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.

 

Classified went sent..Hillarys email drama

page: 2
41
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 15 2016 @ 04:26 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Was or was not Hillary Clinton a classification authority when those emails were sent? Yes or No?

Why did she not mark a single email she sent with the proper classification markings?

I am telling you she is screwed.

She can try to say that in her opinion as a classification authority, she didn't feel they were classified. That's really about the only defense she has left... and being she has been disagreed with on her classification decisions 2200+ times, it doesn't look good for the home team.



So like I said before, your claims of retroactively classified are moot and have no bearing on this because the government will say they were unmarked classified emails went sent...which is exactly what they were.
edit on R352016-05-15T16:35:24-05:00k355Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 15 2016 @ 04:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa
a reply to: introvert

Was or was not Hillary Clinton a classification authority when those emails were sent? Yes or No?

Why did she not mark a single email she sent with the proper classification markings?

I am telling you she is screwed.


You're changing the topic, Rick. I'm trying to be polite and address the topic of the OP. The topic of the OP is the declassification dates and I'm actually trying to learn a bit as we go.

Can you address the points I brought-up?

Why do the declassification dates match the date the items were created, according to section C, and not the date of "original decision", as per section B?



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 04:45 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

"What part of my assertion is incorrect? The declassification dates do not match the date in which the "original decision" was made to classify. They match the date of creation of the documents, per section C of EO 13526. "

As they should.... classified information is born classified..when it is originated.... the day she typed it, it was classified, being an classification authority, she failed her duty to properly mark it prior to transmission.

You forget that the government considers classified information as marked or unmarked... that's a crucial thing to remember.

That is what you are just not seeing..

ALL of her emails that were classified by the State Department should have been marked as such at creation by her or by her conscious decision to forward classified emails.... she never did that...not once that I am aware of, at least in the released emails.

I am telling you that the Governments position will be "classified when sent by Hillary Clinton or received by Hillary Clinton due her position as a classification authority... this makes it 10 times worse and sets the way for gross negligence in the handling of classified information.

As soon as that information was processed in her little classification authority brain, sent to her little classification authority fingers and transmitted as an original email or a forwarded an email.... it was classified, whether marked or unmarked. She is screwed.

I do not see why anyone can not understand this.




edit on R062016-05-15T17:06:22-05:00k065Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R072016-05-15T17:07:22-05:00k075Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 04:51 PM
link   
Hillary, under the Executive Order 13526 was under sworn obligation
to apply the highest judgement handling classified information.

Her word game "marked classified" is just that, a game.


Every email sent within the State Department contains
a classification. In a secure government system, there is
no way to get around this.

She did not use the secure system that would
track when the classified information was sent, and mark
it with appropriate headers, however that does not
relieve her of the charge of sending classified information.
Marked or not, Classified is still Classified.

Classified, marked or not, she was bound by her
signed non disclosure agreement.

She turned in paper copies of non marked classified information,
that were created, stored, and sent on a non secure server.


edit on 15-5-2016 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 05:05 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Will this suffice:


Classification is the process of identifying that information which requires protection in the interests of preserving national security. Examples of classification abound in history, both ancient and modern.

...

Any information which fits into the definition of RD is considered to be classified by the Act upon its generation. This is generally referred to as being "born classified." No specific action is required to classify this type of information.


OFFICE OF DECLASSIFICATION
HISTORY OF CLASSIFICATION AND DECLASSIFICATION
July 22, 1996



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 05:09 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

The point I am trying to address is that it appears, according to the wording of the EO, that declassification is not necessarily an indicator of when a document was considered classified. According to section C, it says something can also be declassified according to it's "date of origin". Which is the case here.

The documents were given declassification dates based on their "date of origin" (section C) and not based on the "original decision" (section B) to classify.

If the declassification dates were set according to the "original decision", they would be completely different dates, correct?

Therefore, it appears that declassification dates are not necessarily an indicator of when the government considered something classified. Declassification dates can also be set dependent upon the documents creation date, which seems to be the case here.



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 05:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: jadedANDcynical
a reply to: introvert

Will this suffice:


Classification is the process of identifying that information which requires protection in the interests of preserving national security. Examples of classification abound in history, both ancient and modern.

...

Any information which fits into the definition of RD is considered to be classified by the Act upon its generation. This is generally referred to as being "born classified." No specific action is required to classify this type of information.


OFFICE OF DECLASSIFICATION
HISTORY OF CLASSIFICATION AND DECLASSIFICATION
July 22, 1996


That is an outdated source and it also says this:


This category, Restricted Data (RD), was specifically targeted at controlling atomic energy information.



edit on 15-5-2016 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 05:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: RickinVa

The point I am trying to address is that it appears, according to the wording of the EO, that declassification is not necessarily an indicator of when a document was considered classified. According to section C, it says something can also be declassified according to it's "date of origin". Which is the case here.

