Comey Defends Decision Not To Recommend Indictment of Hillary

Anyone who has ever served in the military knows different. I thought you served flightie? According to Comey then, if I find classified information on my email then I am free to do anything with it I want. It's not my fault it was there and I am not held to any standard for it's care. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

The Washington Post reported a couple months ago that all of the emails that were deemed "Classified" were not marked "Classified" at the time they were sent. Here is an example taken from the Washington post link in the "Dead Candidate Walking" thread.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graph...clinton-email/

Comey's testimony before congress backs up what the Washington Post reported. All of the emails that were deemed classified were NOT marked classified at the time they were sent. HRC was not indicted for negligence because the label on the emails were not marked classified, just like this one below. Comey testified that HRC and the staffers should have been smart enough to know when a document had classified information. However, not knowing is not a crime. One cannot be indicted for negligence if the label on the email has the wrong security classification, like this one here. You lose JD, back to teaching school for you.

Not all the "classified" emails were marked "classified"!

So they did not contain "classified" material? Right?

Were the emails in which she instructed staff members to delete the classification on the email before sending it to the private server, "classified"?

Not all of the illegally imported firearms had serial numbers on them. Right?

So they were not "illegally" imported! Right?

Was it legal to file or otherwise remove the serial numbers?

So the FBI and Fluffy think it's ok to have classified information on one's private server .... and it's ok to erase emails that are requested in a Congressional investigation. They also think it is ok to lie to FBI agents during an investigation.

The Washington Post reported a couple months ago that all of the emails that were deemed "Classified" were not marked "Classified" at the time they were sent. Here is an example taken from the Washington post link in the "Dead Candidate Walking" thread.

Comey's testimony before congress backs up what the Washington Post reported. All of the emails that were deemed classified were NOT marked classified at the time they were sent. HRC was not indicted for negligence because the label on the emails were not marked classified, just like this one below. Comey testified that HRC and the staffers should have been smart enough to know when a document had classified information. However, not knowing is not a crime. One cannot be indicted for negligence if the label on the email has the wrong security classification, like this one here. You lose JD, back to teaching school for you. Originally Posted by flghtr65

You're a miscreant Kool Aid sotted hildebeest minion, flighty.

The regulations quite clearly state that anyone in possession of classified information is responsible for the security of that classified information, flighty. Comey testified that anyone operating at hildebeest's level of government should have known she was dealing with highly classified information, flighty. But then Comey excused her criminality by saying that hildebeest was too stupid to understand what anyone else at her level understands, flighty ... and anyone else operating at her level would be prosecuted for if they did what hildebeest did. Furthermore, flighty, Odumbo's hireling, Gruber, said you are also stupid.

So, flighty, you're a stupid Kool Aid sotted hildebeest minion defending your too stupid to be president idol.

1. They were not marked Classified when sent to her.
2. The person that sent them should not have sent them to someone that did not have the clearance to receive them if they were.
3. Gowdy tried to fake some and the GOP seems to be okay with that
4. She tried to get a secure Cell/email and was denied.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/emails-s...re-smartphone/

So now that it is obvious to anyone with a normal brain she did nothing wrong, why keep pushing the issue?

If she forwarding them is a crime what about the source that sent them?

If it is unlawful, why isn't Rice , Powell and others not guilty as well?

Why is the NSA not liable for telling her she didnt need a higher level of security?

1. They were not marked Classified when sent to her.
2. The person that sent them should not have sent them to someone that did not have the clearance to receive them if they were.
3. Gowdy tried to fake some and the GOP seems to be okay with that
4. She tried to get a secure Cell/email and was denied.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/emails-s...re-smartphone/

So now that it is obvious to anyone with a normal brain she did nothing wrong, why keep pushing the issue?

If she forwarding them is a crime what about the source that sent them?

If it is unlawful, why isn't Rice , Powell and others not guilty as well?

Why is the NSA not liable for telling her she didnt need a higher level of security? Originally Posted by MT Pockets

Neither Rice nor Powell set up and used an insecured server to conduct 100% of their state department business, so your deflection is complete and utter bullshit. Finally, Comey testified that if anyone else who tries to do what hildebeest did would be prosecuted for violation of the law, so your notion that she did nothing wrong is complete and utter bullshit.

Neither Rice nor Powell set up and used an insecured server to conduct 100% of their state department business, so your deflection is complete and utter bullshit. Finally, Comey testified that if anyone else who tries to do what hildebeest did would be prosecuted for violation of the law, so your notion that she did nothing wrong is complete and utter bullshit.
Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Answer this. When they applied at the NSA were they turned down?
You are twisting what Comey said to suit you. He is a straight shooter that has proven to be unbiased and is a strong supporter of the GOP. He would have charged her if he felt she did something unlawful. You need to learn the difference between a rule and a law first off. Then Explain why the NSA said she didn't need it. It si a gray area that your team id desperate to hang on her because that is all you have. If she can be as bad as you say and never get caught she is the smartest human alive. Makes want to vote for her now.

