Oh boy - I wondered what this whole Mar A Lago thing was about

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,126
20,160
US
✟1,440,518.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I mean, if the worry is that he would potentially have access to information from during the 4 years when he was president is the concern here....

Yeah...so does every president. The only way to ensure that information is never misused is to kill every 2nd term president upon leaving office.

I get people don't trust him, I get people believe he's crooked or dangerous, and I'm sure some people simply don't see him as a former president....

On top of all that, I'm certain a lot of people don't want him to run again. I don't either.

The thing is though, none of those are justification for any of this. This has to be something bigger than the documents themselves.

We have the counter example from very very recently....Hillary Clinton.

It's not a question of "if she had classified information at home". She definitely did. She admitted to it. She had zero ability to declassify documents....or change rules around their distribution. When asked to turn these things over....she wiped her hard drives electronically as best she could and then took a hammer to them.

The FBI director said something to the effect of "no reasonable prosecutor would press charges" but he would "fire her" if she were an agent of his.

Trump’s actually in a less egregious position because he was the final authority on matters of classification in the executive branch. People act like he should be executed for something that so far....appears less criminal than what Hillary did. I don't recall any democrats on here saying she should have to even drop from the race....let alone face charges.

I said back then that Clinton should have been prosecuted.

In fact, I have said it again...in this thread...to you.
 
Upvote 0

Hank77

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2015
26,368
15,457
✟1,099,038.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Oh and what are those "safeguards" that limit the President in his abilities to declassify information?
Not all information but the most sensitive info. for national security.
I don't know the specifics of who's involved. One way that has been mentioned here is info. that is protected by legislation. RD Kirk, I think can explain that better than I can. But here's an article with lots of info. written by someone who has been in the government.

Procedures for declassification of materials are complicated. However, the president has ultimate declassification authority and may declassify anything at any time, subject to certain provisions of the Atomic Energy Act.
Here’s how government documents are classified to keep sensitive information safe > News > USC Dornsife

Because the president has the authority to declassify that doesn't mean he has the authority to just skip the procedures needed to declassify. First, a written memo signed by the president protects both the nation and the president. I think most people can see how.
 
Upvote 0

Hank77

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2015
26,368
15,457
✟1,099,038.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Now, I guess you're claiming this was a lie and he had people digging through her private life the entire time....yet I don't recall any FBI raids on her house.

Got any evidence of this supposed investigation?
Vox - By Ian Millhiser Oct 22, 2019, 8:10am EDT
Last week, Congress received a brief, nine-page report from the State Department, which summarizes the department’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal email account to conduct work business while she was secretary of state. The report can be fairly summarized in two sentences: She shouldn’t have done that. But it wasn’t that big of a deal.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: DaisyDay
Upvote 0

Hank77

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2015
26,368
15,457
✟1,099,038.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Well, as far as the CIA goes...I would imagine the safeguard is the CIA itself. The president can request the names, and the CIA would ask why, and if there's no need to know or suspicion the president intends to disclose that information.....he would probably receive a sheet heavily redacted that lacked the information requested.
Are you saying that the president doesn't have the authority to see all classified information? He can be stopped from obtaining that information?
How can he declassify what he can't see?
 
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,126
20,160
US
✟1,440,518.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Well, as far as the CIA goes...I would imagine the safeguard is the CIA itself. The president can request the names, and the CIA would ask why, and if there's no need to know or suspicion the president intends to disclose that information.....he would probably receive a sheet heavily redacted that lacked the information requested.

No, the president would get the information he asked for. If the Director of the CIA asked any questions at all, it would be to make sure he provided everything the president intended to ask for.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Hank77
Upvote 0

DaisyDay

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State
Jan 7, 2003
37,937
17,416
Finger Lakes
✟7,395.00
Country
United States
Faith
Unitarian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Trump has never even had a speeding ticket.
Trump never committed this particular crime, therefore he never committed any crime at all? Why do you people consider this worth repeating ad nauseum?
 
Upvote 0

RDKirk

Alien, Pilgrim, and Sojourner
Supporter
Mar 3, 2013
39,126
20,160
US
✟1,440,518.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
What does that mean and how does it relate to what Trump did?

That was just a big lie on Trump's part.

Obama did not take anything with him...the National Archives re-iterated that fact just last week. Obama's organization has earmarked a large block of documents, but they are all in the Archives.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

DaisyDay

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State
Jan 7, 2003
37,937
17,416
Finger Lakes
✟7,395.00
Country
United States
Faith
Unitarian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
No doubt there are many people in prison who never had a speeding ticket. Does he even have a driver’s license? Also, you, like us, have not seen the documents seized, therefore you cannot assert what was or wasn’t in those boxes.
Surprisingly he does have a driver’s license although I would be astounded if he’s driven himself anywhere in the last fifty years.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BPPLEE

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
9,546
3,371
60
Montgomery
✟137,002.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Vox - By Ian Millhiser Oct 22, 2019, 8:10am EDT
Last week, Congress received a brief, nine-page report from the State Department, which summarizes the department’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s use of a personal email account to conduct work business while she was secretary of state. The report can be fairly summarized in two sentences: She shouldn’t have done that. But it wasn’t that big of a deal.
It wasn't a big deal because of who did it.
 
Upvote 0

Sparagmos

Well-Known Member
Oct 19, 2018
8,632
7,319
52
Portland, Oregon
✟278,062.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
If the reports had ever been accurate Trump would have been convicted of something by now but 5 years of fishing and nothing to show for it.
We’re talking about something that occurred after he left office. That wasn’t five years ago.
 
Upvote 0

Hank77

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2015
26,368
15,457
✟1,099,038.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
It wasn't a big deal because of who did it.
Is that all you have to say? There's your proof that she was investigated again by the Trump admin. who wrote a report, and made a determination that didn't change anything.
 
Upvote 0

Valletta

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2020
7,958
2,883
Minnesota
✟207,863.00
Country
United States
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
We’re talking about something that occurred after he left office. That wasn’t five years ago.
The FBI could have had the documents anytime they wanted. They asked President Trump if he would put a larger lock on the storage room and he did. But they decided to break in, show the American people force, show that they can do the same to you if they don't like your politics.
 
Upvote 0

SimplyMe

Senior Veteran
Jul 19, 2003
9,612
9,330
the Great Basin
✟325,878.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Not really.

Yes, you did. For just one example, you make the claim, "it would have been completely justifiable to throw her in prison for the rest of her life." There is zero evidence to support this -- it is purely speculation. Even if you suppose that Comey should have prosecuted, it wouldn't have come with anything close to that level of punishment.

There is plenty more in your post that is pure assumption with no evidence to support your claims.

I understand it's been a few years....but this isn't quite correct.

I recall that she only used her private email.

I believe that is what I stated, that she used her private email. So not sure what you are saying that I am incorrect about.

It is also worth noting that while the State Department investigation found Sec. Clinton at fault for using a private email, it noted that it was a departmental problem and previous secretaries had similar issues; such as Sec. Powell (her predecessor) who also used a private email. Odd that we never hear people want him investigated for his use of a private server (and potential classified information sent on that private server).


Right....I'm actually certain that she sent out classified information but since everyone she's corresponding with is using a government address and likely following the rules, they would have been deleted from the server after a fixed time.

I understand that a lot of people don't understand in any real sense how the federal government works.

And that appears to include you. You do realize the State Department doesn't delete emails, instead, they archive emails after people leave the State Department -- they are required to retain them. As such, the FBI could request those emails and compare them against the emails from Sec. Clinton.

She lied. All classified information is marked even in email.

I'll agree, it is supposed to be, that doesn't mean it always is. In this case, reports of the investigation state the emails were not marked as Classified. In fact, from the reports, none of the emails had Classifications headers, as is required. There were a few, apparently three per the FBI, that were marked with a "(c)" to indicate classified information and that was the only indication that the information was classified -- easy to miss, particularly if you didn't know what that (c) meant (as Sec. Clinton claimed she did not).

The bulk of the emails with classified information, 2,093, were found to have retroactively marked classified -- meaning they were not classified at the time they were sent. Additionally, there was an email chain talking of a NY Times article on drones; allegedly the email discussion only spoke of the information available in the article but, because the CIA claims drones are classified, those are all marked as containing classified information -- despite the information being publicly available through numerous non-governmental sources.

