Will Donald Trump Be Afraid To Debate Hillary Clinton?

http://i143.photobucket.com/albums/r147/panzade/image_zpslvg1oqfb.jpeg

0 Replies

@DrewDad,

I suppose that your point here is that Clinton was famously quoted as saying ( with typically Clintonian fine distinctions and parsing of words) that she never sent or received materials on her private e mail that were marked as classified. That is certainly true, and this statment she made was given in the context of her assurances to the public that her use of a private server did not jeapordize any confidential or classified information. Unfortunately the fact, certainly known to her, is that the classification and protection of the information is in the information itself, not the markings on a printed page or text. Thus her statement in that situation was almost certainly deceptive and intended to divert attention from her culpability. This culpability was later verified by the FBI as Director Comey indicated. There was indeed classified information in the e mail messages on her server, and we can only guess about others which she had destroyed even while the material was under subpoena.

So where, in all of this, really is the lie to which you refer?

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

I suppose that your point here is that Clinton was famously quoted as saying ( with typically Clintonian fine distinctions and parsing of words) that she never sent or received materials on her private e mail that were marked as classified. That is certainly true, and this statment she made was given in the context of her assurances to the public that her use of a private server did not jeapordize any confidential or classified information. Unfortunately the fact, certainly known to her, is that the classification and protection of the information is in the information itself, not the markings on a printed page or text. Thus her statement in that situation was almost certainly deceptive and intended to divert attention from her culpability. This culpability was later verified by the FBI as Director Comey indicated. There was indeed classified information in the e mail messages on her server, and we can only guess about others which she had destroyed even while the material was under subpoena.

So where, in all of this, really is the lie to which you refer?

Hey George, I can agree with just about all of this.

1) Clinton didn't lie
2) She certainly tried to divert attention and soften the public image of this issue
3) The FBI slapped her hard on this stuff

The fact is though, that "spinning" a story to something that paint's a politician in the best light is something that every single politician (and public figure) does as part of their day job.

Now, I personally don't think the 3 emails that had classified information on them are really a big deal. From what has been reported I would consider this one of the many instances of over classification that the republicans have been accusing the Obama white house of doing for almost 8 years.

I mean when you hear about the information contained in these classified emails, do you think that information should have been classified in the first place?

Do you think the Obama administration has been engaging in "overclassification" since taking over the white house?

2 Replies

@maporsche,

I think the question about Hillary's emails is over blown. What isn't overblown is Trump's suggestion that he hoped the Russians got into her emails, and reveal them to the world as to what's in them.
Trump's claim that he admires Putin more than Obama proves his judgement is poor to dangerous.

0 Replies

@maporsche,

maporsche wrote:

Misstatements or mistakes or being misinformed are not necessarily lies and you know this.

If Sec. Clinton forgot that 3 of her 60,000+ emails contained a paragraph with a "C" marking in the wrong place then she would not be lying.

Is this the general liberal consensus or just your thoughts?

1 Reply

@edgarblythe,

Somebody suggested that people record the event, and just watch the body language the first time. That's a good idea.

0 Replies

@McGentrix,

McGentrix wrote:

maporsche wrote:

Misstatements or mistakes or being misinformed are not necessarily lies and you know this.

If Sec. Clinton forgot that 3 of her 60,000+ emails contained a paragraph with a "C" marking in the wrong place then she would not be lying.

Is this the general liberal consensus or just your thoughts?

That misstatements or mistakes or being misinformed are not necessarily lies?

That's not something open to debate. Those are words and words have meanings.

0 Replies

@maporsche,

At least we have come down from the high plane of overblown generalities.

I believe there were many more than three e mails judged to contain classified information. Moreover I have read reports that several contained summaries of information Classisified as Top Secret special access only.

All of this begs the fact that her server was likely easily hacked, by numerous parties very interested in getting the information, and that such hacking might not leave any traces adterwards.

More to the point even the casual communications and concerns of the Secretary of State may constitute useful information that might compromise our interests if divulged.

One of our greatest intelligence coups of the Cold War was the U.S. tapping (starting in the late 1970s) of underwater cables in the White Sea and in the Pacific in the Sea of Okhost on which the Soviet Navy transmitted administrative information (unclassified and unencrypted by them) about day to day administrative and ship maintenance activities. This activity, supported by brave and skilled submariners, continued for almost a decade, and was properly very highly classified and closely held by us. We didn't collect any formally highly classified Soviet information about weapons technology, war plans or strategy, but we did gain a rather complete understanding that, contrary to our earlier eestimates, the Soviet Navy was a paper tiger, beset by poor equipment reliability, sloppy maintenance by unmotivated crews, gross shortages of spare parts, inadequate training, and in some cases problems arising from the multiple different languages spoken by conscript crews. It turned out that information was timely and precious - it gave us a clear, continuing picture of the ongoing decay and gathering collapse of the Sovier War Machine. That information was indeed vital in the ensuing years as we then consciously abetted an arms race they could not hope to match, thereby accelerating the collapse of the Soviet Empire and ending a 40 year dangerous era of Cold War.

I believe this is the context in which we should judge the behavior of a Secretary of State who has so amply demonstrated a lack of responsibility for her own actions and those of the department for which was accountable, and who has also frequently demonstrated an inclination to bend and distort the obvious truth by evasion, misstatement and omission.

