2016 Presidential Race

Status
Not open for further replies.
Il Duce said:
Later classified...that means it was not classified when it was sent. If someone sends me unclassified information, unmarked, and I send it to someone else - then later someone decides they'd like that information to be classified - I do not go to jail. In fact, very few people go to jail for NDCIs - nobody in my experience as an S2 at almost every level.
Click to expand...

Sir, if I send you info that clearly indicates information AND details sources and methods, regardless of header, footer, and paragraph markings AND you forward that to your family member...your career as an Intel professional is DONE. Not only would you lose current but future access as well. Merely storing that info in your house is enough to suspend access and more that likely get it completely revoked. I cite Snowden's shit and Washington Post articles as examples. (I do agree with your statements but recommend going further to educate the masses.)

Regarding "upgrading" from unclassified to classified, that ONLY happens when multiple pieces of unclassified info is put together. (For others, A, B, C, D, when isolated are unclassified but combined, they would clearly indicate defense information. Val Plame, her true employer, her advertised employer, and assigned duty location were examples that got Scotter Libby into trouble.) My point is that when an analyst sends a classified email WITHOUT proper markings, they violate multiple policies and regulations. Habitual violations result in performance counseling and ultimate loss of network access.

Hillary was the HEAD of a Department which has a Bureau that produces and analyzes intelligence, yet the HEAD of that Department had neither a NIPR, SIPR, nor JWICS account.

Her direct subordinates, brought over from private practice, sent and received classified info on her behalf. At least one kept classified information on her spouse's "perv serv" and accessed God knows what.

I will fully agree with you on the retrospective look at previous support to other administrations. I feel as if I've been played.:wall:

I absolutely cannot support your love of Pokémon Go.
 
image-1068202-galleryV9-hfcg-1068202.jpg
 
lindy said:
Sir, if I send you info that clearly indicates information AND details sources and methods, regardless of header, footer, and paragraph markings AND you forward that to your family member...your career as an Intel professional is DONE. Not only would you lose current but future access as well. Merely storing that info in your house is enough to suspend access and more that likely get it completely revoked. I cite Snowden's shit and Washington Post articles as examples. (I do agree with your statements but recommend going further to educate the masses.)

Regarding "upgrading" from unclassified to classified, that ONLY happens when multiple pieces of unclassified info is put together. (For others, A, B, C, D, when isolated are unclassified but combined, they would clearly indicate defense information. Val Plame, her true employer, her advertised employer, and assigned duty location were examples that got Scotter Libby into trouble.) My point is that when an analyst sends a classified email WITHOUT proper markings, they violate multiple policies and regulations. Habitual violations result in performance counseling and ultimate loss of network access.

Hillary was the HEAD of a Department which has a Bureau that produces and analyzes intelligence, yet the HEAD of that Department had neither a NIPR, SIPR, nor JWICS account.

Her direct subordinates, brought over from private practice, sent and received classified info on her behalf. At least one kept classified information on her spouse's "perv serv" and accessed God knows what.

I will fully agree with you on the retrospective look at previous support to other administrations. I feel as if I've been played.:wall:

I absolutely cannot support your love of Pokémon Go.
Click to expand...

@lindy - you're not describing what happened with SEC Clinton's server or the subsequent upgrades. In some cases the 'upgraded' information was because someone mentioned or shared newspaper articles that covered topics the IC would like classified.

I've had this experience frequently with national level agencies and some folks with certain INT backgrounds - they want to tell you a message is classified if you use one word, but if you replace it with another word that means the exact same thing you're somehow good to go.

I agree with the FBI's initial assessment - though it took them months to decide what should have been clear in weeks at most - SEC Clinton, and especially her staff, acted carelessly and foolishly given what was entrusted to them but nothing criminal happened. If we want to act like she and her staff are some sort of sleeper agents or traitors to the crown there are a shit-ton of GOs, congresspeople, and senior leaders (especially non-career ambassadors) who we ought to be going after as well.

I think being intense on security is great - I've tried to do it my whole career. However, I've also had the frequent experience - including those that negatively impacted my career - where leaders downplayed, cut-corners, and ignored regulatory guidance or best practices. HRC is not the devil on this stuff - she's just one of the pack.
 
Red Flag 1 said:
A while back, I did ask,"What does the rest of the world think of us"?

Now we know, but is that mud, or something else?
Click to expand...

Its most certainly manure, IMO.


Perhaps the major political parties should be more critical and thoughtful in their choice of candidate.

