Unsealed Trump Search Warrant - Trump had classified Documents

[struth]

I have not not been following this thread but are you guys talking about the difference between rules, regulations and laws? I had a class in college some time that discussed this, but it has been a long time ago.

i am not. i had classes on it too….years ago

 

[forkup]

I actually ran across the report while researching for another post. I wasn’t wanting my time doing research on the orders of another poster.

Do I think Hillary would be convicted? No. However if Hillary had been prosecuted we would have less problems with high level politicians pushing the limits.

My point is that the rule of law should apply equally to all. That means not just Trump but Hillary, Biden and Hunter. If youI are not going to enforce the law at the highest levels than why have it? People will get away with doing anything they think they can get away with.

Peons who have security clearances are very careful while handling classified information which is one reason why there are few prosecutions. I was one of those peons and I knew for a fact that I would have been prosecuted if I did stupid things like Hillary and Biden have done while handling classified info.

Of course there is an argument that too many things are classified in our nation. In other words something that might prove embarrassing to the administration in power is classified Top Secret although it would not do extremely grave damage to the nation if exposed. It may just do grave damage to a Party.

Do I think Hillary would be convicted?

That's not what I asked. I'm asking if she COULD be convicted going by what we know? That is also by the way the problem with your paper. It tries to answer one question. "Is it possible to bring charges on the basis of what is in the law." It answers yes by selectively using scraps of previous cases, removing them of context and then pretending that that's how it would go. It is approaching it like there is no beyond reasonable doubt standard and no defense attorneys. It cites Comey's statement for instance, but curiously completely omits let alone tries to rebut why he said that "no reasonable prosecutor would bring charges."

My point is that the rule of law should apply equally to all.

This is my point to. "Equally to all", means that Clinton should not be criminally prosecuted if the government can't show beyond a reasonable doubt that Clinton meant to collect or distribute classified information.

I was one of those peons and I knew for a fact that I would have been prosecuted if I did stupid things like Hillary and Biden have done while handling classified info.

I will repeat my challenge. Find me a single case where someone was convicted criminally without it being clearly shown that the person caught in possession of classified material purposefully violated the espionage act or committed some other act that showed intent. Any peon will do. Your paper cites other cases. Look up the specifics of why they were charged, it seems a good place to start.

The reason so few espionage act cases exist is not that security breaches are rare. It is that satisfying the different elements to charge people with it are hard to prove in a court of law.

 

[Batcat]

That's not what I asked. I'm asking if she COULD be convicted going by what we know? That is also by the way the problem with your paper. It tries to answer one question. "Is it possible to bring charges on the basis of what is in the law." It answers yes by selectively using scraps of previous cases, removing them of context and then pretending that that's how it would go. It is approaching it like there is no beyond reasonable doubt standard and no defense attorneys. It cites Comey's statement for instance, but curiously completely omits let alone tries to rebut why he said that "no reasonable prosecutor would bring charges."



This is my point to. "Equally to all", means that Clinton should not be criminally prosecuted if the government can't show beyond a reasonable doubt that Clinton meant to collect or distribute classified information.

I will repeat my challenge. Find me a single case where someone was convicted criminally without it being clearly shown that the person caught in possession of classified material purposefully violated the espionage act or committed some other act that showed intent. Any peon will do. Your paper cites other cases. Look up the specifics of why they were charged, it seems a good place to start.

The reason so few espionage act cases exist is not that security breaches are rare. It is that satisfying the different elements to charge people with it are hard to prove in a court of law.

Hillary Clinton sent classified info to her daughter. Would you do that and not intend to do so? Hillary violated the law when she sent classified info to her daughter. Also how did classified info end up on Anthony Weiner‘s computer?

18 U.S. Code § 798 - Disclosure of classified information

www.law.cornell.edu

Classified documents found on Anthony Weiner's computer

At least five emails determined to be classified were found among 2,800 documents stored on a laptop belonging to Anthony Weiner, whose then-wife Huma Abedin was Clinton's chief deputy.

www.dailymail.co.uk

If I had copied a classified document and taken it home as a reminder of all the times I handled classified data and been caught chances are I would be prosecuted. Of course today my attorneys might use the Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden defense to get me off.

The bottom line is all information that is classified should meet the requirements and not be classified just to stop embarrassment. The rules on handling classified info should apply equally to all that handle it. Some low level peon should not be punished while some high level official gets away with sticking highly classified info on an insecure and unauthorized server for all our enemies to hack.

