2016 Postmortem

notadmblnd

(23,720 posts)

3. I'd rather not take a chance on her NOT "Intentionally" putting America in Jeopardy

Sun Apr 10, 2016, 10:19 AM

Apr 2016

Last edited Sun Apr 10, 2016, 11:03 AM - Edit history (1)

again.

Hillary is the sort of person who does not do anything politically without thinking it through. And I don't believe for a minute that carelessness and incompetence is only what she is guilty of.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

132 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Obama: Clinton Didn't "Intentionally" Put America In Jeopardy; [View all] NWCorona Apr 2016 OP

What does he mean by 'emails that she owned'? B2G Apr 2016 #1

I'm thinking her personal emails but that was a bit weird NWCorona Apr 2016 #4

"You were prepared to say she didn't jeopardize," Chris Wallace said. notadmblnd Apr 2016 #6

haha. That is commom phrase--used a lot. riversedge Apr 2016 #105

Watch the video. Transcripts can be deceiving. thesquanderer Apr 2016 #117

I believe he meant she owned the responsibility for the carelessness. Lizzie Poppet Apr 2016 #9

Did you hear what she said on MTP last week? 2cannan Apr 2016 #60

AGREED! THEY ARE OUR FUCKING EMAILS! CorporatistNation Apr 2016 #17

I think it means on her server and that she has "owned up" to carelessness. Don't freak out. Hoyt Apr 2016 #54

Who's freaking out? B2G Apr 2016 #61

If you listen to the video, it's clear to anyone who can hear inflections. Hoyt Apr 2016 #66

It's awkwardly written - he means she owns the carelessness. Avalux Apr 2016 #72

Watch the video. Transcripts can be deceiving. thesquanderer Apr 2016 #114

It is an interesting choice of words CoffeeCat Apr 2016 #127

Sounds like he would agree with charging her with this felony: 18 USC Sec. 793(f) leveymg Apr 2016 #2

I don't see "intent" as part of that statute. Am I missing something? nt antigop Apr 2016 #30

Exactly, there doesn't have to be intent . .. .negligance is enough. pdsimdars Apr 2016 #32

Well, the data has to be lost, stolen, etc. It "could have been compromised" is not in the statute. Hoyt Apr 2016 #71

Well Hillary did have the server wiped, so she was trying to lose the emails. All in it together Apr 2016 #80

Obviously, they were not lost. Not sure you'd have access even if they'd been on a govt server. Hoyt Apr 2016 #81

They were lost except the NSA had a "backup" copy. When she sent classified info, she also broke leveymg Apr 2016 #84

They weren't lost in the sense some spy from an enemy could use them to our detriment. Jeeez. Hoyt Apr 2016 #85

Doesn't have to be lost. Only has to be "removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to leveymg Apr 2016 #88

Don't think it was taken from it's proper place of custody. Hoyt Apr 2016 #89

Nobody in gov't says she was authorized to place classified info on her private server. Nobody. leveymg Apr 2016 #92

Bingo. Proof of intent is not an essential element of this felony charge. leveymg Apr 2016 #62

I wonder how this Executive Order fits into this equation? CoffeeCat Apr 2016 #128

I always liked Chief Justice Rugg's definitions ky_dem Apr 2016 #49

What "top secret" information was released/lost. Don't see in statute that it applies to it COULD Hoyt Apr 2016 #58

The statute applies to all classified information that is lost, stolen, copied (abstracted), etc. leveymg Apr 2016 #74

Don't think so because nothing was lost, etc. I'll leave it to the attorneys, but "intent" is Hoyt Apr 2016 #78

Here's HRC's signed security agreement - "classified info is marked or unmarked classified info"> leveymg Apr 2016 #79

Still wasn't lost, stolen, given to enemies, etc. Sorry. Hoyt Apr 2016 #86

"removed from its proper place or delivered",or "abstracted" not just "lost, stolen, or destroyed." leveymg Apr 2016 #90

"Abstracted" means - hey Isis, I saw email that said something to effect we will invade on April 12. Hoyt Apr 2016 #91

