Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Justice Dept. grants immunity to staffer who set up Clinton email server

+2
2seaoat
Markle
6 posters

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Markle

Markle

Oh...this isn't good news for Hillary and her band merry traitors.

Justice Dept. grants immunity to staffer who set up Clinton email server

The Justice Department has granted immunity to a former State Department staffer, who worked on Hillary Clinton’s private email server, as part of a criminal investigation into the possible mishandling of classified information, according to a senior law enforcement official.

The official said the FBI had secured the cooperation of Bryan Pagliano, who worked on Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign before setting up the server in her New York home in 2009.

As the FBI looks to wrap up its investigation in the coming months, agents are likely to want to interview Clinton and her senior aides about the decision to use a private server, how it was set up, and whether any of the participants knew they were sending classified information in emails, current and former officials said.

[...]

Justice Dept. grants immunity to staffer who set up Clinton email server Detroit-packard-plant_zpsnujzgato.jpg

2seaoat



Please give a credible source where the investigation is about her server SENDING classified documents. Nowhere has this been indicated and copying something which was made up does not make credible news. Again, read the criminal statutes again, and understand that it has been alleged that documents which were later declared to be classified were SENT to her......not the other way around. After the investigation is done, what email make up chit as you go along will next appear?

Markle

Markle

2seaoat wrote:Please give a credible source where the investigation is about her server  SENDING classified documents.  Nowhere has this been indicated and copying something which was made up does not make credible news.  Again, read the criminal statutes again, and understand that it has been alleged that documents which were later declared to be classified were SENT to her......not the other way around.  After the investigation is done, what email make up chit as you go along will next appear?

A document is classified, based on the content, when born. It dies not have to have "CLASSIFIED" OR "TOP SECRET" stamped on it for it to have that classification.

Setting up the private server, in my opinion, shows intent to keep her business and information secret from the government by whom she is employed.

Now Brian Paglino [sp?] has been granted immunity and is cooperating with the FBI.

Guest


Guest

Markle wrote:
2seaoat wrote:Please give a credible source where the investigation is about her server  SENDING classified documents.  Nowhere has this been indicated and copying something which was made up does not make credible news.  Again, read the criminal statutes again, and understand that it has been alleged that documents which were later declared to be classified were SENT to her......not the other way around.  After the investigation is done, what email make up chit as you go along will next appear?

A document is classified, based on the content, when born.  It dies not have to have "CLASSIFIED" OR "TOP SECRET" stamped on it for it to have that classification.  

Setting up the private server, in my opinion, shows intent to keep her business and information secret from the government by whom she is employed.

Now Brian Paglino [sp?] has been granted immunity and is cooperating with the FBI.


Ever had a government top secret security clearance, Markle?

Who determines the "top secret" status?

Can an item be out for all eyes and then determined "secret" or "top secret"?

Guest


Guest

It was part of hillary's job as the chief official to determine whether a document is sensitive in nature.

Btw... documents aren't marked classified... they are marked by their security classification. Hence her legalese statements that nothing was marked classified... technically true... but another dishonest political talkingpoint.

Why don't y'all just admit that you don't mind being lied to or deceived as long as it's from your teams ruling elite?

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

http://mediamatters.org/blog/2016/02/08/newsweek-dismantles-partisan-attacks-on-hillary/208458

Newsweek Dismantles Partisan Attacks On Hillary Clinton's Email

Kurt Eichenwald: Clinton Did "The Exact Same Thing As Her Predecessors" And They "Did Nothing Wrong"

Blog ››› February 8, 2016 9:48 PM EST ››› MEDIA MATTERS STAFF

Newsweek's Kurt Eichenwald debunked the partisan assertions that former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton improperly used a private email account, pointing out that her predecessors similarly used private email accounts that received information that was retroactively classified.

For months, conservative media figures baselessly hyped claims that Clinton violated the law by receiving State Department emails on her private email account while secretary of state. On February 4, reports emerged that Colin Powell and aides to Condoleezza Rice also used private email accounts when they served under President George W. Bush and some of their emails contained information that was subsequently classified on a retroactive basis.