Answer this. When they applied at the NSA were they turned down?
You are twisting what Comey said to suit you. He is a straight shooter that has proven to be unbiased and is a strong supporter of the GOP. He would have charged her if he felt she did something unlawful. You need to learn the difference between a rule and a law first off. Then Explain why the NSA said she didn't need it. It si a gray area that your team id desperate to hang on her because that is all you have. If she can be as bad as you say and never get caught she is the smartest human alive. Makes want to vote for her now. Originally Posted by MT Pockets

Comey said what he said, and it's you who is ignoring what he said. Comey also said hildebeest never had approval from anyone to do what she did, and she was denied because what she wanted to do contravened laws and regulations ... but she willfully and illegally did it anyway.

I suppose these apologists for Bill's "girl" are admitting that she is so dense and incompetent that when she reads an email she can't tell the content is material that would customarily be "classified" ... As a consequence they concede she's too dumb to be President. Kinda like not knowing that someone can have two email accounts on one phone! Or believing she was being shot at by a sniper, or women weren't allowed in the Marine Corps in the 1970's. Or that her husband was getting blow jobs in the other end of the house. The list is almost endless of your stupidity.

1. They were not marked Classified when sent to her.
2. The person that sent them should not have sent them to someone that did not have the clearance to receive them if they were.
3. Gowdy tried to fake some and the GOP seems to be okay with that
4. She tried to get a secure Cell/email and was denied.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/emails-s...re-smartphone/
Originally Posted by MT Pockets

+1

+1 Originally Posted by flghtr65

Odumbo's hireling, Gruber, called you stupid, flighty.

Odumbo's hireling, Gruber, called you stupid, flighty. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Gruber called it right! He certainly wasn't talking about the conservatives!

The conservatives already knew Obaminable was lying.

Comey testified that anyone operating at hildebeest's level of government should have known she was dealing with highly classified information, flighty. But then Comey excused her criminality by saying that hildebeest was too stupid to understand what anyone else at her level understands, flighty ... and anyone else operating at her level would be prosecuted for if they did what hildebeest did.

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

IBH, here is rule 18 USC 1924. The word knowingly is a key word here. Not knowing is not a crime. Comey testified before Congress that HRC "Should have been smart enough to know" . However, according to rule 18 USC 1924 (which Hannity on Fox posted several times) not knowing is not a violation of the rule. Comey ruled correctly based on the facts and the USC rules as written. You have been beaten like a drum. You and the GOP will have to find another way to bring scandal to HRC.

18 USC 1924
(a)Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.

So, the Secretary of State is so inept and stupid that she does not realize that she is receiving classified documents on her unsecure private server, and her server is vulnerable to anybody with the initiative to hack into it.

That's comforting.

IBH, here is rule 18 USC 1924. The word knowingly is a key word here. Not knowing is not a crime. Originally Posted by flghtr65

"knowing" is an element of 99% of the crimes in the United States.

Do you actually believe for one second that all a suspect has to do is say "I didn't know" and they get found "not guilty" ...????

If that were the case there would be one jail in each state and one Federal prison.....for the people who couldn't speak and write.

When you learn something about criminal law and criminal prosecutions and do it for 40 or so years .... come back and talk your shit.

Comey said "intent" .... one proves "knowing" and "intent" by circumstantial evidence short of the suspect saying or writing: I intended to do it!!!!

99% of the Federal prosecutions are based on "intent" proven by circumstantial evidence .... Comey know that! One "knowingly" commits an act when one INTENDS to do it .... Her own dumbass admissions and actions prove her intent.

Now what I want you to do is make the case for HillaryNoMore that SHE IS UNQUESTIONABLY NOT QUALIFIED TO BE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. Confirm that she didn't "know" what she was doing when she had the server set up, sent DOS emails form DOS employees and other contacts through that server, asked DOS employee to DELETE the classification notice on the documents sent SO THEY COULD BE SENT TO AND RECEIVED BY HER PRIVATE SERVER, and attempted to delete 30,000 emails that she didn't want others to see ... and then lied about the above.

All your bullshit is smoke and mirrors.

IBH, here is rule 18 USC 1924. The word knowingly is a key word here. Not knowing is not a crime. Comey testified before Congress that HRC "Should have been smart enough to know" . However, according to rule 18 USC 1924 (which Hannity on Fox posted several times) not knowing is not a violation of the rule. Comey ruled correctly based on the facts and the USC rules as written. You have been beaten like a drum. You and the GOP will have to find another way to bring scandal to HRC.

18 USC 1924
(a)Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both. Originally Posted by flghtr65

Bull fucking shit, flighty. The rules, regulations and laws state that anyone having classified material in their possession is 100% responsible for insuring proper security protocols are followed at all times -- regardless of how that material came into their possession.

