Should Hillary be prosecuted for security violations?

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 08:19:54 -0400

Now that classified material has been found on Hillary’s personal email server, should she be prosecuted? What would happen if you or I took this material home?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/08/12/the-spy-satellite-secrets-in-hillary-s-emails.html

The Spy Satellite Secrets in Hillary’s Emails

These weren’t just ordinary secrets found in Clinton’s private server, but some of the most classified material the U.S. government has.

Response by PO1 John Miller made Aug 13 at 2015 8:21 AM

PO1 John Miller — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 08:21:01 -0400

She SHOULD be, but she won't be!

Response by CW4 Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 13 at 2015 8:21 AM

CW4 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 08:21:37 -0400

LTC Private RallyPoint Member, if it's s punishable offense which I don't see why it wouldn't be and they have hard concrete evidence against her, than why not? Politicians have been prosecuted for far less in the past.

Response by SCPO David Lockwood made Aug 13 at 2015 8:23 AM

SCPO David Lockwood — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 08:23:52 -0400

If in fact she did do this then yes she should be.

Response by SSgt Alex Robinson made Aug 13 at 2015 8:27 AM

SSgt Alex Robinson — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 08:27:19 -0400

She should face the same level of prosecution as any other citizen

Response by MSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 13 at 2015 8:27 AM

MSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 08:27:56 -0400

What good would it do....we tried to impeached her husband and that got us no-where.

Even if she is found at fault.....whats the end game....not like they are going to toss her in prison and the "educated" voters don't care they will vote for any minority that is put in front of them either out of guilt, stupidity, or blind allegiance.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 13 at 2015 8:38 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 08:38:21 -0400

Anyone who has held a security clearance or signed an ND agreement knows that this behavior and breach of policy is absolutely unacceptable. Unfortunately, we will likely witness another exams of money and power and how they can buy you immunity. She may not get the nomination because of this but she will never see a day in jail. Hopefully the FBI and the Justice Department remember their oaths and bring to bear some form of justice.

Response by Col Joseph Lenertz made Aug 13 at 2015 8:43 AM

Col Joseph Lenertz — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 08:43:54 -0400

It doesn't look like there's an option where no crime occurred. If the Intel agency that created the doc didn't properly label it, they committed a felony. If they properly labeled it, then whoever transferred it to an unclass system committed a felony. If the label was removed, whoever removed it committed a felony....and, if they removed it to give the SECSTATE plausible deniability as to its classification, then felony conspiracy charges are added. Finally, if the labels survived and remained attached when introduced to Clinton's network, then everyone who saw or accessed the document and failed to report the security violation can be charged with a felony. I see no way a crime did not occur.

Response by PO3 Steven Sherrill made Aug 13 at 2015 8:55 AM

PO3 Steven Sherrill — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 08:55:32 -0400

I think that this is one of those cases where nobody wants to be caught napping so they are reporting without waiting for the investigation to develop. If Classified information was sent to her, my question is "who the fuck is putting classified information in an E-Mail?" If it was generated by her, then I want to know "Why the fuck are you putting classified information in an E-Mail?"
The other problem is that some of the information was not marked as classified, but was deemed that it should have been marked classified. If it should have been marked as classified, why wasn't it marked as classified before this scandal started breaking.

This morning NBC was reporting that there were messages that contained Top Secret information in them. IF that is the case, not just Hillary needs to be taken to task for that. Everyone who had anything to do with those messages is equally culpable. If I send an E-Mail with Top Secret information in it to an outside source, you receive that information, and don't report that a breach in protocol (at the least) or security (most likely) has occurred, you are no less guilty than the person who sent the information. Operational Security is not a one person show. It is everyone within a chain of information's responsibility to maintain the security of information. This means that Hillary is at least in part culpable for this debacle.

Response by SSG Michael Hathaway made Aug 13 at 2015 9:06 AM

SSG Michael Hathaway — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 09:06:13 -0400

I would get roasted if I did what she did, so what makes her untouchable on such a grave offense? This is what I cannot stand about our society/culture civilian and military. Someone higher up or famous faces serious charges which are usually dropped, they get a slap on the wrist, or nothing as serious as what the average soldier/citizen would receive in the same situation. It goads me that we have such a system whereas a higher rank or prominence in society warrants lesser punishment, if any.

