2016 Postmortem
Related: About this forumA Law Hillary May Have Broken
◾ One of the laws that may have been broken is 18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information.
Note first that the information listed below doesn't require a formal "classified" designation to be relevant, and second, that "intent" is not necessary to trigger the law's penalties. "Gross negligence" is sufficient. Again, my emphasis below:
(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer
Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.
Full analysis at Down With Tyranny: http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2016/06/three-data-points-regarding-clintons.html?m=1
FreakinDJ
(17,644 posts)Tarc
(10,472 posts)Of all the yahoo bullshit tossed around by Emailgate-pushing clap-for-dead-faeries people, this is by far the most nonsensical.
Response to Tarc (Reply #2)
artislife This message was self-deleted by its author.
Tarc
(10,472 posts)We're already in the river's seat, no need to wish for anything.
Response to Tarc (Reply #10)
artislife This message was self-deleted by its author.
Tarc
(10,472 posts)The voters have spoken.
Response to Tarc (Reply #12)
artislife This message was self-deleted by its author.
Tarc
(10,472 posts)Capital-D, there.
Response to Tarc (Reply #15)
artislife This message was self-deleted by its author.
Joe the Revelator
(14,915 posts)Tarc
(10,472 posts)reformist2
(9,841 posts)BlueStateLib
(937 posts)BlueStateLib
(937 posts)(a) Whoever, for the purpose of obtaining information respecting the national defense with intent or reason to believe that the information is to be used to the injury of the United States, or to the advantage of any foreign nation, goes upon
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793
merbex
(3,123 posts)That alphabet thingie is so confusing!
BlueStateLib
(937 posts)Did Clinton believe the information she had on her server could be used to the injury of the United States
f) (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer
The proper place for classified information would be ClassNet accessed through classified workstation. Nobody is accusing clinton of transferring information got from ClassNet
onecaliberal
(32,786 posts)Press Virginia
(2,329 posts)(b)(3) Applies to the Director's statutory obligations to protect from disclosure intelligence sources and methods, as well as the organization, functions, names, official titles, salaries, or numbers of personnel employed by the Agency, in accord with the National Security Act of 1947 and the CIA Act of 1949, respectively.
While most are e-mail addresses identifying them as CIA and NSA employees, there are some references in the bodies of the e-mail
http://www.foia.cia.gov/exemptions-foia