what actually happened. 

dEeP sTaTe!

[Biff Tannen 46219]

God, is today the day?  It needs to be the day because this thread has turned to shit.

It's for sure one kind of day at least

 

Edited June 13, 2023 by Biff Tannen
tuesday is the day we eat the birds

[Pig Bellmont 8888]

So today’s the big day and we’re all talking about someone who hasn’t been in politics since 2016? 

[Sawbonz 28257]

1 hour ago, wildcat09 said:

I don’t really want to continue the tangent, but need to be clear that sawbonz is straight making shit up to complain about Hillary.

Are you saying that she did not have uploaded classified documents that did not contain the required headers?

 

the WaPo article is behind a paywall . She absolutely had classified documents and emails and on servers. They absolutely weren’t marked correctly or that would have provided the evidence of knowledge of criminality and she would not have been able to avoid prosecution. Can you explain how, other than removing the headers, the classified material could have been on there without the requisite headers? I’m not talking about the stuff that was reviewed and retroactively deemed classified. I am talking about actual classified documents.

Edited June 13, 2023 by Sawbonz

[DDD Dad 14668]

Butter emails talk not going away. 

[atomheartbevo 90692]

[DigglerontheHoof 21565]

All you fuckers talking about Hillary: 

[TwiceHorn 32121]

Total sidebar here, but @safe sex seems to be a fairly avid reader of my bloviation, probably because she had a discrimination case that also got hung up on evidence of intent.

Our discrimination laws require evidence, in most cases, of discriminatory intent.  And, as I have been arguing for months, that evidence can be hard to come by even when you have a very indiscreet defendant like Trump.

You can always attempt to infer a discriminatory intent from circumstances, but the rules surrounding proof of discriminatory intent in civil cases, even with just a preponderance burden, make it very difficult to get to a jury without some kind of smoking gun evidence of that intent.

So it is very risky to go to trial on a case where you verily believe there was requisite intention and the circumstances make that conclusion irrefutable, at least to you and your sympathizers.  It's best to have the evidence.  And if you want to nail a slippery bastard like Trump, it's imperative to have that evidence.

Edited June 13, 2023 by TwiceHorn

[RomaVicta 30661]

8 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

All it does is telegraph your attempt to justify your former Republicaness and the fact that you’re still under the influence of the 30 years long right wing hate campaign against her.
 

 

1 hour ago, Sawbonz said:

This is straight up bullshit. She was a deeply flawed candidate full of hubris. Of course that has nothing to do with a trump’s crimes, but it was brought up here and if people are going to try to make it seem like it was nothing they are going to be rightfully called out. Comey all but said she was not charged because of who she was (SOS not Hillary Clinton). Just as Mueller said the same about charging POTUS. Many of us don’t like it. A valid logical equivalency is not “both sides”

Yes, @Bama Chick, we can find absolutely no evidence of people being influenced by the hate engine regarding Hillary Clinton. None. Zero. End of story.

[Sawbonz 28257]

F Trump

Edited June 13, 2023 by Sawbonz

[RomaVicta 30661]

4 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

F Trump

[YGIFS 19458]

Can we all just take a breath and acknowledge that we're having to listen to the heads of our government discuss the Corvette in an 80 year old's garage juxtaposed to nuclear secrets in a fucking pool bathroom.  You realize how fucked up this all is?  

[ConferenceRoom 6214]

10 minutes ago, YGIFS said:

Can we all just take a breath and acknowledge that we're having to listen to the heads of our government discuss the Corvette in an 80 year old's garage juxtaposed to nuclear secrets in a fucking pool bathroom.  You realize how fucked up this all is?  

[Pig Bellmont 8888]

As long as we’re bringing up old scandals- should we talk about Iran Contra and how Reagan absolutely knew and approved of it?

Or I dunno, and I’m just spitballing here, maybe we focus on the criminal conduct by a former president that’s actually getting prosecuted. 
 

Fuck Trump. I hope the stress of these criminal proceedings kills him

[YGIFS 19458]

I mean, I would accept Dodge Charger or Bitchin' Camaro.  But a Corvette?  Did he buy it from Derka?  

[TexArcher 39080]

8 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

Jesus Christ.

Y’all going of on a both sides “but her emails” tangent to project an air of level headed reasonableness while discussing Trump’s actual federal indictments is absolute buffoonery.

It doesn’t make you seem unbiased and fair nor does it make your rightful criticisms of Trump more justified because you believe it somehow proves your impartiality.

All it does is telegraph your attempt to justify your former Republicaness and the fact that you’re still under the influence of the 30 years long right wing hate campaign against her.

Anyone who brings her up in the context of Trump’s criminality is not a serious person.

She’s got fuck all to do with this.

There are only two types of people who still bring up Hillary's emails.

1. Those who are brainwashed members of the MAGA cult, mindlessly spitting out the party line in exchange for whatever in-group dopamine and patriotic feels they get.

2. Those who are bright enough to realize that they made a mistake in voting for Trump, but who can't accept the fact that they actually got conned by the Antichrist, so they're eager to believe in anything that lets them say, "See, they're all bad anyway."

[Underdog 29248]

This suspicious character was spotted at MAL bathroom where docs were stored... 

 

[Pato del Muerto 53614]

My corvette’s newer.

-rocko, probably

[The Dog 44874]

 

 

[TexArcher 39080]

25 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

As long as we’re bringing up old scandals- should we talk about Iran Contra and how Reagan absolutely knew and approved of it?

And let's not forget the time the GOP manufactured evidence to gin up support for bombing a soverign nation into rubble so the VP's company could get rich rebuilding it all on an illegal no-bid government contract.  And only about 600k civilians were killed in the process.

All the but-her-emails bullshit comes from a bunch of people who look the other way for war criminals.  

You'd be ashamed of yourselves, if you weren't so god damned stupid.

Edited June 13, 2023 by TexArcher

[Eastwood 4394]

19 minutes ago, TexArcher said:

There are only two types of people who still bring up Hillary's emails.

1. Those who are brainwashed members of the MAGA cult, mindlessly spitting out the party line in exchange for whatever in-group dopamine and patriotic feels they get.

2. Those who are bright enough to realize that they made a mistake in voting for Trump, but who can't accept the fact that they actually got conned by the Antichrist, so they're eager to believe in anything that lets them say, "See, they're all bad anyway."

Nope and nope and I resent the insinuation that I ever even came close to pulling the lever for Trump. 
 

If you think my take on Hillary’s handling of classified information is a bit strong, hoo-boy, so I have news for you about my take on Trump. Hillary didn’t get assets killed and drastically weaken our intelligence position across the globe like Trump most likely did. Trump deserves no less than prison for the damage he did to America’s defensive posture. 

[Gatorubet 30807]

57 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

 

Yes, @Bama Chick, we can find absolutely no evidence of people being influenced by the hate engine regarding Hillary Clinton. None. Zero. End of story.

….but…but….Clinton Crime Family!!

 

No they aren’t saints.  They just aren’t traitors.  And after this round of posts we do have a good method to discern who voted for Trump in 2016. 

[Red Five 41796]

I saw a guy the other day cut the tags off his mattress. Then I saw him jaywalk. I want to talk about him in this thread today when Dotard is being arrested for committing a shitload of felonies.