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.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

She just doesn't get it......STILL

page: 1
34
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:
+18 more 
posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 08:52 AM
link   
So last night at the "CIC Forum" Hillary again had the opportunity to reset the conversation about her email investigation and allegations of her being careless with classified information. Again she failed miserably. She showed she, at the least, will not learn from her mistakes and she has no intention of accepting responsibility for what she has done.
July 5th:


Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.




There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation. In addition to this highly sensitive information, we also found information that was properly classified as Secret by the U.S. Intelligence Community at the time it was discussed on e-mail (that is, excluding the later “up-classified” e-mails)




None of these e-mails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these e-mails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at Departments and Agencies of the U.S. Government—or even with a commercial service like Gmail.




But even if information is not marked “classified” in an e-mail, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it


So all of this was laid out on July 5th. Plenty of time for Hillary to hire an expert to explain all she should have learned in the training she signed for when becoming SOS. So was she prepared last night for questions about her experience with classified info?

www.dailymail.co.uk... html




Lester: Secretary Clinton, thank you very much for coming tonight. As a naval flight officer, I held a top secret sensitive compartmentalized information clearance. And that provided me access to materials and information highly sensitive to our warfighting capabilities. Had I communicated this information not following prescribed protocols, I would have been prosecuted and imprisoned. Secretary Clinton, how can you expect those such as myself who were and are entrusted with America's most sensitive information to have any confidence in your leadership as president when you clearly corrupted our national security?


A fair question at a "CIC Forum".




Clinton: Well, I appreciate your concern and also your experience. But let me try to make the distinctions that I think are important for me to answer your question. First, as I said to Matt, you know and I know classified material is designated. It is marked. There is a header so that there is no dispute at all that what is being communicated to or from someone who has that access is marked classified. And what we have here is the use of an unclassified system by hundreds of people in our government to send information that was not marked, there were no headers, there was no statement, top secret, secret, or confidential. I communicated about classified material on a wholly separate system. I took it very seriously. When I traveled, I went into one of those little tents that I'm sure you've seen around the world because we didn't want there to be any potential for someone to have embedded a camera to try to see whatever it is that I was seeing that was designated, marked, and headed as classified. So I did exactly what I should have done and I take it very seriously, always have, always will.


She has the balls to tell someone who is actually a PROFESSIONAL that she "did exactly what should have been done", and "I take it very seriously".

Well I disagree.

1. Classified info does not have to be marked to be classified.
2. Even after an fbi investigation into her actions she has yet to learn this small but important detail, and no one on her staff thinks this issue is important enough to get her caught up on what she still does not know.
3. She publicly professes her ignorance on the issue and insults those who have served and understand the discipline required to safeguard our nations secrets, and the consequences of such carelessness.
4. By not learning from her mistakes she shows if she is elected we are to expect simply more of the same from her. More failure with our nations secrets; more failure with respect to middle east foreign policy; more failure in being accountable for any actions she takes.

Why she chooses to be willfully ignorant on the importance of this issue I will never understand. Were she to swallow her pride and admit and discuss her actions and steps she has taken to make sure this does not happen again she would probably beat Trump easily. Until she does this issue will beat her all the way to election day.



+12 more 
posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 09:05 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

There is no app that checks the email as it is typed and places a header on it if it contains classified information. That is done by people after the email is sent, or possibly by the Secretary of State themselves. To claim something wasn't classified because it hadn't yet been deemed to be so by herself, or hadn't yet had time to be deemed so by others, is the height of either incompetency or elitism in trying to lie out of her situation taking advantage of those who don't know better.

ETA: not to mention that since the email was on a private server, it may never have been seen by those whose job it is to mark the emails as classified.

She simply doesn't want to get it.

TheRedneck

edit on 9/8/2016 by TheRedneck because: (no reason given)


+1 more 
posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 09:05 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Why she chooses to be willfully ignorant on the importance of this issue I will never understand.

She's not ignorant, at least not in this regard. She's been briefed on what to say, and both her and the Core group that protects her know this is the best strategy. Sure, she will look like a smug bitch, but she's gonna be the first smug bitch to hold office.

The payoff far outweighs the scrutiny...

BTW - Good write up.




posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 09:09 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody




So last night at the "CIC Forum" Hillary again had the opportunity to reset the conversation about her email investigation

why? its over already, the only people pushing it are judicial watch, they still have cases against bill clinton and, questioned obama's birth for eight fricken years.
if republicans only scare tactic left is over emails, they don't deserve office.



posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 09:14 AM
link   
TheRedneck

If the email was sent on a private server to her..doesn't that automatically deem it as classified and/or sensitive material and should be handled as such? I guess I don't understand...

