Through my military and current career I have held a security clearance for the past 35 years. AT LEAST one time in each of those years I have been drilled on all the necessary precautions for proper handling of classified information. How ALL classified documents and media are to be properly labeled. TEMPEST guidelines for any device (including computers, PDAs, iPhones, etc.) that handle classified information. Restriction on where classified information openly worked with. All of these and more directives come straight from the NSA. The agency Hillary was in charge of. I would expect that if a person is in charge of a specific agency, they are at least moderately familiar with its directives. When dealing with National Security I would hope that person would be intimately familiar with those directives. Yet you expect me to believe that Hillary wasn’t?.Had I ever been found guilty of just 1% of 1% of Hillary’s “extreme carelessness” I would have lost my clearance, been heavily fined, and likely have spent a number of years behind bars. Proving intent is not necessary for charges to be brought and prosecuted. A couple years ago a Chief Petty Officer in my son’s division brought an unauthorized storage device into Radio Central on board his ship. There was no intent by this CPO to use it inappropriately. This CPO lost his clearance, was removed from the ship and his case was pending trial the last my son heard. .As reported by CNN: “…Comey administered an extraordinary tongue-lashing to Clinton and her aides, rebuking them for being “extremely careless” in the handling of classified information and saying the presumptive Democratic nominee should have known an unclassified email system was no place to conduct sensitive government business..The FBI director pointed out that the probe was tasked with examining whether Clinton or her aides had mishandled classified information either intentionally or in a grossly negligent way”..Dictionary.com definition of “grossly”: flagrant and EXTREME.Dictionary.com definition of “negligent”: Lazily CARELESS; offhand..So the FBI probe was to “examine for gross negligence” and by Comey’s own words that is exactly what they found: “extremely careless”. And still no charges are brought. Once again the Clinton’s are proven to be above the law..Is this the person we want as President? Someone who handles above Top Secret information that directly impacts national security in an extremely careless manner? Are we expected to believe that the head of the NSA, the agency responsible for the proper handling of classified information, is ignorant of those directives? You liberals keep telling us how “smart” Hillary is. If she is as smart as you claim then I have to believe she knew exactly what she was doing with regards to this classified information. If she didn’t know, then she’s dumber than a box of rocks. Either way, I don’t want her as my President.
manteo16nc almost 8 years ago
Well, it’s all accessible now, even what Hill-lie-ry thought she had deleted. Indictment or no, her cred is dead.
1941gko almost 8 years ago
“man” is lost in the Faux News echo-chamber!
rnapiera almost 8 years ago
Through my military and current career I have held a security clearance for the past 35 years. AT LEAST one time in each of those years I have been drilled on all the necessary precautions for proper handling of classified information. How ALL classified documents and media are to be properly labeled. TEMPEST guidelines for any device (including computers, PDAs, iPhones, etc.) that handle classified information. Restriction on where classified information openly worked with. All of these and more directives come straight from the NSA. The agency Hillary was in charge of. I would expect that if a person is in charge of a specific agency, they are at least moderately familiar with its directives. When dealing with National Security I would hope that person would be intimately familiar with those directives. Yet you expect me to believe that Hillary wasn’t?.Had I ever been found guilty of just 1% of 1% of Hillary’s “extreme carelessness” I would have lost my clearance, been heavily fined, and likely have spent a number of years behind bars. Proving intent is not necessary for charges to be brought and prosecuted. A couple years ago a Chief Petty Officer in my son’s division brought an unauthorized storage device into Radio Central on board his ship. There was no intent by this CPO to use it inappropriately. This CPO lost his clearance, was removed from the ship and his case was pending trial the last my son heard. .As reported by CNN: “…Comey administered an extraordinary tongue-lashing to Clinton and her aides, rebuking them for being “extremely careless” in the handling of classified information and saying the presumptive Democratic nominee should have known an unclassified email system was no place to conduct sensitive government business..The FBI director pointed out that the probe was tasked with examining whether Clinton or her aides had mishandled classified information either intentionally or in a grossly negligent way”..Dictionary.com definition of “grossly”: flagrant and EXTREME.Dictionary.com definition of “negligent”: Lazily CARELESS; offhand..So the FBI probe was to “examine for gross negligence” and by Comey’s own words that is exactly what they found: “extremely careless”. And still no charges are brought. Once again the Clinton’s are proven to be above the law..Is this the person we want as President? Someone who handles above Top Secret information that directly impacts national security in an extremely careless manner? Are we expected to believe that the head of the NSA, the agency responsible for the proper handling of classified information, is ignorant of those directives? You liberals keep telling us how “smart” Hillary is. If she is as smart as you claim then I have to believe she knew exactly what she was doing with regards to this classified information. If she didn’t know, then she’s dumber than a box of rocks. Either way, I don’t want her as my President.