Is Hillary's e-mail scandal falling apart?

[Synthaholic]

Yeah, it would be devastating if the Russians and Chinese had found out that Hillary liked Parks And Recreation and was trying to get gifilte fish for a Congressman.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

That is what the media is reporting. If they find otherwise, I am sure we will hear about it. You might come out from under the FOX umbrella occasionally.

Prove that

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Hillary Clinton emails: Thousands of new pages released - BBC News


State Department spokesman Mark Toner was quoted by AFP as saying the process of re-evaluating the remaining unreleased emails was continuing.

The emails were not marked as classified at the time Mrs Clinton sent or received them. The vast majority of the correspondence concerned mundane matters of daily life at workplace, including phone messages and relays of daily schedules.

With all due respect, Hutch...your point about e-mails not being marked classified at the time Clinton sent them is in large part semantics. If an e-mail that you send is later determined to be "classified" as so many of Hillary Clinton's redacted e-mails have been...then obviously you were in reality sending classified materials over an unsecured private e-mail server!

That's not either true or how it works.

If something is deemed sensetive or otherwise classified months after it was initially sent, it was still not classified at the time. There could be parts of her daily schedule that were not classified but now may be as that info is being released. These are probably classified now because entire conversations about various subjects are being released with these mails and they don't want that information disclosed.That seems totally reasonable to me especially since they are going through all of them individually before release. Probably to ensue there isn't a clear picture of anything that may be sensitive.

So how does it work, Hutch? Hillary Clinton wants to send an e-mail to Huma Abedin. She opens up her e-mail. She sends the message. Now if something in that message IS sensitive then how can it possibly be "classified" when Clinton sends it...especially since it's being sent through one of the private servers set up at Clinton's house?

Since so many of them were determined to be "classified" by the State Department months or years later when they finally are given those e-mails by Clinton have they somehow magically "morphed" into a different message? Obviously that's not the case. The only thing that's changed from the time those original e-mails were sent is that they are no longer private between Clinton staffers but now are being looked at to determine if they are or are not sensitive. My point remains...if so much of the Clinton emails are now being redacted because they are too sensitive for the public to see then it's pretty obvious that they were JUST as sensitive back then when they were secret!

Look dumbass, if it's not classified AT THE TIME IT WAS SENT,then it wasn't classified.
What's so hard to understand? They told you they weren't classified at the time. Why they are now, they haven't said.

Yes the emails at the time WERE NOT CLASSIFIED. It may only be redacted or classified now because they are making them public.

Show us the emails you are speaking of with staffers.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

That is what the media is reporting. If they find otherwise, I am sure we will hear about it. You might come out from under the FOX umbrella occasionally.

Prove that

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Hillary Clinton emails: Thousands of new pages released - BBC News


State Department spokesman Mark Toner was quoted by AFP as saying the process of re-evaluating the remaining unreleased emails was continuing.

The emails were not marked as classified at the time Mrs Clinton sent or received them. The vast majority of the correspondence concerned mundane matters of daily life at workplace, including phone messages and relays of daily schedules.

With all due respect, Hutch...your point about e-mails not being marked classified at the time Clinton sent them is in large part semantics. If an e-mail that you send is later determined to be "classified" as so many of Hillary Clinton's redacted e-mails have been...then obviously you were in reality sending classified materials over an unsecured private e-mail server!

That's not either true or how it works.

If something is deemed sensetive or otherwise classified months after it was initially sent, it was still not classified at the time. There could be parts of her daily schedule that were not classified but now may be as that info is being released. These are probably classified now because entire conversations about various subjects are being released with these mails and they don't want that information disclosed.That seems totally reasonable to me especially since they are going through all of them individually before release. Probably to ensue there isn't a clear picture of anything that may be sensitive.

So how does it work, Hutch? Hillary Clinton wants to send an e-mail to Huma Abedin. She opens up her e-mail. She sends the message. Now if something in that message IS sensitive then how can it possibly be "classified" when Clinton sends it...especially since it's being sent through one of the private servers set up at Clinton's house?

Since so many of them were determined to be "classified" by the State Department months or years later when they finally are given those e-mails by Clinton have they somehow magically "morphed" into a different message? Obviously that's not the case. The only thing that's changed from the time those original e-mails were sent is that they are no longer private between Clinton staffers but now are being looked at to determine if they are or are not sensitive. My point remains...if so much of the Clinton emails are now being redacted because they are too sensitive for the public to see then it's pretty obvious that they were JUST as sensitive back then when they were secret!

then it's pretty obvious that they were JUST as sensitive back then when they were secret!

Not at all. They may only be redacted now because they're being released to the public.

 

[Oldstyle]

Prove that

Sent from my SM-G386T1 using Tapatalk

Hillary Clinton emails: Thousands of new pages released - BBC News


State Department spokesman Mark Toner was quoted by AFP as saying the process of re-evaluating the remaining unreleased emails was continuing.

The emails were not marked as classified at the time Mrs Clinton sent or received them. The vast majority of the correspondence concerned mundane matters of daily life at workplace, including phone messages and relays of daily schedules.

