Clinton to hand over email server to FBI

Page 19 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
Oh, but if you don't pick it up then you miss all the fun of flinging it. :D


Well, there's classified and there's classified. The Hildabeast is much more concerned with Republicans getting access than with other nations getting access. Iran/China/Russia might use such information against America, but Republicans would definitely use it against her. Matter of priorities.

Nice if desperate innuendo presented as fact.
 

HumblePie

Lifer
Oct 30, 2000
14,665
440
126
It's not nitpicky stupid. It's been a presidential order for a long time with training for everyone about it for a long time. This isn't something new that recently came up or changed. As Secretary of State it is her job as one of the top people to know this inside and out. There isn't any excuse. And best to error on the side of caution than not when it comes to classified info.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
It's not nitpicky stupid. It's been a presidential order for a long time with training for everyone about it for a long time. This isn't something new that recently came up or changed. As Secretary of State it is her job as one of the top people to know this inside and out. There isn't any excuse. And best to error on the side of caution than not when it comes to classified info.

Still dodging, necessarily so if you're to maintain belief in falsehood.

Apparently, I need to use a hypothetical situation. Let's say it's your inbox & you receive material you think might, kinda maybe should be classified. You might bring that to the attention of higher authority, right? What if you were the highest authority, the SoS?

Obviously, your judgment would prevail until such time that you provided the information to the State Dept prior to being made public. The fact that it might become classified by the pinheads after the fact is immaterial at the time.

Any fool, of course, can engage in backbiting & innuendo over that with the convenience of never having the actual material available for discussion because it's classified, of course, thus elevating the judgment of the pinheads above that of the SoS wrt the use of a very necessary tool, email. It's an attempt to usurp the power of the office of the SoS.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,585
17,117
136
Still dodging, necessarily so if you're to maintain belief in falsehood.

Apparently, I need to use a hypothetical situation. Let's say it's your inbox & you receive material you think might, kinda maybe should be classified. You might bring that to the attention of higher authority, right? What if you were the highest authority, the SoS?

Obviously, your judgment would prevail until such time that you provided the information to the State Dept prior to being made public. The fact that it might become classified by the pinheads after the fact is immaterial at the time.

Any fool, of course, can engage in backbiting & innuendo over that with the convenience of never having the actual material available for discussion because it's classified, of course, thus elevating the judgment of the pinheads above that of the SoS wrt the use of a very necessary tool, email. It's an attempt to usurp the power of the office of the SoS.

Have we seen any of these emails with classified info addressed to Hilary?
All I've heard is that her aids might have sent and received emails with classified info in them. What is she supposed to do then?


People are making a big deal over nothing...correction, it was something. Most people don't understand why government officials don't use government email and they think it's wrong and stupid not to. Fair enough but not only was the practice of not using government email ok but the issue has been addressed and is no longer allowed. The outrage should be over.
We know why but try telling them this email "scandal" is supposed to be in relation to the benghazi investigation but guess what?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=6l2FgAk0dko
 

TheGardener

Golden Member
Jul 19, 2014
1,945
33
56
Its not a criminal case according to Clinton. Its just to defame Clinton from presidential race
She is excellent at multitasking.

iu
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
It's not a criminal case. Sure it could turn into one but it's not currently. Do you dispute this?

Exactly one week after the FBI took possession of Hillary Clinton's personal email server, Al Jazeera America has been told that the FBI is now treating the Clinton case as a potential criminal investigation. Our sources add that dozens of federal investigators have now been assigned to this investigation.
http://america.aljazeera.com/articl...ls-as-a-potential-criminal-investigation.html

And what do people think the FBI investigates?

They are a LE agency that conducts criminal investigations.

Fern
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
174
106
-snip-
People are making a big deal over nothing...correction, it was something.

It's not "people" making a big deal.

It's officials in the Obama administration:

The email scandal burst into public view earlier this month after the inspector general for the U.S. intelligence community revealed that some of the thousands of private emails held by Clinton, secretary of state from 2009 to 2013, contained top-secret information, including data labeled “special intelligence” and “TK” for Talent Keyhole, a code word for communications or imagery intelligence derived from satellites.

http://freebeacon.com/national-secu...-laws-appear-broken-in-clinton-email-scandal/

If you don't like that news source pick one of the other zillion.

Fern
 

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
15,846
8,438
136
The timing is right for this to be a non-issue by the time the elections roll around.

If in fact as Fern pointed out that the Dems were the ones to bring this up, then it seems as if things could have been arranged to have this issue taken care of now and not later when it could do much more serious damage to the Clinton campaign effort.

Too much is riding on this race for the Dems to purposely sabotage themselves like this. Rather, it makes much more sense for them to have this issue get exposed, investigated and have Hillary cleared of any wrongdoing before the primaries are over and done with. It gives Hillary a much better position from which to challenge and win against..............*Trump*? lol
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
The timing is right for this to be a non-issue by the time the elections roll around.

If in fact as Fern pointed out that the Dems were the ones to bring this up, then it seems as if things could have been arranged to have this issue taken care of now and not later when it could do much more serious damage to the Clinton campaign effort.