In a February 8 article for Newsweek, Kurt Eichenwald explained that Powell and Rice's aides' use of a private email account was "meaningless except that it sets up a rational conversation (finally) about the Hillary Clinton bogus 'email-gate' imbroglio" and showed that the fixation on Hillary Clinton's emails "has been a big nothing-burger perpetuated for partisan purposes." Eichenwald wrote that Powell and Rice, like Clinton, "did nothing wrong" and that "this could only be considered a scandal by ignorant or lying partisans":

This news involving Powell and Rice is meaningless except that it sets up a rational conversation (finally) about the Hillary Clinton bogus "email-gate" imbroglio. Perhaps the partisans on each side will now be more willing to listen to the facts. From the beginning, the "scandal" about Clinton using a personal email account when she was secretary of state--including the finding that a few documents on it were retroactively deemed classified--has been a big nothing-burger perpetuated for partisan purposes, with reports spooned out by Republicans attempting to deceive or acting out of ignorance. Conservative commentators have raged, presidential candidates have fallen over themselves in apoplectic babbling, and some politicians have proclaimed that Clinton should be in jail for mishandling classified information. The nonsense has been never-ending, and attempts to cut through the fog of duplicity have been fruitless.

[...]

So did Powell and the aides to Rice violate rules governing classified information, since the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) staff has recently determined that some of their years-old personal emails contain top-secret material? No. The rules regarding the handling of classified information apply to communications designated as secret at that time. If documents that aren't deemed classified and aren't handled through a SCIF when they are created or initially transmitted are later, in retrospect, deemed secret, the classification is new--and however the record was handled in the past is irrelevant.

[...]

In other words, just because the FOIA staff years later labeled emails sent from Powell and Rice's aides as classified does not mean those records contain some crown jewels of critical intelligence. In fact, usually they are quite benign. I have seen emails called "top secret" that contained nothing more than a forwarded news article that had been published. (The Associated Press has reported that one of Clinton's "secret" emails contains an AP article.)

[...]

The bottom line: Democrats may try to turn the revelations about the email accounts used by Powell and Rice's staff into a scandal. They may release press statements condemning the former secretaries of state; they may call for scores of unnecessary congressional hearings; they may go to the press and confidently proclaim that crimes were committed by these honorable Republicans. But it all be lies. Powell and Rice did nothing wrong. This could only be considered a scandal by ignorant or lying partisans.

So there is no Powell or Rice email scandal. And no doubt, that will infuriate the Republicans who are trying so hard to trick people into believing Clinton committed a crime by doing the exact same thing as her predecessors.

Eichenwald joins other lawmakers and media commentators who agree that the revelation that Powell and aides to Condoleezza Rice also received retroactively classified information indicates that the allegations against Hillary Clinton are part of a partisan smear campaign.

*************

Guest


Guest

Are you able to understand that there's a major difference between a private email account and a private server set up specifically to circumvent public record keeping laws? There was no convenience... the headings are irrelevant... the intent is criminal.

Btw... why do you continually use far leftist propaganda soros sites? Do you really think he has us interests at heart?

gatorfan



Whether HRC stored classified material intentionally or through sheer negligence she must be held to the same standard as others who were negligent regarding classified material. This article provides a good summary of the situation, whether she is charged (doubtful) or not she has obviously shown extreme negligence proving her incapable of protecting national security interests.

"The FBI’s Two-Pronged Investigation of Hillary Clinton"
by Paul Craig Roberts

http://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2016/01/20/the-fbis-two-pronged-investigation-of-hillary-clinton/

Markle

Markle

SheWrites wrote:
Markle wrote:
2seaoat wrote:Please give a credible source where the investigation is about her server  SENDING classified documents.  Nowhere has this been indicated and copying something which was made up does not make credible news.  Again, read the criminal statutes again, and understand that it has been alleged that documents which were later declared to be classified were SENT to her......not the other way around.  After the investigation is done, what email make up chit as you go along will next appear?

A document is classified, based on the content, when born.  It does not have to have "CLASSIFIED" OR "TOP SECRET" stamped on it for it to have that classification.  

Setting up the private server, in my opinion, shows intent to keep her business and information secret from the government by whom she is employed.

Now Brian Paglino [sp?] has been granted immunity and is cooperating with the FBI.


Ever had a government top secret security clearance, Markle?

Who determines the "top secret" status?

Can an item be out for all eyes and then determined "secret" or "top secret"?


A document is "born" classified when it is originated. The content determines whether or not a document is classified. Those receiving or generating Classified are trained in what is in a classified document and to recognize it when it is seen.

Thus far, they have found over 2,000 classified documents, as you well know, and over 20 designated above top secret.

