Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
What I also said in the request for the signed document was...
As to her rights read the EO. There is enough room to drive a truck through. Note there is no indication she ever received anything on this email server that was obviously classified.
I believe also that all or virtually all of the information involved was received on emails from .gov accounts. These are likely to be virtually all State Dept.
This is the line that Dems are saying over and over and over again. "She didn't have anything on her server that was obviously classified."
Look, I don't work for the government. I don't have highly classified and highly sensitive information crossing my desk regularly. But even in the private sector with no laws in place on the matter, I would get fired instantly if I started mass-forwarding work emails to my gmail. Wouldn't matter if it's all just office gossip. It's just something you don't do. Why? Because I might inadvertently be opening up company secrets to the wider world. This should have been even more obvious with Hillary. She knew she might inadvertently be leaving highly sensitive information out there for the Russians, ISIS, Chinese, North Koreans and others to look at. Her use of her own private server ought to really upset Americans. You just don't do that.
... and the best defense Hillary and her faithful sheep have is, "Nothing on that server was obviously classified." Wow, now that's pretty specific. In fact that's extremely specific. In a single stroke we're being told, "Yes there definitely was sensitive information on my unsecured private server. But none of it was specifically marked "top secret" or "classified" at the time, so it's no big deal." Yes, actually it is a big deal. Any other government employee would have been fired and arrested long ago. But since she's got a D next to her name you don't care.
Clinton divided her emails into two sets. One government related and one personal. She claims to have turned all the government related ones over to the State Dept.
There were reports that the FBI was able to recover the personal emails as well as the government ones.
It is however my understanding that all the purported classified material comes from the ones she turned over as government related.
The server is destroyed... I don't know what happened?
Sorry, there wasn't anything on it anyway, but recipes and baby pictures.
Then we discover, the back up and find a different story, with the content of the e-mail on the server.
Then more and more are "allowed" to be presented to the public. Dumps... one after another. They started out like she said, no government stuff, but big gaps in timelines.
Now as the gaps in the timeline get filled in, a much different picture is being shown. In fact over 2000 e-mails deemed to be government classified information. "oh, they were not marked Classified"
Then as we see the last hold outs what they will release, a big red flag pops up and there are e-mails deemed way too classified for the public. Maybe they are the ones that incriminate Obama and Valerie Jarrett? Who knows.
Hey lvmensch,do you have ANY real experience with any type of governmental security clearance?
I mean, be honest, not just for us but for you as well.....
You are not helping the clinton side, not a chance....
But if you wish to continue, please do, you are actually showing that your side does not care about rules....
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvmensch
And your messages continue to display the childish thoughts that surround this issue.
[quote=lvmensch;42856762]
Quote:
Originally Posted by chucksnee
It's still classified....
It's still classified....[QUOTE/]
What is? He looked at it on a screen.
By who's authority. It has no words or text in common with the original communication.
He wrote it. So he has to classify it? Based on SofS authority is the only way that could happen. It contains original analysis though with insight from classified knowledge.
It is an original work of the State Dept. Therefore the province of the SofS.
I have never been able to figure out if that is true or not. Petreaus after all is a plea bargain...and his friend was very well cleared. I suspect he might well have fought it and won...but risked a felony and lots of bad publicity if he did.
Much of the press suggests Petreaus got a sweetheart deal. He could easily have been charged with multiple felonies that did not involve classified material.
[quote=lvmensch;42857065]
Quote:
Originally Posted by TrapperJohn
It actually costs me to post here...supposed to be hacking at a data base and web site which does not progress while I opine here.
As I have pointed out before it is amazing how few of you understand enough about classification as to find you back side in a security phone booth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvmensch
My position is that the email set up she had was dumb and should not have happened. And it is the State Dept that should have seen to it that she did not do this. It may well have sounded easier for her but should not have happened. This is the job for the technicians and watchers that surround all big government depts.
I would however note that she did nothing illegal and would be in the exact same position she is in now if she had two emails. Neither her own or a .gov or a standard email would be legal for classified email. That had to be handled on the other two systems. She had and used the classified systems for matters which were classified.
I would also note there is and will always be conflict between spooks and the line about classification. Inherent in their roles. The line generally rules particularly on anything in the same dept. Dept heads, particularly State, have large authority on the matter.
And the Secretary of State does control the classification of anything that originates in State or comes to State in the normal course of business. That is not unreasonable...the SofS is the fourth in line to the Presidency.
lvmensch
You have made a LOT of statements, and we are STILL waiting for YOUR security clearance info.