So, no, it typically was not marked -- based on the reports from actual investigators, both at the State Department and the FBI.

She's the head of the State Department, she has detailed information on the movement of government officials in foreign countries....and that's the basic sort of classified information she would be receiving every day. I would estimate someone in her position gets at least 300 emails a day, and it would be extremely generous to imagine that maybe only 10% contain some level of classified information.

Except that most of the briefings you are talking about, such as movement of foreign officials, would be in person briefings -- not sent over email. And, again, you don't need to "estimate" or suppose anything; the numbers are available.

What can we rationally infer from that?

And, actually, I was wrong. In reviewing the information, the order to delete the emails predated the FBI order, by quite a bit. Instead, when she was preparing to archive older emails for the State Department in 2014, roughly 30,000 emails were marked as personal correspondence and she gave the order to have them deleted. This was verified by the investigation.

The Server Administrator did not delete the emails in a timely manner and only got around to deleting them after Congress, for the Benghazi investigation, requested the records; so prior to the FBI requesting them.

What is more interesting is that the FBI recovered many of these deleted emails, though they have never (to my knowledge) ever stated the exact number recovered.

It's baffling that you can write this sentence after writing the previous one.

She used ,if I remember correctly, bleachbit, acidburn, and other data wiping programs to destroy unknown numbers of emails. Then the physical components were smashed with hammers.

So how did the FBI recover some of the deleted emails? Regardless, again, the FBI had access to "the other side" -- the servers where the emails sent to Hillary were sent from. Again, the State Department is required to retain emails -- so the FBI could go back and identify emails sent from the State Department servers. They had executed search warrants to get the emails sent from those that worked with Sec. Clinton. The FBI allegedly found no additional work related emails that Sec. Clinton did not turn over -- or it would have been something else Director Comey would have listed.

I have no doubt she turned over emails of a very insignificant and inconsequential nature.

So why did she turn over hundreds of emails that contained classified information, if she only turned over emails that were "very insignificant and inconsequential nature." This is pure projection on your part and not supported by any evidence, instead, the evidence that has been made public shows this is not true.

Again, the FBI never accused her of withholding pertinent emails -- that is something that Republicans did (but with no evidence for the claim). Again, they could check State Department servers, they recovered many of the deleted emails, yet the FBI never accused Sec. Clinton of withholding evidence. If she had, that would have been a crime they could, and would, have prosecuted.

Which is unsurprising.

Trump says he's not interested in pursuing case against Clinton

He did say in 2016 after all, that he wouldn't pursue anything against her....to avoid appearing divisive....for the good of the country.

Now, I guess you're claiming this was a lie and he had people digging through her private life the entire time....yet I don't recall any FBI raids on her house.

Got any evidence of this supposed investigation?

You mean besides the two articles I linked? The fact that it is easily verifiable that AG Sessions appointed John Huber to investigate Hillary, and he publicly stated that he did it at Trump's order? And why would the FBI raid her house, what grounds would they have used to get the search warrant?




Again, a remarkable statement. The definitive feature of a classified document, file, brief, Intel, etc is the fact that it contains classified information. If it wasn't properly labeled as such, one could excuse the person receiving it....but I've never seen that happen.

And yet, that is what was reported -- just three of the documents were properly marked with classified headers. Again, most of the emails that had classified information seem to have been classified only after the emails were sent. Some were like the drone emails, where they were discussing information from news reports but, despite not getting the information from classified sources, was technically classified information. But the majority of emails that discussed classified information were not marked properly (other than three), if at all, or were just marked with a "(c)" to indicate that information was classified.

Now, there's a exception to this called PII or Personel Identifying Information. A document can contain this....and not be classified, but there are still rules for that sort of information that would result in her justifiably being prosecuted for mishandling.

And you believe this???

Think about what you're asking me for....if I have evidence of classified information being shared in violation of law or policy under Hillary during her appointment to the State Department....you'd like it if I shared that with you.

Because I don't mind risking my career or life or perhaps I prefer to live in Moscow just to prove a point to internet strangers.

I'm not claiming I was standing over her shoulder when she opened her emails.

I'm simply aware of how these things work.

