knapplc Posted March 4, 2016 Share Posted March 4, 2016 It may be confusing, but thousands of people from all levels of the government & military manage to do it right every day. It's not too much to ask that our Sec of State do, too. I think everyone can agree on that. Wow, way to fight the good fight Knapp. I got a chuckle out if it. Link to comment
teachercd Posted March 4, 2016 Share Posted March 4, 2016 It may be confusing, but thousands of people from all levels of the government & military manage to do it right every day. It's not too much to ask that our Sec of State do, too. I think everyone can agree on that. Wow, way to fight the good fight Knapp. I got a chuckle out if it. The should have just given her a Netscape account or Netzero... Link to comment
Saunders Posted March 4, 2016 Author Share Posted March 4, 2016 It may be confusing, but thousands of people from all levels of the government & military manage to do it right every day. It's not too much to ask that our Sec of State do, too. I think everyone can agree on that. Wow, way to fight the good fight Knapp. I got a chuckle out if it. Yeah, for real. That's why I said they're either lying, or grossly incompetent. And don't get me started on the Republican's going full retard. I don't care what party you work for, your job is to serve the American people. Partisanship from citizens and politicians is the worst. It cheeses me off we're forced to pick between scumbags, and idiots. Link to comment
Danny Bateman Posted March 4, 2016 Share Posted March 4, 2016 Wow, way to fight the good fight Knapp. The fact that we're having this conversation about multiple former SoS's seems to indicate that the classification system makes it damn hard for them to do their job correctly. Eh, not really. A buddy and I talked about it with a former SOCOM guy that worked at MacDill here in Tampa. Regarding classified materials, he said that at every level, it's drilled into you so that there's not really much room for error. From what I gather, classified info is classified, regardless of if has a special header on it. If you know that you're discussing a classified topic, even if the relevant document doesn't say it's classified, then you make damn sure that you CYA. Ignorance isn't a defense. Gotta say it. I'm obviously biased. Regardless, I seriously don't envy anyone who has to handle classified information. Specifically if you have to travel a lot. What are the legitimate secured methods of communicating classified info? The term "secure line" comes to mind. Can you talk about it? Can you send it with a messenger in a sealed envelope? Link to comment
Danny Bateman Posted March 4, 2016 Share Posted March 4, 2016 It may be confusing, but thousands of people from all levels of the government & military manage to do it right every day. It's not too much to ask that our Sec of State do, too. I think everyone can agree on that. Wow, way to fight the good fight Knapp. I got a chuckle out if it. Yeah, for real. That's why I said they're either lying, or grossly incompetent. And don't get me started on the Republican's going full retard. I don't care what party you work for, your job is to serve the American people. Partisanship from citizens and politicians is the worst. It cheeses me off we're forced to pick between scumbags, and idiots. Meh, Bernie's not really an idiot. He's more of a crochety old mad-scientist type. His policies, though? Idiotic. Certainly not the strongest round of applicants, ever, this year... Link to comment
Saunders Posted March 4, 2016 Author Share Posted March 4, 2016 Wow, way to fight the good fight Knapp. The fact that we're having this conversation about multiple former SoS's seems to indicate that the classification system makes it damn hard for them to do their job correctly. Eh, not really. A buddy and I talked about it with a former SOCOM guy that worked at MacDill here in Tampa. Regarding classified materials, he said that at every level, it's drilled into you so that there's not really much room for error. From what I gather, classified info is classified, regardless of if has a special header on it. If you know that you're discussing a classified topic, even if the relevant document doesn't say it's classified, then you make damn sure that you CYA. Ignorance isn't a defense. Gotta say it. I'm obviously biased. Regardless, I seriously don't envy anyone who has to handle classified information. Specifically if you have to travel a lot. What are the legitimate secured methods of communicating classified info? The term "secure line" comes to mind. Can you talk about it? Can you send it with a messenger in a sealed envelope? The short answer is that the government has private email servers, VPN's, and intranet's for communication. Even if you travel alot, you can set up a VPN into a secure connection. Large corporations, hospitals, especially the US government, can set this stuff up and handle it rather easily, so it's not like it was hard for her to do. Link to comment
Saunders Posted March 4, 2016 Author Share Posted March 4, 2016 It may be confusing, but thousands of people from all levels of the government & military manage to do it right every day. It's not too much to ask that our Sec of State do, too. I think everyone can agree on that. Wow, way to fight the good fight Knapp. I got a chuckle out if it. Yeah, for real. That's why I said they're either lying, or grossly incompetent. And don't get me started on the Republican's going full retard. I don't care what party you work for, your job is to serve the American people. Partisanship from citizens and politicians is the worst. It cheeses me off we're forced to pick between scumbags, and idiots. Meh, Bernie's not really an idiot. He's more of a crochety old mad-scientist type. His policies, though? Idiotic. Certainly not the strongest round of applicants, ever, this year... True. While I don't agree with alot of his opinions, at least he seems like an honest guy who has kept his ideals for a long time. Link to comment
StPaulHusker Posted March 4, 2016 Share Posted March 4, 2016 It's interesting that the FBI and DOJ are still conducting an investigation and some people already have Hillary's orange jumpsuit hanging in her closet. Maybe, we should wait to vilify her about this until the investigation is concluded. But that would be too much common sense. Link to comment
teachercd Posted March 4, 2016 Share Posted March 4, 2016 It's interesting that the FBI and DOJ are still conducting an investigation and some people already have Hillary's orange jumpsuit hanging in her closet. Maybe, we should wait to vilify her about this until the investigation is concluded. But that would be too much common sense. I thought they already knew she used unsecure emails? Don't they? Link to comment