NOW they are searching for the 30,000 Hillary Clinton deleted by her own discretion. For some strange reason, the FBI aren't especially overwhelmed by the Clinton's candor and honesty. Go figure.

Guest


Guest

Markle wrote:
SheWrites wrote:
Markle wrote:
2seaoat wrote:Please give a credible source where the investigation is about her server  SENDING classified documents.  Nowhere has this been indicated and copying something which was made up does not make credible news.  Again, read the criminal statutes again, and understand that it has been alleged that documents which were later declared to be classified were SENT to her......not the other way around.  After the investigation is done, what email make up chit as you go along will next appear?

A document is classified, based on the content, when born.  It does not have to have "CLASSIFIED" OR "TOP SECRET" stamped on it for it to have that classification.  

Setting up the private server, in my opinion, shows intent to keep her business and information secret from the government by whom she is employed.

Now Brian Paglino [sp?] has been granted immunity and is cooperating with the FBI.


Ever had a government top secret security clearance, Markle?

Who determines the "top secret" status?

Can an item be out for all eyes and then determined "secret" or "top secret"?


A document is "born" classified when it is originated.  The content determines whether or not a document is classified.  Those receiving or generating Classified are trained in what is in a classified document and to recognize it when it is seen.

Thus far, they have found over 2,000 classified documents, as you well know, and over 20 designated above top secret.

NOW they are searching for the 30,000 Hillary Clinton deleted by her own discretion.  For some strange reason, the FBI aren't especially overwhelmed by the Clinton's candor and honesty.  Go figure.


Markle, have you ever had personal experience with government classified documents?

Markle

Markle

SheWrites wrote:
Markle wrote:
SheWrites wrote:
Markle wrote:
2seaoat wrote:Please give a credible source where the investigation is about her server SENDING classified documents. Nowhere has this been indicated and copying something which was made up does not make credible news. Again, read the criminal statutes again, and understand that it has been alleged that documents which were later declared to be classified were SENT to her......not the other way around. After the investigation is done, what email make up chit as you go along will next appear?

A document is classified, based on the content, when born. It does not have to have "CLASSIFIED" OR "TOP SECRET" stamped on it for it to have that classification.

Setting up the private server, in my opinion, shows intent to keep her business and information secret from the government by whom she is employed.

Now Brian Paglino [sp?] has been granted immunity and is cooperating with the FBI.


Ever had a government top secret security clearance, Markle?

Who determines the "top secret" status?

Can an item be out for all eyes and then determined "secret" or "top secret"?


A document is "born" classified when it is originated. The content determines whether or not a document is classified. Those receiving or generating Classified are trained in what is in a classified document and to recognize it when it is seen.

Thus far, they have found over 2,000 classified documents, as you well know, and over 20 designated above top secret.

NOW they are searching for the 30,000 Hillary Clinton deleted by her own discretion. For some strange reason, the FBI aren't especially overwhelmed by the Clinton's candor and honesty. Go figure.


Markle, have you ever had personal experience with government classified documents?

Nope and it has nothing, whatsoever to do with this thread.

Guest


Guest

Markle wrote:
SheWrites wrote:
Markle wrote:
SheWrites wrote:
Markle wrote:
2seaoat wrote:Please give a credible source where the investigation is about her server  SENDING classified documents.  Nowhere has this been indicated and copying something which was made up does not make credible news.  Again, read the criminal statutes again, and understand that it has been alleged that documents which were later declared to be classified were SENT to her......not the other way around.  After the investigation is done, what email make up chit as you go along will next appear?

A document is classified, based on the content, when born.  It does not have to have "CLASSIFIED" OR "TOP SECRET" stamped on it for it to have that classification.  

Setting up the private server, in my opinion, shows intent to keep her business and information secret from the government by whom she is employed.

Now Brian Paglino [sp?] has been granted immunity and is cooperating with the FBI.


Ever had a government top secret security clearance, Markle?

Who determines the "top secret" status?

Can an item be out for all eyes and then determined "secret" or "top secret"?


A document is "born" classified when it is originated.  The content determines whether or not a document is classified.  Those receiving or generating Classified are trained in what is in a classified document and to recognize it when it is seen.

Thus far, they have found over 2,000 classified documents, as you well know, and over 20 designated above top secret.

NOW they are searching for the 30,000 Hillary Clinton deleted by her own discretion.  For some strange reason, the FBI aren't especially overwhelmed by the Clinton's candor and honesty.  Go figure.


