Election 16: Donald Trumps wins Presidency. God Help us all!

[chipwhich]

In the latest batch of emails release 3000 or so they're saying 66 or so were "classified" and of those 65 were confidential, which is the lowest level of classification. Having someone's name and telephone number can be classified confidential because it's PII. What is confidential is an incredible low bar.

I don't think anybody is accusing her of taking a secret document and sending it over an unclassified network email. First off how would she even get the classified document onto the unclassified network?

What she's being accused of is (1)aggregation taking two unclassified pieces of information and then putting them together making a classified disclosure. (2) writing something on the unclassified email which constitutes a classified material.

This is not Sandy Burger who stuffed classified top secret documents down his pants and walked out of a secure facility. This is something else entirely..

This post is totally false lol. Made up nonsense

[visionary]

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/bernie-sanders-bill-clinton-unacceptable-217522

Sanders: Bill Clinton's behavior 'totally disgraceful and unacceptable'

 

Bernie Sanders on Friday decried former President Bill Clinton’s affair with then-White House intern Monica Lewinsky as “totally disgraceful and unacceptable” but stressed that he is running a campaign against Hillary Clinton, not her husband.

 

“Look, Hillary Clinton is not Bill Clinton. What Bill Clinton did, I think we can all acknowledge, was totally, totally, totally disgraceful and unacceptable,” the Vermont senator and Democratic presidential candidate told a crowd at an Iowa town hall. “But I am running against Hillary Clinton. I’m not running against Bill Clinton.”

 

In a jab at the right, Sanders said the nation needs to do what the Republicans are not — focus on serious issues like the disappearing middle class and wealth inequality.

 

“So what I am doing is contrasting my record with Hillary Clinton’s record, and they are very, very different records,” Sanders said. “But I am not gonna get into the personal stuff. You’re looking at somebody who in a long political career — and you call up your friends in Vermont to verify this — I’ve never run a negative TV ad in my life.”

[skinsmarydu]

Trump has to learn to stay on message.   He's strongest when he's (1) talking about his core issues ( rebuilding infrastructure,  securing our boarders,  and taking care of the Vets )...

...all of which are going to be "just terrific". Taking that word at it's core implies terror.

Kind of like "ridiculous" is "worthy of ridicule".

[twa]

 

A new survey shows a sizable number of Democrats (20% of likely Dem Voters) ready to defect from Hillary Clinton to Donald Trump.                                          

                  

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/articles/2016-01-08/new-poll-shows-donald-trump-is-a-real-threat-to-hillary-clinton      ​

 

 

 

if they had any sense most all them would defect somewhere.

 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_presidential_race.html

[skinsmarydu]

if they had any sense most all them would defect somewhere.

 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/2016_presidential_race.html

Hubby told me about this last night.  I swear, I think the public (and the pundits) are punking us all.

 

#hailitsgamedaynopartisannonsense.

[twa]

most folk are unhappy , the election is going to demonstrate that

[nonniey]

In the latest batch of emails release 3000 or so they're saying 66 or so were "classified"  and of those 65 were confidential, which is the lowest level of classification.   Having someone's name and telephone number can be classified confidential because it's PII.   What is confidential is an incredible low bar.

 

I don't think anybody is accusing her of taking a secret document and sending it over an unclassified network email.    First off how would she even get the classified document onto the unclassified network?

 

What she's being accused of is (1)aggregation  taking two unclassified pieces of information and then putting them together making a classified disclosure.  (2)  writing something on the unclassified email which constitutes a classified material.

 

This is not Sandy Burger who stuffed classified top secret documents down his pants and walked out of a secure facility.    This is something else entirely..

You threw some correct language in here but most of this is nonsense. Things that are wrong in this post:

1) PII is not classified. It is protected information but unclassified with the caveat For Official Use Only (FOUO)

2) Confidential information is classified. It must be stored and transferred in systems that are authorized to hold it. (Additionally Secret documents are involved).

3) She is under investigation for mishandling classified information. The investigation seems to be focusing on illegal removal of markings and transfers to an unauthorized network.

4) Sandy Berger got off with a hand slap, Petreus got off with a hand slap and now we're looking at Hillary (Probably with a hand slap or even less). The worker bees were/are pissed at the different standards the elite have. The worker bees go to jail for less serious breaches. (But admittedly this is nothing new - ie Ed Kennedy etc.)