Too much is riding on this race for the Dems to purposely sabotage themselves like this. Rather, it makes much more sense for them to have this issue get exposed, investigated and have Hillary cleared of any wrongdoing before the primaries are over and done with. It gives Hillary a much better position from which to challenge and win against..............*Trump*? lol

Repubs will attempt to drag it out as long as possible, maintain irrationality in their base, spread as much FUD as possible. Last I checked, they were still "investigating" Benghazi, trying to drink whiskey from a bottle of wine over Fast & Furious & the IRS as well.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,585
17,117
136

Cozarkian

Golden Member
Feb 2, 2012
1,352
95
91
They investigate lots of things dumb ass! That doesn't mean everything they investigate is a criminal matter. In order to be a criminal matter they have to find evidence of a criminal act.

It's really not a hard concept to grasp.

They only do criminal investigations. Not every investigation results in the discovery of a crime, but they don't waste their time if the facts don't suggest a crime may have occurred.
 

Knowing

Golden Member
Mar 18, 2014
1,522
13
46
Incorrect. As SoS she declared the information non-classified which is how it stays if & until reclassified later. Any SoS can do that, and it seems likely that only another SoS or the President or their designee can make such information classified.

That's true if the State department was the originator of the information. If it was from a CIA drone flight or NSA SIGINT (etc) then it's subject to derivative classification rules. It doesn't just become unclassified because she wills it so. Further, if it perhaps should've been classified and she was telling fibs (which she most certainly isn't) then it would be possible for those evil conspiring conservatives to FOIA it and I'm pretty sure that the administration would rather not have that black eye so if I were to bet, I'd say it'd find a classification and Hillary would find herself thrown under the bus.

In closing, tl;dr- the story has gone from "There's no classified" to "Hillary was the unwitting recipient of data that subsequently became classified" via PFM (pure f-ing magic). Also we should disregard that you can delegate authority but not responsibility as she tries to shirk the blame on to some other individual and forget that she's in the running for president_of_the_united_states_of_america and incapable of determining with any reliability what is, is not, or should be classified unless she has - at a minimum - 4 months to think about it.
 

trenchfoot

Lifer
Aug 5, 2000
15,846
8,438
136
Repubs will attempt to drag it out as long as possible, maintain irrationality in their base, spread as much FUD as possible. Last I checked, they were still "investigating" Benghazi, trying to drink whiskey from a bottle of wine over Fast & Furious & the IRS as well.

Standard Operating Procedure it surely is.

It's kind'a like the Repubs in Congress showing up at a pot luck picnic and then upon realizing how everybody else brought burgers, hot dogs, steaks and potato salad, the Repubs would immediately start criticizing how tasteless the burgers were and how chewy the steaks were and how runny the potato salad got to hide the fact that all they brought was a ten lb. bag of uncooked rice, some ice and a half-eaten bag of potato chips. ;)
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,685
136
That's true if the State department was the originator of the information. If it was from a CIA drone flight or NSA SIGINT (etc) then it's subject to derivative classification rules. It doesn't just become unclassified because she wills it so. Further, if it perhaps should've been classified and she was telling fibs (which she most certainly isn't) then it would be possible for those evil conspiring conservatives to FOIA it and I'm pretty sure that the administration would rather not have that black eye so if I were to bet, I'd say it'd find a classification and Hillary would find herself thrown under the bus.

In closing, tl;dr- the story has gone from "There's no classified" to "Hillary was the unwitting recipient of data that subsequently became classified" via PFM (pure f-ing magic). Also we should disregard that you can delegate authority but not responsibility as she tries to shirk the blame on to some other individual and forget that she's in the running for president_of_the_united_states_of_america and incapable of determining with any reliability what is, is not, or should be classified unless she has - at a minimum - 4 months to think about it.

She treated email that arrived in her internet inbox as not classified because it was not marked as such and came from an insecure source. She has no way to know if that information was deemed classified by another govt entity.

The fact that it may end up classified is completely immaterial.

I'm sure that the same issue can easily be found in the emails of any modern SoS.

It's different, of course, because it's Hillary.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
That's true if the State department was the originator of the information. If it was from a CIA drone flight or NSA SIGINT (etc) then it's subject to derivative classification rules. It doesn't just become unclassified because she wills it so. Further, if it perhaps should've been classified and she was telling fibs (which she most certainly isn't) then it would be possible for those evil conspiring conservatives to FOIA it and I'm pretty sure that the administration would rather not have that black eye so if I were to bet, I'd say it'd find a classification and Hillary would find herself thrown under the bus.

In closing, tl;dr- the story has gone from "There's no classified" to "Hillary was the unwitting recipient of data that subsequently became classified" via PFM (pure f-ing magic). Also we should disregard that you can delegate authority but not responsibility as she tries to shirk the blame on to some other individual and forget that she's in the running for president_of_the_united_states_of_america and incapable of determining with any reliability what is, is not, or should be classified unless she has - at a minimum - 4 months to think about it.
Well said. But what you're forgetting is that she used her special Highnessy powers to grant her email server perpetual home free status.

Can't believe a significant portion of this nation fervently wishes to usher in her Madlib administration.

"Hillary Rodham Clinton's" "official Secretary of State" "email system server" is in a "loft bathroom closet" in "Denver". Queue hysterical laughter at randomly constructing a sentence so preposterous that it could never happen.
 

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,256
68
86
Now reports are coming out that many of the classified docs were "born" classified, as was stated here repeatedly. She knew that as SoS.

She knowingly broke the law. She has hid probably the worst of it by self selecting and deleting the rest.