I don't know that Trump is any better, but I do know that Hillary doesn't make the cut.

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

I'm not going to base my vote for Clinton on something as trivial as a "handful" (FBI's words, not mine) of meaningless classified emails that may or may not have been hacked.

My vote for Clinton is based on a number of things, but primarily 1) her policies and 2) her opponent

1 Reply

@maporsche,

I assumed Hillary was your choice in the election and that it wouldn't change. What we were deiscussing is something distinct from that.

0 Replies

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

Unfortunately the fact, certainly known to her, is that the classification and protection of the information is in the information itself, not the markings on a printed page or text.

That is patently false. Once again, you show that you're either stupid, a liar, or both.

A data classification is metadata; information is not somehow intrinsically imbued with a data classification upon creation.

I know that you are impervious to criticism and correction, and that you will keep spewing your nonsense long after everyone else is exhausted by the exercise. You've been told the truth, though, which makes you a liar for continuing to promote this BS.

1 Reply

@georgeob1,

georgeob1 wrote:

I believe there were many more than three e mails judged to contain classified information.

You are welcome to your fantasy. I appreciate that you prefaced this with "I believe" so that we can all easily determine that it must be counter-factual.

georgeob1 wrote:

Moreover I have read reports that several contained summaries of information Classisified as Top Secret special access only.

Summaries do not automatically share the same classification as full reports. Original, detailed reports may contain sensitive information, such as methods and sources, that the summaries do not.

0 Replies

In the end it came down to Comey saying Hillary Clinton didn't knowingly break any laws which is why no prosecutor would have brought the case and why he didn't recommend indictment.

The FBI report on Hillary Clinton’s private email server, explained

The whole email saga has been one big mountain out of a mole hill. Wish you republicans and/or others however you classify yourselves would discuss something which actually matters. Hope Trump brings up his tax plan or something else of substance tonight.

0 Replies

@DrewDad,

I am none of the things you insultingly indicated, thouugh your opinion is not a concern of mine. I have my own of you, but I will not imitate your pettiness and self righteousness in doing so.

In the government and its security services the word "classified" is indeed a trait that is applied to information in whatever form it may exist. The published rules and policies are equally clear that appropriate security measures be taken with it in terms of storage, access and markings, but that the incformation remains classified whether those security provisions are present or not. One of these requirements is that it shall not be transmitted unencrypted across uncontrolled (by government) networks.These are the rules and terms that apply to the matter at hand - not yours.

Beyond that , you can piss off.

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

This question is not related to the post I'm replying to.

George, do you think the government (including the State Department) has a problem with over classifying information (in general)?

I won't use your answer in defense of Clinton's supposed misdeeds. I'm just curious your opinion on the matter.

2 Replies

@maporsche,

To anyone who's pissed about this email thing.

Do you think the state department officials who sent/received this "classified" information on their @state.gov email addresses deserve to be prosecuted in addition to Clinton?

Note that the @state.gov system is for non-classified information and classified information is required to be on a more secure system.

1 Reply

@maporsche,

Quote:

Note that the @state.gov system is for non-classified information and classified information is required to be on a more secure system.

You are finally getting at what I have been asking for the last several months. How did the classified information get from the secure network to the non-secure network? I've asked this question on several occasions and no one seemed to have an answer.

Glitterbug who I think used to be an IT govt contractor was not able to answer the question and I don't think anyone really cares. The networks are not connected, so who moved the info and on who's orders?

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

Baldimo wrote:

Quote:
Note that the @state.gov system is for non-classified information and classified information is required to be on a more secure system.

You are finally getting at what I have been asking for the last several months. How did the classified information get from the secure network to the non-secure network? I've asked this question on several occasions and no one seemed to have an answer.

Glitterbug who I think used to be an IT govt contractor was not able to answer the question and I don't think anyone really cares. The networks are not connected, so who moved the info and on who's orders?

That's easy Baldimo.

I imagine you can send an email from the classified system to the non classified system.

Additionally, I'm sure you could just copy/paste from one system to the other.

Or since it's really the knowledge that is classified, not just the document, you can just talk about classified information on non-classified systems (just like you could call somebody and give the information).

That's not really the issue I'm getting at though.

1 Reply

@maporsche,

I've got a great deal of direct personal experience in this matter, mostly in military matters. I believe there is a fair amount of both overclassification and underclassification in the system. It's chief fault is that outdated material sometimes retains its classification for too long. The whole system is clearly biased to resolve doubts in the direction of secrecy. Those are lessons generally learned the hard way in wars and conflict.

In the ongoing chess games of international relations and deal & policy making among nations and other international bodies, knowing the state of awareness, concerns and priorities of top leadership can be a very important advantage. That's why governments, even friendly ones, try so hard to get it, and why we try to prevent that.

My concerns with Clinton are that she doesn't appear to either understand or value that. More concerning to me than that, however, is that she appears unwilling to accept or acknowledge responsibility for what she or the organization she leads does or doesn't accomplish. In my experience those are fatal qualities in a leader.

2 Replies

@georgeob1,

Thank you.

0 Replies

Will Donald Trump Be Afraid To Debate Hillary Clinton?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know