Explain this to me like I'm a second-grader

Information remains classified, even if it's reported in the press. People who handle classified information understand this. It's why you'll see someone decline to discuss something like the CIA drone program, despite that fact that it's been revealed in the press.

And, some of that likely accounts for a fraction of what's been deemed classified among Hillary's emails. It doesn't account for all of it, and it doesn't excuse it.

What folks like Baron need to understand is that "information" is classified. If you put that information in a document, that document is classified the instant it is created. It doesn't need markings.

Senator Kerry, Secretary Clinton, and her top staff all knew, and understood this. They would have been trained on this. They would have been informed of their obligations, and the punishment, including criminal prosecution, for mishandling classified information.

 

I doubt there is very much information that is deemed classified that would raise an eyebrow, much less constitute a threat, if it were released.

 

That's irrelevant to the discussion.

But, the 22 emails, in seven threads, that the State Department says can never be released because they would be too damaging to national security seem to make a counter argument to yours.

 

I think they get the vapors way too much about releasing information to the public.

But, if we go stricly by the letter of the law you are touting, virtually every politician with access to a crumb of classified information has mishandled, misspoke or leaked information on purpose or by accident at some point.

So it would have to be some serious leakage for it to be something I would worry about, Dem or GOP.

 

Surely you recognize the difference between "mishandling" or "leaking" a crumb of classified information and willfully funneling ALL of your electronic communication through an unsecured channel AND storing it there for years, unsecured, without telling anyone, and for no discernible reason.

 

Ahem ...

 

Seems like you are trying to make a point that is sailing over my head.

I like to keep my email close and my servers closer, personally.

 

I still don't get it.

I understand that the information was classified. But isn't that on the person who sent her the email, not on her? She doesn't know the information and, therefore, the email, is classified.

 

Since she can't control what people send her, shouldn't it be her responsibility to, say, not use an unsecured portal for ALL of her electronic communication?

Or, is the argument that the Secretary of State shouldn't have any realistic expectation of receiving classified information?

 

I'm just wondering if it's criminal.

 

I send all of my top secret information to Hillary2016@aol.com.

 

Won't be an issue if she's elected. If not? Whoooo boy!