Federal Register: September 24, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 185)
Rules and Regulations

32 CFR Part 2004

Safeguarding Classified National Security Information; Final Rule

Sec. 2004.4 Responsibilities of holders.

Authorized persons who have access to classified information are
responsible for:
(a) Protecting it from persons without authorized access to that
information, to include securing it in approved equipment or facilities
whenever it is not under the direct control of an authorized person;
(b) Meeting safeguarding requirements prescribed by the agency
head; and
(c) Ensuring that classified information is not communicated over
unsecured voice or data circuits, in public conveyances or places, or
in any other manner that permits interception by unauthorized persons.


Sec. 2004.5 Standards for security equipment.

The Administrator of General Services shall, in coordination with
agency heads originating classified information, establish and publish
uniform standards, specifications and supply schedules for security
equipment designed to provide secure storage for and destruction of
classified information. Whenever new security equipment is procured, it
shall be in conformance with the standards and specifications
established by the Administratior of General Services, and shall, to
the maximum extent possible, be of the type available through the
Federal Supply System.


Sec. 2004.6 Storage.

(a) General. Classified information shall be stored only under
conditions designed to deter and detect unauthorized access to the
information. Storage at overseas locations shall be at U.S. Government
controlled facilities unless otherwise stipulated in treaties or
international agreements. Overseas storage standards for facilities
under a Chief of Mission are promulgated under the authority of the
Overseas Security Policy Board.
(b) Requirements for physical protection. (1) Top Secret. Top
Secret information shall be stored by one of the following methods:
(i) In a GSA-approved security container with one of the following
supplemental controls:
(A) Continuous protection by cleared guard or duty personnel;
(B) Inspection of the security container every two hours by cleared
guard or duty personnel;
(C) An Intrusion Detection System (IDS) with the personnel
responding to the alarm arriving within 15 minutes of the alarm
annunciation [Acceptability of Intrusion Detection Equipment (IDE): All
IDE must be UL-listed (or equivalent as defined by the agency head) and
approved by the agency head. Government and proprietary installed,
maintained, or furnished systems are subject to approval only by the
agency head.]; or
(D) Security-In-Depth conditions, provided the GSA-approved
container is equipped with a lock meeting Federal Specification FF-L-
2740.
(ii) An open storage area constructed in accordance with Appendix
A, which is equipped with an IDS with the personnel responding to the
alarm arriving within 15 minutes of the alarm annunciation if the area
is covered by Security-In-Depth or a five minute alarm response if it
is not.
(iii) An IDS-equipped vault with the personnel responding to the
alarm arriving within 15 minutes of the alarm annunciation.
(2) Secret. Secret information shall be stored by one of the
following methods:
(i) In the same manner as prescribed for Top Secret information;
(ii) In a GSA-approved security container or vault without
supplemental controls; or
(iii) In either of the following:
(A) Until October 1, 2012, in a non-GSA-approved container having a
built-in combination lock or in a non-GSA approved container secured
with a rigid metal lockbar and an agency head approved padlock; or
(B) An open storage area. In either case, one of the following
supplemental controls is required:
(1) The location that houses the container or open storage area
shall be subject to continuous protection by cleared guard or duty
personnel;
(2) Cleared guard or duty personnel shall inspect the security
container or open storage area once every four hours; or
(3) An IDS (per paragraph (b)(1)(i)(C) of this section) with the
personnel responding to the alarm arriving within 30 minutes of the
alarm annunciation. [In addition to one of these supplemental controls
specified in paragraphs (b)(2)(iii)(B)(1) through (3), security-in-
depth as determined by the agency head is required as part of the
supplemental controls for a non-GSA approved container or open storage
area storing Secret information.]
(3) Confidential. Confidential information shall be stored in the
same manner as prescribed for Top Secret or Secret information except
that supplemental controls are not required.
(c) Combinations. Use and maintenance of dial-type locks and other
changeable combination locks.
(1) Equipment in service. The classification of the combination
shall be the same as the highest level of classified information that
is protected by the lock. Combinations to dial-type locks shall be
changed only by persons having a favorable determination of eligibility
for access to classified information and authorized access to the level
of information protected unless other sufficient controls exist to
prevent access to the lock or knowledge of the combination.
Combinations shall be changed under the following conditions:
(i) Whenever such equipment is placed into use;
(ii) Whenever a person knowing the combination no longer requires
access to it unless other sufficient controls exist to prevent access
to the lock; or
(iii) Whenever a combination has been subject to possible
unauthorized disclosure.
(2) Equipment out of service. When security equipment is taken out
of service, it shall be inspected to ensure that no classified
information remains and the built-in combination lock shall be reset to
a standard combination.
(d) Key operated locks. When special circumstances exist, an agency
head may approve the use of key operated locks for the storage of
Secret and Confidential information. Whenever such locks are used,
administrative procedures for the control and accounting of keys and
locks shall be established.