With all due respect, Hutch...your point about e-mails not being marked classified at the time Clinton sent them is in large part semantics. If an e-mail that you send is later determined to be "classified" as so many of Hillary Clinton's redacted e-mails have been...then obviously you were in reality sending classified materials over an unsecured private e-mail server!

That's not either true or how it works.

If something is deemed sensetive or otherwise classified months after it was initially sent, it was still not classified at the time. There could be parts of her daily schedule that were not classified but now may be as that info is being released. These are probably classified now because entire conversations about various subjects are being released with these mails and they don't want that information disclosed.That seems totally reasonable to me especially since they are going through all of them individually before release. Probably to ensue there isn't a clear picture of anything that may be sensitive.

So how does it work, Hutch? Hillary Clinton wants to send an e-mail to Huma Abedin. She opens up her e-mail. She sends the message. Now if something in that message IS sensitive then how can it possibly be "classified" when Clinton sends it...especially since it's being sent through one of the private servers set up at Clinton's house?

Since so many of them were determined to be "classified" by the State Department months or years later when they finally are given those e-mails by Clinton have they somehow magically "morphed" into a different message? Obviously that's not the case. The only thing that's changed from the time those original e-mails were sent is that they are no longer private between Clinton staffers but now are being looked at to determine if they are or are not sensitive. My point remains...if so much of the Clinton emails are now being redacted because they are too sensitive for the public to see then it's pretty obvious that they were JUST as sensitive back then when they were secret!

Look dumbass, if it's not classified AT THE TIME IT WAS SENT,then it wasn't classified.
What's so hard to understand? They told you they weren't classified at the time. Why they are now, they haven't said.

Yes the emails at the time WERE NOT CLASSIFIED. It may only be redacted or classified now because they are making them public.

Show us the emails you are speaking of with staffers.

So the e-mails weren't classified when Hillary sent them because the people that classify those kinds of things didn't KNOW she was sending them since she was using a private server based out of her house! When the people who classify those kinds of things actually did see them...then they became classified?

Do you have any idea how stupid you come across defending that kind of logic?

And that's not even talking about the 50,000 e-mails that Hillary erased from her server! Unless you're the world's most naive person you've got to KNOW that those bad boys contained the stuff that Hillary REALLY doesn't want anyone to see!

The damaging stuff we're seeing now...as bad as that is...don't forget that all that stuff is the stuff that Hillary's crew decided didn't make the grade of the REALLY bad stuff!

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Hillary Clinton emails: Thousands of new pages released - BBC News


State Department spokesman Mark Toner was quoted by AFP as saying the process of re-evaluating the remaining unreleased emails was continuing.

The emails were not marked as classified at the time Mrs Clinton sent or received them. The vast majority of the correspondence concerned mundane matters of daily life at workplace, including phone messages and relays of daily schedules.

With all due respect, Hutch...your point about e-mails not being marked classified at the time Clinton sent them is in large part semantics. If an e-mail that you send is later determined to be "classified" as so many of Hillary Clinton's redacted e-mails have been...then obviously you were in reality sending classified materials over an unsecured private e-mail server!

That's not either true or how it works.

If something is deemed sensetive or otherwise classified months after it was initially sent, it was still not classified at the time. There could be parts of her daily schedule that were not classified but now may be as that info is being released. These are probably classified now because entire conversations about various subjects are being released with these mails and they don't want that information disclosed.That seems totally reasonable to me especially since they are going through all of them individually before release. Probably to ensue there isn't a clear picture of anything that may be sensitive.

So how does it work, Hutch? Hillary Clinton wants to send an e-mail to Huma Abedin. She opens up her e-mail. She sends the message. Now if something in that message IS sensitive then how can it possibly be "classified" when Clinton sends it...especially since it's being sent through one of the private servers set up at Clinton's house?

Since so many of them were determined to be "classified" by the State Department months or years later when they finally are given those e-mails by Clinton have they somehow magically "morphed" into a different message? Obviously that's not the case. The only thing that's changed from the time those original e-mails were sent is that they are no longer private between Clinton staffers but now are being looked at to determine if they are or are not sensitive. My point remains...if so much of the Clinton emails are now being redacted because they are too sensitive for the public to see then it's pretty obvious that they were JUST as sensitive back then when they were secret!

Look dumbass, if it's not classified AT THE TIME IT WAS SENT,then it wasn't classified.
What's so hard to understand? They told you they weren't classified at the time. Why they are now, they haven't said.

Yes the emails at the time WERE NOT CLASSIFIED. It may only be redacted or classified now because they are making them public.

Show us the emails you are speaking of with staffers.

So the e-mails weren't classified when Hillary sent them because the people that classify those kinds of things didn't KNOW she was sending them since she was using a private server based out of her house! When the people who classify those kinds of things actually did see them...then they became classified?

Do you have any idea how stupid you come across defending that kind of logic?

And that's not even talking about the 50,000 e-mails that Hillary erased from her server! Unless you're the world's most naive person you've got to KNOW that those bad boys contained the stuff that Hillary REALLY doesn't want anyone to see!

The damaging stuff we're seeing now...as bad as that is...don't forget that all that stuff is the stuff that Hillary's crew decided didn't make the grade of the REALLY bad stuff!