Quote:
Originally Posted by florida.bob I think you people need to replace this tired phony scandal with a new one .... I am sure you can make one up pretty easily.
Quote:
Originally Posted by godofthunder9010
LOL, I expect that's what most Republicans were saying when Nixon was being investigated for Watergate. Little biased there?
No, Nixon did have this level of blind, misguided support.
Much of the general population can't even afford the type of security Ms. Clinton had on her server. This is not some run of the mill person who had an inhouse server. Geez people, Stop chasing drama and madness as if to be ignorant. This woman had connections and access to the best security people in the nation !!!!!! One would be insane not to have taken advice from these people before setting up a private server at that level of position and function. But, she is not going to tell you that, nor should she tell you that. !!!!!! There is no earthly reason why she'd disclose such intricate information to the general public or anyone else.
It is ironic that you used the word "ignorant," because your post shows a lot of it.
Quote:
The contractor, SECNAP Network Security, identified the attacks, but according to internal emails cited and briefly quoted in the Johnson letter, Clinton's sever may have lacked a threat-detection program for three months, Johnson says.
Officials close to the matter at the Department of Justice are concerned the emails Hillary Clinton sent from her personal devices while overseas on business as U.S. Secretary of State were breached by foreign telecoms in the countries she visited—a list which includes China.
“Her emails could have easily been hacked into by telecoms in these countries. They got the emails first, and then routed them back to her home server. They could have hacked into both,†one Justice Department official close to the matter says.
"At the time I worked for them they wouldn't have been equipped to work for Hillary Clinton because I don't think they had the resources, they were based out of a loft, so [it was] not very high security, we didn't even have an alarm," Tera Dadiotis, who worked for the firm from 2007-2010, told the paper.
I can tell by your hard hitting post that you are not a sheep. So now that you have been educated, I am sure that you will come out and write a scathing rebuke of Hillary for using a server in such a manner that jeopardized national secrets.
This is the line that Dems are saying over and over and over again. "She didn't have anything on her server that was obviously classified."
Look, I don't work for the government. I don't have highly classified and highly sensitive information crossing my desk regularly. But even in the private sector with no laws in place on the matter, I would get fired instantly if I started mass-forwarding work emails to my gmail. Wouldn't matter if it's all just office gossip. It's just something you don't do. Why? Because I might inadvertently be opening up company secrets to the wider world. This should have been even more obvious with Hillary. She knew she might inadvertently be leaving highly sensitive information out there for the Russians, ISIS, Chinese, North Koreans and others to look at. Her use of her own private server ought to really upset Americans. You just don't do that.
... and the best defense Hillary and her faithful sheep have is, "Nothing on that server was obviously classified." Wow, now that's pretty specific. In fact that's extremely specific. In a single stroke we're being told, "Yes there definitely was sensitive information on my unsecured private server. But none of it was specifically marked "top secret" or "classified" at the time, so it's no big deal." Yes, actually it is a big deal. Any other government employee would have been fired and arrested long ago. But since she's got a D next to her name you don't care.
Geez man, do you know that Gmail is not the same as someone having a private server. Not an account with people who provide server access, but HER OWN SERVER...
No one in their right mind owns a server without having the best security software they can get, and you can bet Hillary, had as I said before, access to the government people who have the top level of security, and they would not hesitate to have made her aware of what to use.
Republican whine and whine and whine without thinking !!!!!!
She is not some second rate novice. Geez Whiz!!!!!!! get real people, you will never reach the levels she has attained and held. So, get off the low level whining that you are hung up on.
Petreaus lied to federal agents. Multiple times. Felonies.
So, when hillary says she ha no clue, but you have been provided evidence that she DID sign paperwork to say she will NOT do it.....that's not a lie? LOL....
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvmensch
He plead to a misdemeanor. The lady had a TS clearance and Petreaus could easily have had her cleared for access to his notes which were the big deal involved.
She had a TS, he did not have to grant her anything.....To bad so many folks understand this so poorly....
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvmensch
To bad so many folks understand this so poorly.
Yes, you are correct and you are a great testament to your quote, you really don't understand. Even the obama admin disagrees with you....
You have made a LOT of statements, and we are STILL waiting for YOUR security clearance info.
WHY have you EVADED the issue?
It is a simple question.
You also have to love he he/she is purposely changing the quote from [/quote] to [quote/] so he/she thinks they cannot be properly quoted.....kinda like:
Quote:
“What? Like with a cloth or something?” she asked, then laughed. “I don’t know how it works digitally at all.”
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