Thanks,
blend57



posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 09:15 AM
link   
There are templates for various stages of classified information, watermarks included. This is for the purpose of photocopying. It still shows up as classified even if the header and footer are cut off. The only way to circumvent that is to physically copy the body of the text and paste it into a new document. Doing so is a breech of security.



posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 09:20 AM
link   
a reply to: BestinShow

thanks



posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 09:27 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

Of course your right, but it's all based on that sound-bite ..................Plausible Deniability.
But she has worn that so thin as to be as thin as Graphene.

It also tells you about half of Americas values of right and wrong.



posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: blend57

Why would it?

Think about it like this: if you send me an email, from one private server to another (I use Gmail, which is a private server; I assume you use something similar) does the private server add any similar headers to it automatically? No, because the server cannot determine if the email needs a header. Only people have the intelligence to do that.

Clinton could type out an email and hit send and it would arrive at its destination just like she typed it. If it were on a government server, someone would have access to it and would classify it. If it's not on a government server, classification becomes her responsibility. According to the FBI reports, she failed to classify quite a few emails that contained classified information.

To claim it wasn't classified because it wasn't marked, when she withheld it from the classification process and didn't mark it herself is... well... thinking the public is pretty dumb.

I hope she's wrong about that.

TheRedneck



posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 09:53 AM
link   
a reply to: stinkelbaum

So if it is so over why did a serving naval officer ask her about it? Why is congress asking for obstruction and perjury investigations?
It is only over for those who choose to close their eyes to the exposed evidence of carelessness.



posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 09:57 AM
link   
a reply to: stinkelbaum

Yeah, Hillary supporters don't care if someone lies to Congress, the FBI, and the American people over national security issues! They also don't care that she wants tax dollars to pay for ALL abortions. Seriously, look up her stance on the repeal of the Hyde Amendment. What DO Hillary supporters actually support? Her commercials are nothing but people watching Tump ads. What exactly are Hilary supporters voting FOR? They don't even know.



posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 10:15 AM
link   
a reply to: neveroddoreven99

There you go and you are not going to change their minds.

I'd say a big chunk is voting against Trump.



posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 10:28 AM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

So, what she is saying is that she could email the GPS locations for all the terrorists that the State Dept. knows of and that would be perfectly fine and legal... as long as there is no classification headers.

Sounds like reasonable logic to me. We should should totally give her the top seat in the government to see what else she can surprise us with.



posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 10:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Zarniwoop




So, what she is saying is that she could email the GPS locations for all the terrorists that the State Dept. knows of and that would be perfectly fine and legal... as long as there is no classification headers.


What she is saying is she still knows jack squat about protocol even after being grilled about it for over a year.



posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 11:01 AM
link   
She gets it. She gets it better than maybe anyone else who's run for POTUS in the last 40 years. What she's counting on is enough of the rest of us not getting it.

A vote still tallies 1 no matter how dim the voter is who casts it.



posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 11:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: neveroddoreven99
a reply to: stinkelbaum

Yeah, Hillary supporters don't care if someone lies to Congress, the FBI, and the American people over national security issues! They also don't care that she wants tax dollars to pay for ALL abortions. Seriously, look up her stance on the repeal of the Hyde Amendment. What DO Hillary supporters actually support? Her commercials are nothing but people watching Tump ads. What exactly are Hilary supporters voting FOR? They don't even know.



They are voting for a many times failed idea. They hope the failure will somehow magically become successful even though they know it will continue to fail. Goes to a sheer lack of character or self esteem.



posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 11:46 AM
link   
a reply to: yeahright


A vote still tallies 1 no matter how dim the voter is who casts it.


That's, not quite true when you look at GEMS software.


The results of this study demonstrate that a fractional vote feature is embedded in each GEMS application which can be used to invisibly, yet radically, alter election outcomes by pre-setting desired vote percentages to redistribute votes.


In other words, votes can be counted as a decimal value other than 1.



posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 12:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
3. She publicly professes her ignorance on the issue and insults those who have served and understand the discipline required to safeguard our nations secrets, and the consequences of such carelessness.


That was my impression, that she came off as a total (@&$ to that Navy guy.



posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 12:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
Think about it like this: if you send me an email, from one private server to another (I use Gmail, which is a private server; I assume you use something similar) does the private server add any similar headers to it automatically? No, because the server cannot determine if the email needs a header. Only people have the intelligence to do that.


Right. This is where I argue that of just about any career politician out there, she'd have to be a top pick for ones that should have enough on the jobknow how to be able to look at any document and automatically know whether or not it should be eyes only.



posted on Sep, 8 2016 @ 03:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: yeahright
What she's counting on is enough of the rest of us not getting it.


Worked for Bill ...





top topics



 
34
<<   2 >>

log in

join