"Abstracted" means "Jake, remove headers and send unsecure." That's what "abstracted" means leveymg Apr 2016 #96

I think that is what "redacted" means. In any event, did Clinton remove such identifiers and send to Hoyt Apr 2016 #99

The terms are analogous for this purpose. She had reason to believe it could be used to the leveymg Apr 2016 #103

But you do have to show it was lost, stolen, taken/given to others, etc. You haven't done that yet. Hoyt Apr 2016 #104

You haven't read all the possible ways the law can be violated. Also includes "communicates" leveymg Apr 2016 #106

When she sent classified uncertified server she: (1) through gross negligence permits the same leveymg Apr 2016 #82

"gross negligence" has a specific legal meaning. DCBob Apr 2016 #111

Instructing aides to strip classification headers and "send unsecure" is pretty grossly negligent. leveymg Apr 2016 #112

Still desperately digging. DCBob Apr 2016 #113

It is the AG who determines whether to press charges, not The President. JonLeibowitz Apr 2016 #115

Of course.. but who would know better than the President if there was anything significant here. DCBob Apr 2016 #116

Actually, Obama said he "hasn't been paying attention to the details." leveymg Apr 2016 #118

If he had any suspicion the shit was going to hit the fan on this.. DCBob Apr 2016 #119

The FBI? Are you suggesting the FBI leaks details of active investigations or POTUS solicits it? JonLeibowitz Apr 2016 #121

No but Obama knows a helluva alot more about this than almost anyone else. DCBob Apr 2016 #123

I'd rather not take a chance on her NOT "Intentionally" putting America in Jeopardy notadmblnd Apr 2016 #3

AGREED! Mr. President Please Explain How Hillary Merits Your Comment As Being "Outstanding" As... CorporatistNation Apr 2016 #19

Bad judgement Bjornsdotter Apr 2016 #5

If you are told not to do something 2pooped2pop Apr 2016 #7

That kind of sounds like an "As far as I know" moment. Autumn Apr 2016 #8

Yes, that's it "As far as I know" Fumesucker Apr 2016 #10

Payback comes eight years later! reformist2 Apr 2016 #24

And chilled to a Pluto-like temperature Fumesucker Apr 2016 #36

maybe reading this too hastily but amborin Apr 2016 #11

Sounded to me noretreatnosurrender Apr 2016 #29

yes, exactly amborin Apr 2016 #35

I was actually shocked noretreatnosurrender Apr 2016 #38

totally agree: amborin Apr 2016 #43

Getting Around the "strict line" noretreatnosurrender Apr 2016 #47

So when he said she was careless with the emails was that the message to indict? awake Apr 2016 #129

It's more complicated than that noretreatnosurrender Apr 2016 #131

Well he did say he had to be "careful" in what he said awake Apr 2016 #132

Well that's a great campaign slogan. Nanjeanne Apr 2016 #12

^^^^^^^^^^^ pdsimdars Apr 2016 #33

Well done! Bjornsdotter Apr 2016 #51

+10000000 azmom Apr 2016 #108

Brava!! n/t bvf Apr 2016 #122

There was an article on a computer site last week that said for the first couple of months Vinca Apr 2016 #13

AND.....her mails were likely breached on the Asian trip during that time. grasswire Apr 2016 #98

WOW. "Careless" is really not that far from "negligent"... He kind of threw her under the bus. reformist2 Apr 2016 #14

So she ACCIDENTALLY set up her own server? Waiting For Everyman Apr 2016 #15

The implication is that Hillary is a clueless naif Fumesucker Apr 2016 #37

the implication being that you slipped restorefreedom Apr 2016 #95

Obama all but said Abouttime Apr 2016 #16

But all of those FACTS are still out there which won't go away. And Obama and whoever the VP Skwmom Apr 2016 #21

It is why they want Bernie out notadmblnd Apr 2016 #22

Or once Hillary has the numbers then the hammer comes down awake Apr 2016 #46

Something like that. "Drip, drip, drip", so sayeth a federal Judge. nt leveymg Apr 2016 #97

Hmm. bvf Apr 2016 #124

And to top it off Abouttime Apr 2016 #18

Lynch has motive to do just that. grasswire Apr 2016 #100

Did an outstanding job? Really? n/t Skwmom Apr 2016 #20

He lost me as truthful when he said, "as Secretary of State (she) did an outstanding job." EndElectoral Apr 2016 #23

Agreed NWCorona Apr 2016 #25

Better to say nothing. agracie Apr 2016 #110

It was his "Heckuva job, Brownie" moment. HooptieWagon Apr 2016 #27

GMTA nt grasswire Apr 2016 #102

Like "Heckuva job, Brownie!" grasswire Apr 2016 #101

it totally wasn't intentional AgerolanAmerican Apr 2016 #26

I think Obama is wrong. HassleCat Apr 2016 #28

Here is what she said: antigop Apr 2016 #77

She did not "intentionally" do it, so she "stupidly" did it? that wendylaroux Apr 2016 #31

Intentionally, interesting. kcjohn1 Apr 2016 #34

did she intentionally try to get around FOIA? nt antigop Apr 2016 #39

Yes, and to evade subpoenas, and that was intentional. OOJ. leveymg Apr 2016 #94

He referred to it as an "investigation", not a "security review". nt antigop Apr 2016 #40

Oh so it's not intentional... She's just incompetent GeorgiaPeanuts Apr 2016 #41

Of course she didn't, she just made ANOTHER BAD DECISION, according to her! ViseGrip Apr 2016 #42

Clinton Didn't "Intentionally" Put America In Jeopardy; Ferd Berfel Apr 2016 #44

if she is totally absolved, this is going to create an uproar amborin Apr 2016 #45

There is a key legal meaning to that word. DCBob Apr 2016 #48

The key word was intentional... Punkingal Apr 2016 #50

Take that a step further: it's still a crime even if there is no actual harm to nat'l security leveymg Apr 2016 #126

How does Obama get to opine on the intent of someone else? merrily Apr 2016 #52

Hillary worked for him.. in case you forgot. DCBob Apr 2016 #55

Condescender, please. Employers have no special knowledge of an employee's intent. merrily Apr 2016 #57

Hes not testifying.. just providing his informed opinion. DCBob Apr 2016 #63

No kidding, Sherlock. Yet nothing you posted negates a thing in my posts 52 or 57. merrily Apr 2016 #65

Except that what you posted is totally irrelevant.. DCBob Apr 2016 #73

Not irrelevant at all, but you apparently have a bad case of both Capt Obviouism and last wordism. merrily Apr 2016 #76

You all Bernistas are hoping carburyme Apr 2016 #53

Pretend it was Condaleeza Rice for one second. IdaBriggs Apr 2016 #59

Obama says she's CARELESS and would never INTENTIONALLY jeopardize IdaBriggs Apr 2016 #56

Yeah, how is this good? TCJ70 Apr 2016 #68

As long as Hillary only put the U.S. in jeopardy unintentionally, what's the problem? BernieforPres2016 Apr 2016 #64

Since she failed to keep a personal email she doesn't "own" any of it. onecaliberal Apr 2016 #67

Which of these 2 takes more planning and effort? BernieforPres2016 Apr 2016 #69

there's an 8 lane smooth as glass superhighway to the gates of Hell paved with good intentions. hobbit709 Apr 2016 #70

Maybe shrub didnt intentionally fuck up all he touched either. libtodeath Apr 2016 #75

he also admitted "I haven't been sorting through each and every aspect of this." nt antigop Apr 2016 #83

That's his out. He can look supportive now, and later be surprised by revelations. winter is coming Apr 2016 #125

Good point awake Apr 2016 #130

Sorry Obama.. If you have to explain.. and with a spin! Roaberner Apr 2016 #87

IOW, best case, she negligently put America's national security in jeopardy and, unless he's a mind merrily Apr 2016 #93

He really, really ought to keep his mouth shut. grasswire Apr 2016 #107

Why give republicans apportunity for impeachment? Arizona Roadrunner Apr 2016 #109

Obama Dodging the issue Ferd Berfel Apr 2016 #120