[ExI] Sanders, Clinton and Trump
spike66 at att.net
Wed May 18 06:37:45 UTC 2016
From: extropy-chat [mailto:extropy-chat-bounces at lists.extropy.org] On Behalf Of Adrian Tymes
>…You have argued that Mrs. Clinton is a felon, and when I challenged you on that, you eventually came to see why she is apparently not (whatever the consequences for her staff)…
Adrian, the public domain comment instructing Jake Sullivan:
“If they can’t, turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure.”
refers to a document which exists on a secure server. She suggested, requested, ordered, or otherwise compelled a subordinate to get that information or document to her unsecured server. But she had no legal means of receiving that electronic communication or any classified electronic communication. She was instructing Sullivan to remove, alter, change or otherwise misrepresent the classification markings on a document, which is illegal as all hell.
Sullivan had a secure account, so he checked off the boxes every day, which acknowledged it is a felony under the laws controlling treason, to do exactly what Mrs. Clinton was referring to in that sentence. Mrs. Clinton was ordering or requesting a subordinate to commit a felony with that one sentence. How did the whole evidence-destruction team miss that? She should let them all rot in prison for incompetence. Had they just erased that one sentence, then she perhaps could be elected president and pardon the lot of them. If ours is a nation of law, she will need to join them over one sentence, the one missed piece of evidence which survive the deletion team.
It has been said that Hilliary Clinton had the authority to declassify documents. In theory she did, however she could not have done this, for to do so would require logging on to her secure server where the document exists and following the procedure (it requires passwords and codes, not just saying I declare this document unclassified.) She could not follow that procedure without logging on, and she couldn’t log on, for even she did know her passwords (doubtful) and did know how to do the procedure (doubtful) had she logged on, she would check off the boxes, which acknowledged she was committing crimes every day with that personal server.
>… I've yet to see your case for why she is a traitor, and I wonder if inspection of said case will have a similar result…
Mishandling classified information is controlled under the body of law which deals with treason. In the above case, she was instructing Sullivan to commit treason by passing classified information to an unauthorized location (her unsecured server.) This he could not do. It was not because he was unwilling to commit a crime for her. He made it clear it was physically impossible for him to carry out what she had requested. Otherwise he would have done so. My best guess is that he meant the talking points contained at least one photograph. I have no idea how something like that could be ported across besides sneaking a camera into the SCIF, but doing that means doing time if you are caught. If he had been caught and then it came out that he was doing it to pass it to Mrs. Clinton, both would be serving time.
>…If this is your case, it makes no sense. Each of those things you listed may be a breach of law & security (emphasis: "may"; the FBI's determining if they are), but treason requires actively betraying one's country…
Ja. Intentionally mishandling classified information, as in the Sullivan case, is intentionally mishandling information, which is actively betraying one’s country.
>…In other words, if she is a traitor, to whom was she betraying the US to?
We don’t know all of it yet. But we know that Mrs. Clinton made a copy of the contents of her server after her staff helped wipe the evidence, and gave it to her attorney. He was not cleared. She knew at the time it contained TS, for she had already been told so by the organizations which had classified it to start with and determined that they had not declassified it (so the State Department could not have declassified it even if they had wanted to (no agency can declassify a document another agency classified (they wouldn’t have the necessary access codes to do that even if they tried.)))
>…Everyone directly and intentionally aided by each of those steps (whatever the unintended consequences) would seem to be part of the US, and not an enemy of the country…
Ja, OK I see why we are talking past each other.
In the case of classified information, it does not need to be an identified enemy of the country, only an unauthorized person. Jeffery Sterling is serving time right now for passing classified info to New York Times reporter James Risen. When he was caught and the Feds demanded all the email he had passed, he deleted exactly one yoga routine. Busted! He probably would have served time anyway for leaking the info. But the attempted cover up, it was soooo game over man. Furthermore, Sterling is not Mrs. Clinton. Equal, but not as equal as Mrs. Clinton.
>… Absent some specific enemy of the US that she was working with, there is no treason there…
James Risen has not been identified as an enemy of the state; only a reporter who is not in the echo-chamber.
This whole case is so downright bizarre, had it been fiction it would be too implausible to even be entertaining fantasy. A Secretary of State had no legal means of sending or receiving classified information. Absurd! Everything any Secretary of State does is at least sensitive, perhaps even including the actual literal yoga, if there is any of that at all. A Secretary of State must be able to communicate to do her job.
So what really happened here? My theory is that Mrs. Clinton just disregarded the entire body of law which governed the office she was occupying and the job she was assigned but apparently not performing. She must have somehow convinced herself that law doesn’t apply to her. She was wrong. It does. Had she just handed over the server with everything on there so we could verify that there was no illegal activity, this would have all gone away. Had Nixon not erased those 18 minutes of audio, he would have skated as well, then could have pardoned his staff who did serve time.
On 4 May 2015, former president uttered the comment “There’s one set of rules for us, and another set for everybody else.” We know. How well we know. We are working to fix that Bill. Your wife is working to keep it broken. The double standard at play here is so glaring I need dark sunglasses.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the extropy-chat