http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016...d-marking.html
Trolls like Munchkin have been holding the position that all the classified emails were classified as such AFTER Hillary handled them but now we have at least one email that was classified when Hillary recieved it. The State department says that there are more.
So what does Munchkin do now when his defense of Hillary is shot to hell?
Why change tactics of course...
- JD Barleycorn
- 06-11-2016, 10:42 PM
- Yssup Rider
- 06-12-2016, 12:08 AM
Or, lie about her mother?
- LexusLover
- 06-12-2016, 05:19 AM
Trolls like Munchkin have been holding the position that all the classified emails were classified as such AFTER Hillary handled them but now we have at least one email that was classified when Hillary recieved it. The State department says that there are more. Originally Posted by JD BarleycornCNN is carrying the STORIES now also with specific mention of CONTENT!
- DSK
- 06-12-2016, 05:17 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016...d-marking.htmlHe will probably hit you with ineffective negative attacks, claim victory and a superior intellect and moral compass, then make a gay insult about you, in spite of the recent tragedy involving Islamic terrorists and gay people.
Trolls like Munchkin have been holding the position that all the classified emails were classified as such AFTER Hillary handled them but now we have at least one email that was classified when Hillary recieved it. The State department says that there are more.
So what does Munchkin do now when his defense of Hillary is shot to hell?
Why change tactics of course... Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn
- The_Waco_Kid
- 06-14-2016, 01:05 AM
http://www.investors.com/politics/co...l-outlive-her/
that whore doesn't have long to live anyway ahahahahaha
KERRY JACKSON
Hillary Clinton is telling the country that her email problem, which grew over the weekend due to new evidence that indicates she’s lied about never sending or receiving classified material, won’t be an issue in the general election. But the department she ran for four years is claiming that it will outlast her, and probably her only child, now 36, as well.
“I’m looking forward to this being wrapped up as soon as possible,” she told a California radio station a few days before telling Fox News’ Bret Baier much the same thing Wednesday. She swore to Baier that an indictment for using her personal email account on a private server for official State Department business “is not going to happen.”
The State Department, however, has announced that Clinton’s email scandal will roll out to almost the end of this century. The Week reported Wednesday that State said “it will take about 75 years to fully compile and release the emails sent by Hillary Clinton and three of her top aides during her tenure in the Obama administration.”
Market Watch quoted State Department spokesman Mark Toner telling reporters Tuesday that “it’s not an outlandish estimation, believe it or not.”
So not only will it still be a simmering, about-to-boil-over issue in the fall campaign — Donald Trump will ensure that it’s a campaign topic no matter what is happening in any official probe — it will be anchor on Clinton for the entire course of her administration, if she’s elected, as well as the rest of her life. The last time there was a cancer on the presidency, Richard Nixon resigned. Is Clinton running for the job just to be the second president to quit the office with an inescapable dark could overhead?
Maybe it won’t get that far. (But we’ve been thinking that for a while now, yet there she is, closing in on her party’s nomination despite the muck that clings to every pantsuit and expensive Italian designer jacket she owns.) Fox News reported Saturday that, yet again, Clinton’s claim that she never sent or received classified material on her account is not consistent with the facts.
A “2012 email released by the State Department,” says Fox, “appears to challenge” her story “because it carries a classified code known as a ‘portion marking’ – and that marking was on the email when it was sent directly to Clinton’s account.”
This disclosure came two days after the Associated Press reported that security experts are saying that “the names of CIA personnel could have been compromised” by Clinton’s rigged-in-a-garage email system. Stewart Baker — identified as “a Washington lawyer who spent more than three years as an assistant secretary of the Homeland Security Department and is former legal counsel for the National Security Agency” — said it is “entirely plausible . . . that foreign intelligence services discovered and rifled Hillary Clinton’s server.”
We’d say it’s more of a certainty than a plausibility. In fact, Clinton’s server was likely so crowded with foreign spies that they had to hand out numbers at her email deli to keep things orderly.
Either way, these particulars should be enough to sink her campaign. A candidate who has shown she’s loose with secrets should not be a candidate for as long as she has.
LIAR!
go ahead libtards. vote for a liar that makes Nixon look like a Lilly white Vestal virgin
SNICK!
that whore doesn't have long to live anyway ahahahahaha
KERRY JACKSON
Hillary Clinton is telling the country that her email problem, which grew over the weekend due to new evidence that indicates she’s lied about never sending or receiving classified material, won’t be an issue in the general election. But the department she ran for four years is claiming that it will outlast her, and probably her only child, now 36, as well.
