Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

     

Left Nav S-B Home FAQ Members List S-B on Facebook Arcade WEAX Tides Buoys Calendar Today's Posts Right Nav

Left Container Right Container
 

Go Back   Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating » Striper Chat - Discuss stuff other than fishing ~ The Scuppers and Political talk » Political Threads

Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi:

 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 01-20-2016, 07:51 AM   #1
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,441
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
Retroactively mind you. There also seems to be a lot of disagreements as to how different departments believe certain information should be handled. You could have info that considered top secret by one agency and yet published publicly in multiple sources but it's still considered classified.

There's not much new in this latest report, other than Republicans continuing to leak information to hurt Clinton's campaign. Wait that's not really new either.

I'd note Clinton's not under investigation and there's no yet evidence she broke any laws...
"There also seems to be a lot of disagreements as to how different departments believe certain information should be handled"

No, there's not a lot of disagreement there. It's established practice that the agency that develops a piece of intelligence, has sole authority to classify it, and all other agencies are bound to accept that. So if the CIA takes a pic of North Korea missile movements and classifies it as top secret or higher, Hilary doesn't get to decide that it's no more sensitive that her yoga schedule.

"Retroactively mind you"

Absolutely, 100% false. The 2 emails cited in the story I posted, were deemed to have been higher than top secret before they got to Hilary's server. The IG considers that "a closed matter". The State Dept tried to change the classification, but as I said, they don't get to do that unless they developed the information.

When she said her server had nothing but wedding plans and yoga, it was a lie. Then she said it had no emails that were classified at the time. Also b.s.
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 01-20-2016, 08:44 AM   #2
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,464
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
No, there's not a lot of disagreement there. It's established practice that the agency that develops a piece of intelligence, has sole authority to classify it, and all other agencies are bound to accept that. So if the CIA takes a pic of North Korea missile movements and classifies it as top secret or higher, Hilary doesn't get to decide that it's no more sensitive that her yoga schedule.
But that's not what's happening. The information being discussed wasn't classified when she was at State. It was either classified after she left or classified as part of the email release process. Given the media scrutiny around there simply could be things they don't want to draw attention to.

Quote:
Absolutely, 100% false. The 2 emails cited in the story I posted, were deemed to have been higher than top secret before they got to Hilary's server. The IG considers that "a closed matter". The State Dept tried to change the classification, but as I said, they don't get to do that unless they developed the information.
That's also not entirely true.

This is based on off the record information...but what appears to have happened is an aid forwarded Clinton a few emails citing public news reporting about the political fallout from drone strikes. Because the drone strikes weren't supposed to be happening (ssssshhhhhhhhhh) the program was considered top secret/SAP and so any government correspondence on the topic "should" be handled with that designation.

I'm sure some will clamor that Clinton would have known this and should have rang the alarm bell on mishandling information, but that's pretty silly...If the above is true you can toss this right back into the dust bin with all the other accusations.
spence is offline  
Old 01-20-2016, 08:55 AM   #3
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,441
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
But that's not what's happening. The information being discussed wasn't classified when she was at State. It was either classified after she left or classified as part of the email release process. Given the media scrutiny around there simply could be things they don't want to draw attention to.


That's also not entirely true.

This is based on off the record information...but what appears to have happened is an aid forwarded Clinton a few emails citing public news reporting about the political fallout from drone strikes. Because the drone strikes weren't supposed to be happening (ssssshhhhhhhhhh) the program was considered top secret/SAP and so any government correspondence on the topic "should" be handled with that designation.

I'm sure some will clamor that Clinton would have known this and should have rang the alarm bell on mishandling information, but that's pretty silly...If the above is true you can toss this right back into the dust bin with all the other accusations.
"The information being discussed wasn't classified when she was at State"

That is what Hilary is saying. That's not what the IG is saying. Read the link I posted...

"As Fox News first reported, those two emails were “top secret” when they hit the server, and it is now considered a settled matter."

At a minimum, Spence...what do you think of her initial claims that her server only had wedding plans, yoga schedules, things like that?

We will see.

Another story...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015...challenge.html

From this article...

"An intelligence community review has re-affirmed that two classified emails were indeed “top secret” when they hit Hillary Clinton’s unsecured personal server despite a challenge to that designation by the State Department, according to two sources familiar with the review.

The sources described the dispute over whether the two emails were classified at the highest level as a “settled matter.”
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 01-20-2016, 09:57 AM   #4
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,464
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
At a minimum, Spence...what do you think of her initial claims that her server only had wedding plans, yoga schedules, things like that?
I don't think she ever claimed that.

But anyway, you're getting your emails confused. The IG report is not about the same emails in your second link. FOX is spinning you around so fast the stories are getting all mixed together.
spence is offline  
Old 01-20-2016, 10:12 AM   #5
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,441
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
I don't think she ever claimed that.

But anyway, you're getting your emails confused. The IG report is not about the same emails in your second link. FOX is spinning you around so fast the stories are getting all mixed together.
I see...

So, then, what about the 2 emails that were top secret (or higher) at the time they hit her server?
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 01-20-2016, 11:09 AM   #6
spence
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
spence's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: RI
Posts: 21,464
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
I see...

So, then, what about the 2 emails that were top secret (or higher) at the time they hit her server?
I believe the situation here was that State acquired information through a casual channel they didn't deem should be classified while another agency acquired the same information through a more sensitive channel that they did deem was classified.

But the info as sent to Clinton's server was not market Top Secret nor did the originator believe it was classified at the time. The DNI got involved to review the discrepancy...

Quote:
"DNI Clapper’s determination is further evidence that there was no wrongdoing by Secretary Clinton," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.). "The classification process is complex and subjective, but this confirms Secretary Clinton did not send classified information through her email account. It’s time to put this issue behind us and move on.”
spence is offline  
Old 01-20-2016, 11:21 AM   #7
scottw
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
scottw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 12,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post

Quote:
"DNI Clapper’s determination is further evidence that there was no wrongdoing by Secretary Clinton," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.). "The classification process is complex and subjective, but this confirms Secretary Clinton did not send classified information through her email account. It’s time to put this issue behind us and move on.”

...
Clinton, Clapper and Feinstein...lot's a credibility there
scottw is offline  
Old 01-20-2016, 11:29 AM   #8
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,441
Quote:
Originally Posted by spence View Post
I believe the situation here was that State acquired information through a casual channel they didn't deem should be classified while another agency acquired the same information through a more sensitive channel that they did deem was classified.

But the info as sent to Clinton's server was not market Top Secret nor did the originator believe it was classified at the time. The DNI got involved to review the discrepancy...
OK, you're saying that as one agency got that data and classified it as above top secret, State got the same infor and classified it as "nothing to see here, show it to the world".

I think that's merely your opinion, and in a stunning coincidence, it is an opinion which clears her of any wrongdoing.

The IG report states clearly, that after the email was discovered on her server, State tried to re-classify another agency's intelligence. That request was rejected.

We will see.

"But the info as sent to Clinton's server was not market Top Secret nor did the originator believe it was classified at the time"

The IG report disputes your claim here. They say it was top secret (or higher) at the time it hit her server.

"nor did the originator believe it was classified at the time"

If it was classified as top secret by the agency that developed it, the originator doesn't get to make that call.
Jim in CT is offline  
 

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:16 AM.


Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Please use all necessary and proper safety precautions. STAY SAFE Striper Talk Forums
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com