12 Things to Remember when Handling Classified Information | securitywing

securitywing.com

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Hillary Clinton sent classified info to her daughter. Would you do that and not intend to do so? Hillary violated the law when she sent classified info to her daughter. Also how did classified info end up on Anthony Weiner‘s computer?

18 U.S. Code § 798 - Disclosure of classified information

www.law.cornell.edu

Classified documents found on Anthony Weiner's computer

At least five emails determined to be classified were found among 2,800 documents stored on a laptop belonging to Anthony Weiner, whose then-wife Huma Abedin was Clinton's chief deputy.

www.dailymail.co.uk

If I had copied a classified document and taken it home as a reminder of all the times I handled classified data and been caught chances are I would be prosecuted. Of course today my attorneys might use the Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden defense to get me off.

The bottom line is all information that is classified should meet the requirements and not be classified just to stop embarrassment. The rules on handling classified info should apply equally to all that handle it. Some low level peon should not be punished while some high level official gets away with sticking highly classified info on an insecure and unauthorized server for all our enemies to hack.

12 Things to Remember when Handling Classified Information | securitywing

securitywing.com

But her emails….

 

[forkup]

Hillary Clinton sent classified info to her daughter. Would you do that and not intend to do so? Hillary violated the law when she sent classified info to her daughter. Also how did classified info end up on Anthony Weiner‘s computer?

18 U.S. Code § 798 - Disclosure of classified information

www.law.cornell.edu

Classified documents found on Anthony Weiner's computer

At least five emails determined to be classified were found among 2,800 documents stored on a laptop belonging to Anthony Weiner, whose then-wife Huma Abedin was Clinton's chief deputy.

www.dailymail.co.uk

If I had copied a classified document and taken it home as a reminder of all the times I handled classified data and been caught chances are I would be prosecuted. Of course today my attorneys might use the Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden defense to get me off.

The bottom line is all information that is classified should meet the requirements and not be classified just to stop embarrassment. The rules on handling classified info should apply equally to all that handle it. Some low level peon should not be punished while some high level official gets away with sticking highly classified info on an insecure and unauthorized server for all our enemies to hack.

12 Things to Remember when Handling Classified Information | securitywing

securitywing.com

Would you do that and not intend to do so

Sure. If that info wasn't deemed classified at the time of sending I don't see how not. I gave you the link. A link that I in turn got from actually using the footnotes.

Also how did classified info end up on Anthony Weiner‘s computer?

Three of them were sent either to or from an address called 'BBB Backup,' which one email identifies as a backup of a Blackberry Bold 9700, presumably belonging to Abedin.

Maybe the backup was stored to the same cloud address, maybe the computer was originally from Abedin and her husband took it over, maybe the tooth fairy intervened. I don't know. The point is if you want to charge Abedin (not Clinton considering she wasn't involved) the government would have to show that she PURPOSEFULLY planned to send her husband classified information. I would say good luck.

Of course today my attorneys might use the Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden defense to get me off.

There were security breaches prior 2015. Again, find me the peon who got convicted without intent being clearly present. People convicted with the espionage act are rare so it shouldn't be that hard. I'll help. Espionage Act of 1917 - Wikipedia This has a lot of names. Find me the peon.


To your last link I say this. What does that have to with anything? Sure, there are rules when handing classified information. The question is what happens when you break those rules. You seem to imply that breaking them automatically causes criminal prosecution for everybody except for people like Clinton and Biden. This is simply not the case.

The main punishment for mishandling of classified information is administrative—officials can be demoted, lose their security clearances, and be fired.
As such, the classification system exists in parallel to separate criminal penalties Congress has imposed to protect secret information deemed particularly critical to national security. Classified Information: Definition, Examples, and Laws.

State Department revokes security clearance for acting chief of staff to UN ambassador

Jennifer Davis, a career Foreign Service officer, is returning to her previous role but will “aggressively appeal this decision.”

www.politico.com

NBC: CIA officer fired after admitting leak

In a rare occurrence, the CIA fired an officer on Thursday who acknowledged admitting leaking classified information to a reporter, NBC News has learned.

www.nbcnews.com

Mary McCarthy (CIA) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Paul R. Pillar - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I can go on and on and give you people even in the Trump era, some who I my opinion egregiously violated the espionage act and weren't prosecuted.

Since we are interested in applying the law to all people equally.