Perhaps there should be much higher standards for a candidate for the most powerful executive office, and the document outlining an inappropriately bare minimum of candidate "standards" should be modified to keep certain individuals out of consideration, and to require more job-specific training and experience.

Because they're politically leading the entire United States of America and 16 territories.
 
Red Flag 1 said:
FWIW, The GOP has a spotty history when it comes to supporting their candidate for the White House. They have done so again this election cycle. Trump has the personality, and the resources to roll on despite a GOP that can't agree on when to pull the rug out from under you. Trump is where he is because of who he is, no other candidate would have made it this far, on his/her own against HRC.
Click to expand...

GOP candidates have a history of being spineless, look at Romney in the debates.
I said it before, and am saying it again. Trump used the Democratic/Liberal/Alinsky playbook to take his rivals out during the primaries and continues to use it against her in the run up till Tuesday.
No other Republican would be this lose to winning.

Diamondback 2/2 said:
To somewhat change topic, I was just told by my daughters that today in school they voted for Hillary Clinton. Normal school stuff, right? I ask them why they voted for her, they replied that their whole class did. I again ask why? They reply because our teachers told us that Trump wants to take all the money from poor people and give it to rich people. That he wants to make laws that would make them their brother and mother have to leave the country (my wife is hispanic), etc.

This is the bullshit that makes me want to fuck people up. Their fucking school teacher is there to teach my kids how to read, write and do arithmetic. Not to influence their thinking on national politics. Now granted in the grand scheme of things, it's just elementary school kids learning about voting and the democratic process of our country. I know that it's just for learning and I know there are teachers probably doing the same with regards to Trump or whomever they support. I doubt any data from their little vote will ever leave the school. But it still pisses me the fuck off that a snivelingbitch, would lie to my daughters to get them to vote for something they know nothing about, or even care about for that matter. I mean really, my kids and wife are hispanic, so they have to leave the country, who says shit like that to a 8 and 5 year old girls?

I'm debating on going full fucking angry dad at the school Monday, or just sending a nasty-gram and call it good. I got my ass chewed pretty good for my last come to Jesus meeting at the school. My wife is supposed to handle this shit now, but fuck me, I'd like to verbally rip into this bitch and watch her scurry around in fear. }:-):mad:
Click to expand...

Go visit, just don't start screaming or threatening. E-mails and phone calls are ignorable.

Agoge said:
Politics is a section of schooling that the educational system has lost control of. They should be teaching "how" government works and not their personal endorsements of any candidates for any reason.

I would have a talk with the school. I would advise them that it isn't the teacher's place to endorse candidates, but to teach the methods of government. I have had those talks myself. I wouldn't get completely bent up on that subject like I had others, but I would speak with them. If they aren't held accountable, schools will dive deeper into areas they shouldn't and we will continue to have functionally illiterate kids graduating school.
Click to expand...

You can also raise it at a school board meeting, this is Texas and the teacher doesn't have a union to protect him/her.

lindy said:
Ah, the classic struggle between the Bourgeoisie and the Proletariat when, ultimately, this class will lead to a proletariat revolution.

Sorry buddy, but their teacher is a fucking Marxist...or a progressive Democrat that leans far left.
Click to expand...

Most of them are, those that can do, and those that can't teach comes to mind.

TLDR20 said:
What has Hillary been convicted of, if that is the standard?
Click to expand...

Cattle futures anyone, oh wait; they had a fall guy. The Clintons are like pro-athletes who have a designated fall guy to do the time. At sometime you have to look at their circle of friends and ask why they surround themselves with criminals.

DocIllinois said:
A fine indicator of how most of the rest of the world views whomever will be our next.... "President."

Dear Spiegel had another cover with just Donnie on it and the word, "Wahnsinn."

Yep.
Click to expand...

How does Der Spiegel view Merkle, or immigration?
How did they portray Obama 8 years ago?
They world doesn't view the current guy as a strong leader, I think Trump is willing to stand up to others.
 
Il Duce said:
@lindy - you're not describing what happened with SEC Clinton's server or the subsequent upgrades. In some cases the 'upgraded' information was because someone mentioned or shared newspaper articles that covered topics the IC would like classified.

I've had this experience frequently with national level agencies and some folks with certain INT backgrounds - they want to tell you a message is classified if you use one word, but if you replace it with another word that means the exact same thing you're somehow good to go.

