By pointing out how you have no facts and instead offer up speculation and bias?
Sure buddy.
She was in violation of best practices
Republicans are confusing things that are marked as classified when they are sent, and things that are marked as classified long after the fact by another party when examining whether they should be publicly released to a Congressional inquiry.
its clear you have never had a job dealing with classified. just be quiet.
Put up or shut up
Republicans are confusing things that are marked as classified when they are sent, and things that are marked as classified long after the fact by another party when examining whether they should be publicly released to a Congressional inquiry.
To be fair, you have to read eight paragraphs in to see that continues to be the case. And of course that continuing to be the case doesn't stop the media from churning out articles over the subject. But my personal favorite is still the very serious Russia-linked hackers tried to access Clinton server which amounts to Clinton getting the same phishing spam thousands of other people got.
put up what? that if she reported it that the server would have been secured and investigated immediately? sure.
That fundamental misunderstanding is intentional, of course.
I mean, "she should have known that it should have been classified at the time" is the basic line of attack. The SoS needs to be all-knowing, but only when it's Hillary.
The best part is that the only bits known to have been leaked into the wild were released anonymously by Repub congress critters.
its clear you have never had a job dealing with classified. just be quiet.
But hey, if they've been lied to and mislead on numerous occasions about this scandal then the lies are probably true this time! Right? I mean the odds of them being mislead again! Have to be small right?
in reality does it matter? she shouldn't have either done.
but i'm sure people will find a reason to justify it.
Desperate, huh?
It's the partisan back biters who claim some nebulous victimhood in all this, even though they cannot show any real harm has been done. It's flimsier than Benghazi.
In handling classified material it doesn't matter if real harm was done. If you were familiar with the handling of classified material you would know the term "real or implied harm". Regardless of that point the law was broken and it was on her. If she received it she should have taken steps to correct it. If she sent it well she shouldn't have. If she says she didn't know, well that is no excuse. It is her job to know.
Charles McCulllough, the intelligence community's inspector general, said in a letter to the chairmen of the Senate intelligence and foreign affairs committees that he has received sworn declarations from an intelligence agency he declined to name.
The declarations cover "several dozen emails containing classified information determined by the IC element to be at the CONFIDENTIAL, SECRET and TOP SECRET/SAP information."
An intelligence official familiar with the matter told NBC News that the special access program in question was so sensitive that McCullough and some of his aides had to receive clearance to be read in on it before viewing the sworn declaration about the Clinton emails.
Cool thesis, except for one issue. The material wasn't classified when she handled it.
Cool thesis, except for one issue. The material wasn't classified when she handled it.
This is also your opinion and not a fact. It may apply to some e-mails but this is new material with the SAP data. Marked or not she should know what is and is not sensitive information.
Is this another Benghazm? The only people who care about it are those who wouldn't vote for Hillary if she was the only choice.
Move on, find something new...
... And of course Benghazi.