[Fergasun]

To be fair, I suspect most politicians mishandle Classified information all the time, or even set up their own personal servers.

I would love to FOIA any emails from House.gov or Senate.gov, to executive agencies and see what comes up - do you guys know Congress doesn't fall under FOIA rules?

This is pretty much the definition of witch hunt... although I would suspect other executive heads running for President would get similar treatment (Colin Powell).

I will concede, laws were likely broken. Given. the shear volume, hard not to think laws were broken. But I wonder if the subsequent investigation is doing more damage to national security interests (i.e. Streisand effect).

As I support Democratic policy positions, I will vote for Hillary if she is the nominee.

I suspect Trump actually may govern to the left of any of the GOP on some issues - I am shocked he has gotten so far because I haven't seen substantial policy recently.

Trump is the last person you would want heading up Tax Reform, which is high on the GOP agenda. I am unsure if he will follow the agenda.

[chipwhich]

Come on DNC, stop making Hillary nervous.  It's her turn!  The DNC wants Bernie about as much as the GOP wants Trump.

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/bernie-sanders-popularity-making-hillary-clinton-campaign-nervous/story?id=36187078

 

Bernie Sanders' Popularity Making Hillary Clinton Campaign 'Nervous'

The Clinton campaign appears to be getting nervous.

 

While from the start Hillary Clinton's campaign has said they were not taking anything for granted, the Democratic frontrunner didn't always act that way -– for months carrying on as though her challenger, Bernie Sanders, didn’t exist.

 

Over time, however, the 74-year-old Vermont senator has risen in the polls and gained growing support that eventually became too big for Clinton to ignore.

 

Now, just a few weeks until the first voting begins in Iowa and New Hampshire, her campaign is showing signs they're more anxious than ever about the outcome of these races.

 

The most blatant sign came earlier this week when Clinton's campaign manager Robby Mook sent a fundraising email to supporters with the subject line "nervous."

 

"There's a situation developing in Iowa and New Hampshire that could change the course of this election," Mook wrote in the e-mail, noting that Sanders' campaign is outspending Clinton in TV ads in the two early states.

 

Two days later, the campaign sent another fundraising email mentioning the "(seriously!) tight" polls in New Hampshire.

 

The e-mail came after Fox News released a poll showing Sanders, who is from neighboring Vermont, ahead of Clinton in New Hampshire by 13 points.

 

In light of tightening polls, the Clinton campaign has also ramped up its aggressive opposition against Sanders.

[nonniey]

To be fair, I suspect most politicians mishandle Classified information all the time, or even set up their own personal servers.

I would love to FOIA any emails from House.gov or Senate.gov, to executive agencies and see what comes up - do you guys know Congress doesn't fall under FOIA rules?

This is pretty much the definition of witch hunt... although I would suspect other executive heads running for President would get similar treatment (Colin Powell).

I will concede, laws were likely broken. Given. the shear volume, hard not to think laws were broken. But I wonder if the subsequent investigation is doing more damage to national security interests (i.e. Streisand effect).

As I support Democratic policy positions, I will vote for Hillary if she is the nominee.

I suspect Trump actually may govern to the left of any of the GOP on some issues - I am shocked he has gotten so far because I haven't seen substantial policy recently.

Trump is the last person you would want heading up Tax Reform, which is high on the GOP agenda. I am unsure if he will follow the agenda.

Well I guess that is par for course for many. You state you will support the Democrat regardless of what they did. Understand that. I'm just not there. If Trump is the nominee I will be either writing in or voting for Webb. I also understand if Trump is the nominee Clinton will be president.

[visionary]

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-cruz-idUSKCN0UO0TD20160110?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=twitter

Trump hammers away at Cruz citizenship, U.S. Senate leader mum

 

Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump on Sunday hammered away at his closest challenger's eligibility to be U.S. president, while the party's Senate leader said the chamber will stay out of the fray involving Ted Cruz's citizenship.

 

Under the Constitution, presidents must be "natural born citizens." Cruz was born in Calgary, Alberta, but his mother was a U.S. citizen, which he says makes him eligible to run.

 

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell told ABC's "This Week" that the Senate would not act to formally counter Trump's claim that the senator's Canadian birth makes him ineligible to be president. Cruz's father was born in Cuba.