I agree with the FBI's initial assessment - though it took them months to decide what should have been clear in weeks at most - SEC Clinton, and especially her staff, acted carelessly and foolishly given what was entrusted to them but nothing criminal happened. If we want to act like she and her staff are some sort of sleeper agents or traitors to the crown there are a shit-ton of GOs, congresspeople, and senior leaders (especially non-career ambassadors) who we ought to be going after as well.

I think being intense on security is great - I've tried to do it my whole career. However, I've also had the frequent experience - including those that negatively impacted my career - where leaders downplayed, cut-corners, and ignored regulatory guidance or best practices. HRC is not the devil on this stuff - she's just one of the pack.
Click to expand...
No. that was not careless. That was unauthorized disclosure, that's not even spillage (which can happen simply by not encrypting an email).
 
DA SWO said:
How does Der Spiegel view Merkle, or immigration?
How did they portray Obama 8 years ago?
They world doesn't view the current guy as a strong leader, I think Trump is willing to stand up to others.
Click to expand...

Not well.
Not favorably.

If only 'standing up to others' were the main occupational requirement to being POTUS. I admit that its possible I've been just imagining all other activities of that office for the past few decades, to include working with other leaders.

Perhaps he can next run for political office in China; only 40% of people say they have no confidence in his leadership there.
 
At the end of the day Trump believes vaccines cause autism. I could never vote for someone that is that purposefully ignorant of science.
 
Ooh-Rah said:
These fucking guys are just as bad as the BLM dudes....

Pro-Trump Militia members in Georgia in hand-to-hand combat training | Daily Mail Online

Down a Georgia country road, camouflaged members of the Three Percent Security Force have mobilized for rifle practice, hand-to-hand combat training -- and an impromptu campaign rally for Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump.

'How many people are voting for Trump? Ooh-rah!' asks Chris Hill, a paralegal who goes by the code name 'Bloodagent.'

'Ooh-rah!' shout a dozen militia members in response, as morning sunlight sifted through the trees last weekend.

39FB0C2A00000578-3896784-image-a-52_1478135677351.jpg
Click to expand...
I live in the same state as these people. SMH
 
Il Duce said:
@lindy - you're not describing what happened with SEC Clinton's server or the subsequent upgrades. In some cases the 'upgraded' information was because someone mentioned or shared newspaper articles that covered topics the IC would like classified.

I've had this experience frequently with national level agencies and some folks with certain INT backgrounds - they want to tell you a message is classified if you use one word, but if you replace it with another word that means the exact same thing you're somehow good to go.

I agree with the FBI's initial assessment - though it took them months to decide what should have been clear in weeks at most - SEC Clinton, and especially her staff, acted carelessly and foolishly given what was entrusted to them but nothing criminal happened. If we want to act like she and her staff are some sort of sleeper agents or traitors to the crown there are a shit-ton of GOs, congresspeople, and senior leaders (especially non-career ambassadors) who we ought to be going after as well.

I think being intense on security is great - I've tried to do it my whole career. However, I've also had the frequent experience - including those that negatively impacted my career - where leaders downplayed, cut-corners, and ignored regulatory guidance or best practices. HRC is not the devil on this stuff - she's just one of the pack.
Click to expand...

If the FBI said that of the emails they found (implying there could be others deleted) they found TS, S, and C info, to include SAP, I doubt many of those were "retro": the headers, footers, and paragraph markings were INTENTIONALLY removed as was its transfer from SIPR and JWICS. Even if the USG concedes the retro classification, the TS and S transmitted, stored, and disseminated to uncleared personnel are ALL grounds for at least permanent loss of access (e.g gross negligence) and at most felony conviction (e.g. intentional = treason).

These emails were INTENTIONALLY modified for transfer on NIPR, which flags classification markings to sysadmins in order to detect spillage.

I 100% agree with the fact she is just another of the pack. :(

I too have seen serious shit swept under the rug but was also personally involved in a case where an AF EOD airmen kept confidential weapons manuals in his garage. The consequences and penalties were very severe.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
  • Question Question
crossroads/mid life crisis
Replies
5
Views
504
Muppet
Muppet
R.Caerbannog
Economic shifts in Central America and China
2
Replies
28
Views
2K
R.Caerbannog
R.Caerbannog
Marauder06
"Selfie Culture"
2
Replies
27
Views
2K
AWP
AWP
Marauder06
Team Rubicon
Replies
7
Views
885
x SF med
x SF med
Blizzard
New Officers: Are We Getting Our Best and Brightest?
Replies
9
Views
960
Devildoc
Devildoc
Back
Top