“I’m looking forward to this being wrapped up as soon as possible,” she told a California radio station a few days before telling Fox News’ Bret Baier much the same thing Wednesday. She swore to Baier that an indictment for using her personal email account on a private server for official State Department business “is not going to happen.”
The State Department, however, has announced that Clinton’s email scandal will roll out to almost the end of this century. The Week reported Wednesday that State said “it will take about 75 years to fully compile and release the emails sent by Hillary Clinton and three of her top aides during her tenure in the Obama administration.”
Market Watch quoted State Department spokesman Mark Toner telling reporters Tuesday that “it’s not an outlandish estimation, believe it or not.”
So not only will it still be a simmering, about-to-boil-over issue in the fall campaign — Donald Trump will ensure that it’s a campaign topic no matter what is happening in any official probe — it will be anchor on Clinton for the entire course of her administration, if she’s elected, as well as the rest of her life. The last time there was a cancer on the presidency, Richard Nixon resigned. Is Clinton running for the job just to be the second president to quit the office with an inescapable dark could overhead?
Maybe it won’t get that far. (But we’ve been thinking that for a while now, yet there she is, closing in on her party’s nomination despite the muck that clings to every pantsuit and expensive Italian designer jacket she owns.) Fox News reported Saturday that, yet again, Clinton’s claim that she never sent or received classified material on her account is not consistent with the facts.
A “2012 email released by the State Department,” says Fox, “appears to challenge” her story “because it carries a classified code known as a ‘portion marking’ – and that marking was on the email when it was sent directly to Clinton’s account.”
This disclosure came two days after the Associated Press reported that security experts are saying that “the names of CIA personnel could have been compromised” by Clinton’s rigged-in-a-garage email system. Stewart Baker — identified as “a Washington lawyer who spent more than three years as an assistant secretary of the Homeland Security Department and is former legal counsel for the National Security Agency” — said it is “entirely plausible . . . that foreign intelligence services discovered and rifled Hillary Clinton’s server.”
We’d say it’s more of a certainty than a plausibility. In fact, Clinton’s server was likely so crowded with foreign spies that they had to hand out numbers at her email deli to keep things orderly.
Either way, these particulars should be enough to sink her campaign. A candidate who has shown she’s loose with secrets should not be a candidate for as long as she has.
LIAR!
go ahead libtards. vote for a liar that makes Nixon look like a Lilly white Vestal virgin
SNICK!
- LexusLover
- 06-14-2016, 03:48 AM
He will probably hit you with ineffective negative attacks, claim victory and a superior intellect and moral compass, then make a gay insult about you, in spite of the recent tragedy involving Islamic terrorists and gay people. Originally Posted by DSKHe said "MunchMuch" not IVA-LITTLE-ONE OR YOURONG!
- Old-T
- 06-14-2016, 04:08 AM
There are only two possibilities for her:
1. The most likely. She directed people to strip all portion markings (which are just the way of identifying what is classified, and how classified it is) before sending them to her. The stripping of the markings is itself against all regs and a clear indication that the players all KNEW it was seriously wrong. In this case they should include conspiracy as well as willfully putting US lives at risk (given the nature of some of the info involved) and doing "great harm to the United States". But she clearly thinks her personal convenience is more important than lives and the safety of the country.
or
2. Even though she had original classification authority--the authority to determine that it was classified--she was incapable of applying the most basic classification principles and was too stupid to recognize the material for what it was. A first year in the government GG-1 would have known several of the e-mails she received were highly classified, markings or not. And the basic rule is if you suspect classified is out of the proper channels you protect it and report it. Personally, though she is an evil person, she is not stupid and this option--that she didn't recognize it--is beyond belief.
So: incompetent and stupid at best, criminally conspiratorial at worst.
But many will still vote for her regardless.
1. The most likely. She directed people to strip all portion markings (which are just the way of identifying what is classified, and how classified it is) before sending them to her. The stripping of the markings is itself against all regs and a clear indication that the players all KNEW it was seriously wrong. In this case they should include conspiracy as well as willfully putting US lives at risk (given the nature of some of the info involved) and doing "great harm to the United States". But she clearly thinks her personal convenience is more important than lives and the safety of the country.
or
2. Even though she had original classification authority--the authority to determine that it was classified--she was incapable of applying the most basic classification principles and was too stupid to recognize the material for what it was. A first year in the government GG-1 would have known several of the e-mails she received were highly classified, markings or not. And the basic rule is if you suspect classified is out of the proper channels you protect it and report it. Personally, though she is an evil person, she is not stupid and this option--that she didn't recognize it--is beyond belief.
