Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Comey's Own Words Condemn Him (vanity)

Posted on 07/05/2016 9:10:52 AM PDT by Don Hernando de Las Casas

Comey’s words…

Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.

For example, seven e-mail chains concern matters that were classified at the Top Secret/Special Access Program level when they were sent and received. These chains involved Secretary Clinton both sending e-mails about those matters and receiving e-mails from others about the same matters. There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton's position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later "up-classified" e-mails). None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government--or even with a commercial service like Gmail. Separately, it is important to say something about the marking of classified information. Only a very small number of the e-mails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information. But even if information is not marked "classified" in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it.

Interpretation: She’s guilty, but nobody would ever think of prosecuting her. Hey, Comey! This was NOT a slip up or mistake on hillary’s part—this was sop, all day every day for SIX LONG YEARS, this was an ongoing, continuous breaking of the law day in and day out, and she cannot be prosecuted?


TOPICS: Society
KEYWORDS: arizona; criminalconspiracy; crookedhillary; fbi; jamescomey; lorettalynch; phoenix; ruleofforce; thefixisin
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-46 last
To: Don Hernando de Las Casas
Comey says he can't prove Hillary with intent (BS), but here's the law that Comey grossly neglected to say in his statement.



See number 1.

"18 U.S. Code § 793 - Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information"

(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."

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793

41 posted on 07/05/2016 10:07:35 AM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Don Hernando de Las Casas

Americans should not be so smug against Argentina and Brazil. We are clearly no better. USA, welcome to the Banana Republic Club.


42 posted on 07/05/2016 10:12:21 AM PDT by poinq
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ObozoMustGo2012

(He gave her cover.)

He gave Trump ammo!

___________

You are 100% right. Trump (and we) must use this information. The FBI, after an exhaustive investigation, has found her reckless. They have made factual findings completely at odds with her public statements. Corey’s statement is VERY valuable.


43 posted on 07/05/2016 10:15:22 AM PDT by The Continental Op
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Don Hernando de Las Casas

I don’t understand what Comey is talking about here. She broke the law with gross negligence and jeopardized national security. That’s the law.

What does intent have to do with this law? Any prosecutor would take this slam dunk case.


44 posted on 07/05/2016 10:48:49 AM PDT by mom.mom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Don Hernando de Las Casas

Looks like he feared becoming the new Ron Brown?.


45 posted on 07/05/2016 12:49:48 PM PDT by Vaduz (women and children to be impacted the most.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Talisker

He told her she would not be reasonable should she decide to prosecute.


46 posted on 07/05/2016 12:54:39 PM PDT by Protect the Bill of Rights
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-46 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson