It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

U.S. declares 22 Clinton emails 'top secret'

page: 6
32
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 03:09 PM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: SkyNetBeware

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: SkyNetBeware

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: SkyNetBeware
Anyone saying they know what is in the emails is lying.

We don't know yet.

They weren't classified at the time they were sent.

No evidence yet any law was broken.

The only purpose this discussion serves is to hilite who the Hillary haters are.


Man your head must be really thick.... you have a letter from the IG stating that emails were Top Secret//SI//TK//NOFORN and you again state no one knows what was in the emails.... we do know for a FACT that some of the emails contained TK information... TK information is classified Top Secret from birth... it was classified Top Secret before it ever landed on Hillarys server.

Your just talking to hear your self talk. You're not doing yourself any favors in the credibility department.


Show me a link to the IG ITSELF, not some right wing blog. News sources are claiming the emails were classified long AFTER they were sent.

www.vox.com...


Look man... I already told you that ATS will not link the senate PDF... just google "IG letter 11 August 2015".. the senate website with the PDF will be listed.... if you do not know how to google something, I can't help you.

And while you are at it, google talent keyhole and learn that stuff is classified from birth.... do some research.


I worked in classified environments. Not everything is classified at birth. Many news sources are saying these emails were classified recently, not before they were sent.


I have 18 years in the IC..... you dont know that anything related to Talent Keyhole is classified? From the second it is taken up in space? Before it is beamed back to earth? Before it landed up on Hillarys email server?

You don't know any of that?

Amazing.... I will check back tomorrow... I have better thing to do than play watch the dog chase its tail.


You have no idea what's in the emails. It's classified. You are lying if you say you know.




posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 03:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: SkyNetBeware

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: SkyNetBeware

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: SkyNetBeware

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: SkyNetBeware
Anyone saying they know what is in the emails is lying.

We don't know yet.

They weren't classified at the time they were sent.

No evidence yet any law was broken.

The only purpose this discussion serves is to hilite who the Hillary haters are.


Man your head must be really thick.... you have a letter from the IG stating that emails were Top Secret//SI//TK//NOFORN and you again state no one knows what was in the emails.... we do know for a FACT that some of the emails contained TK information... TK information is classified Top Secret from birth... it was classified Top Secret before it ever landed on Hillarys server.

Your just talking to hear your self talk. You're not doing yourself any favors in the credibility department.


Show me a link to the IG ITSELF, not some right wing blog. News sources are claiming the emails were classified long AFTER they were sent.

www.vox.com...


Look man... I already told you that ATS will not link the senate PDF... just google "IG letter 11 August 2015".. the senate website with the PDF will be listed.... if you do not know how to google something, I can't help you.

And while you are at it, google talent keyhole and learn that stuff is classified from birth.... do some research.


I worked in classified environments. Not everything is classified at birth. Many news sources are saying these emails were classified recently, not before they were sent.


I have 18 years in the IC..... you dont know that anything related to Talent Keyhole is classified? From the second it is taken up in space? Before it is beamed back to earth? Before it landed up on Hillarys email server?

You don't know any of that?

Amazing.... I will check back tomorrow... I have better thing to do than play watch the dog chase its tail.


You have no idea what's in the emails. It's classified. You are lying if you say you know.



I know it was classified before it ever hit Hillarys server... that is what TK means. You do not have to know what was in the email,...just the classification of the email itself.

nsarchive.gwu.edu...
edit on R132016-01-30T15:13:52-06:00k131Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R142016-01-30T15:14:24-06:00k141Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 03:13 PM
link   
Why can't these goofballs here link to the IG directly?

Ha!

The only place they can find this "document" is on GOP websites.

Face palm!

In response they quote forest bump and think that somehow proves their point.

Just show me the evidence. I'm easily swayed by facts, not BS.



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 03:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: SkyNetBeware

I worked in classified environments. Not everything is classified at birth. Many news sources are saying these emails were classified recently, not before they were sent.


The letter I linked to above says Hillary had to give the emails.

That means nobody else had access to them before !!!

So, *OF Course* they need to be ranked now.

And it's all because the SD is under court order to produce those and publish them on their site (which they are doing).

State Dept -- Hillary emails -- link to released documents

(( minus the ones they can't release because of security issues of course ))




posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 03:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: SkyNetBeware

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: SkyNetBeware

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: SkyNetBeware

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: SkyNetBeware
Anyone saying they know what is in the emails is lying.

We don't know yet.

They weren't classified at the time they were sent.

No evidence yet any law was broken.

The only purpose this discussion serves is to hilite who the Hillary haters are.


