Is Hillary Clinton In Violation Of The Espionage Act Regarding Her Private Servers And Devices In Handling "Top Secret" Information?

Truth7t7

Newbie
Dec 20, 2012
5,084
1,308
✟92,534.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hillary Clinton was in lawful possession of "Top Secret" information, she through gross negligence permitted this to be removed from its proper place of custody, and put on her private unsecure servers, computers, and mobile phones "Fact"

Hillary Clinton had full knowledge that this "Top Secret" information was removed from its proper place of custody, and placed on the private insecure devices mentioned above

Hillary Clinton was/is in violation of The Federal Espionafe Act, Section18 U.S. Code 793 (f) punishable by fine or maximum sentence of 10 years in prison, or both

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.

FBI.GOV NEWS​

Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System​

From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification.

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.

We also assess that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal e-mail extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Vambram

Truth7t7

Newbie
Dec 20, 2012
5,084
1,308
✟92,534.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hillary Clinton was in lawful possession of "Top Secrets" information, she through gross negligence permitted this to be removed from its proper place of custody, and put on her private insecure servers, computers, and mobile phones "Fact"

Hillary Clinton had full knowledge that this "Top Secret" information was removed from its proper place of custody, and placed on the private insecure devices mentioned above

Hillary Clinton was/is in violation of The Federal Espionafe Act, Section18 U.S. Code 793 (f) punishable by fine or maximum sentence of 10 years in prison, or both

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.

FBI.GOV NEWS​

Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System​

From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification.

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.

We also assess that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal e-mail extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account.
Yes it very apparent there are two sets of systems concerning justice, and we the common people don't meet their grade

If we were guilty of the same, it would be maximum fine and 10 years in prison, while Hillary sits on the beach in Tahiti sipping Mai-Tais, looking back and laughing (Injustice) or (Just4Us)?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vambram
Upvote 0

HTacianas

Well-Known Member
Jul 9, 2018
8,520
9,015
Florida
✟325,451.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
Hillary Clinton was in lawful possession of "Top Secrets" information, she through gross negligence permitted this to be removed from its proper place of custody, and put on her private insecure servers, computers, and mobile phones "Fact"

Hillary Clinton had full knowledge that this "Top Secret" information was removed from its proper place of custody, and placed on the private insecure devices mentioned above

Hillary Clinton was/is in violation of The Federal Espionafe Act, Section18 U.S. Code 793 (f) punishable by fine or maximum sentence of 10 years in prison, or both

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.

FBI.GOV NEWS​

Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System​

From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification.

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.

We also assess that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal e-mail extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account.

Of course she was. James Comey said that she was. But then said "no reasonable prosecutor" would have brought charges against her. Let's see. "Reasonable prosecutor" might be the key that unlocks the mystery here.
 
Upvote 0

Yttrium

Independent Centrist
May 19, 2019
3,893
4,317
Pacific NW
✟246,106.00
Country
United States
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
Single
Hillary Clinton had full knowledge that this "Top Secret" information was removed from its proper place of custody, and placed on the private insecure devices mentioned above
There was no indication that Clinton knew the information was classified. She also didn't withhold the e-mails from the government. She was stupidly careless in using a private server for official business and should have faced some kind of punishment for her actions, but she fell short of earning a criminal indictment.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Hans Blaster
Upvote 0

Truth7t7

Newbie
Dec 20, 2012
5,084
1,308
✟92,534.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
There was no indication that Clinton knew the information was classified. She also didn't withhold the e-mails from the government. She was stupidly careless in using a private server for official business and should have faced some kind of punishment for her actions, but she fell short of earning a criminal indictment.
Of course she knew just as Comey stated, she was the secretary of state in one of the most sensitive positions in the US government, Hillary believed she was above the laws, and the outcome proved it

She wasn't stupid and careless, she was grossly negligent, in violation of the law as written

Hillary Clinton should have been sentenced to jail time "Top Secret" on her private server and other unsecure devices as secretary of state "Wow"!

She fell short of earning an indictment?

