(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.
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.
Obama knew she didn't have a state.gov email address. He's complicit too. Six year statute of limitations.
I think the section you posted agrees with me...?
This is the famous 18 USC section salient to HRCs’ email activities.
The awesome responsibility of simply possessing these items in any form whatsoever....As I said, it isn’t a “deliberate” or “by accident” duality.
Granting of access to these materials (eg; a “security clearance”) carries the explicit acceptance of the complete responsibility of either shepherding it/them in the prescribed fashion of using strictly government servers; or, immediately reporting any security breach that the security clearance itself provides for.
So HRC’s whole “I didn’t know” line of reasoning is impossible in its very utterance, in any variation. It’s not possible for her to not know. If she knows enough to NOT use (and never sign up for or on to) the gov’t server then she must be aware that breaching the gov’t <> private barrier is the offense. This is the mens rea alone and by itself, without any reference to any external act or consequence. There is no plausible reason to avoid the gov’t server other than to keep her affairs off it/them. That she (or the Clinton foundation) paid for her server and the IT setup of same and remotely located it all only bolsters the case that she worked to hide her affairs.
So then, if she receives her official email on her private server, that is the same type of illegal security breach proscribed in the law. Just receiving it. Just receiving it without knowing or not knowing whether it was deemed “classified”. If you received it...then realized it was classified...then where is the report that secrecy laws were breached? She never made any such report, as far as I know, though it would not surprise me that the report of a classified security breach is itself classified the instant it is generated and thus we would not know about it.
But AFAIK, she has not stated to date anything at all suggesting she made a “breach” report...as is her absolute responsibility...and the failure to so report is exactly the same offense as offering it up for sale or leaving on the seat of a taxi by accident. No, she has made excuse after excuse how an innocent grandmother shouldn’t have to cope with these kinds of trivialities.