Las Vegas Advisor Menu
« LVA Forums « Vegas Free-for-All

Immunity for ex-staffer who set up Clinton email server

pjstroh
pjstroh
Mar 6, 2016
11:22pm
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: hoops2
We now know that she wrote over 100 classified emails, even though she denied ever having any classified emails. Missing are the 30,000 emails that she claimed were for yoga classes. Considering all her lies on this matter, why should we believe her?


Can you cite even one email that was classified at the time of sending?

Hoops has been fundamentally dishonest on this topic from day one....and in 10 years of posting has never had the courage to show the source where he gets his information from. Why should we believe him?
Don
Don
Mar 7, 2016
12:05am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: pjstroh

Can you cite even one email that was classified at the time of sending?


DonDiego supposes pjstroh is mistaken as to what "classifies" a document.

From the Washington Post, 5 March 2016:
"Hillary Clinton wrote 104 emails that she sent using her private server while secretary of state that the government has since said contain classified information, according to a new Washington Post analysis of Clinton’s publicly released correspondence."

The content of the document determines the "classification".
Whether a document is marked with an official classification or not, the content itself determines the classification.

If one initiates a document or receives a document or forwards a document that contains classified information, it is that person's responsibility know the appropriate official classification and take action to correct any deficiency in the "classification markings" on the document.
Clearly this responsibility is most importantly applicable to the originator of the document. And the former Secretary of State initiated 104 e-mails which she failed to classify appropriately.

The former Secretary of State signed, or should have signed a document recognizing this procedure upon assuming office. (DonDiego would not be too surprised if somehow this requirement to accept responsibility for handling classified information in writing somehow slipped through the cracks upon Her Ascension to office, but the Laws pertaining to such responsibility still apply.)

P.S. DonDiego cannot cite a specific classified e-mail. He is not on the Secretary of States e-mail list. And if he had received a classified e-mail, he still could not cite it, . . . BECAUSE IT'S CLASSIFIED ! ! !
Boilerman
Boilerman
Mar 7, 2016
12:58am
Block User
I posted specific government regulations governing such issue for PJ's review some time ago, and he seems to ignore the truth and the law.



Quote
Originally posted by: DonDiego
Quote
Originally posted by: pjstroh

Can you cite even one email that was classified at the time of sending?


DonDiego supposes pjstroh is mistaken as to what "classifies" a document.

From the Washington Post, 5 March 2016:
"Hillary Clinton wrote 104 emails that she sent using her private server while secretary of state that the government has since said contain classified information, according to a new Washington Post analysis of Clinton’s publicly released correspondence."

The content of the document determines the "classification".
Whether a document is marked with an official classification or not, the content itself determines the classification.

If one initiates a document or receives a document or forwards a document that contains classified information, it is that person's responsibility know the appropriate official classification and take action to correct any deficiency in the "classification markings" on the document.
Clearly this responsibility is most importantly applicable to the originator of the document. And the former Secretary of State initiated 104 e-mails which she failed to classify appropriately.

The former Secretary of State signed, or should have signed a document recognizing this procedure upon assuming office. (DonDiego would not be too surprised if somehow this requirement to accept responsibility for handling classified information in writing somehow slipped through the cracks upon Her Ascension to office, but the Laws pertaining to such responsibility still apply.)

P.S. DonDiego cannot cite a specific classified e-mail. He is not on the Secretary of States e-mail list. And if he had received a classified e-mail, he still could not cite it, . . . BECAUSE IT'S CLASSIFIED ! ! !


pjstroh
pjstroh
Mar 7, 2016
12:59am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: DonDiego
Quote
Originally posted by: pjstroh

Can you cite even one email that was classified at the time of sending?


DonDiego supposes pjstroh is mistaken as to what "classifies" a document.

From the Washington Post, 5 March 2016:
"Hillary Clinton wrote 104 emails that she sent using her private server while secretary of state that the government has since said contain classified information, according to a new Washington Post analysis of Clinton’s publicly released correspondence."

The content of the document determines the "classification".
Whether a document is marked with an official classification or not, the content itself determines the classification.

If one initiates a document or receives a document or forwards a document that contains classified information, it is that person's responsibility know the appropriate official classification and take action to correct any deficiency in the "classification markings" on the document.
Clearly this responsibility is most importantly applicable to the originator of the document. And the former Secretary of State initiated 104 e-mails which she failed to classify appropriately.