The documents were given declassification dates based on their "date of origin" (section C) and not based on the "original decision" (section B) to classify.

If the declassification dates were set according to the "original decision", they would be completely different dates, correct?

Therefore, it appears that declassification dates are not necessarily an indicator of when the government considered something classified. Declassification dates can also be set dependent upon the documents creation date, which seems to be the case here.


Simple answer... Due to the fact Hillary Clinton was an authorized classification official, the governments position will be that the information was classified the instance she processed it in her brain. . which is the date of the emails.

Hillary Clinton was the first classification authority to see these emails.... there is no way around that. Just because she didn't mark them as classified does not make them any less classified in the eyes of the law.
edit on R162016-05-15T17:16:22-05:00k165Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 05:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
The point I am trying to address is that it appears, according to the wording of the EO, that declassification is not necessarily an indicator of when a document was considered classified. According to section C, it says something can also be declassified according to it's "date of origin". Which is the case here.

The documents were given declassification dates based on their "date of origin" (section C) and not based on the "original decision" (section B) to classify.





Hillary, nor any of her aides, nor any one can declassify information
that was classified and controlled by another agency.


edit on 15-5-2016 by burntheships because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 05:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: RickinVa

The point I am trying to address is that it appears, according to the wording of the EO, that declassification is not necessarily an indicator of when a document was considered classified. According to section C, it says something can also be declassified according to it's "date of origin". Which is the case here.

The documents were given declassification dates based on their "date of origin" (section C) and not based on the "original decision" (section B) to classify.

If the declassification dates were set according to the "original decision", they would be completely different dates, correct?

Therefore, it appears that declassification dates are not necessarily an indicator of when the government considered something classified. Declassification dates can also be set dependent upon the documents creation date, which seems to be the case here.


Simple answer... Due to the fact Hillary Clinton was an authorized classification official, the governments position will be that the information was classified the instance she processed it in her brain. . which is the date of the emails.

Hillary Clinton was the first classification authority to see these emails.... there is no way around that. Just because she didn't mark them as classified does not make them any less classified in the eyes of the law.


That is not the topic of the OP and not the topic I am addressing. I'm trying to be very specific in my questions here so that I get very specific answers. Otherwise I learn nothing. Can you address the comments and question I have asked?



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 05:29 PM
link   


Hillary, nor any of her aides, nor any one can declassify information that was classified and controlled by another agency.


That has absolutely nothing to do with my questions and comments.

Focus guys...
edit on 15-5-2016 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 05:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: RickinVa

The point I am trying to address is that it appears, according to the wording of the EO, that declassification is not necessarily an indicator of when a document was considered classified. According to section C, it says something can also be declassified according to it's "date of origin". Which is the case here.

The documents were given declassification dates based on their "date of origin" (section C) and not based on the "original decision" (section B) to classify.

If the declassification dates were set according to the "original decision", they would be completely different dates, correct?

Therefore, it appears that declassification dates are not necessarily an indicator of when the government considered something classified. Declassification dates can also be set dependent upon the documents creation date, which seems to be the case here.


Simple answer... Due to the fact Hillary Clinton was an authorized classification official, the governments position will be that the information was classified the instance she processed it in her brain. . which is the date of the emails.

Hillary Clinton was the first classification authority to see these emails.... there is no way around that. Just because she didn't mark them as classified does not make them any less classified in the eyes of the law.


That is not the topic of the OP and not the topic I am addressing. I'm trying to be very specific in my questions here so that I get very specific answers. Otherwise I learn nothing. Can you address the comments and question I have asked?


No sir.. I will not engage you..All this is nonsense to you so it would be a total waste of my time to reply to you anymore.. What I suggest you do is some research, to try to arrive at your own conclusions and come back and post them.

Maybe someone else can help you find the answers you seek, but because of our past history, I politely decline to discuss what you attribute to "nonsense".

Have a nice pre-indictment recommendation day!



All I can tell you is that those emails should have been classified by the first classification authority that they came into the possession of,,,Hillary Clinton, which makes them unmarked classified email from the date she had them.

I am being as nice and polite as I can be, but if this degenerates into name calling and character assassination, I will alert the Mods immediately as soon as I see it.
edit on R372016-05-15T17:37:49-05:00k375Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 05:47 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa

I did do some research and I posted links/quotes from the EO you used in the OP.

My conclusion, so far, is that there is some doubt as to declassification dates and how it relates to "original decision" and "date of origin".

The documents listed in the OP were given classification dates based upon "date of origin", not "original decision". That casts some doubt on your assertions in the OP.

But I suppose I can leave the thread, if you wish. I've been completely respectful and only offered intelligent discourse on the very topic you created the OP for.


edit on 15-5-2016 by introvert because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 06:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: RickinVa

I did do some research and I posted links/quotes from the EO you used in the OP.

