Indictments coming...

[fskimospy]

I handled Top Secret and below information daily for 20 years.

I remember back when I was a Missile Technician in the US Navy and Readers Digest published an article about the Poseidon Missile program. They had listed many things that were Top Secret in the articles as in the number of warheads, ranges etc...

Did they break the law when they published it? The answer is no. Because it was not published as an official document, but as speculation. It was not verified even though we all knew that much of it was true and factual. Now if we had come out and verified that this information was indeed true then we would be guilty as we were in the loop so to speak due to our positions and training about this system.

Patraous and Hillary are guilty due to their positions and knowledge of the information they possessed.

Me posting shit that was in the news is not the same thing, regardless of how you and that other asshole try and spin it.

If you cannot see this I am sorry for you.

How do you know they had any knowledge that the information was classified? You have literally no idea. Her ‘offense’ could very well be completely identical to your ‘offense’ of discussing Snowden.

I worked in radio central for almost my entire naval career and I have a lot of experience with the type of news that is and is not classified. If you handled classified information for 20 years and didn’t know that you’re only responsible for information you know to be classified you were grossly mistrained.

 

[Younigue]

Thanks for my monthly check. I'll enjoy it special this month just for you!

LOL all the way to the bank.

You think it's funny to be a hate-filled piece of shit getting a monthly pay check from tax payers? Do you pay any attention to how fu*ked up you'll let yourself be? You're scum of the earth pc.

 

[fskimospy]

No, Hillary is guilty of mishandling classified information that she knows or should know is classified due to her position as sec of state.

Your position that the Secretary of State should know all classified information?

Now we know you’re trolling. Nobody is this stupid.

 

[Younigue]

Your position that the Secretary of State should know all classified information?

Now we know you’re trolling. Nobody is this stupid.

Not True. Pc is absolutely and exactly that stupid.

 

[ivwshane]

Your position that the Secretary of State should know all classified information?

Now we know you’re trolling. Nobody is this stupid.

Hi, are you new here? Or have you never met pcgeek?

 

[pcgeek11]

I said I was done, but I have to comment on these post.

How do you know they had any knowledge that the information was classified? You have literally no idea. Her ‘offense’ could very well be completely identical to your ‘offense’ of discussing Snowden.

I worked in radio central for almost my entire naval career and I have a lot of experience with the type of news that is and is not classified. If you handled classified information for 20 years and didn’t know that you’re only responsible for information you know to be classified you were grossly mistrained.

I didn't say that they KNEW the information was classified. I said that it was classified, regardless of if they knew. It it was an unofficial piece in Readers Digest. Them printing it was not a violation of anything. That was my point. Just as the post that I made on Snowden etc is not a violation of anything.

I don't know where you got the idea that I said that you are responsible for classified material that you don't know is classified. I never said that nor meant to imply it.

Your position that the Secretary of State should know all classified information?

Now we know you’re trolling. Nobody is this stupid.

Nobody said that. You implying that I did is just you trying to create a false narrative.

Hillary should know as sec of state what data she is handling is classified and not classified. Just as you working in the radio room would or should know the classification of the materials you handled. It is part of your job to know. And when in doubt.... what would you do? Put it on your personal server? NO you wouldn't or shouldn't.

 

[fskimospy]

Not True. Pc is absolutely and exactly that stupid.

Nah, he’s just engaged in motivated reasoning. He has an emotional need to believe that Clinton was guilty of something. No amount of facts can change his mind because his opinion is based on emotion, not logic.

On some level he’s aware of this though because you can see how he dances around the definition of guilty. He knows she’s not guilty in any legal sense so he invents a new defintion so he doesn’t have to change his mind.

 

[fskimospy]

I said I was done, but I have to comment on these post.

I didn't say that they KNEW the information was classified. I said that it was classified, regardless of if they knew. It it was an unofficial piece in Readers Digest. Them printing it was not a violation of anything. That was my point. Just as the post that I made on Snowden etc is not a violation of anything.

I don't know where you got the idea that I said that you are responsible for classified material that you don't know is classified. I never said that nor meant to imply it.

I agree you aren’t responsible for material you don’t know is classified. Related to this, there’s no indication that Clinton was aware of the classified material or that it was classified.

Nobody said that. You implying that I did is just you trying to create a false narrative.

Hillary should know as sec of state what data she is handling is classified and not classified. Just as you working in the radio room would or should know the classification of the materials you handled. It is part of your job to know. And when in doubt.... what would you do? Put it on your personal server? NO you wouldn't or shouldn't.

This is a gross misunderstanding of how classified material works which may come from you only handling classified material that was technical in nature and not news or intelligence information.

