Call transcript already Exonerates Trump

SimplyMe said:

No, that isn't what I stated. Calls are not classified, they start Unclassified. The are only moved to classified if classified information is actually discussed -- which does not typically occur with foreign leaders on phone calls.

Further, the server with calls that are held with foreign leaders is not classified. Very few government servers are "open" -- information tends to be kept private. Let's use, for example, IRS servers -- these are protected because of people's personal information that are held on these servers, however they are not "classified server," since tax returns are not classified information. Instead, they are subject to privacy laws and are protected accordingly.

The White House server where they keep calls with foreign heads of state is similar, it is not classified. Not being classified, however, does not mean it is "open" and that anyone can access it. Instead, it is protected to allow the many people who need to know -- again, those in the President's administration, the State Department, Intelligence services, etc. -- to be able to access calls where they need to know what was talked about while keeping those who don't need to know, and the general public, from being able to access the calls.

Click to expand...

The calls do not start unclassified. Unclassified means anyone can read it. You can't be trying to say that a call to a foreign leader regarding foreign policy is open to everyone until it's given a classification?

There are servers where the information is kept that are classified.

The president himself can classify something. There are a number of classifications that can be given. And the president among others has the ability to do so.

So you have knowledge as to exactly what happened in this instance. And I mean step by step knowledge of what was decided, who decided it and the reasons for it?

ChristianForCats said:

They are concernd about the facts that happened directly in their eyes and ears. There is no opinino in an experience someone had: what he heard on the phone, read in a text message or letter, saw at mettings, etc. The reaosn they are concerned is they knew what they witnessed was illegal.

Click to expand...

No they didn't know. It you read what they all have said, none of them said they believed it was illegal. They have shared "concerns" and concerns are opinions. And a number of them weren't even there.

ChristianForCats said:

Why do you think it is only speculation when we have proof of what they mean?

Click to expand...

You have no proof what the elipses mean or what is missing. It's speculation.

KCfromNC said:

Nope, that's not what is happening right now.

Click to expand...

Yes they are. They are being asked what they think.

The other part that's being missed is that Ukraine was alreading looking at investigating Burisma again.

Ukraine planned to reopen Biden investigation — months before Trump's call to Zelensky

Once again, Trump has a right to request an investigation into this whole corruption perhaps illegal actions during this whole deal with Biden and Burisma. There is enough suspicious dealings that indicate there was an investigation going on at the time when the prosecutor was fired because of Bidens demand.
Solomon: These once-secret memos cast doubt on Joe Biden's Ukraine story

rjs330 said:

The calls do not start unclassified. Unclassified means anyone can read it. You can't be trying to say that a call to a foreign leader regarding foreign policy is open to everyone until it's given a classification?

There are servers where the information is kept that are classified.

The president himself can classify something. There are a number of classifications that can be given. And the president among others has the ability to do so.

So you have knowledge as to exactly what happened in this instance. And I mean step by step knowledge of what was decided, who decided it and the reasons for it?

Click to expand...

Again, they start unclassified, even if they don't stay that way for long. Also, Unclassified does not mean "anyone can read it," that is simply false. I mentioned one example -- your tax returns which are kept by the IRS, your tax returns are not classified but they are kept on a secure server that has limited access. There is also information controlled under the Privacy Act; this would be any government agency records about a person, such as next years Census Records.

I can't claim I have personal knowledge of how the process works with these calls, what I know about their specific process is from things I've read. However, while I was in the Air Force I was a Network Security Officer for a Top Secret Computer Network -- so I have knowledge about the entire process, including protection of non-classified data, the procedures of classifying and unclassifying information, etc. And, yes, non-classified data is still protected, particularly if it has exemptions from the Freedom of Information Act and is governed by other laws (such as the Presidential Records Act).

The facts remain -- there were no reasons for that phone call (based on the transcript that was released) to be on a Classified server; that it was appears to be a violation of laws and regulations covering Classified Information. Further, Presidential phone calls are not automatically classified -- they are classified only if there is classified information discussed.

SimplyMe said:

Again, they start unclassified, even if they don't stay that way for long. Also, Unclassified does not mean "anyone can read it," that is simply false. I mentioned one example -- your tax returns which are kept by the IRS, your tax returns are not classified but they are kept on a secure server that has limited access. There is also information controlled under the Privacy Act; this would be any government agency records about a person, such as next years Census Records.

I can't claim I have personal knowledge of how the process works with these calls, what I know about their specific process is from things I've read. However, while I was in the Air Force I was a Network Security Officer for a Top Secret Computer Network -- so I have knowledge about the entire process, including protection of non-classified data, the procedures of classifying and unclassifying information, etc. And, yes, non-classified data is still protected, particularly if it has exemptions from the Freedom of Information Act and is governed by other laws (such as the Presidential Records Act).

The facts remain -- there were no reasons for that phone call (based on the transcript that was released) to be on a Classified server; that it was appears to be a violation of laws and regulations covering Classified Information. Further, Presidential phone calls are not automatically classified -- they are classified only if there is classified information discussed.

Click to expand...

Please prove your asurtion.

Aldebaran said:

No, you don't know that. Just because it's the main MSM narrative that they want people to believe doesn't mean you know it.

Click to expand...

There is no reason to think proof is just a media narrative. If there was no proof of it, nobody would say it's proof. Don't believe me? Read Bill Taylor's opening statements online and watch PBS on Wednesday at 10:00 a.m. He already told Congress what the missing words after the tirgger phrase are and that there is a word change from "Burisma" to "the company" in the same paragraph.

What is MSM?

rjs330 said:

The other part that's being missed is that Ukraine was alreading looking at investigating Burisma again.

Ukraine planned to reopen Biden investigation — months before Trump's call to Zelensky

Click to expand...

Nothing that happened betewen these two guys before January 20, 2017 should matter.A lot happened in the months, weeks, and days leading up to the morning of July 25. If Trump is telling the truth, everyone he ever hired did not.

rjs330 said:

Yes they are. They are being asked what they think.

Click to expand...

The testimony I was discussing regarded discussions of facts about the exclusion of various parts of the call from the transcript. No idea what you're talking about here, and since you're not telling us which testimony you want to discuss, I can't really figure out how to help your understanding.

rjs330 said:

The other part that's being missed is that Ukraine was alreading looking at investigating Burisma again.

Ukraine planned to reopen Biden investigation — months before Trump's call to Zelensky

Click to expand...

Please explain how this fact is relevant as a defense of Donald's actions. Specifically, please describe how the correct (and legal) response in this situation would be to try and trade a weapons deal to that country in exchange for them announcing an investigation into a political rival - timed to coincide with an election ad campaign about that same rival.

Seems like a weird response. If Donald actually thought that the Justice Department could help with a legitimate investigation, why fire off a bunch of Facebook ads instead? Something doesn't add up here.

rjs330 said:

Once again, Trump has a right to request an investigation into this whole corruption perhaps illegal actions

Click to expand...

Maybe he has the right. The problem is, he didn't. Instead, he asked for a press conference to go along with his ad campaign against a political rival.

KCfromNC said:

Maybe he has the right. The problem is, he didn't. Instead, he asked for a press conference to go along with his ad campaign against a political rival.

Click to expand...

That's your opinion.