Look dullard, if the transmission of classified material is a crime, you cannot charge someone with a crime if it was not classified when it was sent or received. We don't have pre-crime laws as of yet. If alcohol becomes illegal next month you can't charge me for posession yesterday. Get it? Why ,when and how those communications were later classified has not been disclosed, but since they weren't at the time it's really irrelevant as to why they are now.

BTW, it was 55k work emails released to state and 30k private that were erased.

 

[Mac1958]

I keep seeing proactive epitaphs for Hillary's candidacy, The Democratic Party Would Be Foolish to Nominate Hillary Clinton, for example. And certainly plenty of victory dances being done on USMB.

She's still in the race, and she's still leading in most polls. Something pretty dramatic would have to happen for her to drop out of the nominating process, and the GOP may still not run a nationally attractive candidate.

Just sayin'.
.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I keep seeing proactive epitaphs for Hillary's candidacy, The Democratic Party Would Be Foolish to Nominate Hillary Clinton, for example. And certainly plenty of victory dances being done on USMB.

She's still in the race, and she's still leading in most polls. Something pretty dramatic would have to happen for her to drop out of the nominating process, and the GOP may still not run a nationally attractive candidate.

Just sayin'.
.

Very true. She's taken some hits but she hasn't even hit the trail hard yet and is still leading. It comes down to electability. Both sides will rally around whoever has the best chance of winning for their side. Right now that's still Hillary for the dems.

 

[Oldstyle]

I keep seeing proactive epitaphs for Hillary's candidacy, The Democratic Party Would Be Foolish to Nominate Hillary Clinton, for example. And certainly plenty of victory dances being done on USMB.

She's still in the race, and she's still leading in most polls. Something pretty dramatic would have to happen for her to drop out of the nominating process, and the GOP may still not run a nationally attractive candidate.

Just sayin'.
.

Very true. She's taken some hits but she hasn't even hit the trail hard yet and is still leading. It comes down to electability. Both sides will rally around whoever has the best chance of winning for their side. Right now that's still Hillary for the dems.

Some hits? She's gone from leading the nearest challenger by something close to 50 points to being almost neck and neck with Bernie Sanders! All that happening as she slowly trickles out e-mails trying to mitigate the damage.

You do realize that at some point what was contained in the e-mails she erased SHOULD be recovered by FBI investigators? What's coming out now is the stuff her team have deemed LEAST damaging. What will be coming later is the stuff they really don't want anyone to see.

 

[Oldstyle]

With all due respect, Hutch...your point about e-mails not being marked classified at the time Clinton sent them is in large part semantics. If an e-mail that you send is later determined to be "classified" as so many of Hillary Clinton's redacted e-mails have been...then obviously you were in reality sending classified materials over an unsecured private e-mail server!

That's not either true or how it works.

If something is deemed sensetive or otherwise classified months after it was initially sent, it was still not classified at the time. There could be parts of her daily schedule that were not classified but now may be as that info is being released. These are probably classified now because entire conversations about various subjects are being released with these mails and they don't want that information disclosed.That seems totally reasonable to me especially since they are going through all of them individually before release. Probably to ensue there isn't a clear picture of anything that may be sensitive.

So how does it work, Hutch? Hillary Clinton wants to send an e-mail to Huma Abedin. She opens up her e-mail. She sends the message. Now if something in that message IS sensitive then how can it possibly be "classified" when Clinton sends it...especially since it's being sent through one of the private servers set up at Clinton's house?

Since so many of them were determined to be "classified" by the State Department months or years later when they finally are given those e-mails by Clinton have they somehow magically "morphed" into a different message? Obviously that's not the case. The only thing that's changed from the time those original e-mails were sent is that they are no longer private between Clinton staffers but now are being looked at to determine if they are or are not sensitive. My point remains...if so much of the Clinton emails are now being redacted because they are too sensitive for the public to see then it's pretty obvious that they were JUST as sensitive back then when they were secret!

Look dumbass, if it's not classified AT THE TIME IT WAS SENT,then it wasn't classified.
What's so hard to understand? They told you they weren't classified at the time. Why they are now, they haven't said.

Yes the emails at the time WERE NOT CLASSIFIED. It may only be redacted or classified now because they are making them public.

Show us the emails you are speaking of with staffers.

So the e-mails weren't classified when Hillary sent them because the people that classify those kinds of things didn't KNOW she was sending them since she was using a private server based out of her house! When the people who classify those kinds of things actually did see them...then they became classified?

Do you have any idea how stupid you come across defending that kind of logic?

And that's not even talking about the 50,000 e-mails that Hillary erased from her server! Unless you're the world's most naive person you've got to KNOW that those bad boys contained the stuff that Hillary REALLY doesn't want anyone to see!

The damaging stuff we're seeing now...as bad as that is...don't forget that all that stuff is the stuff that Hillary's crew decided didn't make the grade of the REALLY bad stuff!

Look dullard, if the transmission of classified material is a crime, you cannot charge someone with a crime if it was not classified when it was sent or received. We don't have pre-crime laws as of yet. If alcohol becomes illegal next month you can't charge me for posession yesterday. Get it? Why ,when and how those communications were later classified has not been disclosed, but since they weren't at the time it's really irrelevant as to why they are now.