Markle, have you ever had personal experience with government classified documents?

Nope and it has nothing, whatsoever to do with this thread.  


You are not a subject matter expert on security. I'd be inclined to think the JUSTICE DEPARTMENT might know more about it than you. Therefore, since you have no background in security matters, let them make the decisions on who is granted immunity. You offer no substantive information.

Guest


Guest

http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/obamas-justice-department-gave-bernie-sanders-presidency_b_9372012.html

Bernie Sanders's path to the presidency was never going to be easy. After surging in the polls and consistently proving America's political establishment wrong,Sanders won Colorado and other states on Super Tuesday. He still has a path to win the Democratic nomination via the primaries,but Bernie Sanders just won the presidency for another reason: Hillary Clinton's quest for "convenience."

Bryan Pagliano,the person who set up Clinton's private server and email apparatus,was just given immunity by the Justice Department. According to The Washington Post,"The Clintons paid Pagliano $5,000 for 'computer services' prior to his joining the State Department,according to a financial disclosure form he filed in April 2009."

First,this can't be a right-wing conspiracy because it's President Obama's Justice Department granting immunity to one of Hillary Clinton's closest associates. Second,immunity from what? The Justice Department won't grant immunity to anyone unless there's potential criminal activity involved with an FBI investigation. Third,and most importantly for Bernie Sanders, there's only one Democrat in 2016 not linked to the FBI,Justice Department,or 31,830 deleted emails.

These 31,830 deleted emails,by the way,were deleted without government oversight.

Only one person set up the server that circumvented U.S. government networks and this person is Bryan Pagliano. Not long ago,Pagliano pleaded the Fifth,so this new development speaks volumes. His immunity,at this point in Clinton's campaign,spells trouble and could lead to an announcement in early May from the FBI about whether or not Clinton or her associates committed a crime. As stated in The New York Times,"Then the Justice Department will decide whether to file criminal charges and,if so,against whom."

The FBI's investigation will decide if there was criminal activity involved in owning the server and storing classified information on a non-government network. Already,I've written numerous articles on why Bernie Sanders is the true front-runner,and has been since last year,partly because of Clinton's FBI investigation. Bryan Pagliano being granted immunity, however,changes the ballgame.

Hillary supporters everywhere most likely don't care,but this development, and the testimony (free from any legal consequences) of the man who set up Clinton's computer apparatus,secures Bernie Sanders's front-runner status as the Democratic nominee. The DNC would be engaging in political suicide by entering November 8,2016 with a nominee linked to a person just granted immunity from President Obama's Justice Department, primarily because there's a reason this man was granted immunity in the first place.

Connect the dots while being honest with these developments,and only one logical progression,if Democrats actually want to win this year,must take place: Bernie Sanders saves the Democratic Party from Hillary Clinton and defeats Donald Trump by 8 points. Yes,Bernie defeats Trump by a wider margin than Clinton in a general election.

Trump wins with a Democratic nominee linked not only to an FBI investigation,but to aides being given immunity for their testimony.

Bernie Sanders already defeats Donald Trump by a much wider margin than Clinton's 3.4-point victory on average,without an FBI investigation, and without an associate enjoying legal immunity from the Justice Department.

In addition to born classified emails (emails that were classified from the start of their existence,undermining the claim that certain emails weren't classified when Clinton stored them on her server),as well as Top Secret intelligence on an unguarded server stored in her basement,Hillary Clinton has never explained the political utility of owning a private server.

Why did Hillary need to own a private server?

Aside from her excuse pertaining to convenience,why did Clinton need to circumvent U.S. government networks?

Clinton already apologized for the private server,and here's the apology:

Clinton has said: "Yes, I should have used two email addresses, one for personal matters and one for my work at the State Department. Not doing so was a mistake. I'm sorry about it, and I take full responsibility."

However,only Bryan Pagliano can explain to the FBI why Clinton needed the server,it's political utility,and most importantly,how the computer network was protected. Also,Pagliano can help with understanding the computer server's connection to other Clinton projects like their foundation,or other activities.

There are most likely a number of reasons Clinton needed the server and Pagliano's immunity helps the FBI immeasurable in deciphering whether or not criminal intent or behavior is a part of their recommendation to the Justice Department. Pagliano's immunity is explained in a Washington Post piece titled Justice Dept. grants immunity to staffer who set up Clinton email server:

The Justice Department has granted immunity to a former State Department staffer,who worked on Hillary Clinton's private email server, as part of a criminal investigation into the possible mishandling of classified information,according to a senior law enforcement official.