 

[Batcat]

Sure. If that info wasn't deemed classified at the time of sending I don't see how not. I gave you the link. A link that I in turn got from actually using the footnotes.


Three of them were sent either to or from an address called 'BBB Backup,' which one email identifies as a backup of a Blackberry Bold 9700, presumably belonging to Abedin.

Maybe the backup was stored to the same cloud address, maybe the computer was originally from Abedin and her husband took it over, maybe the tooth fairy intervened. I don't know. The point is if you want to charge Abedin (not Clinton considering she wasn't involved) the government would have to show that she PURPOSEFULLY planned to send her husband classified information. I would say good luck.


There were security breaches prior 2015. Again, find me the peon who got convicted without intent being clearly present. People convicted with the espionage act are rare so it shouldn't be that hard. I'll help. Espionage Act of 1917 - Wikipedia This has a lot of names. Find me the peon.


To your last link I say this. What does that have to with anything? Sure, there are rules when handing classified information. The question is what happens when you break those rules. You seem to imply that breaking them automatically causes criminal prosecution for everybody except for people like Clinton and Biden. This is simply not the case.

The main punishment for mishandling of classified information is administrative—officials can be demoted, lose their security clearances, and be fired.
As such, the classification system exists in parallel to separate criminal penalties Congress has imposed to protect secret information deemed particularly critical to national security. Classified Information: Definition, Examples, and Laws.

State Department revokes security clearance for acting chief of staff to UN ambassador

Jennifer Davis, a career Foreign Service officer, is returning to her previous role but will “aggressively appeal this decision.”

www.politico.com

NBC: CIA officer fired after admitting leak

In a rare occurrence, the CIA fired an officer on Thursday who acknowledged admitting leaking classified information to a reporter, NBC News has learned.

www.nbcnews.com

Mary McCarthy (CIA) - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Paul R. Pillar - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I can go on and on and give you people even in the Trump era, some who I my opinion egregiously violated the espionage act and weren't prosecuted.

Since we are interested in applying the law to all people equally.

No matter how hard you try to justify Hillary’s actions the fact that classified information ended up on Weiners’s laptop is damning. Perhaps it was originally Abedin’s laotop but even so — NO CLASSIFIED INFORMATION SHOULD HAVE EVER BEEN ON IT. Hillary was violating security rules and therefore so was her aide or possibly aides. The end result was China and possibly other nations hacked her server and gained access to information that did damage to our nation.

Some of the emails on Clinton's private server were reportedly even more classified than 'top secret'

Fox News reported on the contents of a letter authored by Intelligence Community Inspector General I. Charles McCullough III.

www.businessinsider.com

Whoa: Did Hillary's Emails Expose Undercover US Spies and Identify Foreigners on CIA Payroll?

Security Risks.

townhall.com

If I would have been the last person out of the secure area I worked in but had left a safe open, there would have been minor consequences, I would not have been prosecuted. If I had taken a classified document home with me and hid it in a closet, I would have been prosecuted. It‘s not rocket science.

You will probably argue that I could have taken info beyond top secret and put it on a server for all to see and walked away scot-free like Hillary. in reality my ass would have bee hung high.

In the future people will use the Clinton and Biden defense to get off when they violate security laws. It will be interesting to see if it works.

 

[forkup]

No matter how hard you try to justify Hillary’s actions the fact that classified information ended up on Weiners’s laptop is damning. Perhaps it was originally Abedin’s laotop but even so — NO CLASSIFIED INFORMATION SHOULD HAVE EVER BEEN ON IT. Hillary was violating security rules and therefore so was her aide or possibly aides. The end result was China and possibly other nations hacked her server and gained access to information that did damage to our nation.

Some of the emails on Clinton's private server were reportedly even more classified than 'top secret'

Fox News reported on the contents of a letter authored by Intelligence Community Inspector General I. Charles McCullough III.

www.businessinsider.com

Whoa: Did Hillary's Emails Expose Undercover US Spies and Identify Foreigners on CIA Payroll?

Security Risks.

townhall.com

If I would have been the last person out of the secure area I worked in but had left a safe open, there would have been minor consequences, I would not have been prosecuted. If I had taken a classified document home with me and hid it in a closet, I would have been prosecuted. It‘s not rocket science.

You will probably argue that I could have taken info beyond top secret and put it on a server for all to see and walked away scot-free like Hillary. in reality my ass would have bee hung high.