BTW, it was 55k work emails released to state and 30k private that were erased.

So you admit that Hillary Clinton was in fact sending sensitive e-mails on private, unsecured e-mail accounts...e-mails that were later deemed to be classified?

You're just claiming that "technically" she's not guilty of a crime?

 

[Oldstyle]

I keep seeing proactive epitaphs for Hillary's candidacy, The Democratic Party Would Be Foolish to Nominate Hillary Clinton, for example. And certainly plenty of victory dances being done on USMB.

She's still in the race, and she's still leading in most polls. Something pretty dramatic would have to happen for her to drop out of the nominating process, and the GOP may still not run a nationally attractive candidate.

Just sayin'.
.

The only thing that's allowed Hillary to survive this politically, Mac is that nobody from the Democratic side was running against her! Let's be honest with ourselves here...the Democratic nomination of Clinton was etched in stone. The only people running against her were Martin O'Malley (who nobody's ever heard of) and Bernie Sanders (who's the crazy old guy from down the street who protests everything)! Essentially she was running in the Kentucky Derby against a sloth and a tortoise.

So the problem that the Democratic Party now has is that they have a candidate that the majority of the country sees as being completely dishonest but they can't get rid of her because she's Hillary and Hillary wants the Presidency so bad she'd toss her mother under a train to get it...and if they DO get her to step aside...they don't have another viable candidate ready to run! Biden? Gore? Warren? They all have major "warts".

 

[Mac1958]

I keep seeing proactive epitaphs for Hillary's candidacy, The Democratic Party Would Be Foolish to Nominate Hillary Clinton, for example. And certainly plenty of victory dances being done on USMB.

She's still in the race, and she's still leading in most polls. Something pretty dramatic would have to happen for her to drop out of the nominating process, and the GOP may still not run a nationally attractive candidate.

Just sayin'.
.

The only thing that's allowed Hillary to survive this politically, Mac is that nobody from the Democratic side was running against her! Let's be honest with ourselves here...the Democratic nomination of Clinton was etched in stone.

I think that's probably true, so it will be interesting to see if Biden gets in. If he doesn't, then the Dems will no doubt be nervous after she's nominated. The shit could then hit the fan at just the wrong time.
.

 

[Care4all]

I keep seeing proactive epitaphs for Hillary's candidacy, The Democratic Party Would Be Foolish to Nominate Hillary Clinton, for example. And certainly plenty of victory dances being done on USMB.

She's still in the race, and she's still leading in most polls. Something pretty dramatic would have to happen for her to drop out of the nominating process, and the GOP may still not run a nationally attractive candidate.

Just sayin'.
.

The only thing that's allowed Hillary to survive this politically, Mac is that nobody from the Democratic side was running against her! Let's be honest with ourselves here...the Democratic nomination of Clinton was etched in stone. The only people running against her were Martin O'Malley (who nobody's ever heard of) and Bernie Sanders (who's the crazy old guy from down the street who protests everything)! Essentially she was running in the Kentucky Derby against a sloth and a tortoise.

So the problem that the Democratic Party now has is that they have a candidate that the majority of the country sees as being completely dishonest but they can't get rid of her because she's Hillary and Hillary wants the Presidency so bad she'd toss her mother under a train to get it...and if they DO get her to step aside...they don't have another viable candidate ready to run! Biden? Gore? Warren? They all have major "warts".

There is plenty of time for the truth to come out and the right wing spinning, twisting, turning and crying wolf to be exposed.

What I won't let happen if I have a voice left to scream and fingers left to write is Republicans picking the Democratic candidate for us through fear mongering and political, fabricated smears....it's what you did last time with Hillary running....scaring the crowd in to believing the republicans in congress would fabricate one "gate" after another if she were picked, and then you all caused even more he'll on Earth with Obama...

We know your modus operandi now....

Tell me something, any emails yet implicating Hillary or Obama with criminal actions taken with Benghazi?

No!

Did Hillary and Obama tell the CIA TO STAND DOWN?
Did Hillary and Obama watch while rubbing their hands in glee a live feed as the 4 were being killed?

Was Ambassador Stevens raped by the Muslims who actually brought him to the hospital?

How about Lerner, you've had all of her emails for months, where are the emails that show she was a criminal and in cahoots with Obama.... Ohhhhh, there aren't any....

You, the Republicans, have cried wolf, one too many times and have been simply full of crapola....it's hard for anyone paying attention to ever believe you....even if you ever have something you are truthful on.... that's what happens when you fabricate and regurgitate, so many, many, many lies.

I'm certain you think the same thing about Dems....

There is no foreseeable end to this.... imo.

 

[Oldstyle]

I keep seeing proactive epitaphs for Hillary's candidacy, The Democratic Party Would Be Foolish to Nominate Hillary Clinton, for example. And certainly plenty of victory dances being done on USMB.

She's still in the race, and she's still leading in most polls. Something pretty dramatic would have to happen for her to drop out of the nominating process, and the GOP may still not run a nationally attractive candidate.

Just sayin'.
.