84HuskerLaw Posted March 4, 2016 Share Posted March 4, 2016 While many of the posts on the political topics (which I think ought to be left to political and news sites and not in the Husker family) obviously reflect a clear political bias of the author (the libs always defend Hillary and Bill no matter what the do, say or involve themselves in btw) and the conservatives are of course critical as can be, the facts seem to get lost in the whole discussion (really it becomes a debate). The facts are not in dispute. Hillary had of her own design, funding, instruction, operation and in all other ways, a personal email server which received, stored, preserved, deleted, monitored, maintained, controlled, in every manner and way possible, her communications of all types. This specifically included, at Hillary's own personal direction, order and control all of her business, personal, government and otherwise communications and records, etc. She specifically desired, intended and included all of her government business (top secret, beyond top secret, confidential, private, public and any other kind, type or description) information and communications on the said server. She refused and declined, depsite direction and orders and rules AND LAWS requiring her to not only keep any and all of the government related communications, files, and information on the protected, safegaurded and government controlled server (file cabinet in simple English). The taking, keeping, storing, using, having, sending or receiving of ANY government records, documents, files, communications, work products, etc. away from the government offices and control is ILLEGAL AND CRIMINAL. Each and every time someone violates these government records laws is a seperate and distinct criminal act and violation, Depending on the document, it can be misdemeanor or felony with SERIOUS FINES, JAIL TIME, AND OTHER CONSEQUENCES INCLUDING SPECIFICALLY THE PROHIBITION FROM SERVING IN FURTHER GOVERNMENT EMPLOY OR ELECTIVE OFFICE. In other words, Hillary has violated laws (there is almost NO DOUBT as she has admitted to the essential facts and elements of the crimes involved) which would very likely cause her to face long term jail time (perhaps even the rest of her life!) and further she would be barred from elective office and could not be elected President. In addition to the above, inappropriate handling of CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS, EMAILS, COMMUNICATIONS, INFORMATION OR THE DISCLOSURE OF THE SAME TO PERSONS NOT QUALIFIED TO SEE OR KNOW THE SAME, is felonious as well. Each time she did this is a seperate offense as well. Many, even hundreds of felonies,m are likely involved and again she has admitted to the essential elements of the offenses and the facts are not in dispute. She handled classified communications as the Secretary of State of the United States (by definition such office holder handles classified, confidential, top secret, etc. information on a daily basis in the ordinary course of doing her job. She served in this capacity for FOUR YEARS! She has stated she handled ONLY all communications on her personal devices, etc. By definition she has violated all sorts of protocols, rules, laws, etc. There is simply not reasonable or logical way to defend her behavior and blatant, deliberate disregard of the Nation's laws, secrets, protocols, etc. She had no reason or purpose, except to obviously attempt to hide and conceal her actvities from public review and from the lawful government (agency, congressional, judicial) oversight which the laws specifically required and demand of all government officials. The foregoing, in my view, is not even being challenged. Hillary says her only defense is 'the files were not marked classified when she handled them". The classification is NOT an element of the crimes involved in the first portion. Many laws apply. I think it is conceivable that her indictment could include literally HUNDREDS OR EVEN THOUSANDS OF seperate violations (both felonies and misdemeanors) for obstruction, mishandling of governmment secret, etc. Link to comment
knapplc Posted March 4, 2016 Share Posted March 4, 2016 Can a president pardon themselves? Maybe Hillary would be the first president to do so. If that's not legal, Obama will do it, or whomever wins the election (presuming it isn't Hillary). There's no way she sees jail time, no matter how truthful the allegations are. She won't pay one red cent in fines, either. Link to comment
AR Husker Fan Posted March 4, 2016 Share Posted March 4, 2016 Moraine brought up an interesting issue regarding cyber-security and education/training. In addition to it being an interesting question for debate and discussion, it kind of was off-topic. So I moved it to it's own thread entitled "Is The US Losing The Education War?" Link to comment
Moiraine Posted March 4, 2016 Share Posted March 4, 2016 Moraine brought up an interesting issue regarding cyber-security and education/training. In addition to it being an interesting question for debate and discussion, it kind of was off-topic. So I moved it to it's own thread entitled "Is The US Losing The Education War?" You caught me. I'm actually a Hillary Clinton plant and I was trying to make people forget about the e-mails. Link to comment
zoogs Posted March 5, 2016 Share Posted March 5, 2016 This has always seemed like another fruitless exercise in scansal-chasing to me: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/03/04/clinton-emails-continue-to-be-non-scandal-disappointing-republicans/ Just popping in, haven't followed this analysis and am not looking to contribute further for now. Carry on 3 Link to comment
Saunders Posted March 5, 2016 Author Share Posted March 5, 2016 This has always seemed like another fruitless exercise in scansal-chasing to me: https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2016/03/04/clinton-emails-continue-to-be-non-scandal-disappointing-republicans/ Just popping in, haven't followed this analysis and am not looking to contribute further for now. Carry on Point #4 shows that the writer doesn't understand (like many people it seems) how classified materials work. Information can be classified regardless of if it's actually marked as such. She asked staffers to send classified materials unmarked. It's still classified, even if they removed the markings. So, the summary of the article is that since she didn't get hacked (and nobody got hurt) it doesn't matter. I guess I'll start 100mph in a 55mph zone from now on and as long as I don't crash, I'll use the Hillary defense, and the cops should just let me be. Link to comment
Recommended Posts