More like she was given special treatment and a nod in a two tier judicial system, just like all the other criminal politicians in cover ups, sweep it under the carpet, he's my buddy

Try researching other lower level employees that had and mishandled classified info, not many slaps on the wrists for them

Hillary Clinton was secretary of State over America, "Top Secret" info on a private unsecure server and devices "Scary"!
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Yttrium

Independent Centrist
May 19, 2019
3,893
4,317
Pacific NW
✟246,106.00
Country
United States
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
Single
She fell short of earning an indictment?
Yeah, try proving in court that she knew she had classified information on the server. They're not going to prosecute her if they can't prove it to a jury. Meanwhile, again, she didn't withhold the e-mails from the government.

Trump's indictment is waaay easier, since he intentionally withheld a lot of documents, and he's on record as knowing he had classified in his possession. Outside of his delaying tactics, he makes things pretty easy for the prosecution.
 
Upvote 0

Truth7t7

Newbie
Dec 20, 2012
5,084
1,308
✟92,534.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Yeah, try proving in court that she knew she had classified information on the server.
Sounds like a biased response to me, your lady of liberty has her blind fold removed, with her scale being tipped fully to the left IMHO

In the light of FBI director Comeys statement below, there is only "One" reasonable conclusion

Sorta like mom catching little Johnny with his hand in the cookie jar with crumbs on his face, and the question is asked if he ate a cookie and his answer is "No"

Quote FBI Director Comey:

"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."
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Vambram
Upvote 0

WolfGate

Senior Member
Site Supporter
Jun 14, 2004
4,173
2,093
South Carolina
✟449,551.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I think almost certainly "yes", she was in violation. I don't see any inconsistency with Trump's situation though - had he simply complied with request to seek out and turn over classified information, as he should have, he would not have been prosecuted either.

Now, the question of whether our political leaders get different treatment than lower level personnel is different, but I'd have the same answer "yes".
 
Upvote 0

Yttrium

Independent Centrist
May 19, 2019
3,893
4,317
Pacific NW
✟246,106.00
Country
United States
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
Single
Sounds like a biased response to me, your lady of liberty has her blind fold removed, with her scale being tipped fully to the left IMHO
Ha ha. Try again. You're not going to get away with defining Trump as the right, so anyone not a loyal follower of Trump is fully to the left. Trump is an anomaly, and the Republican Party should disown him. I'm someone who wants to vote AGAINST Biden this time around, if the Republicans can just nominate a reasonable candidate (like Haley).

Saying that any reasonable person would have known that using the server for official business was moronic implies that Clinton either knew what she was doing, OR she's not a reasonable person. The latter is quite possible. And I notice you're still completely ignoring the whole point that Trump intentionally withheld classified documents, while Clinton (and Biden and Pence) did not.
 
Upvote 0

Truth7t7

Newbie
Dec 20, 2012
5,084
1,308
✟92,534.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Saying that any reasonable person would have known that using the server for official business was moronic implies that Clinton either knew what she was doing, OR she's not a reasonable person.
Your original statement was try proving it to a court of law that she knew

Comey gave his evaluation of the investigation, Hillary was reasonable and had knowledge of what she was doing in handling "Top Secret" classified info, that was the direct implication given by Comey "Hillary Knew What She Was Doing"

I believe a jury would find it the same way, she wasn't charged with the crimes she committed, in a two tier judicial system of favoritism and special treatment

In your reasoning you don't see Hillary not being charged and tried by a jury as an injustice or special treatment given, as your lady of liberty has her blindfold removed, scale tipped fully to the left IMHO

In my opinion a unbiased reasonable person would believe Hillary should be charged and tried by a jury, just as many others relating to the same crimes

Quote FBI Director Comey:

"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."
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

SimplyMe

Senior Veteran
Jul 19, 2003
9,723
9,443
the Great Basin
✟330,277.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Your original statement was try proving it to a court of law that she knew

Comey gave his evaluation of the investigation, Hillary was reasonable and had knowledge of what she was doing in handling "Top Secret" classified info, that was the direct implication given by Comey "Hillary Knew What She Was Doing"

I believe a jury would find it the same way, she wasn't charged with the crimes she committed, in a two tier judicial system of favoritism and special treatment

In your reasoning you don't see Hillary not being charged and tried by a jury as an injustice or special treatment given, as your lady of liberty has her blindfold removed, scale tipped fully to the left IMHO

In my opinion a reasonable person would believe Hillary should be charged and tried by a jury, just as many others relating to the same crimes
As I continue to point out, per the State Dept IG, both Rice and Powell used private servers and had classified information on their servers, yet they were never locked up. As such, where is the "two tier judicial system of favoritism and special treatment" you claim is happening -- as both the left and the right were treated equally. It is actually you pushing the "two tier system" by demanding Hillary (the Left) be prosecuted but not Rice and Powell (the Right).
 