 

In 2008, the Senate passed a resolution declaring Senator John McCain, a Republican presidential candidate, a natural born citizen. McCain was born to American parents on a U.S. military base in the Panama Canal Zone.

 

"I just don't think the Senate ought to get into the middle of this," McConnell said. "These guys are all slugging it out in Iowa and New Hampshire. We'll have a nominee, hopefully, by sometime in the spring."

 

The winner will face the Democrats' nominee in the November general election.

Asked on "Fox News Sunday" whether he really doubted Cruz was a natural born citizen, Trump said, "I don't know. I really don't know. It depends.

"Does natural born mean born to the land, meaning born on the land? In that case, he's not."

 

Trump said the term has not been adjudicated, and advised Cruz to seek a judgment.

 

"The Democrats are going to bring a lawsuit," Trump predicted. "He's got to have this thing worked out."

 

Another one of Cruz's Republican campaign rivals, Senator Rand Paul, said on Sunday it was unclear if Cruz met the test of being a natural born citizen.

 

"I think the Democrats will challenge it at the very least and I think it will have to be decided by the Supreme Court,” he said on CBS' "Face the Nation."

[visionary]

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/bernie-sanders-hillary-clinton-neck-neck-hampshire-iowa/story?id=36196183

Bernie Sanders, Hillary Clinton Neck-and-Neck in New Hampshire and Iowa, Polls Find

 

Democratic presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Sen. Bernie Sanders are in a statistical tie in both Iowa and New Hampshire, according to the latest NBC News/Wall Street Journal/Marist College poll.

 

The polls, which both had a margin of error of +/- 4.8 percent, showed that Clinton had 48 percent among likely Iowa caucus-goers, compared to Sanders’ 45 percent and former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley's 5 percent. In New Hampshire, however, the poll found Sanders had 50 percent among likely primary voters, compared to Clinton's 46 percent and O’Malley's 1 percent.

 

The close results of the polls highlight the challenges the Clinton campaign faces.

 

On Saturday, the Clinton campaign sent an email to supporters in New Hampshire appealing for donations, writing “we’re neck and neck in New Hampshire, and I need my best supporters like you with me.” Earlier in the week, the Clinton campaign sent another email to New Hampshire supporters: “Just four weeks from the New Hampshire primary the polls are (seriously!) tight.”

 

On Wednesday, Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook sent an email to supporters with the subject line “nervous.” The email went on to say that he's “not trying to be dramatic about this situation (I swear! I’m really not!), but there’s a situation developing in Iowa and New Hampshire that could change the course of this election.”

 

On the Republican side, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and business mogul Donald Trump are in a statistical tie in Iowa -- Cruz with 28 percent among likely caucus-goers against Trump’s 24 percent, with a margin of error of +/- 4.6 percent. Rounding out the top five are Florida Sen. Marco Rubio with 13 percent, retired neurosurgeon Ben Carson with 11 percent, and Sen. Rand Paul with 5 percent.

[JMS]

This post is totally false lol. Made up nonsense

 

Yes chip..  throw out a general rebuttal because you have nothing specific to discuss.

 

     

​Not made up... I've checked several sources and of the 3000 emails released late last week 66 were being called classified disclosures or spillage.   of those 65 were "confidential" the lowest level of State's classification...  which is in fact an incredible low bar of classified material.. the lowest.. 

 

 

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/US-Clinton-Emails/2016/01/08/id/708674/

 

 

Confidential documents covers such things as personal identifiable information (PII) such as using someone's name and telephone number in the same document.   Or traditionally personal observations made by State Dept personnel about foreign counterparts..

 

​and you can check out examples of what are considered confidential documents here..

 https://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/dos-class.pdf                    

[JMS]

To be fair, I suspect most politicians mishandle Classified information all the time, or even set up their own personal servers.

I would love to FOIA any emails from House.gov or Senate.gov, to executive agencies and see what comes up - do you guys know Congress doesn't fall under FOIA rules?

 

 

I'll bet you if you went over most contractors and fed employees emails with such a fine tooth comb they are all chalk full of "confidential information" not just politicians.  

 

What makes Hillary's email special is most government folks and most politicians would use the official gov email and not set up their own server.    In this case Hillary has given license to her political enemies to go on this extraordinary snipe hunting expedition at her political and our monitory expense.