I'm not asking for classified information, which you should know. That doesn't preclude you from linking to stories that talk about the FBI investigation and the results of what they found. Did Dir. Comey have to divulge classified information when he gave his reports on the email investigation, particularly the part where he claimed she technically broke the law?

Would you like to take a guess at how many people have Top Secret clearance or SCI clearance?

Who does?

Who can declassify documents depends on who classified it. In the case of nuclear secrets, it appears to be Congress (The Atomic Energy Acts of 1946 and 1954).

If he wasn't president at the time he took possession of the documents....You're correct. I don't know who would possibly send him these things in Biden's administration......but if that's what you think happened, I'd wonder why.

I'm not saying he wasn't President when he received them, I'm saying he wasn't president for the last year and a half. Since he was no longer President he had no reason to be holding onto Presidential records, much less classified information.

This is a chart of the State Department.

View attachment 319734


That big square at the tippy top is where Hillary sat.

Now, I'm certain that some of those offices have almost no classified information. Many have some. A few will have more classified information than not.

So when I say thousands of classified emails....I'm really just trying to be generous. I'm giving what has to be a lowball estimate. An entry level person at the bottom of this Department probably gets on average 10% classified information.

Hillary wouldn't even be bothering with minor issues. It would be more realistic to imagine half of what she saw was classified.


They do.

....


Do you like movies?

You make all these assumptions and are trying to rationalize them. Rather than continuing to make assumptions you should actually look at what has been reported, what the FBI released about the investigation -- what was found. That is our difference, I'm trying to work off of what was actually found by investigators, you are going based on your own suppositions.


I'm not going by Huber....I'm going by Comey.

He didn't say there was nothing they could prosecute her on. He said he wouldn't.



No harm in waiting to see the evidence.

I'm going by both Huber and Comey. Comey did not say "they wouldn't" -- and it is more interesting that Comey was not the one who would make that determination, that belongs to the DoJ and the prosecutor overseeing the case. Comey can definitely send his recommendations but it isn't his decision.

Instead, the DoJ determined, prior to Comey discussing his conclusions, that the evidence did not exist to successfully prosecute Sec. Clinton -- and that is what Comey claimed. If the current FBI Director came out and stated these things against Trump, you'd argue that he was "poisoning the well" by offering his opinion that Trump had broken the law while at the same time saying they couldn't get a conviction despite the evidence.

Again, the DoJ determined that they were not going to prosecute Hillary, that the evidence would not support getting a guilty verdict (and this is what Comey stated). Now, you could write that off as "bias," that Obama's DoJ was not going to prosecute Hillary. The issue is, Huber then does the same thing -- he looks at that same evidence that "proved Hillary broke the law" (per Comey) and also decides not to prosecute. If she was that obviously guilty, as you've claimed, and broke laws that should have put her in jail for life -- why would Huber not have prosecuted, why would he have not done his job (which AG Sessions appointed him to)? The evidence does not support your claims and suppositions.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: DaisyDay
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

DaisyDay

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State
Jan 7, 2003
37,937
17,416
Finger Lakes
✟7,395.00
Country
United States
Faith
Unitarian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Upvote 0

Hank77

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Jun 26, 2015
26,368
15,457
✟1,099,038.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
It wasn't a big deal because of who did it.
Right now are you OK with the whole world having access to all the documents that Trump had at Mar-a-Lago? All, 35 boxes plus the leather binder/? of documents?
 
Upvote 0

DaisyDay

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State
Jan 7, 2003
37,937
17,416
Finger Lakes
✟7,395.00
Country
United States
Faith
Unitarian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
The establishment loved him too. Obama supporter
What "too"? He did it before Obama was on the scene. She was investigated, several times, while he got a free pass.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Hank77
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

BPPLEE

Well-Known Member
Apr 13, 2022
9,546
3,371
60
Montgomery
✟137,002.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Right now are you OK with the whole world having access to all the documents that Trump had at Mar-a-Lago? All, 35 boxes plus the leather binder/? of documents?
I don't know what was in them. Doesn't seem like the whole world had access to Trump's basement. But a lot of people can access a private server. Isn't that what happened to the DNC? Emails published on Wikileaks?
 
Upvote 0