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

How on Earth are you people still defending her?

page: 26
158
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 03:44 PM
link   
a reply to: cavtrooper7

I suppose this is one reason why Biden isn't running for President. Your point?




posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 03:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: RickinVa




It is a crime to keep classified information on an unclassified server such as Hillary Clinton's.


No it isn't. Not backing certain documents up to the National Archives is.



Bingo.,, you have no clue what you are talking about.....


So you are saying that it is not illegal to keep classified information on an unclassified server.... you sir are absolutely clueless and have proven it beyond a smidgen of a doubt..

Have a good day and I will leave you to your nonsense.
edit on R452016-11-01T15:45:38-05:00k4511Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 03:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: wantsome

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: wantsome

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: NotTooHappy
a reply to: RickinVa

Can you provide a link showing that she's been charged with any crimes in the past 25 years, or better yet, convicted of any crimes? I have looked and I can't seem to find any.
You keep calling her a criminal but, her record doesn't reflect that. Having baseless accusations hurled at her for 25+ years is not the same as actually being charged with, or found guilty of committing any crimes.
So, what's she been charged with again? Convicted of? Is the answer, "nothing"?


Hillary Clinton is a criminal. A criminal is someone who commits criminal acts. The is no judge or jury, no indictment or conviction.

A person who commits criminal acts is a criminal. Having classified information on an unclassified server in your house is illegal under US law all day long.

Is that easy enough for you to comprehend? Hillary Clinton committed criminal acts in her handling of classified information.

The fact that the decision not to prosecute does not mean criminal acts were not committed. They were committed and documented by the FBI.
If thats how you feel about a illegal email server you must be outraged over us starting a war in the middle east that caused the entire region to descend into chaos killing millions.


No that is how I feel about someone who knowing violated the laws concerning the handling of classified information when I spent my whole career walking a tight line to make sure my clearance was never in jeopardy. That kind of influences how one feels about people who are careless with classified information.
What kind of classified information have they found so far?




110 classified at the time
8 top secret at the time
36 secret
8 confidential
OK so she did her email at home or whatever. It's not like she was selling aircraft carrier propulsion systems to the Chinese or something. Hell Bush started a war that caused the entire middle east to descend into chaos. Removing Sadam Hussein was the biggest foreign policy disaster I witness in my lifetime. It created a power vacuum in the region that can still be seen today.



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 03:47 PM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

No-one can promise you that. In fact, I'm surprised he isn't buddy buddy with Kim Jong-un considering his views and what he says and plans to do.



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 03:49 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

Photographic PROOF without SJW so called righteous indignation and the pointlessness of jumping Trump for it.
AKA we don't BUY the bullsh#t ,EMO, crap any more ..WELL I never did.
edit on 1-11-2016 by cavtrooper7 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 03:51 PM
link   
a reply to: wantsome

Yup, the perpetual war has been good for a few folks and really, really bad for most of us. But the issue here isn't what Bush did. (Obama kind of wore out the 'blame Bush' tag line his first 6 years in.) Right this moment we are discussing things that Hillary did that were illegal. Now the fact that what she did with regard to those e-mails may not be fully understood by those who haven't held a security clearance, but I assure you, for those that have, it's a really big deal. Lucky for her, most don't get it.

But if you look it up, you can find that bad things can happen when you screw up. Ask Petraeus.



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 03:54 PM
link   
a reply to: spiritualzombie

Your post made no sense, too many contradictions to have any meaning whatsoever.



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 03:55 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

No.... it's not one or the other... too much stupid in this thread. My head hurts.



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 03:59 PM
link   
a reply to: Monger

Wow, just wow. So anyone calling out hillary and her supporters just have to be a trump supporter? And Hillary hasn't been tried and indicted, not because she is innocent, but because of the power, wealth and influence her family name throws around with it. I don't know why that is so hard for you and people like you to conceive...



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 04:00 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa




So you are saying that it is not illegal to keep classified information on an unclassified server....


What? What is an "unclassified server". She used a private server, which was proven to be much safer than the .gov servers, as White House server and the Pentagon server were hacked! It wasn't illegal for her to use a private server, and the only reason that her emails are being reviewed is because they didn't back them up to the National Archives!


"Mrs. Clinton did not have a government email address during her four-year tenure at the State Department," The New York Times reported in a story published late Monday. "Her aides took no actions to have her personal emails preserved on department servers at the time, as required by the Federal Records Act."
.......
Regulations from the National Archives and Records Administration at the time required that any emails sent or received from personal accounts be preserved as part of the agency’s records.



The National Archives started the Electronic Records Archives in 2000, and funded pilot programs in 2008, but it didn’t start operating until 2012. Until that point, the National Archive had no way of dealing with Microsoft Word documents, PowerPoint presentations, or emails with attachments. Even now, as the Times story indicates, the protocols and procedures aren’t fully in place. It’s still very much a work in progress; some aspects of the new program aren’t scheduled to go into effect until the end of next year.