 

The legitimacy of this is it's fair to conduct this search to see if there were any compromises on her personal email, used for State Business.    The illegitimacy is to try to equate Top Secret  with confidential under the umbrella of "classified disclosures".    That's just political BS as are most of the headlines the GOP are generating here...

 

This scandal represents a poor decision on Hillary's part to leave her self open to this kind purely political character assassination, and just more cheap and unconscionable political exploitation from the GOP who for the most part are more comfortable talking about made up scandals than trying to win an election on the merits of their own ideas.     Amazingly the GOP feels that way against Hillary... Hillary who hasn't had a new idea in several decades.

[JMS]

Well I guess that is par for course for many. You state you will support the Democrat regardless of what they did. Understand that. I'm just not there. If Trump is the nominee I will be either writing in or voting for Webb. I also understand if Trump is the nominee Clinton will be president.

 

It would be very hard for me to vote for Trump after he stated he would use the US military to target the innocent relatives of suspected but unconvicted Terrorists.    That's pretty abhorrent to me.

 

Given that I don't share your optimism a Trump GOP nomination means Hillary becomes president.   Amazingly

 

--------------------------------------------------------------

Like you Webb was and is still my first choice for President and I'm pretty upset with the DNC and Hillary for his treatment in the first debate.    I was also interested that Webb is strongly considering an independent run for President.

[chipwhich]

Yes chip.. throw out a general rebuttal because you have nothing specific to discuss.

​Not made up... I've checked several sources and of the 3000 emails released late last week 66 were being called classified disclosures or spillage. of those 65 were "confidential" the lowest level of State's classification... which is in fact an incredible low bar of classified material.. the lowest..

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/US-Clinton-Emails/2016/01/08/id/708674/

Confidential documents covers such things as personal identifiable information (PII) such as using someone's name and telephone number in the same document. Or traditionally personal observations made by State Dept personnel about foreign counterparts..

​and you can check out examples of what are considered confidential documents here..

https://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/dos-class.pdf

It was rebutted clearly by another poster

[sacase]

Yes chip..  throw out a general rebuttal because you have nothing specific to discuss.

 

     

​Not made up... I've checked several sources and of the 3000 emails released late last week 66 were being called classified disclosures or spillage.   of those 65 were "confidential" the lowest level of State's classification...  which is in fact an incredible low bar of classified material.. the lowest.. 

 

 

http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/US-Clinton-Emails/2016/01/08/id/708674/

 

 

Confidential documents covers such things as personal identifiable information (PII) such as using someone's name and telephone number in the same document.   Or traditionally personal observations made by State Dept personnel about foreign counterparts..

 

​and you can check out examples of what are considered confidential documents here..

 https://www.fas.org/sgp/othergov/dos-class.pdf                    

You keep repeating it like it is true. You have several people who are actually part of the IC and they are telling you that you are wrong, yet you know better because you "found a source on the internet". PII is not classified information. It is unclassified information and if sent on an unclassified network needs to be encrypted. Confidential information is the lowest level of classification, but guess what, it is still classified. 

[sacase]

In the latest batch of emails release 3000 or so they're saying 66 or so were "classified"  and of those 65 were confidential, which is the lowest level of classification.   Having someone's name and telephone number can be classified confidential because it's PII.   What is confidential is an incredible low bar.

 

I don't think anybody is accusing her of taking a secret document and sending it over an unclassified network email.    First off how would she even get the classified document onto the unclassified network?

 

What she's being accused of is (1)aggregation  taking two unclassified pieces of information and then putting them together making a classified disclosure.  (2)  writing something on the unclassified email which constitutes a classified material.

 

This is not Sandy Burger who stuffed classified top secret documents down his pants and walked out of a secure facility.    This is something else entirely..

This is not about aggregation of classified info, this about mishandling classified information. Guess what, writing something in unclassified email is still mishandling classified information. The most recent revelation is her telling someone to send her an email on the unclassified side and to remove the portion markings because they cannot get the secure fax to work. You only use a secure fax to send classified, otherwise it is to much of a pain in the ass to use it for anything else. Fact is, she  did not think that the classification system applied to her and she wanted to screen her emails from disclosure from a this election cycle. There are a ton of ways to get secret documents to the unclassified network, it happens all of time and people pay the price. I promise if it was a regular person with this scope of spillage.....whew...would not be good. 

