Home
I know this will go completely over the head of the Hillary haters, but I feel compelled to do it nonetheless.
Let's just have a quick review of where we are ....
1. The personal email and server themselves were totally legal, and permitted by regulations for transmitting "sensitive but unclassified" info.
There is no evidence Hillary knowingly transmitted any info that was classified.
None.
2. The regulations even specify security requirements for a home computer handling such info, including no unencrypted wireless access, using appropriate anti-virus software, and installing any software and operating system security updates in a timely fashion.
There's no evidence she failed to comply with any of these.
None.
3. The Espionage Act basically requires someone wilfully disclose important defense info (not just "classified" -- it has to directly involve US defenses; foreign government info for example doesn't typically apply here), to an unauthorized person, with the knowledge that it could be used to the injury of the United States.
There's just no way in hell this could ever be applied to a good faith exchange between the Secretary of State and a top aide.
There are no grounds whatsoever for criminal charges.
None.
4. With regards to the vast majority of now classified emails, which were the lowest classification level, "confidential", we know that most of them were "foreign government info", which we know that sometimes were permitted to be sent by internet e-mail (if the foreign government entity providing it permitted it).
We have no idea if redacted emails met this criteria, since the codes used for redactions on declassified emails make no distinction between different categories of "confidential".
5. State Department regulations (5 FAM 483.3-3) currently require a notification be sent to all individuals who have previously sent or received a document that has recently been classified in connection with an FOIA request.
That notification includes the following paragraph:
(m)Note that the classification of this document, pursuant to E.O. 13526, Section 1.7(d), does not in itself indicate that any person previously acted improperly with respect to the document or the information contained therein. Going forward, however, the document is to be safeguarded in accordance with Department procedures for the handling of classified information.
So, the fact that these emails have now been classified does not indicate that anyone previously acted improperly.
That's it.
End of story.
Let's just have a quick review of where we are ....
1. The personal email and server themselves were totally legal, and permitted by regulations for transmitting "sensitive but unclassified" info.
There is no evidence Hillary knowingly transmitted any info that was classified.
None.
2. The regulations even specify security requirements for a home computer handling such info, including no unencrypted wireless access, using appropriate anti-virus software, and installing any software and operating system security updates in a timely fashion.
There's no evidence she failed to comply with any of these.
None.
3. The Espionage Act basically requires someone wilfully disclose important defense info (not just "classified" -- it has to directly involve US defenses; foreign government info for example doesn't typically apply here), to an unauthorized person, with the knowledge that it could be used to the injury of the United States.
There's just no way in hell this could ever be applied to a good faith exchange between the Secretary of State and a top aide.
There are no grounds whatsoever for criminal charges.
None.
4. With regards to the vast majority of now classified emails, which were the lowest classification level, "confidential", we know that most of them were "foreign government info", which we know that sometimes were permitted to be sent by internet e-mail (if the foreign government entity providing it permitted it).
We have no idea if redacted emails met this criteria, since the codes used for redactions on declassified emails make no distinction between different categories of "confidential".
5. State Department regulations (5 FAM 483.3-3) currently require a notification be sent to all individuals who have previously sent or received a document that has recently been classified in connection with an FOIA request.
That notification includes the following paragraph:
(m)Note that the classification of this document, pursuant to E.O. 13526, Section 1.7(d), does not in itself indicate that any person previously acted improperly with respect to the document or the information contained therein. Going forward, however, the document is to be safeguarded in accordance with Department procedures for the handling of classified information.
So, the fact that these emails have now been classified does not indicate that anyone previously acted improperly.
That's it.
End of story.