The former Secretary of State signed, or should have signed a document recognizing this procedure upon assuming office. (DonDiego would not be too surprised if somehow this requirement to accept responsibility for handling classified information in writing somehow slipped through the cracks upon Her Ascension to office, but the Laws pertaining to such responsibility still apply.)

P.S. DonDiego cannot cite a specific classified e-mail. He is not on the Secretary of States e-mail list. And if he had received a classified e-mail, he still could not cite it, . . . BECAUSE IT'S CLASSIFIED ! ! !


Oh! So DonDiego confesses he does not know the contents of the "classified email" but he knows the contents were obvious to the sender as to their proper classification. I thank DonDiego for sharing his uninformed opinion and judgement on the subject.

Also - Don Diego obviously did not see the comments of Hillary Clinton's predecessor who engaged in the same exact practices and yet mysteriously has not been investigated by the same Republican led committee. They seem to only care about this massive crime in the context of it being associated with their greatest political opponent. Just a coincidence I'm sure.

in any event -
Colin Powell might be able to help out DonDiego's trouble understanding email-gate

"I have reviewed the messages and I do not see what makes them classified." Powell said. "The emails were from my Executive Assistant and forwarded messages sent by two of our Ambassadors to State Department staff members. My Executive Assistant thought I should see them in a timely manner so sent them to my personal account. Both messages were unclassified. There was no reason not to forward them in this manner. ... The Ambassadors did not believe the contents were Confidential at the time and they were sent as unclassified. That is a fact. While they have not yet clarified this point, the State Department cannot now say they were classified then because they weren’t. If the Department wishes to say a dozen years later they should have been classified that is an opinion of the Department that I do not share."







jatki
jatki
Mar 7, 2016
2:40am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: pjstroh
Quote
Originally posted by: DonDiego
Quote
Originally posted by: pjstroh

Can you cite even one email that was classified at the time of sending?


DonDiego supposes pjstroh is mistaken as to what "classifies" a document.

From the Washington Post, 5 March 2016:
"Hillary Clinton wrote 104 emails that she sent using her private server while secretary of state that the government has since said contain classified information, according to a new Washington Post analysis of Clinton’s publicly released correspondence."

The content of the document determines the "classification".
Whether a document is marked with an official classification or not, the content itself determines the classification.

If one initiates a document or receives a document or forwards a document that contains classified information, it is that person's responsibility know the appropriate official classification and take action to correct any deficiency in the "classification markings" on the document.
Clearly this responsibility is most importantly applicable to the originator of the document. And the former Secretary of State initiated 104 e-mails which she failed to classify appropriately.

The former Secretary of State signed, or should have signed a document recognizing this procedure upon assuming office. (DonDiego would not be too surprised if somehow this requirement to accept responsibility for handling classified information in writing somehow slipped through the cracks upon Her Ascension to office, but the Laws pertaining to such responsibility still apply.)

P.S. DonDiego cannot cite a specific classified e-mail. He is not on the Secretary of States e-mail list. And if he had received a classified e-mail, he still could not cite it, . . . BECAUSE IT'S CLASSIFIED ! ! !


Oh! So DonDiego confesses he does not know the contents of the "classified email" but he knows the contents were obvious to the sender as to their proper classification. I thank DonDiego for sharing his uninformed opinion and judgement on the subject.

Also - Don Diego obviously did not see the comments of Hillary Clinton's predecessor who engaged in the same exact practices and yet mysteriously has not been investigated by the same Republican led committee. They seem to only care about this massive crime in the context of it being associated with their greatest political opponent. Just a coincidence I'm sure.

in any event -
Colin Powell might be able to help out DonDiego's trouble understanding email-gate

"I have reviewed the messages and I do not see what makes them classified." Powell said. "The emails were from my Executive Assistant and forwarded messages sent by two of our Ambassadors to State Department staff members. My Executive Assistant thought I should see them in a timely manner so sent them to my personal account. Both messages were unclassified. There was no reason not to forward them in this manner. ... The Ambassadors did not believe the contents were Confidential at the time and they were sent as unclassified. That is a fact. While they have not yet clarified this point, the State Department cannot now say they were classified then because they weren’t. If the Department wishes to say a dozen years later they should have been classified that is an opinion of the Department that I do not share."