[sacase]

I'll bet you if you went over most contractors and fed employees emails with such a fine tooth comb they are all chalk full of "confidential information" not just politicians.  

 

What makes Hillary's email special is most government folks and most politicians would use the official gov email and not set up their own server.    In this case Hillary has given license to her political enemies to go on this extraordinary snipe hunting expedition at her political and our monitory expense.

 

The legitimacy of this is it's fair to conduct this search to see if there were any compromises on her personal email, used for State Business.    The illegitimacy is to try to equate Top Secret  with confidential under the umbrella of "classified disclosures".    That's just political BS as are most of the headlines the GOP are generating here...

 

This scandal represents a poor decision on Hillary's part to leave her self open to this kind purely political character assassination, and just more cheap and unconscionable political exploitation from the GOP who for the most part are more comfortable talking about made up scandals than trying to win an election on the merits of their own ideas.     Amazingly the GOP feels that way against Hillary... Hillary who hasn't had a new idea in several decades.

I will say this. I work for the agency that provides oversight of contractors. We deal with spills regularly and its not pretty. We made a company destroy 15 Iphones and 10 Ipads due to a spillage.  So no, they are not chalked full of classified information. In fact, we know the consequences of a spillage and we error on the side of caution when it comes to protecting classified. 

 

FYI, look at the statute, it says classified information. It does not differentiate between confidential or top secret. Its not political BS, its the LAW!

[chipwhich]

FYI, look at the statute, it says classified information. It does not differentiate between confidential or top secret. Its not political BS, its the LAW!

 

JMS loves to post long paragraphs and tons of links even though his point is typically wrong but never admit he is wrong, just post more paragraphs and ignore the facts from those of us that work in this industry.

[chipwhich]

In other Hillary news...

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/the-fantasy-scenario-that-could-become-reality-for-clinton/2016/01/10/085496a6-b7d6-11e5-829c-26ffb874a18d_story.html

 

The scenario that could become a nightmare for Hillary Clinton

Close your eyes for a minute and imagine it’s Feb. 10. In the past nine days, Sen. Bernie Sanders (Vt.) has beaten his Democratic presidential challenger Hillary Clinton in the Iowa caucuses and the New Hampshire primary. There won’t be another vote for 10 more days (Nevada) and then it’ll be another week until South Carolina, the last of the big four early states, votes.

 

That scenario would be a total nightmare for Clinton. Period. It’s also a lot more likely to go from fantasy to reality than most people — including most establishment Democrats — understand.

Consider two polls conducted by NBC and Marist College in Iowa and New Hampshire that were released Sunday. In Iowa, Clinton has 48 percent, Sanders has 45 percent, and former Maryland governor Martin O’Malley has 5 percent. In New Hampshire, it’s Sanders in the lead with 50 percent, with 46 percent for Clinton, and 1 percent for O’Malley.

 

Even if you accept that these surveys are a snapshot in time and take a step back to look at the broader polling picture, the idea of Sanders sweeping the first two states remains plausible.

 

In Iowa, Clinton’s lead on Sanders is 10 points, according to the RealClearPolitics average of polling conducted in the race. In New Hampshire, Sanders’s lead over Clinton is just shy of five points, according the RCP polling average.

There’s little question that Iowa is the tougher nut to crack of the two states for Sanders. Although Clinton finished third in the state in the 2008 Democratic primary, she and her team have worked extremely hard to ensure that she is well organized and well funded in the state to avoid a repeat of that performance.

 

Sanders’s strong liberal positions on, well, almost everything — including his early opposition to the war in Iraq — should endear him to liberals who tend to comprise a large chunk of the caucus electorate. In 2008, by way of comparison, a majority of Iowa Democrats in the caucus exit poll identified themselves as either “very” (18 percent) or “somewhat” (34 percent) liberal.

 

In New Hampshire, Sanders has steadily run ahead of Clinton. Of the past 10 polls in the state, Clinton has led just three — and never by anything outside of the surveys’ margins of error.