So: incompetent and stupid at best, criminally conspiratorial at worst.
But many will still vote for her regardless.
- LexusLover
- 06-14-2016, 04:24 AM
There are only two possibilities for her:#1. Emails have already been produced in which she gave instructions to a staff member to delete the "Classified" heading on emails to send to her to HER private server.
1. The most likely. She directed people to strip all portion markings (which are just the way of identifying what is classified, and how classified it is) before sending them to her. The stripping of the markings is itself against all regs and a clear indication that the players all KNEW it was seriously wrong. In this case they should include conspiracy as well as willfully putting US lives at risk (given the nature of some of the info involved) and doing "great harm to the United States". But she clearly thinks her personal convenience is more important than lives and the safety of the country.
or
2. Even though she had original classification authority--the authority to determine that it was classified--she was incapable of applying the most basic classification principles and was too stupid to recognize the material for what it was. A first year in the government GG-1 would have known several of the e-mails she received were highly classified, markings or not. And the basic rule is if you suspect classified is out of the proper channels you protect it and report it. Personally, though she is an evil person, she is not stupid and this option--that she didn't recognize it--is beyond belief.
So: incompetent and stupid at best, criminally conspiratorial at worst.
But many will still vote for her regardless. Originally Posted by Old-T
#2. The Hillary supporters can't use this one, because their King has anointed her "the most qualified person to have ever run for President (which includes him)"
and you forgot #3.
#3. She is a pathological LIAR of the worse order, who forgets her LIES. (LIARS have a tendency to do that ... we see it occasionally on here!)
- Yssup Rider
- 06-14-2016, 08:02 AM
We see it in your posts, Mr. Mayor (of Clarksville before we were born).
- LexusLover
- 06-14-2016, 08:06 AM
Speaking of LIARS .... our resident porker leaped at the thought.
The guilty pig oinks first!
The guilty pig oinks first!
- DSK
- 06-14-2016, 09:41 AM
- LexusLover
- 06-14-2016, 10:18 AM
- i'va biggen
- 06-14-2016, 10:38 AM
- The_Waco_Kid
- 06-14-2016, 12:03 PM
#1. Emails have already been produced in which she gave instructions to a staff member to delete the "Classified" heading on emails to send to her to HER private server.all of the above? lol.
#2. The Hillary supporters can't use this one, because their King has anointed her "the most qualified person to have ever run for President (which includes him)"
and you forgot #3.
#3. She is a pathological LIAR of the worse order, who forgets her LIES. (LIARS have a tendency to do that ... we see it occasionally on here!) Originally Posted by LexusLover
no one has mentioned lately that i recall the 900 pd gorilla in the room. i've read several articles where security experts say it's not possible to forward emails from the secure gov intranet out to the internet. some have speculated her aides would have to type in the contents from the secure servers into their personal devices in order to send them to Clinton. that would explain the lack of classified markings. it would also be a huge security breech.
yet some articles say there are emails sent to her personal server that did have the classification marking still there. so unless her aides typed it all into a personal device while viewing on the secure system, including the classification, how did it get there?
if there's no direct access to forward, how did the emails get to her server? did her aides download them in some way to a flash drive and upload/send them?
all of this makes Clinton look less stupid and more like someone who knowingly had her aides take classified data from a secure location and put it on non-secure devices in order to send it to her.
there is at least one known instance where Clinton instructed her staff to remove classification headers so they could be faxed via a non-secure fax device. apparently, they didn't have to do that as they were able to fax it securely but this kind of action just because she was "impatient" to get the info is egregious in itself.
so were her aides sitting in their offices using the secure system and regularly printing these documents and them scanning/sending to Clinton?
how else could the security on the secure system be breached?
i wonder what the FBI knows about this? Hmmmm. could that be why they offered Pagliano immunity? was he responsible in some way to breach the system in order to send these emails directly to Clinton's server?
regardless, any scenario on how this data got moved from a secure system where in many cases it can only be accessed in a secure room and with no personal devices allowed, to Clinton's personal server makes this more like deliberate breech of security and less like any argument of "convenience" Clinton could ever claim.
- Old-T
- 06-14-2016, 03:14 PM
Yes, it was deliberate.