But the State Department disclosed on Friday that until last month it had no way of routinely preserving senior officials’ emails. Instead, the department relied on individual employees to decide if certain emails should be considered public records, and if so, to move them onto a special record-keeping server, or print them out and manually file them for preservation.
www.slate.com... html



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 04:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
a reply to: wantsome

Yup, the perpetual war has been good for a few folks and really, really bad for most of us. But the issue here isn't what Bush did. (Obama kind of wore out the 'blame Bush' tag line his first 6 years in.) Right this moment we are discussing things that Hillary did that were illegal. Now the fact that what she did with regard to those e-mails may not be fully understood by those who haven't held a security clearance, but I assure you, for those that have, it's a really big deal. Lucky for her, most don't get it.

But if you look it up, you can find that bad things can happen when you screw up. Ask Petraeus.
What Bush did is relevant because I'm making comparisons to the seriousness who's crimes are worse. Owning a private email server or leaking the names CIA operatives in the field.



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 04:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: network dude

Thems not the facts tho. We can't do that. It's either one or the other. I pick the "one", not the other, for reason that I've posted.

Hillary 2016! I'm with her.




My decision to not vote for Hillary isn't a political decision.

It's a moral decision.

And I just signed a petition put out today by change.org to get Hillary and/or the DNC to make Hillary step down and replace her with Bernie. They've already amassed a ton of signatures - of registered democrats.

Nothing legally binding there but if the results of said petition are made public it will place yet more pressure on Hillary to step down - now.



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 04:03 PM
link   



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 04:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Riffrafter


And I just signed a petition put out today by change.org to get Hillary and/or the DNC to make Hillary step down and replace her with Bernie. They've already amassed a ton of signatures - of registered democrats.

Nothing legally binding there but if the results of said petition are made public it will place yet more pressure on Hillary to step down - now.



Yeah?!!! To put Bernie on there instead?

That would be truly historical.

I can only hope and think positive thoughts about how great that will be.





posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 04:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Riffrafter




My decision to not vote for Hillary isn't a political decision. It's a moral decision.


Ditto that. My decision not to vote for Trump is a moral decision.



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 04:08 PM
link   
a reply to: SyxPak




Show Me Why I should like Her. Maybe there is some good in Her, somewhere? I need to take care of some matters here in the physical world so have to leave...


I'm not here to change your mind. I'm here to defend my stance.



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 04:08 PM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Divert Divert Divert. Hilarious how all this finger pointing at Russia begins every time Hillary's corruptness is being focused on.

Only blind Hillary fools cant see it. The racist, sexism, cards seem to not be working as good as was hoped for so now the Russian card is being played.

Putin is a pretty smart guy and called it out too. DIVERT DIVERT DIVERT
edit on 1-11-2016 by ker2010 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 04:08 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

What? What is an "unclassified server".

Easy...

An unclassified server are servers that are used every single day millions of times........ yahoo,....gmail.....cnn....abc...cbs...all of those are ran on unclassified servers.

A Classified server is a server that is used only for classified information. They have no connections to the open internet. The servers and the associated software have to meet NSA standards. Classified servers are protected by a class one type encryption device. Classified servers must be stored using methods dictated by the National security Agency. Classified server must be stored n SCIF's, which also has to meet certain NSA standards to pass. And so on and so on.

If Hillary's server had been authorized to hold classified material, then this would have never happened in the first place. She would produce the documentation from NSA authorizing her to store classified materials in her house.


Hillarys server was a unclassified server that contained classified information on the open internet which is strictly 100% illegal no matter how you slice or dice it.


edit on R122016-11-01T16:12:42-05:00k1211Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)

edit on R132016-11-01T16:13:42-05:00k1311Vpm by RickinVa because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 04:13 PM
link   
a reply to: windword

You are out of your element here. Your ignorance is telling when you cite "Government servers"...

Classified information (as those of us who have / had clearances know) is transmitted and stored on a completely different "network" so to speak. I've discussed this before, but do yourself a favor and google SIPRNet and JWICS for examples.

There is not possible way to transmit classified information to over a non-classified network (i.e. NIPRNet) without physically removing said information from a classified network like printing it out or taking a picture and then scanning / uploading it to the unclass system. Just doing that would be a serious crime. I've heard stories from friends who have seen contractors plug in non-secure laptops to SIPRNet while out in the field and get taken out of theater in handcuffs.

One hack of the Pentagon I heard about because I have a close relative that works there was when someone opened up a phishing email from their unclass email (i.e. NIPRNet) and they had to shut things down for a couple days. They could still do everything on the classified networks since those were unaffected.

Not making a personal judgment about you, but there are folks here on ATS that have decades of experience on this topic and you are showing yourself to have no knowledge of the matter.



posted on Nov, 1 2016 @ 04:13 PM
link   
a reply to: RickinVa




An unclassified server are servers that are used every single day millions of times........ yahoo,....gmail.....cnn....abc...cbs...all of those are ran on unclassified servers.


Uh, Collin Powell used AOL's server.



A Classified server is a server that is used only for classified information.


There's no such thing. Please site some federal document that states the existence of such a server outside of the .gov server, and that federal employees need to use that special server for "Classified" information.



If Hillary server had been authorized to hold classified material, then this would have never happened in the first place.


You don't know what you're talking about.



new topics

top topics



 
158
<< 23  24  25    27  28  29 >>

log in

join