The only thing that's allowed Hillary to survive this politically, Mac is that nobody from the Democratic side was running against her! Let's be honest with ourselves here...the Democratic nomination of Clinton was etched in stone. The only people running against her were Martin O'Malley (who nobody's ever heard of) and Bernie Sanders (who's the crazy old guy from down the street who protests everything)! Essentially she was running in the Kentucky Derby against a sloth and a tortoise.

So the problem that the Democratic Party now has is that they have a candidate that the majority of the country sees as being completely dishonest but they can't get rid of her because she's Hillary and Hillary wants the Presidency so bad she'd toss her mother under a train to get it...and if they DO get her to step aside...they don't have another viable candidate ready to run! Biden? Gore? Warren? They all have major "warts".

There is plenty of time for the truth to come out and the right wing spinning, twisting, turning and crying wolf to be exposed.

What I won't let happen if I have a voice left to scream and fingers left to write is Republicans picking the Democratic candidate for us through fear mongering and political, fabricated smears....it's what you did last time with Hillary running....scaring the crowd in to believing the republicans in congress would fabricate one "gate" after another if she were picked, and then you all caused even more he'll on Earth with Obama...

We know your modus operandi now....

Tell me something, any emails yet implicating Hillary or Obama with criminal actions taken with Benghazi?

No!

Did Hillary and Obama tell the CIA TO STAND DOWN?
Did Hillary and Obama watch while rubbing their hands in glee a live feed as the 4 were being killed?

Was Ambassador Stevens raped by the Muslims who actually brought him to the hospital?

How about Lerner, you've had all of her emails for months, where are the emails that show she was a criminal and in cahoots with Obama.... Ohhhhh, there aren't any....

You, the Republicans, have cried wolf, one too many times and have been simply full of crapola....it's hard for anyone paying attention to ever believe you....even if you ever have something you are truthful on.... that's what happens when you fabricate and regurgitate, so many, many, many lies.

I'm certain you think the same thing about Dems....

There is no foreseeable end to this.... imo.

I'd be oh so careful what you wish for here, Care...I think it's reasonable to assume that the e-mails that Clinton is slowly releasing now are the least damaging of the e-mails that she sent. The ones that she didn't want anyone to see EVER were the ones that she erased from her servers. Those e-mails the FBI is supposedly attempting to recover. This is quite literally a "death of a thousand cuts" with (as you put it) no foreseeable end in sight but that isn't because of the GOP...that's because Clinton has stonewalled this scandal just as she's stonewalled so many in the past.

As for Clinton losing to Obama? Don't blame that on conservatives...we're not the ones who chose a guy with zero experience to be President based on some vague promise of "Hope & Change"...that would be you liberals that bought into that song and dance!

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I keep seeing proactive epitaphs for Hillary's candidacy, The Democratic Party Would Be Foolish to Nominate Hillary Clinton, for example. And certainly plenty of victory dances being done on USMB.

She's still in the race, and she's still leading in most polls. Something pretty dramatic would have to happen for her to drop out of the nominating process, and the GOP may still not run a nationally attractive candidate.

Just sayin'.
.

Very true. She's taken some hits but she hasn't even hit the trail hard yet and is still leading. It comes down to electability. Both sides will rally around whoever has the best chance of winning for their side. Right now that's still Hillary for the dems.

Some hits? She's gone from leading the nearest challenger by something close to 50 points to being almost neck and neck with Bernie Sanders! All that happening as she slowly trickles out e-mails trying to mitigate the damage.

You do realize that at some point what was contained in the e-mails she erased SHOULD be recovered by FBI investigators? What's coming out now is the stuff her team have deemed LEAST damaging. What will be coming later is the stuff they really don't want anyone to see.

" her team has deemed least damaging"?
You are so full of shit.

When she gets out there campaigning as much as everyone else and after some debates her numbers will go back up.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

That's not either true or how it works.

If something is deemed sensetive or otherwise classified months after it was initially sent, it was still not classified at the time. There could be parts of her daily schedule that were not classified but now may be as that info is being released. These are probably classified now because entire conversations about various subjects are being released with these mails and they don't want that information disclosed.That seems totally reasonable to me especially since they are going through all of them individually before release. Probably to ensue there isn't a clear picture of anything that may be sensitive.

So how does it work, Hutch? Hillary Clinton wants to send an e-mail to Huma Abedin. She opens up her e-mail. She sends the message. Now if something in that message IS sensitive then how can it possibly be "classified" when Clinton sends it...especially since it's being sent through one of the private servers set up at Clinton's house?

Since so many of them were determined to be "classified" by the State Department months or years later when they finally are given those e-mails by Clinton have they somehow magically "morphed" into a different message? Obviously that's not the case. The only thing that's changed from the time those original e-mails were sent is that they are no longer private between Clinton staffers but now are being looked at to determine if they are or are not sensitive. My point remains...if so much of the Clinton emails are now being redacted because they are too sensitive for the public to see then it's pretty obvious that they were JUST as sensitive back then when they were secret!

Look dumbass, if it's not classified AT THE TIME IT WAS SENT,then it wasn't classified.
What's so hard to understand? They told you they weren't classified at the time. Why they are now, they haven't said.

Yes the emails at the time WERE NOT CLASSIFIED. It may only be redacted or classified now because they are making them public.