Powell's not running for POTUS but regardless, are you saying because someone else did it, that makes it perfectly acceptable? If Powell jumped off a bridge..well, you know how it goes.
If he did something wrong, he should be tried as well, don't you think? Or are you sticking with the two wrongs make it right theory?

pjstroh
pjstroh
Mar 7, 2016
3:00am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: jatki99


Powell's not running for POTUS but regardless, are you saying because someone else did it, that makes it perfectly acceptable? If Powell jumped off a bridge..well, you know how it goes.
If he did something wrong, he should be tried as well, don't you think? Or are you sticking with the two wrongs make it right theory?


Am I defending illegal behavior? No - I'm doing what you seem to be incapable of - judging everyone on the same scale. Don't worry. You're in plenty of good company on this board.

let me clarify my point so as to help you. If what Hillary did was a crime then both Colin Powell and Condi Rice are guilty of the same behavior. But they are not being investigated....and they are not being demagogue by the right wing punditry...and nobody in the right wing propaganda circle is making the same prison-predictions for Colin/Condi as they do for Hillary. Why do you suppose that is, jatki?

Let me help. Because they don't expect any of those three to be indicted - but if they say lots of bad things about Hillary they know it makes for great red meat to give their base in an election year. And there you have it. Your leadership is lying to you, jatki. Just like when they tell you they have an alternative, better healthcare system to Obamacare.

So let me tell you what will/wont happen before November:
- Hillary, Colin and Condi will not be indicted for the 70 million dollar circus in the House
- Republicans will not submit a healthcare plan to the CBO to replace Obamacare and vote on it
- You will not turn your back on the propaganda sites that fed you a false narrative in both instances above....instead you will gladly embrace whatever new false narrative they feed you going forward.





billryan
billryan
Mar 7, 2016
3:09am
Block User
One email Hilary sent which has since been classified stated that the USofA and England should work together to promote peace in several regions.
Imagine if our enemies got a hold of that one. Think what it would do to our countries reputation.
You have a madman running for President who wants to order our sons and daughters to assassinate the families of suspected terrorists but you want to obsess over emails?
hoops2
hoops2
Mar 7, 2016
3:28am
Block User
She should have followed her own policy that stated ALL STATE DEPT CORRESPONDANCE BE CONDUCTED ON THE STATE DEPT SYSTEM.

The classified portions of the emails have been redacted, so how does bill ryan know what was in those emails.
Boilerman
Boilerman
Mar 7, 2016
3:55am
Block User
What else did it say?

Quote
Originally posted by: billryan
One email Hilary sent which has since been classified stated that the USofA and England should work together to promote peace in several regions.
Imagine if our enemies got a hold of that one. Think what it would do to our countries reputation.
You have a madman running for President who wants to order our sons and daughters to assassinate the families of suspected terrorists but you want to obsess over emails?


billryan
billryan
Mar 7, 2016
3:59am
Block User
Quote
Originally posted by: hoops2
She should have followed her own policy that stated ALL STATE DEPT CORRESPONDANCE BE CONDUCTED ON THE STATE DEPT SYSTEM.

The classified portions of the emails have been redacted, so how does bill ryan know what was in those emails.



That's incorrect. Most of the so called classified emails are at the lowest level and arent redacted.
From Yahoo yesterday

CLASSIFIED INFORMATION

The emails are full of sections that the State Department decided were improper for release and blanked out, ranging from personal information to national secrets.

In the end, State Department reviewers classified more than 2,000 emails, mostly at the lower "confidential" and "secret" levels. Twenty-two emails were withheld entirely from publication on grounds that they were "top secret." None of these bore classification markings at the time they were sent and most were written by other officials.

Most of the time, Clinton and aides appeared keenly aware of the limitations of operating over an unclassified, nongovernment account. Sometimes they were frustrated by the constraints.

In a February 2010 message, Clinton exclaimed: "It's a public statement! Just email it." Sent moments later, the document merely said U.S. and British officials would cooperate to promote peace. "Well that is certainly worthy of being top secret," Clinton responded sarcastically.

But the State Department's Freedom of Information Act reviewers found plenty of cases where releasing the emails in uncensored form today, more than three years after Clinton left office, would pose diplomatic or national security concerns.

Many were written by advisers and experts, and then forwarded to Clinton by one of three close aides: Cheryl Mills, her chief of staff; Jake Sullivan, her director of policy planning; and Huma Abedin, her longtime personal assistant. All three remain in Clinton's inner circle.


Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:
Diamond Membership
$3 per month
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Limited Member Rewards Online
Join Now
or
Platinum Membership
$50 per year
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Exclusive Member Rewards Book
Join Now