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

[BPPLEE]

@RDKirk I picked one example of about a dozen posts I read that appeared to indicate your position on the matter.

The other posts don't substantially deviate from what I would describe as generally mild defense of Hillary and uninterest in her prosecution.

If I was trying to play "gotcha" there's other posts which would have been better.



Those aren't the issue here...classified information on classified documents isn't something remarkable.



At the time? Sure...but how about now? How much would you devalue that intel given the time that had passed between the dates and it being made public?

We're drifting off my point....you didn't seem to be in favor of Hillary being prosecuted. Hillary "took home" vast numbers of classified documents and information and then did her best to scrub the evidence of her crime. She didn't even have a choice in declassifying the information.

It appears to be an issue Trump simply dropped...to avoid any further division in the US. Unfortunately, he didn't know wayyy back then, division was the plan for the left for the next 4 years.

By her own words we could have charged Hillary with matters like....

1. Violation of government policy regarding the securing of classified information. It doesn't matter what personal security her private server had....it's not a government server.
2. Destruction of evidence during an official investigation of matters of national security. #1 would ensure she never holds office...#2 here should ensure prison time.
3. Dereliction of duty, violating her oath of office, impeding an official investigation, etc.

It's literally a laundry list...I wouldn't even have to interrogate her....I could just use her own statements.

And again, it's not because I think she should go to jail...I don't. I'm aware of how these things work. I'm aware that even Top Secret documents are getting balled up and chucked into the trash, and a garbage man who knew where to look could find them. The reason being no more significant than a shredder not working and not wanting to walk down the hall to one that does.

That's the reality of it.

That's why I'm saying it really really needs to be more than just procedural. It's gotta be that he was using it for nefarious deals or sharing or something.

That's the evidence they need....that's what they gotta show the public. If they don't, you know how this will look.

I would be surprised if they had anything more than a process crime on Trump

 

[RDKirk]

@RDKirk I picked one example of about a dozen posts I read that appeared to indicate your position on the matter.

The other posts don't substantially deviate from what I would describe as generally mild defense of Hillary and uninterest in her prosecution.

IOW, you didn't find a post from me declaring that she should not be prosecuted.

But thanks for all the research. I'm flattered.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I would be surprised if they had anything more than a process crime on Trump

I'm not going to assume...I have no idea.

I'm really just concerned about how it looks.

 

[Ana the Ist]

IOW, you didn't find a post from me declaring that she should not be prosecuted.

I'm not trying to prove a negative.

I disproved your claim. There's a wide difference between the two events, despite them being substantially the same, in your mind.

These are two officials with access to classified documents they took home.

They aren't exactly the same....but it's close enough for a comparison.

 

[Ana the Ist]

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.

I can recall her statements made under investigation. You can look them up.

There's multiple instances of the facts contradicting her statements....under investigation.

We're talking about the head of the State Department here....not some low level neophyte who goofed up. There's no way she was unaware she violated not only procedures which can get her 10 years in jail
...but by destroying evidence much longer.

I don't think she has that many decades left and in cases wherein we would give someone the maximum....I would think that a lifelong politician who has regularly handled classified information....it seems like the right time to impose maximums.

Even if you suppose that Comey should have prosecuted, it wouldn't have come with anything close to that level of punishment.

A single mishandling of Top Secret information carries a 10 year maximum.

Does that typically happen? No.

It would really only happen if we had good reason to consider she did this on purpose, placed people in danger, or disclosed this information to people she shouldn't.

Well, we know she did this on purpose. She created a server. She told people to email her there. Her excuse was that she didn't like government servers (which would be slower because of volume) and it was easier to just send it all to one address....regardless of if it were work or personal.

I fully understand that it's probably more annoying, more difficult, more inconvenient to use the government server....it's also easily subjected to all the rules she's supposed to follow. The creation of the server, address, and its use in violation of policy are all crimes. If some guy with some pointless job like fetching coffee and making spreadsheets had done something like this, they would turn him inside out. She's the head of the State Department.