[visionary]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-politics/wp/2016/01/10/donald-trump-asks-a-reno-audience-to-weigh-in-on-ted-cruzs-eligibility/

Donald Trump asks a Reno audience to weigh in on Ted Cruz’s eligibility

 

After days of coyly raising questions about Ted Cruz's eligibility to be president, given that he was born in Canada to an American mother and a Cuban father, Donald Trump let his audience weigh in at a rally Sunday afternoon.

 

"Is he a natural-born citizen?" the Republican White House hopeful asked several thousand gathered in a Reno ballroom. Members of the crowd shouted back, "No!"

"I don't know," Trump said. "Honestly, we don't know. Who the hell knows."

 

Cruz was Trump's No. 1 target during the 65-minute event, revealing just how much of a threat the Republican senator from Texas has become to the front-runner. Before the rally started, Bruce Springsteen's "Born in the U.S.A." blared, a new edition to Trump's playlist.

 

"So, Cruz is a problem," Trump said, beginning an attack that lasted about seven minutes. "And here's the problem: It's called uncertainty. It's called you just don't know."

"I just heard this: He was a citizen of Canada for a long time," Trump said, referring to Cruz having citizenship in the United States and Canada until recently. "He was a citizen of the United States, I believe, and Canada simultaneously. How do you, how -- what's going on here? So, he's got to straighten these things out."

 

Trump questioned why Cruz didn't revoke his Canadian citizenship years ago, especially when he became a U.S. senator.

 

"Does he get a pass from that?" Trump asked. The crowd again answered, "No!"

And amid this circus-like atmosphere, Trump said he likes being compared to P.T. Barnum, the showman who founded the Barnum & Bailey Circus.

 

"We need a P.T. Barnum," Trump said, citing a comparison that had been made Sunday morning on NBC's "Meet the Press." "I'll tell you what: We need energy in this country of ours because we're losing our spirit. No, we are losing our spirit. We are losing our spirit. We need somebody that's going to be a cheerleader."

 

Trump said the United States has become soft and weak like the National Football League, adding that he yearns for the days of "violent, head-on" tackles.

 

"It was incredible to watch, right?" he said, saying that such tackles now result in a flag being thrown. "Football's become soft. Football has become soft. Now, I'll be criticized for that. They'll say, 'Oh, isn't that terrible?' But football's become soft like our country has become soft. It's true. It's true."

A few minutes later, Trump wrapped up his speech with a obscenity-filled rallying cry that listed off all the things he would do as president.

 

"We're going to win so much -- win after win after win -- that you're going to be begging me: 'Please, Mr. President, let us lose once or twice. We can't stand it any more.' And I'm going to say: 'No way. We're going to keep winning. We're never going to lose. We're never, ever going to lose," Trump said to cheers. "Register and vote. I love you all."

[88Comrade2000]

It would be very hard for me to vote for Trump after he stated he would use the US military to target the innocent relatives of suspected but unconvicted Terrorists.    That's pretty abhorrent to me.

 

Given that I don't share your optimism a Trump GOP nomination means Hillary becomes president.   Amazingly

 

--------------------------------------------------------------

Like you Webb was and is still my first choice for President and I'm pretty upset with the DNC and Hillary for his treatment in the first debate.    I was also interested that Webb is strongly considering an independent run for President.

Webb will go nowhere. Running as a true independent requires money to get on all the ballots.  That's why Michael Bloomberg, who has money is giving it serious thought.  Trump and Clinton. Surely, I would have a chance there.

[sacase]

Trump and Hillary are like Ying and Yang. The establishment want Hillary and the people don't care for her to much. The people want trump, but the establishment don't. Kind of funny how that is with those two. 

[JMS]

You threw some correct language in here but most of this is nonsense. Things that are wrong in this post:

1) PII is not classified. It is protected information but unclassified with the caveat For Official Use Only (FOUO)

Yeah, Not all PII is classified, but a broad category of it which Hillary would have dealt with regularly would have been. PII may not be classified confidential at the DoD, or NSA, or CIA but it can be at the State Dept. You can verify that in the Department of State Classification Guide (DSCG) the primary authority for the classification of information in documents created by the State Department or it's personnel. Coarse to see the most recent version you would need to have access to the State Depts Classified Web Site. Believe their is an unclassified copy floating around on google. If you find it I'll refer you to page 11, section 3, subsection c. under the heading "Types of FGI Likely to Require Classification".

 

2) Confidential information is classified. It must be stored and transferred in systems that are authorized to hold it. (Additionally Secret documents are involved).

