It Is A Crime...

[easyt65]

"It’s a crime under the Espionage Act to willingly, or inadvertently, transfer 22 Top Secret emails from secure State Department servers, to an unguarded private server. This is essentially what Hillary Clinton paid Bryan Pagliano to do (when linking her private computer server to secure State servers) and is likely the reason he was granted immunity.

It is a crime to remove government documents—classified and Top Secret—from secure locations and store them within unsecure locations. I ask how Clinton got this Top Secret intelligence onto a private server in the following YouTube segment.
--

Whether or not the existence of Clinton’s server was known by others is entirely irrelevant to her own legal predicament.

Clinton’s Top Secret emails contained Special Access Program intelligence; an aspect overlooked by pundits focused solely upon “emails” and intent. The severity of Clinton’s SAP emails is highlighted in a Wall Street Journal article titled Hillary’s ‘Special Access’ Server:
-- Hillary’s ‘Special Access’ Server

"The SAP—special access program—reference in particular is ringing Washington alarms. A SAP usually refers to a highly covert technology program, often weaponry. Knowledge of these programs is usually restricted to small groups of people on a need-to-know basis.

NBC News first reported that the SAP reference on Mrs. Clinton’s server is so sensitive that Mr. McCullough had to get special clearance before he could even view the intelligence-community declarations.

Mrs. Clinton would surely have recognized the sensitive nature of such a program—the details of which were sitting on her unsecured email server, affording “special access” to any quality Chinese hacker.

This is probably why Mrs. Clinton’s campaign decided to smear Mr. McCullough as a partisan."

Clinton’s server was unencrypted for three months."
-- That means she had SAP material on an un-protected server for 3 Months! THAT IS A MAJOR ISSUE!

"Under the Espionage Act, “gross negligence” is enough to prosecute, so intent isn’t needed when evaluating the harm done to national security from an unencrypted private server containing Top Secret emails. Simply claiming ignorance, or disinterest, or naiveté in using a private server isn’t enough to circumvent criminal indictments under the Espionage Act.

The fact that Hillary Clinton owned an unencrypted private server at her home, combined with the fact foreign nations (and Romanian hacker Guccifer) attempted to hack into her server, are other reasons indictments should be a genuine concern for all Hillary supporters."


As for the retroactively classified emails, retroactively classified intelligence was enough to convict CIA whistleblower Jeffrey Sterling and indict NSA whistleblower Thomas Drake.

If Clinton isn’t indicted, free Jeffrey Sterling.

Why Hillary Clinton Could Face Indictments and How This Makes Bernie Sanders Nominee

 

[easyt65]

It Is A Crime:

"The report, which was provided to lawmakers, states, “At a minimum, Secretary Clinton should have surrendered all emails dealing with Department business before leaving government service and, because she did not do so, she did not comply with the Department’s policies that were implemented in accordance with the Federal Records Act.”

Why Hillary Clinton Could Face Indictments and How This Makes Bernie Sanders Nominee

 

[easyt65]

She Did NOT Get Approval...

...the report says that the Inspector General’s office “found no evidence that the Secretary requested or obtained guidance or approval to conduct official business via a personal email account on her private server.”

 

[easyt65]

CONCLUSSION:

"...the basis for imminent indictments rests upon the fact that neither the State Department, nor the president gave Clinton the authority to use a private server. Since this server contained SAP and other Top Secret intelligence, and since these emails are born classified and immune to any retroactively classified defense of owning the server, Clinton faces legal consequences."

 

[Fenton Lum]

So haul her in and charge her.

 

[emilynghiem]

"It’s a crime under the Espionage Act to willingly, or inadvertently, transfer 22 Top Secret emails from secure State Department servers, to an unguarded private server. This is essentially what Hillary Clinton paid Bryan Pagliano to do (when linking her private computer server to secure State servers) and is likely the reason he was granted immunity.

It is a crime to remove government documents—classified and Top Secret—from secure locations and store them within unsecure locations. I ask how Clinton got this Top Secret intelligence onto a private server in the following YouTube segment.
--

Whether or not the existence of Clinton’s server was known by others is entirely irrelevant to her own legal predicament.

Clinton’s Top Secret emails contained Special Access Program intelligence; an aspect overlooked by pundits focused solely upon “emails” and intent. The severity of Clinton’s SAP emails is highlighted in a Wall Street Journal article titled Hillary’s ‘Special Access’ Server:
-- Hillary’s ‘Special Access’ Server

"The SAP—special access program—reference in particular is ringing Washington alarms. A SAP usually refers to a highly covert technology program, often weaponry. Knowledge of these programs is usually restricted to small groups of people on a need-to-know basis.

NBC News first reported that the SAP reference on Mrs. Clinton’s server is so sensitive that Mr. McCullough had to get special clearance before he could even view the intelligence-community declarations.

Mrs. Clinton would surely have recognized the sensitive nature of such a program—the details of which were sitting on her unsecured email server, affording “special access” to any quality Chinese hacker.

This is probably why Mrs. Clinton’s campaign decided to smear Mr. McCullough as a partisan."

Clinton’s server was unencrypted for three months."
-- That means she had SAP material on an un-protected server for 3 Months! THAT IS A MAJOR ISSUE!

"Under the Espionage Act, “gross negligence” is enough to prosecute, so intent isn’t needed when evaluating the harm done to national security from an unencrypted private server containing Top Secret emails. Simply claiming ignorance, or disinterest, or naiveté in using a private server isn’t enough to circumvent criminal indictments under the Espionage Act.

The fact that Hillary Clinton owned an unencrypted private server at her home, combined with the fact foreign nations (and Romanian hacker Guccifer) attempted to hack into her server, are other reasons indictments should be a genuine concern for all Hillary supporters."


As for the retroactively classified emails, retroactively classified intelligence was enough to convict CIA whistleblower Jeffrey Sterling and indict NSA whistleblower Thomas Drake.

If Clinton isn’t indicted, free Jeffrey Sterling.

Why Hillary Clinton Could Face Indictments and How This Makes Bernie Sanders Nominee

Dear easyt65 then WHY isn't Trump getting all his money behind Bernie Sander to push this legally in the
media, courts and govt; in order to get BERNIE the nomination, so Trump can roll right over him, easier than Clinton. Those two should REALLY team up. Trump and Sanders, at least until Trump turns on him too!

 

[Laughing-gas]

 

[The Irish Ram]

We can discuss them right now. Two wrongs don't make a right.....

 

[Luddly Neddite]

 

[TooTall]

You must include Clinton and Obama on your list of war criminals since they have used US weapons to kill people and Obama still is.

 

[Timmy]

What criminal statute did she violate ?

And isn't it really the emailers who committed the crime ?