Man your head must be really thick.... you have a letter from the IG stating that emails were Top Secret//SI//TK//NOFORN and you again state no one knows what was in the emails.... we do know for a FACT that some of the emails contained TK information... TK information is classified Top Secret from birth... it was classified Top Secret before it ever landed on Hillarys server.

Your just talking to hear your self talk. You're not doing yourself any favors in the credibility department.


Show me a link to the IG ITSELF, not some right wing blog. News sources are claiming the emails were classified long AFTER they were sent.

www.vox.com...


Look man... I already told you that ATS will not link the senate PDF... just google "IG letter 11 August 2015".. the senate website with the PDF will be listed.... if you do not know how to google something, I can't help you.

And while you are at it, google talent keyhole and learn that stuff is classified from birth.... do some research.


I worked in classified environments. Not everything is classified at birth. Many news sources are saying these emails were classified recently, not before they were sent.


I have 18 years in the IC..... you dont know that anything related to Talent Keyhole is classified? From the second it is taken up in space? Before it is beamed back to earth? Before it landed up on Hillarys email server?

You don't know any of that?

Amazing.... I will check back tomorrow... I have better thing to do than play watch the dog chase its tail.


You have no idea what's in the emails. It's classified. You are lying if you say you know.



I know it was classified before it ever hit Hillarys server... that is what TK means

nsarchive.gwu.edu...


That doesn't prove anything.

You have NO CLUE what's in the emails because they haven't been released and it's illegal to reveal their contents publicly because they are now classified. We also don't know which emails were recently classified.

Again: no one in the public knows what's in the emails. You are stupid or lying if you think you do.



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 03:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: SkyNetBeware
Why can't these goofballs here link to the IG directly?

Ha!

The only place they can find this "document" is on GOP websites.

Face palm!

In response they quote forest bump and think that somehow proves their point.

Just show me the evidence. I'm easily swayed by facts, not BS.


WTF man.... where is that logic coming from?

its on red state....IG letter dated 11 August 2015... it is right wing

its on a senate website...IG letter dated 11 August 2015.....its GOP propaganda

its on the IG"s website...IG letter dated 11 August 2015... all of a sudden that makes it legit?

I don't follow your logic or lack thereof.

You only will believe what ever it is you believe in your own private little world....done talking to you... you make absolutely no sense what so ever other than just rambling on.


edit on R212016-01-30T15:21:21-06:00k211Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 03:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: SkyNetBeware
Why can't these goofballs here link to the IG directly?

Ha!



July 23 2015 letter

It confirms Hillary had the emails on her server. That's why they are scrambling like jealous seahorses after she was forced to give them up.

No small wonder they never had a chance to "classify" anything ahead of time.




posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 03:21 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

I read there were 60,000 emails recovered from the Hillary hdd wipe, go FBI!



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 03:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: SkyNetBeware
Why can't these goofballs here link to the IG directly?

Ha!

The only place they can find this "document" is on GOP websites.

Face palm!

In response they quote forest bump and think that somehow proves their point.

Just show me the evidence. I'm easily swayed by facts, not BS.


WTF man.... where is that logic coming from?

its on red state....IG letter dated 11 August 2015... it is right wing

its on a senate website...IG letter dated 11 August 2015.....its GOP propaganda

its on the IG"s website...IG letter dated 11 August 2015... all of a sudden that makes it legit?

I don't follow your logic or lack thereof.

You only will believe what ever it is you believe in your own private little world....done talking to you... you make absolutely no sense what so ever other than just rambling on.



Logic?

I asked for a link to the IG. All I get are links to GOP politicians and blogs. How many times must I explain this?



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 03:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: SkyNetBeware

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: SkyNetBeware
Why can't these goofballs here link to the IG directly?

Ha!

The only place they can find this "document" is on GOP websites.

Face palm!

In response they quote forest bump and think that somehow proves their point.

Just show me the evidence. I'm easily swayed by facts, not BS.


WTF man.... where is that logic coming from?

its on red state....IG letter dated 11 August 2015... it is right wing

its on a senate website...IG letter dated 11 August 2015.....its GOP propaganda

its on the IG"s website...IG letter dated 11 August 2015... all of a sudden that makes it legit?

I don't follow your logic or lack thereof.

You only will believe what ever it is you believe in your own private little world....done talking to you... you make absolutely no sense what so ever other than just rambling on.



Logic?

I asked for a link to the IG. All I get are links to GOP politicians and blogs. How many times must I explain this?


If the exact same letter is on multiple sites, what does it matter what site it is on? That makes no sense what so ever.

You are going to see the exact same letter, whether it is redstate, a senate webpage or the IG webpage.