If she wanted to use one server, one address, out of convenience....we would have to start from the assumption that all of her work emails, classified or otherwise, went to that server.

Fortunately, she turned over the server, they found all the emails, and realized it was all harmless stuff like yoga and wedding planning.

Psyche. That would have been a short investigation that could have been cleared in weeks....not months. Her server had harmless emails....but it wasn't enough to account for her time in office.

Her server was wiped of incriminating evidence.

That's why the FBI had to go through the emails of everyone under her (a lot of people, a lot of emails, an investigation that took months). What still existed, what still remained, what was recovered.....people outside of that investigation probably won't know about until Hillary has died.

The idea though....that she didn't know she was violating procedure is ridiculous. She withstood 8 Benghazi investigations like a brick wall....and now I'm supposed to believe that the whole time, she was actually severely mentally handicapped and not someone deeply acquainted with the rules regarding classified information?

Because that's more or less the picture you're painting here. A very smart, very tough, career politician capable of mounting a defense of her actions in a situation like Benghazi.....multiple times....

And yet when it comes to basic procedure regarding classified information....she decides to skip it, set up her own server, and pretend she doesn't know she can get a decade in jail for just doing that.

We don't have to go over anything else....just explain how you reconcile that?

Every time she received classified information over that server is another count. Another 10 years she could do in jail.

You might think why risk it? Why do that to yourself?

And I would remind you that she was appointed by Obama, who can squash the investigation, pardon her, or otherwise exempt her from the rules regarding those procedures. Why wouldn't she think she would get away with it?

Do you even remember her response to the Senator (Maybe congressman? I don't remember) who asked if she had ever wiped her servers???

I'm paraphrasing here but it was something like....

"Do you mean like wiping it with a cloth?"

That's the same person. The same one who was capable of justifying every action regarding Benghazi no matter how hard they scrutinized it.

Just explain that. Tell me how you reconcile those two women named Hillary Clinton.

"I can defend every detail, every response, every decision during a high stakes coordinated attack on a US embassy by terrorists."

"Server? Like the lady that brings you dinner? Wiping? You mean like dusting it off? I'm just a humble public servant that doesn't know anything about this computery stuff or the rules I'm supposed to follow regarding classified information....you can just let this slide, can't you?"

These are two very different responses....I'm curious how you reconcile them.

Because we both know that she set up the server for work....that's her own explanation.

We also know that a lot of emails had to be recovered from the people who worked under her and weren't recovered from her server.

We don't even have to get into the content of those emails, why they had mysteriously disappeared from her server, or what classified information Comey was willing to share with the public.

We can keep it to those two facts and her own words regarding them.

 

[BPPLEE]

I can recall her statements made under investigation. You can look them up.

There's multiple instances of the facts contradicting her statements....under investigation.

We're talking about the head of the State Department here....not some low level neophyte who goofed up. There's no way she was unaware she violated not only procedures which can get her 10 years in jail
...but by destroying evidence much longer.

I don't think she has that many decades left and in cases wherein we would give someone the maximum....I would think that a lifelong politician who has regularly handled classified information....it seems like the right time to impose maximums.



A single mishandling of Top Secret information carries a 10 year maximum.

Does that typically happen? No.

It would really only happen if we had good reason to consider she did this on purpose, placed people in danger, or disclosed this information to people she shouldn't.

Well, we know she did this on purpose. She created a server. She told people to email her there. Her excuse was that she didn't like government servers (which would be slower because of volume) and it was easier to just send it all to one address....regardless of if it were work or personal.

I fully understand that it's probably more annoying, more difficult, more inconvenient to use the government server....it's also easily subjected to all the rules she's supposed to follow. The creation of the server, address, and its use in violation of policy are all crimes. If some guy with some pointless job like fetching coffee and making spreadsheets had done something like this, they would turn him inside out. She's the head of the State Department.

If she wanted to use one server, one address, out of convenience....we would have to start from the assumption that all of her work emails, classified or otherwise, went to that server.

Fortunately, she turned over the server, they found all the emails, and realized it was all harmless stuff like yoga and wedding planning.