Show us the emails you are speaking of with staffers.

So the e-mails weren't classified when Hillary sent them because the people that classify those kinds of things didn't KNOW she was sending them since she was using a private server based out of her house! When the people who classify those kinds of things actually did see them...then they became classified?

Do you have any idea how stupid you come across defending that kind of logic?

And that's not even talking about the 50,000 e-mails that Hillary erased from her server! Unless you're the world's most naive person you've got to KNOW that those bad boys contained the stuff that Hillary REALLY doesn't want anyone to see!

The damaging stuff we're seeing now...as bad as that is...don't forget that all that stuff is the stuff that Hillary's crew decided didn't make the grade of the REALLY bad stuff!

Look dullard, if the transmission of classified material is a crime, you cannot charge someone with a crime if it was not classified when it was sent or received. We don't have pre-crime laws as of yet. If alcohol becomes illegal next month you can't charge me for posession yesterday. Get it? Why ,when and how those communications were later classified has not been disclosed, but since they weren't at the time it's really irrelevant as to why they are now.

BTW, it was 55k work emails released to state and 30k private that were erased.

So you admit that Hillary Clinton was in fact sending sensitive e-mails on private, unsecured e-mail accounts...e-mails that were later deemed to be classified?

You're just claiming that "technically" she's not guilty of a crime?

They may be deemed as sensitive and therefore classified when viewed as a whole. None of these communications were meant to be seen by the public and certainly not all of them.
No, they said they weren't classified at the time. What part of that don't you understand? If they weren't classified then where is the crime?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I keep seeing proactive epitaphs for Hillary's candidacy, The Democratic Party Would Be Foolish to Nominate Hillary Clinton, for example. And certainly plenty of victory dances being done on USMB.

She's still in the race, and she's still leading in most polls. Something pretty dramatic would have to happen for her to drop out of the nominating process, and the GOP may still not run a nationally attractive candidate.

Just sayin'.
.

The only thing that's allowed Hillary to survive this politically, Mac is that nobody from the Democratic side was running against her! Let's be honest with ourselves here...the Democratic nomination of Clinton was etched in stone. The only people running against her were Martin O'Malley (who nobody's ever heard of) and Bernie Sanders (who's the crazy old guy from down the street who protests everything)! Essentially she was running in the Kentucky Derby against a sloth and a tortoise.

So the problem that the Democratic Party now has is that they have a candidate that the majority of the country sees as being completely dishonest but they can't get rid of her because she's Hillary and Hillary wants the Presidency so bad she'd toss her mother under a train to get it...and if they DO get her to step aside...they don't have another viable candidate ready to run! Biden? Gore? Warren? They all have major "warts".

There is plenty of time for the truth to come out and the right wing spinning, twisting, turning and crying wolf to be exposed.

What I won't let happen if I have a voice left to scream and fingers left to write is Republicans picking the Democratic candidate for us through fear mongering and political, fabricated smears....it's what you did last time with Hillary running....scaring the crowd in to believing the republicans in congress would fabricate one "gate" after another if she were picked, and then you all caused even more he'll on Earth with Obama...

We know your modus operandi now....

Tell me something, any emails yet implicating Hillary or Obama with criminal actions taken with Benghazi?

No!

Did Hillary and Obama tell the CIA TO STAND DOWN?
Did Hillary and Obama watch while rubbing their hands in glee a live feed as the 4 were being killed?

Was Ambassador Stevens raped by the Muslims who actually brought him to the hospital?

How about Lerner, you've had all of her emails for months, where are the emails that show she was a criminal and in cahoots with Obama.... Ohhhhh, there aren't any....

You, the Republicans, have cried wolf, one too many times and have been simply full of crapola....it's hard for anyone paying attention to ever believe you....even if you ever have something you are truthful on.... that's what happens when you fabricate and regurgitate, so many, many, many lies.

I'm certain you think the same thing about Dems....

There is no foreseeable end to this.... imo.

I'd be oh so careful what you wish for here, Care...I think it's reasonable to assume that the e-mails that Clinton is slowly releasing now are the least damaging of the e-mails that she sent. The ones that she didn't want anyone to see EVER were the ones that she erased from her servers. Those e-mails the FBI is supposedly attempting to recover. This is quite literally a "death of a thousand cuts" with (as you put it) no foreseeable end in sight but that isn't because of the GOP...that's because Clinton has stonewalled this scandal just as she's stonewalled so many in the past.

As for Clinton losing to Obama? Don't blame that on conservatives...we're not the ones who chose a guy with zero experience to be President based on some vague promise of "Hope & Change"...that would be you liberals that bought into that song and dance!

I think it's reasonable to assume that the e-mails that Clinton is slowly releasing now are the least damaging of the e-mails that she sent.

Clinton isn't releasing anything. The State department is. She turned these over quite a while ago.
55k takes a while to go through.
It's State that is redacting and classifying these before release not Clinton.

 

[RedTeamTex]

Can't say I've waded through all 32 pages of this thread, but based on the discussion here at the end, I might mention at the risk of redundancy:

Hillary Clinton & Email Scandal -- Clinton Ordered 'Born Classified' Info Sent to Her Private Account | National Review Online

Born Classified.