I would most certainly know that the material that had proper classification markings was classified. I would also know to presume things sent over SIPRNET were likely classified. If I mishandled them that would indeed be negligence on my part. My NIPR account? Absolutely not. It’s more than likely that some news articles or other discussions that we had on our unclassified network actually contained classified material. Even if it related to something that had passed through our shop the sheer volume of information would make it impossible to know everything. I’m sure the Secretary of State’s purview was several orders of magnitude larger.

There are certain types of information that are obviously classified, markings or no. There are plenty of other types that you would have no way of knowing. All that’s even assuming she’s the one that sent or received the emails in question. The idea that she should know the classification of all materials that she might have been exposed to on email is self evidently ridiculous to anyone who has worked with this kind of information.

On some level I’m quite sure you know this.

 

[Younigue]

Nah, he’s just engaged in motivated reasoning. He has an emotional need to believe that Clinton was guilty of something. No amount of facts can change his mind because his opinion is based on emotion, not logic.

On some level he’s aware of this though because you can see how he dances around the definition of guilty. He knows she’s not guilty in any legal sense so he invents a new defintion so he doesn’t have to change his mind.

And he truly is stupid.

 

[Denly]

With all the bs and lawsuit happened the last few weeks why are people still talking about "her email"?

 

[Jhhnn]

With all the bs and lawsuit happened the last few weeks why are people still talking about "her email"?

Buttery males are their version of a safe space. They hold it up as a shield to ward off inconvenient truths.

 

[zinfamous]

Nope it is you who cannot understand how they are same. I'm sorry your cognitive abilities are in line with your avatar.

He always gets the #1 avatar award from me!

 

[IJTSSG]

How about the ones that had classification markings? Did she purposely ignore them or is she too fucking stupid to know what they meant?

May want to read this before spouting off about no markings and she had no way of knowing.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ndings-tear-holes-hillary-clintons-email-def/

 

[zinfamous]

Just defending myself against the morons that have never handled a classified document in their lives and have no idea what they are talking about.

I'm done with you idiots in this thread.

Dude, I handled a classified document.

I handled 36 of them.

 

[zinfamous]

.... He has an emotional need to believe ...No amount of facts can change his mind because his opinion is based on emotion, not logic.

... invents a new defintion so he doesn’t have to change his mind.

The conservative brain defined.

 

[zinfamous]

How about the ones that had classification markings? Did she purposely ignore them or is she too fucking stupid to know what they meant?

She was too busy stalking you in your bedroom closet at night to learn what those markings meant.

 

[ivwshane]

How about the ones that had classification markings? Did she purposely ignore them or is she too fucking stupid to know what they meant?

May want to read this before spouting off about no markings and she had no way of knowing.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...ndings-tear-holes-hillary-clintons-email-def/

Did you even read your own link?

 

[Jhhnn]

Did you even read your own link?

He googled a headline, then copy/pasted the wrong link...

Oops!

 

[IJTSSG]

He googled a headline, then copy/pasted the wrong link...

Oops!

No. Try reading it. Then come back and try to argue some more about Hillary couldn't have known, there weren't any classified emails and the the usual blah, blah,blah from the Hillary taint cleaners.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

No. Try reading it. Then come back and try to argue some more about Hillary couldn't have known, there weren't any classified emails and the the usual blah, blah,blah from the Hillary taint cleaners.

I’m still waiting for an answer to when your boys intend on locking Hillary up. Been hearing it so long I’m starting to wonder if your boys are competent enough to do it.

 

[IJTSSG]

I’m still waiting for an answer to when your boys intend on locking Hillary up. Been hearing it so long I’m starting to wonder if your boys are competent enough to do it.

I don't know who 'your boys' are but you'll have to ask them.

Once again, one plus one doesn't equal ninety seven.

 

[Jhhnn]

Heh. The way the rabid right goes on about the buttery males you'd think she won the election or something. They seem to need to talk about it incessantly, to somehow reassure themselves that Trump isn't a huge mistake because Hillary.

Meanwhile, the tsunami of slime emanating from the Trump white house takes on a surreal, almost supernatural character.

Indictments? We ain't seen nothin' yet, and none of them will be about Hillary...

 

[Fanatical Meat]

I don't know who 'your boys' are but you'll have to ask them.

Once again, one plus one doesn't equal ninety seven.

You sir are not a native English speaker.

 

[zinfamous]

Once again, one plus one doesn't equal ninety seven.

I don't know what that means.

Off topic: why is your mind consumed with thoughts of Hilary's taint? That's weird, bro.

 

[uclaLabrat]

No. Try reading it. Then come back and try to argue some more about Hillary couldn't have known, there weren't any classified emails and the the usual blah, blah,blah from the Hillary taint cleaners.

I read the whole thing. It basically says there were two emails out of 30,000 that were marked classified at the time of sending, so they rated her statement as false.

Then, the editors note at the bottom admits that three of the emails in question were marked classified, but not in the header, only in the body. It's entirely possible that was overlooked.

So basically the whole article says, yeah, she basically acted completely in good faith and the system sucks.