In my opinion, the higher the rank or position, the more you should KNOW how wrong something is and thus the more severe the punishment should be.

Response by Capt Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 13 at 2015 9:32 AM

Capt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 09:32:59 -0400

Hillary will probably get off with nothing or a slap on the wrist.

The four star got a fine

You and I or any other lower ranking person would see the inside of a jail cell.

Response by SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. made Aug 13 at 2015 9:33 AM

SPC Jan Allbright, M.Sc., R.S. — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 09:33:18 -0400

When was the material found?
According to the article....
"There’s still a lot we don’t know about Hillary’s Emailgate. Exactly how many emails contained TOP SECRET//SI information is unclear. We may never know since thousands of emails were already destroyed by Clinton. Who exactly placed the classified information in emails—it may not have been Hillary Clinton—and how did they access the information in the first place? How many of Hillary’s staffers at Foggy Bottom were also using her personal server?"

Response by SGT Roberto Mendoza-Diaz made Aug 13 at 2015 9:41 AM

SGT Roberto Mendoza-Diaz — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 09:41:15 -0400

Yes she should get prosecuted, however is not going to happen. That's just the sad truth.

Response by CW5 Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 13 at 2015 9:58 AM

CW5 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 09:58:27 -0400

When does the question that even if it wasn't marked with a classification that the sender or receiver reasonably knew that the information had a classification come into play?. Her defense seems to be based upon the assertion that the info was not classified at the time she received it. Just because the football doesn't have a TS/SCI banner on the briefcase doesn't make the codes within any less classified.
Just because I put a red sticker on a piece of paper doesn't make the info secret. It implies that the paper should be treated as such based upon what I know of the information. I personally don't have the ability to say that one thing is actually classified but I can recognize that it has been declared as such by a proper authority. With that in mind, failure to classify something appropriately or failure to report that something was inappropriately labelled is a security violation at the least.
We also have a problem of overclassifying information as it is (by mistake or as a broad brush trying to protect) which makes FOIA more difficult.

Response by SGT Bryon Sergent made Aug 13 at 2015 9:59 AM

SGT Bryon Sergent — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 09:59:05 -0400

YES, YES, YEs, Yes and Hell Yes. Show the democrats that they are NOT above the law! Get her ass for Bengazi as well!

Response by Maj Chris Nelson made Aug 13 at 2015 10:07 AM

Maj Chris Nelson — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 10:07:24 -0400

General Petraeus got sacked for alleged leak of classified system. If I had classified email on MY home system, I would be charged. Bring her up on charges. Fair is Fair.

Response by COL Jon Thompson made Aug 13 at 2015 10:10 AM

COL Jon Thompson — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 10:10:37 -0400

My gut feeling is that she will not be convicted of anything but this will ruin her chances for becoming President. It will come down to how much politics get involved in this process and the investigation. If it is an impartial investigation, then perhaps charges would be filed. As much as I would like to see that happening with a potential conviction, I would also settle for this scuttling her campaign to help save our nation from her.

Response by SMSgt Tony Barnes made Aug 13 at 2015 10:11 AM

SMSgt Tony Barnes — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 10:11:49 -0400

Absolutely and no veteran should ever vote for her.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 13 at 2015 10:18 AM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 10:18:20 -0400

If Gen Petreaus was, then she should be as well. Especially if she had classified govt docs on an unsecured civilian system.

Response by 1stSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 13 at 2015 10:33 AM

1stSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 10:33:18 -0400

Need to wait for the investigation to conclude . Not a Hillary supporter, but to found guilty you must first be charged with a crime.

Response by MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca made Aug 13 at 2015 11:38 AM

MAJ Robert (Bob) Petrarca — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 11:38:30 -0400

She should be prosecuted solely for being Hillary Clinton. How mush damage and havoc can one family be allowed to wreak? Enough already with Clintons and Bushs.

Response by Sgt Kelli Mays made Aug 13 at 2015 1:23 PM

Sgt Kelli Mays — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 13:23:17 -0400

If it is found she is in violation and clearly she knew and broke the law...then HELL YES...but unfortunately I feel even if she is found guilty without any doubt....she'll somehow avoid jail/prison time.

using a personal server and not the designated government server for ANY emails is unlawful....it's against the law....why are they only looking for classified documents...bottom line is SHE BROKE PROTOCOL...SHE BROKE THE RULES.... PERIOD!