Assuming merely that is true or also that information deriving from originally marked classified documents wound their way through those entrepreneurs' bathroom, then here's precisely the laws that were broken (from http://fas.org/irp/cia/product/ig_deutch.html ) :

"WHAT LAWS, REGULATIONS, AGREEMENTS, AND POLICIES HAVE POTENTIAL APPLICATION?

109. (U) Title 18 United States Code (U.S.C.) § 793, "Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information" specifies in paragraph (f):

• Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing,... or information, relating to national defense ... through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

110. (U) Title 18 U.S.C. § 798, "Disclosure of classified information" specifies in part:

• Whoever, knowingly and willfully ... uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States ... any classified information ... obtained by the processes of communication intelligence from the communications of any foreign government, knowing the same to have been obtained by such processes ... shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

111. (U) Title 18 U.S.C. § 1924, "Unauthorized removal and retention of classified documents or material" specifies:

• 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 not more than $1,000, or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.

112. (U) The National Security Act of 1947, CIA Act of 1949, and Executive Order (E.O.) 12333 establish the legal duty and responsibility of the DCI, as head of the United States intelligence community and primary advisor to the President and the National Security Council on national foreign intelligence, to protect intelligence sources and methods from unauthorized disclosure.
113. (U) Director of Central Intelligence Directive (DCID) 1/ 16, effective July 19, 1988, "Security Policy for Uniform Protection of Intelligence Processed in Automated Information Systems and Networks," reiterates the statutory authority and responsibilities assigned to the DCI for the protection of intelligence sources and methods in Section 102 of the National Security Act of 1947, E.O.s 12333 and 12356, and National Security Decision Directive 145 and cites these authorities as the basis for the security of classified intelligence, communicated or stored in automated information systems and networks.
114. (U) DCID 1/21, effective July 29, 1994, "Physical Security Standards for Sensitive Compartmented Information Facilities (SCIFs) specifies in paragraph 2:

• All [Sensitive Compartmented Information] must be stored within accredited SCIFs. Accreditaticn is the formal affirmation that the proposed facility meets physical security standards imposed by the DCI in the physical security standards manual that supplements this directive.

115. (U/ /FOUO) Headquarters Regulation (HR) 10-23, Storage of Classified Information or Materials. Section C (1)specifies:

• Individual employees are responsible for securing classified information or material in their possession in designated equipment and areas when not being maintained under immediate personal control in approved work areas.

116. (U/ /FOUO) HR 10-24, "Accountability and Handling of Collateral Classified Material," prescribes the policies, procedures, and responsibilities associated with the accountability and handling of collateral classified material. The section concerning individual employee responsibilities states:

• Agency personnel are responsible for ensuring that all classified material is handled in a secure manner and that unauthorized persons are not afforded access to such material.

117. (U/ /FOUO) HR 10-25, "Accountability and Handling of Classified Material Requiring Special Control," sets forth policy, responsibilities, and procedures that govern the transmission, control, and storage of Restricted Data, treaty organization information, cryptographic materials, and Sensitive Compartmented Information. The section states:

• Individuals authorized access to special control materials are responsible for observing the security requirements that govern the transmission, control, and storage of said materials. Further, they are responsible for ensuring that only persons having appropriate clearances or access approvals are permitted access to such materials or to the equipment and facilities in which they are stored."

I'm rooting for the warrior princess above to carry the day: I'd love for Hillary to choke out the competition for the Democratic nomination so we have her and her paper trail of brazen arrogance to run against in the general.


Funny how the longer this thread goes, the better it's summed up by the first two posts.

 

[browsing deer]

She was a NOC, on several occasions, Fitzgerald's report says such and shows such.....

A NOC is the MOST covert operative that there is.... with the MOST dangerous positions, and if they are caught on foreign soil, the CIA will deny knowing them...it takes a true patriot to put oneself in that position for your country.

please, just STOP with smearing her....

She was as covert as a 110 piece brass band plus the glockenspiels and the timpani's. She was covert enough with her who's who entries.

 

[Oldstyle]

So how does it work, Hutch? Hillary Clinton wants to send an e-mail to Huma Abedin. She opens up her e-mail. She sends the message. Now if something in that message IS sensitive then how can it possibly be "classified" when Clinton sends it...especially since it's being sent through one of the private servers set up at Clinton's house?

Since so many of them were determined to be "classified" by the State Department months or years later when they finally are given those e-mails by Clinton have they somehow magically "morphed" into a different message? Obviously that's not the case. The only thing that's changed from the time those original e-mails were sent is that they are no longer private between Clinton staffers but now are being looked at to determine if they are or are not sensitive. My point remains...if so much of the Clinton emails are now being redacted because they are too sensitive for the public to see then it's pretty obvious that they were JUST as sensitive back then when they were secret!

Look dumbass, if it's not classified AT THE TIME IT WAS SENT,then it wasn't classified.
What's so hard to understand? They told you they weren't classified at the time. Why they are now, they haven't said.

Yes the emails at the time WERE NOT CLASSIFIED. It may only be redacted or classified now because they are making them public.

Show us the emails you are speaking of with staffers.