You are trying to invalidate the letter because of whatever website it is on..it is not available on the IG website that I am aware of.


AGAIN: I ask you one more time....

Are you saying that the IG letter dated 11 August 2015 is fraudulent? That is all I want to know.

Focusing on the question of what website published the damning evidence outlined in a letter to Congress by the intelligence community Inspector General is a lame attempt to distract from...the damning evidence outlined in a letter to Congress by the intelligence community Inspector General. What websites have published the letter isn't the story here, and it never will be.

edit on R382016-01-30T15:38:09-06:00k381Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 03:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: SkyNetBeware

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: SkyNetBeware
Why can't these goofballs here link to the IG directly?

Ha!

The only place they can find this "document" is on GOP websites.

Face palm!

In response they quote forest bump and think that somehow proves their point.

Just show me the evidence. I'm easily swayed by facts, not BS.


WTF man.... where is that logic coming from?

its on red state....IG letter dated 11 August 2015... it is right wing

its on a senate website...IG letter dated 11 August 2015.....its GOP propaganda

its on the IG"s website...IG letter dated 11 August 2015... all of a sudden that makes it legit?

I don't follow your logic or lack thereof.

You only will believe what ever it is you believe in your own private little world....done talking to you... you make absolutely no sense what so ever other than just rambling on.



Logic?

I asked for a link to the IG. All I get are links to GOP politicians and blogs. How many times must I explain this?


It would help you get to bottom of it if you would just think this through for what it is and not what you are trying to make it fit. We have people here who have politely explained, with reference s how "Hillary is innocent" is wrong and that ship has already sailed. You are making yourself look bad at this point. Like wacky comments from others, say on the far right, you look "out there" bud. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Holmes would say "elementary my dear Watson" to you.
edit on 30-1-2016 by Justoneman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 04:21 PM
link   
MeThinks we are seeing The Hillary Clinton for President Campaign in operation mode.

Right in front of our own eyes !!






posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 04:27 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa



I know for a fact the TK stands for Talent Keyhole,,,, which is a spy satellite program.


It is not just a spy satellite program. TK also refers to surveillance aircraft, their products and subsequent analysis. That would include drones.



Yes Yes we all know that it was just an email article in the New York Times that was forwarded that talked about a drone program... yada yada yada.


Why do you dismiss the possibility that this particular email triggered the TK classification? It seems to me that you already know the flaw in your line of debate and are trying to shut-down a debate of that possibility.



AGAIN for the record:

Do you want to address the FACT that her emails were classified TS//SI//TK//NOFORN and stop the BS about whether it was actually a photograph? Cmon man I really want to discuss that with you with your smokescreens.


AGAIN, we know little to nothing about this. We don;t know why it was classified, what the emails contained and I find myself in a better position to wait and see what transpires. You are already putting the cart before the horse and trying to come to conclusions with no evidence.



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 04:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

originally posted by: xuenchen

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
The Secretary of State received highly classified emails.

Shocker.....


Sure.

On a wide open private computer system.





But they were only classified after she received them....

Also am i the only one who finds this whole email thing a little boring.

Just a wild guess...your a dem, liberal and likely progressive. Am I right? Because supporting people regardless of their actions is real bad character. Much like the Germans that did nothing when Hitler came to power. But here you are just saying "who care", "not news", etc. because this person is on your team. Can't you look at such a person and see the illegal things they do don't benefit anyone but her? Or do you always support criminals...as long as they share your view?

Wouldn't surprise me. Typical democrat reaction.



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 04:40 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Have a look see at this email .....

It's a GEM.

Hillary email / Sid B




From: H hrod17@clintonemail.com
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 1:03 AM
To: sullivanjj@state.gov
Subject: Fw: H: some intel on internal german/euro maneuvering. Sid
Attachments: hrc_memo_internal_german_euro_politics_062712.docx

More on the Eurozone crisis.


From: sbwhoeop [mailto:sbwhoeop
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 12:00 AM
To: H
Subject: H: some Intel on internal german/euro maneuvering. Sid

Blank


edit on Jan-30-2016 by xuenchen because: classified !!



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 04:42 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

"Why do you dismiss the possibility that this particular email triggered the TK classification? It seems to me that you already know the flaw in your line of debate and are trying to shut-down a debate of that possibility."


Because as you like to put it, that would be be assuming something that is not known as a fact.

The letter specifically states that "some emails were up to TS//SI//TK//NOFORN.... I only used 1 as a reference number because that is the only known fact....it could be 2, 3 or 4 or more.... "some" is an ambiguous term... but it does mean at least 1 was at the TK level.

