The past Friday this information came out in the news.

From Breitbart.com:

New Email Appears to Show Clinton Ordering Staff to Improperly Handle Sensitive Material

by John Hayward

The latest Hillary Clinton document dump occurred in the wee hours of Friday morning, and contains what appears to be a smoking-gun revelation: Clinton ordering her aides to strip the classification markings from confidential material and retransmit it using unsecure methods.

Let’s pause for a moment in order to examine a very salient portion of the USC or United States Code,

18 USC § 1924:- UNAUTHORIZED REMOVAL AND RETENTION OF CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS OR MATERIAL

(a) Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.

(b) For purposes of this section, the provision of documents and materials to the Congress shall not constitute an offense under subsection (a)

(c) In this section, the term “classified information of the United States” means information originated, owned, or possessed by the United States Government concerning the national defense or foreign relations of the United States that has been determined pursuant to law or Executive order to require protection against unauthorized disclosure in the interests of national security.

From CBSNews.com:

In email, Hillary Clinton tells aide to send talking points “nonsecure”

by Reena Flores

To comply with a court-ordered goal, the State Department made public about 3,000 pages of emails from Hillary Clinton’s private server early Friday morning, including 66 messages that were later marked “classified” on some level.

On the campaign trail, the presidential candidate has insisted that no classified information was sent or received through her private email server.

But in one email exchange between Clinton and staffer Jake Sullivan from June 17, 2011, the then-secretary advised her aide on sending a set of talking points by email when he had trouble sending them through secure means.

Part of the exchange is redacted, so the context of the emails is unknown, but at one point, Sullivan tells Clinton that aides “say they’ve had issues sending secure fax. They’re working on it.”

THE CLINCHER:

Clinton responds, “If they can’t, turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure.”

To tell the staffer to send the document(s) purposely minus the header portrays to me a clear consciousness of guilt and an attempt to evade.

In my opinion, this is a violation of the above statute.  Further, you could easily add the word CONSPIRACY to the charges, as that is two or persons conspiring to commit a crime concomitant with an overt act.

Let’s see.  Did Hillary Clinton tell her staffer, not ask, but tell her staffer to send a document minus its official header?

Breitbart.com finally observes:

Fox News notes that the latest document dump includes 65 more messages classified as “confidential,” plus one classified as “secret,” bringing the total number of classified emails discovered on Clinton’s mail server to 1,340. Needless to say, this is considerably higher than the “zero” she claimed.

What of this consideration?  What about the word “precedent”?

And what about, regarding classified information, the “Hillary Clinton Defense”?

BZ