So the e-mails weren't classified when Hillary sent them because the people that classify those kinds of things didn't KNOW she was sending them since she was using a private server based out of her house! When the people who classify those kinds of things actually did see them...then they became classified?

Do you have any idea how stupid you come across defending that kind of logic?

And that's not even talking about the 50,000 e-mails that Hillary erased from her server! Unless you're the world's most naive person you've got to KNOW that those bad boys contained the stuff that Hillary REALLY doesn't want anyone to see!

The damaging stuff we're seeing now...as bad as that is...don't forget that all that stuff is the stuff that Hillary's crew decided didn't make the grade of the REALLY bad stuff!

Look dullard, if the transmission of classified material is a crime, you cannot charge someone with a crime if it was not classified when it was sent or received. We don't have pre-crime laws as of yet. If alcohol becomes illegal next month you can't charge me for posession yesterday. Get it? Why ,when and how those communications were later classified has not been disclosed, but since they weren't at the time it's really irrelevant as to why they are now.

BTW, it was 55k work emails released to state and 30k private that were erased.

So you admit that Hillary Clinton was in fact sending sensitive e-mails on private, unsecured e-mail accounts...e-mails that were later deemed to be classified?

You're just claiming that "technically" she's not guilty of a crime?

They may be deemed as sensitive and therefore classified when viewed as a whole. None of these communications were meant to be seen by the public and certainly not all of them.
No, they said they weren't classified at the time. What part of that don't you understand? If they weren't classified then where is the crime?

My question for you is a simple one...have any of the e-mails that Hillary Clinton sent or received on her private e-mail account been subsequently designated as classified?

 

[Oldstyle]

I keep seeing proactive epitaphs for Hillary's candidacy, The Democratic Party Would Be Foolish to Nominate Hillary Clinton, for example. And certainly plenty of victory dances being done on USMB.

She's still in the race, and she's still leading in most polls. Something pretty dramatic would have to happen for her to drop out of the nominating process, and the GOP may still not run a nationally attractive candidate.

Just sayin'.
.

The only thing that's allowed Hillary to survive this politically, Mac is that nobody from the Democratic side was running against her! Let's be honest with ourselves here...the Democratic nomination of Clinton was etched in stone. The only people running against her were Martin O'Malley (who nobody's ever heard of) and Bernie Sanders (who's the crazy old guy from down the street who protests everything)! Essentially she was running in the Kentucky Derby against a sloth and a tortoise.

So the problem that the Democratic Party now has is that they have a candidate that the majority of the country sees as being completely dishonest but they can't get rid of her because she's Hillary and Hillary wants the Presidency so bad she'd toss her mother under a train to get it...and if they DO get her to step aside...they don't have another viable candidate ready to run! Biden? Gore? Warren? They all have major "warts".

There is plenty of time for the truth to come out and the right wing spinning, twisting, turning and crying wolf to be exposed.

What I won't let happen if I have a voice left to scream and fingers left to write is Republicans picking the Democratic candidate for us through fear mongering and political, fabricated smears....it's what you did last time with Hillary running....scaring the crowd in to believing the republicans in congress would fabricate one "gate" after another if she were picked, and then you all caused even more he'll on Earth with Obama...

We know your modus operandi now....

Tell me something, any emails yet implicating Hillary or Obama with criminal actions taken with Benghazi?

No!

Did Hillary and Obama tell the CIA TO STAND DOWN?
Did Hillary and Obama watch while rubbing their hands in glee a live feed as the 4 were being killed?

Was Ambassador Stevens raped by the Muslims who actually brought him to the hospital?

How about Lerner, you've had all of her emails for months, where are the emails that show she was a criminal and in cahoots with Obama.... Ohhhhh, there aren't any....

You, the Republicans, have cried wolf, one too many times and have been simply full of crapola....it's hard for anyone paying attention to ever believe you....even if you ever have something you are truthful on.... that's what happens when you fabricate and regurgitate, so many, many, many lies.

I'm certain you think the same thing about Dems....

There is no foreseeable end to this.... imo.

I'd be oh so careful what you wish for here, Care...I think it's reasonable to assume that the e-mails that Clinton is slowly releasing now are the least damaging of the e-mails that she sent. The ones that she didn't want anyone to see EVER were the ones that she erased from her servers. Those e-mails the FBI is supposedly attempting to recover. This is quite literally a "death of a thousand cuts" with (as you put it) no foreseeable end in sight but that isn't because of the GOP...that's because Clinton has stonewalled this scandal just as she's stonewalled so many in the past.

As for Clinton losing to Obama? Don't blame that on conservatives...we're not the ones who chose a guy with zero experience to be President based on some vague promise of "Hope & Change"...that would be you liberals that bought into that song and dance!

I think it's reasonable to assume that the e-mails that Clinton is slowly releasing now are the least damaging of the e-mails that she sent.

Clinton isn't releasing anything. The State department is. She turned these over quite a while ago.
55k takes a while to go through.
It's State that is redacting and classifying these before release not Clinton.

Gee, I wonder if the reason that it's taking them so long to release e-mails is that there is so much sensitive material contained in them that needs to be redacted? There are a lot more e-mails than 55 thousand! That's just the tip of the iceberg.