Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-17-2015, 04:54 PM
 
12,973 posts, read 15,933,385 times
Reputation: 5478

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
Try harder...
Try this...

Sec. 3.2. Transferred Records. (a) In the case of classified records transferred in conjunction with a transfer of functions, and not merely for storage purposes, the receiving agency shall be deemed to be the originating agency for purposes of this order.



And then there is this....

(d) It is presumed that information that continues to meet the classification requirements under this order requires continued protection. In some exceptional cases, however, the need to protect such information may be outweighed by the public interest in disclosure of the information, and in these cases the information should be declassified. When such questions arise, they shall be referred to the agency head or the senior agency official. That official will determine, as an exercise of discretion, whether the public interest in disclosure outweighs the damage to the national security that might reasonably be expected from disclosure. This provision does not:

(1) amplify or modify the substantive criteria or procedures for classification; or

(2) create any substantive or procedural rights subject to judicial review.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-17-2015, 05:00 PM
 
Location: Southern Oregon
3,040 posts, read 5,041,047 times
Reputation: 3423
Quote:
Originally Posted by sware2cod View Post
Nobody cares about the Clinton email probe except a subset of Republicans. But they weren't going to vote for her anyway. They are the only ones that keep bringing it up like the sky is falling.
The only people who don't care about her email problems and other questionable actions are those who don't care about the ethics, character and honesty of a person that has the potential of being POTUS. To elect a person of this character really speaks volumes of just how far we have sunk morally and ethically as a country.

Just for the record, I vote as a non partisan, party loyalty has no bearing on my comment above.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2015, 05:19 PM
 
Location: Native of Any Beach/FL
35,923 posts, read 21,387,824 times
Reputation: 14395
Quote:
Originally Posted by Terryj View Post
The only people who don't care about her email problems and other questionable actions are those who don't care about the ethics, character and honesty of a person that has the potential of being POTUS. To elect a person of this character really speaks volumes of just how far we have sunk morally and ethically as a country.

Just for the record, I vote as a non partisan, party loyalty has no bearing on my comment above.
Please -please - pretty please- do not go into the moral characters of our politicians - the forum will shut down- with the many 'sins' of our leaders in DC-- and other capitols
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2015, 08:19 PM
 
Location: U.S.
9,510 posts, read 9,211,972 times
Reputation: 5927
Quote:
Originally Posted by sware2cod View Post
Nobody cares about the Clinton email probe except a subset of Republicans. But they weren't going to vote for her anyway. They are the only ones that keep bringing it up like the sky is falling.
Wow. So misinformed voters that don't care to measure their candidates on competency? Just cover your eyes and vote. Will you hold your nose or vote for Webb? Just make sure to fully punch that chad out. Happy voting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2015, 05:49 AM
 
41,813 posts, read 51,404,418 times
Reputation: 17868
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvoc View Post
Try this...

Sec. 3.2. Transferred Records. (a) In the case of classified records transferred in conjunction with a transfer of functions, and not merely for storage purposes, the receiving agency shall be deemed to be the originating agency for purposes of this order.
I'm no lawyer Lvoc but my understanding of the meaning of the bolded is if for example the CIA has closed a case and transferred records to another agency.


Quote:
And then there is this....

(d) It is presumed that information that continues to meet the classification requirements under this order requires continued protection. In some exceptional cases, however, the need to protect such information may be outweighed by the public interest in disclosure of the information, and in these cases the information should be declassified. When such questions arise, they shall be referred to the agency head or the senior agency official. That official will determine, as an exercise of discretion, whether the public interest in disclosure outweighs the damage to the national security that might reasonably be expected from disclosure. This provision does not:

(1) amplify or modify the substantive criteria or procedures for classification; or

(2) create any substantive or procedural rights subject to judicial review.
The key phrase is bolded, the convenience of Clinton is nothing exceptional.


Bottom line is if she is to believed she possessed and disseminated classified information in an insecure manner just for her own convenience. Convenience was the excuse for server, I don't buy that. Even if she is 100% within her rights it is not something that should be acceptable to anyone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2015, 05:55 AM
 
Location: Native of Any Beach/FL
35,923 posts, read 21,387,824 times
Reputation: 14395
Quote:
Originally Posted by thecoalman View Post
I'm no lawyer Lvoc but my understanding of the meaning of the bolded is if for example the CIA has closed a case and transferred records to another agency.




The key phrase is bolded, the convenience of Clinton is nothing exceptional.


Bottom line is if she is to believed she possessed and disseminated classified information in an insecure manner just for her own convenience. Convenience was the excuse for server, I don't buy that. Even if she is 100% within her rights it is not something that should be acceptable to anyone.

The problem here a simple BOLO is considered classified. They are looking at the content of the emails- that would provoke a security problem
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2015, 06:02 AM
 
59,543 posts, read 27,874,017 times
Reputation: 14426
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvoc View Post
Yes anything she decided was not classified was not classified. Simple as that.

Some of the Security IGs claim some of the information contained was classified. Might be true until she used it in an unclassified way.

And I cite little if anything being written by Hillary to note it was virtually all prepared by State Dept personnel where she controls the classification.

You folk are clearly off into the favorite RWN mode...beating the hell out of a dead horse.
"Yes anything she decided was not classified was not classified. Simple as that."

You don't know a thing about what you are trying to defend he with.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2015, 06:05 AM
 
59,543 posts, read 27,874,017 times
Reputation: 14426
Quote:
Originally Posted by lvoc View Post
Absolutely. Happens all the time I suspect.

This is the obvious battle between the doers and the spooks.
" Happens all the time I suspect."

POh, please, youe 'suspect".

Being you claim so many things about this subject, of which NONE is correct, what was YOUR TS clearance?

Even IF you had one many years ago, you could NEVER pass the continual courses required to keep it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2015, 06:06 AM
 
59,543 posts, read 27,874,017 times
Reputation: 14426
Quote:
Originally Posted by sware2cod View Post
Nobody cares about the Clinton email probe except a subset of Republicans. But they weren't going to vote for her anyway. They are the only ones that keep bringing it up like the sky is falling.
"Nobody cares about the Clinton email probe except a subset of Republicans."

The polls show otherwise.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2015, 06:29 AM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 14,051,900 times
Reputation: 5661
My award to the Congressional committees investigating Clinton:

AWARD
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:39 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top