General Petraeus did far less, in my opinion with his pillow talk than Hilary did with her emails not being secured.....and he was punished for it.

Response by SPC Tony Tarone made Aug 13 at 2015 7:52 PM

SPC Tony Tarone — Thu, 13 Aug 2015 19:52:11 -0400

Perhaps it's just another vast right-wing conspiracy.

Response by SSgt Alex Robinson made Aug 14 at 2015 6:37 AM

SSgt Alex Robinson — Fri, 14 Aug 2015 06:37:28 -0400

She should face the same scrutiny General Petreaus

Response by PO3 Bob Walsh made Aug 15 at 2015 5:24 AM

PO3 Bob Walsh — Sat, 15 Aug 2015 05:24:45 -0400

. Retired U.S. Army general and former CIA chief David H. Petraeus was found guilty of having mishandled secret files. I would like to see Hilliary prosecuted for security violations. Why did she choose, or insist on useing her private home server instead of the State Department's, secure server. There must have been a reason, but no one is asking, "WHY". What was the benefit, or who was the Beneficiary. I have heard comments from Knowledgeable people that it is a sure thing that her private server has been hacked. This is the kind of problem that must be analyzed and questioned by a skilled prosecutor.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 15 at 2015 10:13 PM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 15 Aug 2015 22:13:24 -0400

Yes she should

Response by Maj Private RallyPoint Member made Aug 15 at 2015 10:14 PM

Maj Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 15 Aug 2015 22:14:10 -0400

Her account, her responsibility. If I send a SSN that isn't encrypted I'm toast. She gets TS e-mails and people want to give her a pass because someone else may have removed the markings. BS.....

Response by LTC Stephen C. made Aug 15 at 2015 10:17 PM

LTC Stephen C. — Sat, 15 Aug 2015 22:17:10 -0400

LTC Private RallyPoint Member, I believe that she should be prosecuted, but I consider the likelihood to be remote, regardless of what is ultimately revealed to be her transgressions.

Response by CPT Alan W. made Aug 17 at 2015 12:49 AM

CPT Alan W. — Mon, 17 Aug 2015 00:49:08 -0400

She can get in line behind Carl Rove: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/12/AR [login to see] 408.html

Rove E-Mail Sought by Congress May Be Missing

A lawyer for the Republican National Committee told congressional staff members yesterday that the RNC is missing at least four years' worth of e-mail from White House senior adviser Karl Rove that is being sought as part of investigations into the Bush administration, according to the chairman o...

Response by CW3 Jim Norris made Jan 12 at 2016 10:36 AM

CW3 Jim Norris — Tue, 12 Jan 2016 10:36:01 -0500

Absolutely - she should already be shackled and perp walked into a federal facility.

Response by CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 14 at 2017 9:17 PM

CMSgt Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 14 Dec 2017 21:17:25 -0500

The fact her security clearance was not even suspended during a criminal investigation speaks volumes.

Response by CSM William DeWolf made Dec 14 at 2017 10:18 PM

CSM William DeWolf — Thu, 14 Dec 2017 22:18:44 -0500

We wouldn't be in a comfortable situation, that's for sure!

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 15 at 2017 3:11 AM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 15 Dec 2017 03:11:18 -0500

She clearly broke the law, so clearly she should be prosecuted. Any other member of the government would be held to the law without regards.

Response by Sgt Kelli Mays made Jun 18 at 2018 5:44 PM

Sgt Kelli Mays — Mon, 18 Jun 2018 17:44:58 -0400

LTC Private RallyPoint Member Heck yeah...she should have already been prosecuted and sitting in a federal penitentiary by now...but more than likely, nothing will b done.

Response by SSgt GG-15 RET Jim Lint made Jun 19 at 2018 12:04 PM

SSgt GG-15 RET Jim Lint — Tue, 19 Jun 2018 12:04:25 -0400

I would not need your intent, just the fact that it is yours and you did not control it. Guilty. Rookie Counterintelligence agents should be able to do this short case.