Actually confidential information is not always classified,  understanding that is key to understanding what's going on here.   This is why we have the term RETROACTIVE CLASSIFICATION. Especially true at the State Dept.  Example, If I ask a foreign official a question in public within the earshot of a dozen folks. "Hey Abdul, how about those Redskins?" I may have the absolute belief that his answer is not classified. I may legally send his response as well as his name to folks on the unclassified side of the house with full belief and legal right to do so. Upon review that data may and often is reclassified retroactively . At least as often as 66 times out of 70,000 pages. That is what at least is part of what the Clinton campaign is saying is happened here.   The fact that the IG is investigating this and it is not a criminal investigation after 3 years is a pretty clear determination that the Clinton Campaign take on this is accurate.

Is it still a problem she had these documents on her personal email server. Absolutely, just not a criminal problem.   It's a security auditing problem which is what the IG performs for the State Dept.. Non Criminal Security Audits.

 

Is Hillary's offense similar offense as General Petreus who knowingly leaked top secret and secret documents to a non cleared woman in his chain of command who he was having an affair with? A woman who was writing his autobiography in which case he stranded to gain financially for his disclosure. No.

Nor is it equivalent to Sandy Burger who stuffed secret documents in his underpants and left a State Dept, secure reading facility.

 

two were criminal, one is not.

 

3) She is under investigation for mishandling classified information. The investigation seems to be focusing on illegal removal of markings and transfers to an unauthorized network.

 

Actually she isn't under investigation nor are any of her staff present or passed.  As the Department of Justice and Inspectors General have continuously made clear, the IGs made a security referral. This is not and never has been criminal investigation as has been continually misreported by some right leaning press.

 

Cough Cough.. FOX!  Cough Cough

 

NewsWeek  July 2015

http://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-email-justice-department-probe-criminal-investigation-356891

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT: NO CRIMINAL REFERRAL OVER CLINTON EMAILS

 

Washington Times,  Sept 2015

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/sep/10/justice-department-rules-hillary-clinton-followed-/

Justice Department rules Hillary Clinton followed law in deleting emails

 

 

 

Time Magazine  July 2015

None of the investigating bodies, in Congress or elsewhere, have accused Clinton of wrongdoing.......

 

Rep. Elijah Cummings, the ranking Democrat on the House committee investigating Benghazi, denied Friday that there was any criminal referral. “I spoke personally to the State Department inspector general on Thursday, and he said he never asked the Justice Department to launch a criminal investigation of Secretary Clinton’s email usage,” Cummings wrote in a statement. “This is the latest example in a series of inaccurate leaks to generate false front-page headlines − only to be corrected later − and they have absolutely nothing to do with the attacks in Benghazi or protecting our diplomatic corps overseas.”

 

http://time.com/3971238/hillary-clinton-email-justice-classified/

This has never been a criminal investigation,  nor has anybody at the IG's office or Justice said any laws were broken.   Which is why it's a nothing burger and not a Sandy Berger.

 

4) Sandy Berger got off with a hand slap, Petreus got off with a hand slap and now we're looking at Hillary (Probably with a hand slap or even less). The worker bees were/are pissed at the different standards the elite have. The worker bees go to jail for less serious breaches. (But admittedly this is nothing new - ie Ed Kennedy etc.)

 

Solute to you Nonnley who can laugh off such fines and penalties.

 

Sandy Berger took 5 copies of the same classified report from the reading room of the state dept over a period of several months while preparing both his own and former President Clintons testimony before the 9/11 commission. He subsequently lied to investigators about these breaches. For this he was finned $50,000, lost his security clearance for 3 years and was sentenced to 2 years probation. The report in question was compiled by then Clinton's Anti Terrorism Czar Richard Clark on the Clinton's handling of the Y2k terror threats.   Berger eventually said he took the reports because he was unable to take notes or adequately make use of the documents in the provided reading room facilities.  Which the judge did not find as a legitimate excuse.

 

Peutraus leaked secret documents to Paula Broadwell  a woman under his direct chain of command who he was having an affair with and who was writing his autobiography.    General Peutraus was finned $100,000,  2 years probation and lost his job and security clearance for a number of years.   The fine handed down by a federal judge was more than twice what the Justice Dept had asked for.