4 ms·

It's hard to understand if you haven't handled classified information before. If the average DoD employee or military member did what she did (allegedly), they

It's hard to understand if you haven't handled classified information before. If the average DoD employee or military member did what she did (allegedly), they'd already be in prison. The only reason it's taking so long is because it's a high profile person. And, well... politics.

chvid 11y ago
Then why do you have "many legal experts" in the LA Times article saying that there is little chance of prosecution? Are they merely protecting a political allied? Can the current democratic administration delay the prosecution until after the presidential election or have I been watching house of cards too much? I understand these questions are heavily political and touchy subjects; but I am just trying to understand what is going on. I really don't have an opinion on American politics.
- talmand 11y ago
  It's because no one outside a small circle of people really knows what's going on. It's too many people speculating on what they know, or what they think they know, just to have something to talk about when the subject comes up. For every legal expert that says not guilty before knowing all the facts I can probably find you one that says guilty before knowing all the facts.
kevin_thibedeau 11y ago
The "classified" information wasn't regarded as such at the time. It is only now regarded as secret information through reclassification, likely stemming from political influence to ante up the charges against Clinton. That entails a responsibility to maintain secrecy from here on out but doesn't mean the original act (however stupid) was a breach of national security.
- woodman 11y ago
  A big part of the whole security clearance process is determining the competency of the individual in recognizing incorrectly classified material. Saying that the designated markings were missing is no longer an excuse once you get the clearance. Over two thousand emails were determined to contain classified material, that is over two thousand opportunities to recognize how badly you've screwed up in using a private server for official government business. Twenty of those where classified top-secret, which is really difficult to mistake for uncontrolled information. I'm pretty sure that the issue of competency will be front and center during these interviews.
- djrogers 11y ago
  None of that has been established, as there are plenty of purportedly classified emails that have not been released. It would be highly irresponsible to claim that they were either classified after-the-fact or classified from birth, without knowing one way or the other. One would assume that that would be one of the outcomes of this investigation. B
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

chvid 11y ago

Then why do you have "many legal experts" in the LA Times article saying that there is little chance of prosecution? Are they merely protecting a political allied? Can the current democratic administration delay the prosecution until after the presidential election or have I been watching house of cards too much? I understand these questions are heavily political and touchy subjects; but I am just trying to understand what is going on. I really don't have an opinion on American politics.

talmand 11y ago
It's because no one outside a small circle of people really knows what's going on. It's too many people speculating on what they know, or what they think they know, just to have something to talk about when the subject comes up. For every legal expert that says not guilty before knowing all the facts I can probably find you one that says guilty before knowing all the facts.

kevin_thibedeau 11y ago

The "classified" information wasn't regarded as such at the time. It is only now regarded as secret information through reclassification, likely stemming from political influence to ante up the charges against Clinton. That entails a responsibility to maintain secrecy from here on out but doesn't mean the original act (however stupid) was a breach of national security.

woodman 11y ago
A big part of the whole security clearance process is determining the competency of the individual in recognizing incorrectly classified material. Saying that the designated markings were missing is no longer an excuse once you get the clearance. Over two thousand emails were determined to contain classified material, that is over two thousand opportunities to recognize how badly you've screwed up in using a private server for official government business. Twenty of those where classified top-secret, which is really difficult to mistake for uncontrolled information. I'm pretty sure that the issue of competency will be front and center during these interviews.
djrogers 11y ago
None of that has been established, as there are plenty of purportedly classified emails that have not been released. It would be highly irresponsible to claim that they were either classified after-the-fact or classified from birth, without knowing one way or the other. One would assume that that would be one of the outcomes of this investigation. B

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]