Psyche. That would have been a short investigation that could have been cleared in weeks....not months. Her server had harmless emails....but it wasn't enough to account for her time in office.

Her server was wiped of incriminating evidence.

That's why the FBI had to go through the emails of everyone under her (a lot of people, a lot of emails, an investigation that took months). What still existed, what still remained, what was recovered.....people outside of that investigation probably won't know about until Hillary has died.

The idea though....that she didn't know she was violating procedure is ridiculous. She withstood 8 Benghazi investigations like a brick wall....and now I'm supposed to believe that the whole time, she was actually severely mentally handicapped and not someone deeply acquainted with the rules regarding classified information?

Because that's more or less the picture you're painting here. A very smart, very tough, career politician capable of mounting a defense of her actions in a situation like Benghazi.....multiple times....

And yet when it comes to basic procedure regarding classified information....she decides to skip it, set up her own server, and pretend she doesn't know she can get a decade in jail for just doing that.

We don't have to go over anything else....just explain how you reconcile that?

Every time she received classified information over that server is another count. Another 10 years she could do in jail.

You might think why risk it? Why do that to yourself?

And I would remind you that she was appointed by Obama, who can squash the investigation, pardon her, or otherwise exempt her from the rules regarding those procedures. Why wouldn't she think she would get away with it?

Do you even remember her response to the Senator (Maybe congressman? I don't remember) who asked if she had ever wiped her servers???

I'm paraphrasing here but it was something like....

"Do you mean like wiping it with a cloth?"

That's the same person. The same one who was capable of justifying every action regarding Benghazi no matter how hard they scrutinized it.

Just explain that. Tell me how you reconcile those two women named Hillary Clinton.

"I can defend every detail, every response, every decision during a high stakes coordinated attack on a US embassy by terrorists."

"Server? Like the lady that brings you dinner? Wiping? You mean like dusting it off? I'm just a humble public servant that doesn't know anything about this computery stuff or the rules I'm supposed to follow regarding classified information....you can just let this slide, can't you?"

These are two very different responses....I'm curious how you reconcile them.

Because we both know that she set up the server for work....that's her own explanation.

We also know that a lot of emails had to be recovered from the people who worked under her and weren't recovered from her server.

We don't even have to get into the content of those emails, why they had mysteriously disappeared from her server, or what classified information Comey was willing to share with the public.

We can keep it to those two facts and her own words regarding them.

Likely that the investigation didn't go any further because Obama sent her classified information on her private server.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Likely that the investigation didn't go any further because Obama sent her classified information on her private server.

I don't need to speculate. As that poster pointed out with Colin Powell, this sort of thing happens far more often than most people realize. I don't know if she was using that office in some way she shouldn't have....I can't prove it.

That's the sort of moral standard the left widely accepted in 2016 when Hillary ran for the Presidency.

Now, I get it....it doesn't look good from the outside....but it doesn't really bother me. If she was caught selling secrets to Saudis or something....by all means, throw her in jail.

But she wasn't.

If they have something like that on Trump....fine, throw him in jail.

But if they don't....they should announce they won't be pursuing any charges asap.

 

[Sparagmos]

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.

Was that reply meant for someone else? It’s not related to my comment, addressing you saying they’ve been investigating for 5 years or whatever. You’re kind of all over the place here.

They’ve always been able to “do the same” to us, that is investigate us for crimes and obtain search warrants with evidence. People want to see that politicians aren’t above the law and, for the most part, are happy he is being treated like any of us would be under the same circumstances.

 

[Ana the Ist]

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?

Obviously that's not a secure location.

If that's the issue....then the issue has been solved.

Right?

 

[JosephZ]

If that's the issue....then the issue has been solved.

The issue now is who has already seen some of these highly sensitive documents? Were copies made? Are there still some at other locations? Did Trump pass along any sensitive documents or information to others?

 

[Ana the Ist]

The issue now is who has already seen some of these highly sensitive documents?

Uh huh.

Were copies made?

That's not a real question....there's always copies made. That's one of those movie questions. The idea that Trump personally received the only copy of highly sensitive information and then just kept it is hilarious.