In the future people will use the Clinton and Biden defense to get off when they violate security laws. It will be interesting to see if it works.

No matter how hard you try to justify Hillary’s actions

When have I ever tried to justify her actions? I've been using one argument and one only. An argument you consistently try to not address. Even when I give you help in finding sourcing to do it and ask you to rebut my assertion. Clinton's actions aren't prosecutable because proving the charges would fail in front of a jury.

If I had taken a classified document home with me and hid it in a closet, I would have been prosecuted. It‘s not rocket science.

If it is not rocket science, you will have no problem finding people who just did that and were found guilty under the espionage act. I gave you the link you need to find this person in the previous post. One name, just one single name.

 

[Batcat]

When have I ever tried to justify her actions? I've been using one argument and one only. An argument you consistently try to not address. Even when I give you help in finding sourcing to do it and ask you to rebut my assertion. Clinton's actions aren't prosecutable because proving the charges would fail in front of a jury.

If it is not rocket science, you will have no problem finding people who just did that and were found guilty under the espionage act. I gave you the link you need to find this person in the previous post. One name, just one single name.

No matter how you try to excuse Hillary she set up a server and conducted government business on it. That in itself was a violation of the law. Her job required she deal with classified information so she had classified information on that server much of which she likely destroyed. The destroyed email probably contained a lot of classified email, some even more damaging than what has been found.

Obama communicated with her on her illegal server which is most likely one of the reasons Hillary was not prosecuted. Obama most likely lacked the cojones to stand up to Hillary. But even so we can’t make our first black President look bad. That would be considered racist.

It is my argument that Hillary had intent to violate the laws on handling classified information and not only negligently mishandled it but knowingly mishandled it and ended up exposing some of the most highly classified info to our enemies. It is possible that lives were lost because of Hillary’s actions.

The fact that Hillary was not prosecuted adds to the argument that the DOJ and FBI are now politically motivated to help the Democratic Party. Since human nature is to do anything you can get away with, we are seeing a lot of corruption and malfeasance committed by high level Democrats in the D.C. Swamp. They know they can get away with it so why not take advantage. The Biden Crime Family is another example.

For the Record: Yes, Hillary Clinton Should Have Been Prosecuted for Willful Gross Negligence

Gross Negligence and Intent.

townhall.com

***snip***


Over-classification' may be a real issue, but as French states, the problem here was not "at the margins." Obviously and very highly classified material -- including about dealings with Iran and North Korea's nuclear program -- were sent and received through Hillary's bootleg server, to the point that some witnesses were shocked to learn about the type content that was recklessly compromised. As for his point about the effort and intent that's required to move classified information from a classified system into an unclassified one, that was illustrated in stark relief by Hillary's own virtual paper trail in at least one case, in which she ordered a subordinate to strip the 'identifying heading' from a classified memo and send it over regular email, "nonsecure." Hillary repeatedly claimed that none of the emails on her server were classified (a laughable lie), then switched to saying none were classified at the time they were disseminated (also a lie). Desperate, she then turned to arguing that none were marked classified at the time they were disseminated.

This distinction is irrelevant, a misleading tautology, and also a lie. It's irrelevant because she signed a binding nondisclosure agreement, under penalty of perjury, that it was her duty to recognize and safeguard classified information, explicitly marked and unmarked as such. Go back and read French's argument about why the top secret and Special Access Program content was unambiguously classified. She knew better. It's a misleading tautology because in any cases, in order for emails to be marked as classified, they would have to go through a review process. In the vast majority of instances involving her home-brew server, emails were never reviewed (and therefore never marked) because the official system was bypassed; that was the whole point. It is also a lie because in at least two instances, there were classified markings on the messages. Hillary told investigators that she didn't know what they meant. They didn't believe her because her explanation was insultingly absurd. But they couldn't definitively prove that she was lying. I repeat: All of this required intent and constituted extreme recklessness that rose to the level of gross negligence.

Clinton Broke Federal Rules With Email Server, Audit Finds

She should have surrendered all emails dealing with State Department issues, the audit found.

www.nbcnews.com

Obama used pseudonym to talk with Hillary on private server

President Obama used an undisclosed pseudonym to communicate with then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on her private email server – shocking her top aide Huma Abedin when she learned of i…

nypost.com

https://www.newsmax.com/Politics/former-justice-department-lawyer/2016/07/05/id/737182/

 

[forkup]

No matter how you try to excuse Hillary she set up a server and conducted government business on it. That in itself was a violation of the law. Her job required she deal with classified information so she had classified information on that server much of which she likely destroyed. The destroyed email probably contained a lot of classified email, some even more damaging than what has been found.

