Speakeasy forum

Rant

He ain't as smart as he claims

Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: He ain't as smart as he claims
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: He ain't as smart as he claims
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
Evidently

In reply to: He ain't as smart as he claims

99% of the news media see the "C" marking as interchangeable with 'confidential' and 'classified' because most of what I've seen so far in both written and televised media have them saying 'classified' rather than 'confidential'. In any event, no matter which term is used (because there is no differential between the two even with the State Department) they BOTH mean you aren't to share it or speak about it with anybody not holding the proper credentials to know about that information. As a matter of fact, according to the categories used, there is NO category called 'classified' as they are ALL 'classified' with 'confidential' being the second lowest ('public trust' is the lowest), then 'secret', and it goes up from there.

Considering that hilLIARy had been First Lady, a NY Senator (on the Foreign Relations Committee to boot) and then SoS, there is NO excuse for her to NOT know what the "C" marking meant..........and she just keeps digging that hole deeper every time she tries to deflect with more lies about it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classified_information_in_the_United_States

Collapse -
RE: there is NO category called 'classified'

In reply to: Evidently

YOU should run for POTUS

You're already smarter than TheRUMP

Collapse -
As I said....the two words are interchangeable

In reply to: RE: there is NO category called 'classified'

However, I've already shown you that no matter what you THINK you know about our laws, I'm still smarter than you'll ever be about them, JP, because even YOU believed the two were different and tried to smear Trump over his 'mistake'.

Collapse -
RE:Trump over his 'mistake'.

In reply to: As I said....the two words are interchangeable

HIS mistake?

HE admitted?

Are YOU saying HE made a mistake?

You're off the team!!!!....You should be praying TheRUMP doesn't hear about your blasphemous talk.

He's fired people for less...I hope you get a good settlement.

Collapse -
I put the word 'mistake' in quotes

In reply to: RE:Trump over his 'mistake'.

just to irritate you, because there was NO mistake made......except by YOU with this thread In the first place. He really IS smarter than you claim.

Collapse -
RE:just to irritate you,

In reply to: I put the word 'mistake' in quotes

NO WAY!!!!!

YOU would never do that....I have lost all faith in humanity.

He really IS smarter than you claim.

I claimed he didn't understand the classification markings....and he didn't. Judging by what HE said...that's what everyone has to go on...His words.

Deny all you want...it won't change the facts

Collapse -
You classify a document

In reply to: He ain't as smart as he claims

It could be confidential, eyes only, secret, top secret, or top secret compartmented info.

Collapse -
RE:You classify a document

In reply to: You classify a document

And this 'document" has a "header" with the "classification"?

NO "header"=NO "classification"?

FBI Director James Comey: no…There were three e-mails. The “c” was in the body, in the text but there was no header on the e-mail or the text.

Rep. Matt Cartwright: So if Secretary Clinton really were an expert at what’s classified and what’s not classified, and were following the manual, the absence of a header would tell her immediately that those three documents were not classified. Am I correct in that?

FBI Director James Comey: That would be a reasonable inference.

Collapse -
One of her aides or perhaps Sullivan

In reply to: RE:You classify a document

I can't remember which one right now, actually wrote to her and said that an email they wanted to forward to her refused to come and SHE wrote back giving them instructions on how to REMOVE the header so it would go through. That was revealed in one of the earlier document 'dumps' months ago, and I remember it clearly because I had to ask Derek about that. He told me that a 'classified' document coming from a 'classified' system would NEVER be delivered to an 'unclassified' system which is why all of the systems in the government itself are set up as 'classified'. The two systems are NOT allowed to talk to each other because of the header itself. By physically editing that document to remove the header, you are breaking the law in order to bypass the system itself. And NOBODY, including the FBI, has bothered to nail her on this topic, and I'm really pissed off over the fact that nobody in CONGRESS in ANY of the hearings they've held has brought this up either (at least not publicly that I've seen).

Collapse -
Common sense plays a part as well

In reply to: You classify a document

My USAF security clearance when working in a communication center was Top Secret/Crypto. This did not mean I had the right to read or distribute any communications whatsoever. All it meant was that I was cleared to be in an area where documents up to that classification could be present and accessible. All classified documents carried the additional requirement of "need to know" before one could seek to view them. Even a document marked "Confidential" would not be fair game for a person with a higher clearance if that document was not important to their mission. We were taught that all potentially sensitive documents should be treated with great care. Conversations with our superiors or conversations overheard between other personnel should also be regarded as potentially sensitive. Almost nothing that left with us at the end of our shift was something that didn't come in with us at the start of the day. A security clearance wasn't something to take frivolously. When in doubt, keep it to oneself and leave it at the workplace.

That being said, I would think that politician's such as HC should know simply by the content of the material in their possession whether or not it's sensitive and should use common sense in assuring that it's kept private and allowed to remain only in one's official workplace under the control of those assigned to protect it. The lack of a marking on a document changes little. Its content is enough. I believe that the investigation disclosed that she, though not committing anything of a criminal nature that couldn't be defended, exhibited extreme lack of respect for the security of material with which she was entrusted. I guess we're supposed to think she's become instantly rehabilitated and ready to take on an even higher level of responsibility. I say "rubbish". I was just an enlisted person with no desire for a career in the military and even I knew better.

Collapse -
See my reply to JP regarding headers and removing them....

In reply to: Common sense plays a part as well

Editing it out for an unclassified system is all by itself a criminal offense and SHE gave instructions to others on how to do it.........Why is nobody bring this up? I'm so disgusted by this I could puke every day over that alone. Isn't that, along with setting up the server in the first place, the INTENT Comey ignored?

Collapse -
She should already be in jail

In reply to: See my reply to JP regarding headers and removing them....

or at least a trial.

Collapse -
Intent and criminal activity also includes

In reply to: She should already be in jail

the order to destroy and hide devices and the decision to mail via USPS instead of a courier hand delivering both a laptop and a flash drive containing ALL of the archived emails and documents that got 'lost' and never received by the FBI, all of this being done AFTER an order by Congress to preserve everything and AFTER a subpoena by Congress to hand over everything..........which is why Chavez is now opening a new investigation into obstruction. Without the few notes that the FBI took, this new information would never have come out again, but why the FBI didn't investigate this while they already had this information is another example of how Comey is another agency head that has been bought and paid for by this administration. There isn't even one agency in this administration that isn't corrupt and it started with the IRS revelations. back in 2010 with targeting the Tea Party exemptions and Eric Holder with Fast and Furious. Nobody fired, nobody held accountable, and nobody even investigated.

Not one department/agency is immune to corruption......

Collapse -
I think Comey's comments told why this wouldn't happen

In reply to: She should already be in jail

It had nothing to do with whether charges were justified. It had to do with trying to find a prosecutor who'd risk their own career in order to see her tried and possibly not gain a conviction. I can imagine the real trial would be one against that prosecutor which would take place in the media.

Collapse -
Sadly enough.......

In reply to: I think Comey's comments told why this wouldn't happen

I can see BO going the route that Ford did with Nixon......pardon her before an indictment could become a prosecution in a court room........OR she becomes president and actually has the authority to pardon herself.

Popular Forums

icon
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
icon
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
icon
Laptops 21,181 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
icon
Phones 17,137 discussions
icon
Security 31,287 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
icon
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
icon
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

REVIEW

Sublime suburban chariot

High on style and technology, the 2019 Volvo XC90 is an incredibly satisfying everyday crossover.