My conclusion, so far, is that there is some doubt as to declassification dates and how it relates to "original decision" and "date of origin".

The documents listed in the OP were given classification dates based upon "date of origin", not "original decision". That casts some doubt on your assertions in the OP.

But I suppose I can leave the thread, if you wish. I've been completely respectful and only offered intelligent discourse on the very topic you created the OP for.


Back to the same question
Same flat tire same telling the mechanic it's the engine
Have you held a clearance?


Every doodle, scribble, note one generates is to be treated as classified. That is what you don't get. Ignorance and accidents are not excuses.



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 06:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: RickinVa

I did do some research and I posted links/quotes from the EO you used in the OP.

My conclusion, so far, is that there is some doubt as to declassification dates and how it relates to "original decision" and "date of origin".

The documents listed in the OP were given classification dates based upon "date of origin", not "original decision".

But I suppose I can leave the thread, if you wish. I've been completely respectful and only offered intelligent discourse on the very topic you created the OP for.



Again all I can tell you is this, follow the process:

1. As a Original Classification Authority (OCA), Hillary Clinton was legally responsible for marking her own emails with proper classification codes when they came into her possession or she created them, prior to sending or forwarding.

2. Classified information may be marked or unmarked.

It is considered unmarked classified information... plain and simple whether it contained official markings is irrelevant. Those two statements together show you why those emails are considered classified in her possession by the US Government.

The information was classified when she sent it... it was considered classified before the State Department ever received them from Hillary Clinton because she was in fact a OCA herself. It just simply doesn't get any clearer than that.

Now you want to talk about dates, but completely ignore that the original classification date was the day it came into Hillarys possession or was created by her, which is what the declassification dates are based on because that is the day the Government says it is classified.

There is nothing else I can do to make you understand this, mainly because you do not want to understand it. All I can tell you to is look on military sites and you may find what you seek... doesn't matter... it was classified when sent or received by Hillary... Bottom line. The data on the SD site backs this up 100%.

You need to research the process of how classification works... there are a lot of sites out there, even military training guides you can download and read, but you won't because you think this is all a bunch of nonsense.

I can lead you to the water, but I can not make you drink the water.

Now back to our regularly scheduled programming.


Condensed version:

The original classification authority that classified the emails in 2015 & 2016 for the State Department was not the original classification authority for those emails... Hillary Clinton was. That is the point they became classified when she had them by virtue of her position, when she created or willfully chose to forward a email she knew contained classified information. We all make mistakes, including Hillary... you can overlook 1 or 2 and maybe even 3 times....2200+ is a tad bit overboard.

edit on R062016-05-15T19:06:45-05:00k065Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 06:35 PM
link   
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Apparently there is good reason to believe some of the emails, in question, were 'born classfied.'

Dozens of Clinton's emails were born classfied



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 06:47 PM
link   
I bet the 22 they won't release at all were born top secret.




posted on May, 15 2016 @ 06:48 PM
link   
a reply to: MotherMayEye

There is information that, by it's very nature and existence, is classified whether or not anyone ever looks at it to categorize it under any section of applicable law, ie "born classified."

I know that.

introvert is playing word games and being quite cagey, reminiscent of an attorney.

What I linked deals with nuclear secrets and lists it as Restricted Data (RD), as pointed out, quite correctly, by introvert.

I think all of the classification levels Rick has been listing fall under the larger umbrella of RD, and that is why anything ever classified is considered classified at birth, unless and untill it is specifically declassified; caveat being some information can never be declassified, if I am reading correctly.



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 07:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: MotherMayEye
a reply to: jadedANDcynical

Apparently there is good reason to believe some of the emails, in question, were 'born classfied.'

Dozens of Clinton's emails were born classfied


Correct.
The entire reason for this thread is because Hillary Clinton declares that she never emailed classified information...... Actually, she claims that she never emailed information that 'was marked classified'.

It doesn't matter whether it was marked or not, it was classified.

This whole argument over classification dates and retroactive classification is a few people, including Hillary, trying to blow smoke up the people's butts.



posted on May, 15 2016 @ 07:16 PM
link   
Like I said earlier....it is so obvious if you just look at it.....


Was the State Department the Original Classifying Authority or was Hillary Clinton the Original Classification Authority?

Sorry Hillary you lose.... not only you were the first official with Original Classifying Authority powers to come into contact with these emails, you failed to properly mark them and kept them in unauthorized storage for years before turning them over to the authorities.

It just doesn't look good for team Clinton at this point. The deeper you dig, the worse it gets.
edit on R292016-05-15T19:29:43-05:00k295Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R332016-05-15T19:33:39-05:00k335Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
41
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join