Obama communicated with her on her illegal server which is most likely one of the reasons Hillary was not prosecuted. Obama most likely lacked the cojones to stand up to Hillary. But even so we can’t make our first black President look bad. That would be considered racist.

It is my argument that Hillary had intent to violate the laws on handling classified information and not only negligently mishandled it but knowingly mishandled it and ended up exposing some of the most highly classified info to our enemies. It is possible that lives were lost because of Hillary’s actions.

The fact that Hillary was not prosecuted adds to the argument that the DOJ and FBI are now politically motivated to help the Democratic Party. Since human nature is to do anything you can get away with, we are seeing a lot of corruption and malfeasance committed by high level Democrats in the D.C. Swamp. They know they can get away with it so why not take advantage. The Biden Crime Family is another example.

For the Record: Yes, Hillary Clinton Should Have Been Prosecuted for Willful Gross Negligence

Gross Negligence and Intent.

townhall.com

***snip***


Over-classification' may be a real issue, but as French states, the problem here was not "at the margins." Obviously and very highly classified material -- including about dealings with Iran and North Korea's nuclear program -- were sent and received through Hillary's bootleg server, to the point that some witnesses were shocked to learn about the type content that was recklessly compromised. As for his point about the effort and intent that's required to move classified information from a classified system into an unclassified one, that was illustrated in stark relief by Hillary's own virtual paper trail in at least one case, in which she ordered a subordinate to strip the 'identifying heading' from a classified memo and send it over regular email, "nonsecure." Hillary repeatedly claimed that none of the emails on her server were classified (a laughable lie), then switched to saying none were classified at the time they were disseminated (also a lie). Desperate, she then turned to arguing that none were marked classified at the time they were disseminated.

This distinction is irrelevant, a misleading tautology, and also a lie. It's irrelevant because she signed a binding nondisclosure agreement, under penalty of perjury, that it was her duty to recognize and safeguard classified information, explicitly marked and unmarked as such. Go back and read French's argument about why the top secret and Special Access Program content was unambiguously classified. She knew better. It's a misleading tautology because in any cases, in order for emails to be marked as classified, they would have to go through a review process. In the vast majority of instances involving her home-brew server, emails were never reviewed (and therefore never marked) because the official system was bypassed; that was the whole point. It is also a lie because in at least two instances, there were classified markings on the messages. Hillary told investigators that she didn't know what they meant. They didn't believe her because her explanation was insultingly absurd. But they couldn't definitively prove that she was lying. I repeat: All of this required intent and constituted extreme recklessness that rose to the level of gross negligence.

Clinton Broke Federal Rules With Email Server, Audit Finds

She should have surrendered all emails dealing with State Department issues, the audit found.

www.nbcnews.com

Obama used pseudonym to talk with Hillary on private server

President Obama used an undisclosed pseudonym to communicate with then Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on her private email server – shocking her top aide Huma Abedin when she learned of i…

nypost.com

https://www.newsmax.com/Politics/former-justice-department-lawyer/2016/07/05/id/737182/

No matter how you try to excuse Hillary

I haven't nor am planning to excuse Hillary. Saying something isn't prosecutable is not the same as saying something is justified or excused. You keep on putting up that strawman, and it is anoying if I'm being honest. If you can't rebut my argument then say so and not mistate my position.

It is my argument that Hillary had intent to violate the laws on handling classified information and not only negligently mishandled it

If that's your argument I would like you to support it. Instead of begging the question and hoping I don't notice that you continiously refuse to do so.

The fact that Hillary was not prosecuted adds to the argument that the DOJ and FBI are now politically motivated to help the Democratic Party.

Only if you can show that Hillary got away with something other people wouldn't. The way you do that is by showing me examples of other people who didn't get away with it. Like for instance Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice also used private servers for classified emails - Breitbart ... Oh wait, they did. I have asked you almost every post to do just that, you continously refuse. I for instance have given you examples of people who didn't get charged even when they admitted to have leaked classified information purposefully to the press. Including people in the Trump administration, and people prior 2015 some of which you would describe as "peons" like for instance a simple data analyst. I even showed that both her predecessors had private email servers that did receive classified information. Her 2 Republican predecessors.