The official said the FBI had secured the cooperation of Bryan Pagliano, who worked on Clinton's 2008 presidential campaign before setting up the server in her New York home in 2009.

As the FBI looks to wrap up its investigation in the coming months, agents are likely to want to interview Clinton and her senior aides about the decision to use a private server, how it was set up, and whether any of the participants knew they were sending classified information in emails, current and former officials said.

... Spokesmen at the FBI and Justice Department would not discuss the investigation. Pagliano's attorney, Mark J. MacDougall, also declined to comment.

"There was wrongdoing," said a former senior law enforcement official. "But was it criminal wrongdoing?"

Yes,Pagliano was granted immunity for a reason,and even if he helped a crime take place,or engaged in questionable practices,he's free to give testimony to the FBI and Justice Department officials. As for Hillary Clinton's campaign,immunity for Pagliano could mean that other associates,like Huma Abedin,also seek a bargain with law enforcement officials.

As for the issue of criminality,Detroit's Click on Detroit Local 4 News explains the severity of this saga in a piece titled DOJ grants immunity to ex-Clinton staffer who set up email server:

Bryan Pagliano,a former Clinton staffer who helped set up her private email server,has accepted an immunity offer from the FBI and the Justice Department to provide an interview to investigators,a U.S. law enforcement official told CNN Wednesday.

With the completion of the email review, FBI investigators are expected to shift their focus on whether the highly sensitive government information, including top secret and other classified matters, found on Clinton's private email server constitutes a crime.

Whether or not a crime was committed is intrinsically linked to why Hillary Clinton needed a private server. Pagliano's testimony will be invaluable in helping the FBI decipher why the server was needed and how safe it was in storing sensitive information.

As for others within Clinton's inner circle,Huma Abedin is also part of this email investigation,as stated in a CNN article titled Clinton emails: What have we learned?:

The State Department is furthermore being sued for the emails of top aides,and for the tens of thousands of emails Clinton deemed personal and didn't turn over for review.

At a hearing last week in one such lawsuit, U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan said he's considering asking the State Department to subpoena Clinton, and aide Huma Abedin, in an effort to learn more about those emails...

Clinton and her aides insist none of the emails she sent or received were marked as classified at the time they were sent,but more than 2,101 have been retroactively classified during the State Department-led pre-release review process.

Whether or not the intelligence was classified at the time is irrelevant; there's already proof of born classified intelligence on Clinton's server. Former Obama official Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn believes Hillary Clinton should "drop out" of the race because of the FBI investigation.

Bernie Sanders just won the Democratic nomination and presidency, primarily because Clinton can't even type an email without an FBI investigation. I explained my thoughts on the FBI investigation with Victor Blackwell on CNN New Day. Ultimately,President Obama's legacy,as well as the Democratic Party's future are linked to James Comey's investigation of Clinton's emails. While few see the correlation,Bernie Sanders will become president,primarily because he's the only honest Democratic nominee running in 2016.

Markle

Markle

SheWrites wrote:
Markle wrote:
SheWrites wrote:
Markle wrote:
SheWrites wrote:
Markle wrote:
2seaoat wrote:Please give a credible source where the investigation is about her server  SENDING classified documents.  Nowhere has this been indicated and copying something which was made up does not make credible news.  Again, read the criminal statutes again, and understand that it has been alleged that documents which were later declared to be classified were SENT to her......not the other way around.  After the investigation is done, what email make up chit as you go along will next appear?

A document is classified, based on the content, when born.  It does not have to have "CLASSIFIED" OR "TOP SECRET" stamped on it for it to have that classification.  

Setting up the private server, in my opinion, shows intent to keep her business and information secret from the government by whom she is employed.

Now Brian Paglino [sp?] has been granted immunity and is cooperating with the FBI.


Ever had a government top secret security clearance, Markle?

Who determines the "top secret" status?

Can an item be out for all eyes and then determined "secret" or "top secret"?


A document is "born" classified when it is originated.  The content determines whether or not a document is classified.  Those receiving or generating Classified are trained in what is in a classified document and to recognize it when it is seen.

Thus far, they have found over 2,000 classified documents, as you well know, and over 20 designated above top secret.