Back to square one.... at least one email contained information classified at TS//SI//TK//NOFORN.... that means it was classified before it ever hit her server. That my misguided friend is a plain and simple fact.

For someone who accuses people of assuming things, you sure do assume a lot of things...







edit on R422016-01-30T16:42:44-06:00k421Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R432016-01-30T16:43:57-06:00k431Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R442016-01-30T16:44:27-06:00k441Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 04:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: introvert

Have a look see at this email .....

It's a GEM.

Hillary email / Sid B



From: H hrod17@clintonemail.com
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 1:03 AM
To: sullivanjj@state.gov
Subject: Fw: H: some intel on internal german/euro maneuvering. Sid
Attachments: hrc_memo_internal_german_euro_politics_062712.docx

More on the Eurozone crisis.


From: sbwhoeop [mailto:sbwhoeop
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 12:00 AM
To: H
Subject: H: some Intel on internal german/euro maneuvering. Sid

Blank



Sure is a gem.....it's doesn't say anything other than the subject.

Do we know if anything within that document is grounds for prosecution?

That's the point here. We don't know squat and there are too many armchair know-it-alls that think she is guilty based on incomplete information.
edit on 1/30/2016 by eriktheawful because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 04:49 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa



Because as you like to put it, that would be be assuming something that is not known as a fact.


If it is not known to us, why assume she is guilty of breaking US Code?



The letter specifically states that "some emails were up to TS//SI//TK//NOFORN.... I only used 1 as a reference number because that is the only known fact....it could be 2, 3 or 4 or more.... "some" is an ambiguous term... but it does mean at least 1 was at the TK level.


True. Do we know why it received that classification? Is it possible that a specific term was used that triggered that classification, yet does not pertain to information produced by the TK system?



Back to square one.... at least one email contained information classified at TS//SI//TK//NOFORN.... that means it was classified before it ever hit her server. That my misguided friend is a plain and simple fact.


Prove it was classified before she received it. Most if not all of her emails that contained classified were classified after the fact. Why would something with such a classification have to be classified before she received it?



For someone who accuses people of assuming things, you sure do assume a lot of things...


I've assumed nothing. In fact, the reason you and I disagree on this issue is because I will not assume and come to a conclusion without proper evidence.
edit on 30-1-2016 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 04:59 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

"Do we know why it received that classification? Is it possible that a specific term was used that triggered that classification, yet does not pertain to information produced by the TK system?"

Dude...wtf,,, you are asking questions that would require that the answers be based on incomplete information so you can claim I am making assumptions? The mere fact that you are asking those questions means you are assuming things.

"Is it possible"

That unicorns have more than one horn?

That if bullfrogs had wings they wouldn't bump their butt when they hopped?

"Is it possible" means you are asking people to guess at answers.... damn sure sounds like assuming stuff to me.


Again we are back to square one:

The letter specifically states that "some emails were up to TS//SI//TK//NOFORN.... I only used 1 as a reference number because that is the only known fact....it could be 2, 3 or 4 or more.... "some" is an ambiguous term... but it does mean at least 1 was at the TK level.

That is not making any assumptions what so ever. That is straight from the IG of the Intelligence Community.

Go ahead and spew your nonsense.... I got better crap to do... like go read about the 18 emails between Hillary and the Whitehouse.

This gets better every single day..... just got back from the store and yes, I picked up some more popcorn.

Lets just agree to disagree. Although I already know you will keep trying to shoot down the classified email talk.
edit on R052016-01-30T17:05:19-06:00k051Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R072016-01-30T17:07:17-06:00k071Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 30 2016 @ 05:06 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa



Dude...wtf,,, you are asking questions that the answers to would be based on incomplete information


Exactly my point. All we have is incomplete information. No conclusions can be made.



The letter specifically states that "some emails were up to TS//SI//TK//NOFORN.... I only used 1 as a reference number because that is the only known fact....it could be 2, 3 or 4 or more.... "some" is an ambiguous term... but it does mean at least 1 was at the TK level.


Again, why did that one email receive that classification? Was it because it contained actual information regarding TK, or was it an automatic trigger because of specific terms used...like the email that was classified because it contained the word "drone"?

Is it possible that particular email is the "one" in question?

Edit to add:



"Is it possible" means you are asking people to guess at answers.... damn sure sounds like assuming stuff to me.


I'm asking if it is possible. Yes or no? If it's not, prove why it is not. If it is, it is most logical to withhold judgement until charges are filed or more information is provided.


edit on 30-1-2016 by introvert because: (no reason given)

edit on 30-1-2016 by introvert because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
32
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join