Yttrium

Independent Centrist
May 19, 2019
3,893
4,317
Pacific NW
✟246,106.00
Country
United States
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
Single
In your reasoning you don't see Hillary not being charged and tried by a jury as an injustice or special treatment given, as your lady of liberty has her blindfold removed, scale tipped fully to the left IMHO
So you're just going to keep misrepresenting my position and ignoring the key issue. Fine, be that way. I'll just put you on the ol' ignore list.
 
Upvote 0

grasping the after wind

That's grasping after the wind
Jan 18, 2010
19,458
6,354
Clarence Center NY USA
✟237,637.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
There was no indication that Clinton knew the information was classified. She also didn't withhold the e-mails from the government. She was stupidly careless in using a private server for official business and should have faced some kind of punishment for her actions, but she fell short of earning a criminal indictment.
If the Federal bureaucracy had not become corrupted, she would have been indicted.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vambram
Upvote 0

SimplyMe

Senior Veteran
Jul 19, 2003
9,723
9,443
the Great Basin
✟330,277.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
If the Federal bureaucracy had not become corrupted, she would have been indicted.
In that case, Rice and Powell would have been indicted, as well. There evidence that justice is biased toward the rich and powerful (and has been for decades), but not based on political views.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Truth7t7

Newbie
Dec 20, 2012
5,084
1,308
✟92,534.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
As I continue to point out, per the State Dept IG, both Rice and Powell used private servers and had classified information on their servers, yet they were never locked up. As such, where is the "two tier judicial system of favoritism and special treatment" you claim is happening -- as both the left and the right were treated equally. It is actually you pushing the "two tier system" by demanding Hillary (the Left) be prosecuted but not Rice and Powell (the Right).
All violators should be charged and tried in a court of law, regardless of political affiliation, yes there is a two tier system, the gave and the have not, and I'm a have not

Your claim that I favor a republican crime over a democratic crime is "False" and stop implying that I do
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vambram
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Site Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,291
20,292
US
✟1,477,322.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I think almost certainly "yes", she was in violation. I don't see any inconsistency with Trump's situation though - had he simply complied with request to seek out and turn over classified information, as he should have, he would not have been prosecuted either.

Now, the question of whether our political leaders get different treatment than lower level personnel is different, but I'd have the same answer "yes".
Which is why we won't see charges filed against Pence or Biden on the same violations.
 
Upvote 0

Larniavc

Leading a blameless life
Jul 14, 2015
12,340
7,679
51
✟315,079.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
UK-Liberal-Democrats
Hillary Clinton was in lawful possession of "Top Secret" information, she through gross negligence permitted this to be removed from its proper place of custody, and put on her private insecure servers, computers, and mobile phones "Fact"

Hillary Clinton had full knowledge that this "Top Secret" information was removed from its proper place of custody, and placed on the private insecure devices mentioned above

Hillary Clinton was/is in violation of The Federal Espionafe Act, Section18 U.S. Code 793 (f) punishable by fine or maximum sentence of 10 years in prison, or both

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.

FBI.GOV NEWS​

Statement by FBI Director James B. Comey on the Investigation of Secretary Hillary Clinton’s Use of a Personal E-Mail System​

From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification.

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.

We also assess that Secretary Clinton’s use of a personal e-mail domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent. She also used her personal e-mail extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related e-mails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal e-mail account.
Buttery males? In 2023?

Bwaaaaa hahaha!
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Truth7t7

Newbie
Dec 20, 2012
5,084
1,308
✟92,534.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
So you're just going to keep misrepresenting my position and ignoring the key issue. Fine, be that way. I'll just put you on the ol' ignore list.
No misrepresentation as you claim, you defended the actions of Hillary with the statement "Try Proving That In A Court" and you don't see no charges or a court trial for Hillary as an injustice, please correct me if I'm wrong?
 
Upvote 0