Are there still some at other locations? Did Trump pass along any sensitive documents or information to others?

Nope....haven't you ever seen Men In Black? They just flash every president once he leaves office. His memory is erased, and he gets a couple of guards as decoys just to throw off foreign countries.

The only way to be certain is to call MI6, ask for M, and tell her to put James Bond on the job.

You do realize that at some point, some people have to be trusted with the information they are given. That point, was the day Trump got elected. I understand that you don't trust him....that's ok.

The problem is that if he's somehow treated significantly different from all those previous presidents....and this is some shallow ploy to remove political opponents....there's almost certainly going to be a bad reaction to that.

 

[BPPLEE]

Uh huh.



That's not a real question....there's always copies made. That's one of those movie questions. The idea that Trump personally received the only copy of highly sensitive information and then just kept it is hilarious.



Nope....haven't you ever seen Men In Black? They just flash every president once he leaves office. His memory is erased, and he gets a couple of guards as decoys just to throw off foreign countries.

The only way to be certain is to call MI6, ask for M, and tell her to put James Bond on the job.

You do realize that at some point, some people have to be trusted with the information they are given. That point, was the day Trump got elected. I understand that you don't trust him....that's ok.

The problem is that if he's somehow treated significantly different from all those previous presidents....and this is some shallow ploy to remove political opponents....there's almost certainly going to be a bad reaction to that.

I think we need to get ready for a bad reaction. They subpoenaed the video from Mar a Lago so they could do more fishing. I think the plan is to indict Trump for something.

 

[Brihaha]

I think we need to get ready for a bad reaction. They subpoenaed the video from Mar a Lago so they could do more fishing. I think the plan is to indict Trump for something.

Good, trump likely will be indicted on more than one charge. That is encouraging to anticipate. The folks who have unbridled political passion for trump need to separate themselves from the guy sooner or later. They absolutely cannot accept that trump is bad news. Hate stirs trouble. Love forgives all. Trump doesn't forgive. He only seems to inspire hate. It needs to end soon.

 

[JosephZ]

Uh huh.

He apparently shared classified maps among other things with a washed up singer while in office. It's not much of a stretch that he shared sensitive materials with others since leaving, perhaps several others.

 

[durangodawood]

I think we need to get ready for a bad reaction. They subpoenaed the video from Mar a Lago so they could do more fishing. I think the plan is to indict Trump for something.

"The plan".

The only plan yet was to retrieve classified materials. If that leads to an indictment, so be it.

 

[Ana the Ist]

I think we need to get ready for a bad reaction. They subpoenaed the video from Mar a Lago so they could do more fishing. I think the plan is to indict Trump for something.

The video of the raid?

 

[RDKirk]

Obviously that's not a secure location.

If that's the issue....then the issue has been solved.

Right?

There is some indication--or it might just be speculation--that is all the FBI wanted: To get those documents into proper storage.

And that would be the mindset of a typical security bureaucrat's mindset. He would not be so much concerned about legal consequences, but the thought that some classified material was out there improperly stored would drive him nuts.

 

[JosephZ]

The video of the raid?

DOJ Subpoenaed 60 days of video from inside Mar a Lago. It shows people going in and out of the locked storage area and boxes being moved in and out as well.

Mar-a-Lago footage subpoenaed by DoJ sparks speculation Trump may still have some classified documents

 

[Ana the Ist]

He apparently shared classified maps among other things with a washed up singer while in office. It's not much of a stretch that he shared sensitive materials with others since leaving, perhaps several others.

Oh absolutely.

I even remember when he told highly classified info to the PM of Japan in public and everyone around him heard it.

Of course, it's not like you can arrest a president for disclosure of his own information.

But it's been almost long enough for more elections so perhaps he's been up to something.

Have they arrested anyone in his orbit?

 

[Pommer]

Obviously that's not a secure location.

If that's the issue....then the issue has been solved.

Right?

Right.
If someone were to take a Patek Philippe watch from Cartier’s without authorization I’m sure the matter would be overlooked if the watch was sent back.
Yep.