NOW they are searching for the 30,000 Hillary Clinton deleted by her own discretion.  For some strange reason, the FBI aren't especially overwhelmed by the Clinton's candor and honesty.  Go figure.


Markle, have you ever had personal experience with government classified documents?

Nope and it has nothing, whatsoever to do with this thread.  

You are not a subject matter expert on security.  I'd be inclined to think the JUSTICE DEPARTMENT might know more about it than you.  Therefore, since you have no background in security matters, let them make the decisions on who is granted immunity.  You offer no substantive information.  

All the information I posted is factual. Here again you vividly confirm that you cannot show that anything I posted is not true. So, typical of Progressives. They try and they try and they try to find something to disprove a Conservatives post, they fail, so they then whine that the source is bad or that the poster doesn't know what they are talking about.

The difference is...I READ!

dumpcare



Markle wrote:
SheWrites wrote:
Markle wrote:
SheWrites wrote:
Markle wrote:
2seaoat wrote:Please give a credible source where the investigation is about her server  SENDING classified documents.  Nowhere has this been indicated and copying something which was made up does not make credible news.  Again, read the criminal statutes again, and understand that it has been alleged that documents which were later declared to be classified were SENT to her......not the other way around.  After the investigation is done, what email make up chit as you go along will next appear?

A document is classified, based on the content, when born.  It does not have to have "CLASSIFIED" OR "TOP SECRET" stamped on it for it to have that classification.  

Setting up the private server, in my opinion, shows intent to keep her business and information secret from the government by whom she is employed.

Now Brian Paglino [sp?] has been granted immunity and is cooperating with the FBI.


Ever had a government top secret security clearance, Markle?

Who determines the "top secret" status?

Can an item be out for all eyes and then determined "secret" or "top secret"?


A document is "born" classified when it is originated.  The content determines whether or not a document is classified.  Those receiving or generating Classified are trained in what is in a classified document and to recognize it when it is seen.

Thus far, they have found over 2,000 classified documents, as you well know, and over 20 designated above top secret.

NOW they are searching for the 30,000 Hillary Clinton deleted by her own discretion.  For some strange reason, the FBI aren't especially overwhelmed by the Clinton's candor and honesty.  Go figure.


Markle, have you ever had personal experience with government classified documents?

Nope and it has nothing, whatsoever to do with this thread.  

Well it does have to do with this thread since you brought up what a classified document is and yes they used to be marked upon origination, top secret, secret, classified. So if you've never seen one you cannot judge.

ZVUGKTUBM

ZVUGKTUBM

ppaca wrote:
Markle wrote:
SheWrites wrote:
Markle wrote:
SheWrites wrote:
Markle wrote:
2seaoat wrote:Please give a credible source where the investigation is about her server  SENDING classified documents.  Nowhere has this been indicated and copying something which was made up does not make credible news.  Again, read the criminal statutes again, and understand that it has been alleged that documents which were later declared to be classified were SENT to her......not the other way around.  After the investigation is done, what email make up chit as you go along will next appear?

A document is classified, based on the content, when born.  It does not have to have "CLASSIFIED" OR "TOP SECRET" stamped on it for it to have that classification.  

Setting up the private server, in my opinion, shows intent to keep her business and information secret from the government by whom she is employed.

Now Brian Paglino [sp?] has been granted immunity and is cooperating with the FBI.


Ever had a government top secret security clearance, Markle?

Who determines the "top secret" status?

Can an item be out for all eyes and then determined "secret" or "top secret"?


A document is "born" classified when it is originated.  The content determines whether or not a document is classified.  Those receiving or generating Classified are trained in what is in a classified document and to recognize it when it is seen.

Thus far, they have found over 2,000 classified documents, as you well know, and over 20 designated above top secret.

NOW they are searching for the 30,000 Hillary Clinton deleted by her own discretion.  For some strange reason, the FBI aren't especially overwhelmed by the Clinton's candor and honesty.  Go figure.


Markle, have you ever had personal experience with government classified documents?

Nope and it has nothing, whatsoever to do with this thread.  

Well it does have to do with this thread since you brought up what a classified document is and yes they used to be marked upon origination, top secret, secret, classified. So if you've never seen one you cannot judge.

It doesn't matter if the information posted isn't factual. He posts his shit for the effect. That is what propagandists do.

http://www.best-electric-barbecue-grills.com

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 1]

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum