Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

leveymg

(36,418 posts)
79. Here's HRC's signed security agreement - "classified info is marked or unmarked classified info">
Sun Apr 10, 2016, 12:53 PM
Apr 2016

Note Sec. 793 is referenced at multiple places in her Classified Information Nondisclosure Agreement:

UNCLASSIFIED U.S. Department of State Case No. F-2015-05069 Doc No. C05833708 Date: 11/05/2015
! I RELEASE IN PART I
B7(C),B6
---------------------------------1REVIEW AUTHORITY:
CLASSIFIED INFORMATION NONDISCLOSURE AGREEMENT Barbara Nielsen, Senior
Reviewer
AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN Hillary Rodham Clinton AND THE UNITED STATES
1. lntending to be legally bound. I hereby accept the obligations contained In this Agreement In consideration of my being granted access to classified information. As used in this Agreement, classified Information is marked or unmarked classified Information, including oral communications, that is classified under the standards or Executive Order 12958, or under any other Executive order or statute that prohibits unauthorized disclosure of lnformation in the Interest of national security; and unclassified Information that meets the standards for classification and is in the process of a classification determination as provided In Section 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 and 1A(e) of Executive Order 12958 or under any other Executive order or statute that requires protection for such information in the of national security. I understand and accept that by being granted access to classified lnformation special confidence and trust have been placed in me by the United States Government .
2. I hereby acknowledge that I have received a security lndoctrination concerning the nature and protection of classified information, including the procedures to be followed in ascertaining whether other persons to whom I contemplate disclosing this Information have been approved for access to it, and that I understand these procedures.
3. I have been advised that the unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of classified Information by me could cause damage or irreparable injury to the United States or could be used to advantage by a foreign nation. I hereby agree that I will not divulge classified information to anyone unless: (a) I have officially verified that the recipient has been properly authorized by the United States Government to receive it, or (b) I have been given prior written notice of authorization from the United States Government Department or Agency (hereinafter Department or Agency) 1'9SJ) responsible for the classification of information or last granting me a security clearance that such disclosure is permitted. I understand that lf I am uncertain about the classification status of Information, I am required to confirm from an authorized official that the Information is unclassified before I may disclose It, except to a person as provided in (a) or (b), above. I further understand that I am obligated to comply with laws and regulations that prohibit the unauthorized disclosure of classified lnformation.
4. I have been advised that any breach of this may result In the termination of any security clearances I hold; removal from any position of special confidence and trust requiring such clearances; or termination of my employment or other relationships with the Departments or Agencies that granted my security clearance or clearances. In addition, I have been advised that any unauthorized disclosure of classified lnformation by me may constitute a violation, or violations. of Untied States criminal laws, including the provisions of Sections 641. 793, 794, 798, *952 and 1924, Title 18, United States Code, and the provisions of Section 783(b), Title 50,
United Slates code. and the provisions of the Intelligence Identities Protection Act of 1982. I recognize that nothing In the Agreement constitutes a waiver by the United States of the right to prosecute me for any statutory violation..
5. I hereby assign to the United States Government all royalties, remunerations. and emoluments that have resulted, wiII result or may result from any disclosure, publication or revelation of classified Information not consistent with the terms of this Agreement
6. I understand that the United States Government may seek any remedy available to it to enforce this Agreement Including, but not but not limited to application for a court order prohibiting disclosure of Information In breach of this Agreement.
1. I understand that all classifled information to which I have access or may obtain access by signing this Agreement will remain the property of, or under the control of the United States Government unless and until otherwise determined by an authorized official or final ruling of a court of law. I agree that I shall return all classffled materials which have or may come into my possession or for which I am responsible because of such access: (a) upon demand by an authorized representative of the United States Government; (b) upon the conclusion of employment or other relationship with the Department or Agency that last granted me a security clearance or- that provided me access ID classifled Information; or (c) upon the conclusion of my employment or other relationship that requires access to classified information. If I do not return such materials upon request, I understand that this may be a violation of Sections 793 and/or 1924, § 18, United States Code, a United States criminal law.
8. Unless and until I am released In writing by an authorized representative or the United States Government.. I understand that all conditions and obligations imposed upon me by this Agreement apply during the time I am granted access to classified lnformation, and at all times thereafter.
9. Each provision of this Agreement is severable. If a court should find provision of this Agreement to be unenforceable, all other provisions of this Agreement shall remain In full force and effect.
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
Latest Discussions»Retired Forums»2016 Postmortem»Obama: Clinton Didn't "In...»Reply #79