Mar-A-Lago Raid

[Gordon_4]

Well sure, I'm not arguing that what she did was wise.

Hosting a private email server in your cupboard and allowing official government correspondence and information on it in way that contravenes the most basic tenants if IT Security, information security and good governance is unwise in the same way attempting to eat the Eiffel Tower is difficult.

Just that those who wanted her jailed for this are being tremendous hypocrites now in acting like it's no big thing when Trump does it.

I agree.

And... well, for my intents and purposes, I think it's fair to consider "unclassified" and "not classified" to be synonyms.

Your purposes and intents aren’t relevant to various laws and policies that govern the control, classification and dissemination of government data. They matter, and to those laws, unclassified and not classified are NOT the same.

 

[Silvanus]

Hosting a private email server in your cupboard and allowing official government correspondence and information on it in way that contravenes the most basic tenants if IT Security, information security and good governance is unwise in the same way attempting to eat the Eiffel Tower is difficult.

Do you consider improperly storing unclassified documents and taking home documents with higher classification status to be equal in severity, merely because both are bad?

Your purposes and intents aren’t relevant to various laws and policies that govern the control, classification and dissemination of government data. They matter, and to those laws, unclassified and not classified are NOT the same.

OK, "unclassified" then. This naming convention is pointlessly confusing and self-contradictory and doesn't really affect the substance of my point.

 

[tstorm823]

Well, there's a bit of a key difference that isn't quite clear from that passage-- those designations was made afterwards. Most documents determined to contain classified information were not marked classified until the FBI investigation. A few were (my mistake), though they were also apparently not clearly marked as such, lacking the headers and footers they should've had.

There's an entire section in the quoted passage dedicated to making that clear. Is that insufficient for you?

Well sure, I'm not arguing that what she did was wise. Just that those who wanted her jailed for this are being tremendous hypocrites now in acting like it's no big thing when Trump does it.

You mean the people who want Trump jailed now when they hand wave Clinton are tremendous hypocrites? To be clear, I don't think trying to jail either of these people of this is a good idea. But at least the people who say now it's not a big deal for Trump have the benefit of hindsight. They can say "if they didn't arrest Clinton, they shouldn't arrest Trump." People who think only Trump of the two should suffer consequences are asking for the application of law to be actively biased against their enemies.

 

[Trunkage]

There's an entire section in the quoted passage dedicated to making that clear. Is that insufficient for you?

You mean the people who want Trump jailed now when they hand wave Clinton are tremendous hypocrites? To be clear, I don't think trying to jail either of these people of this is a good idea. But at least the people who say now it's not a big deal for Trump have the benefit of hindsight. They can say "if they didn't arrest Clinton, they shouldn't arrest Trump." People who think only Trump of the two should suffer consequences are asking for the application of law to be actively biased against their enemies.

May I point out that Clinton was still a politician when she sent these emails

Trump is not. He took the documents and pretended he owns them after he left office.

Unless Clinton was keeping these emails for herself without permission from the Records Department, I dont find this a good analogy. She wasn't stealing. She was doing poor cybersecurity

 

[Silvanus]

There's an entire section in the quoted passage dedicated to making that clear. Is that insufficient for you?

Your passage has a section about how 2000 papers contained information that was upclassified later. It does not make clear that even the majority of the remaining 30,000 documents were not marked classified until later.

You mean the people who want Trump jailed now when they hand wave Clinton are tremendous hypocrites? To be clear, I don't think trying to jail either of these people of this is a good idea. But at least the people who say now it's not a big deal for Trump have the benefit of hindsight. They can say "if they didn't arrest Clinton, they shouldn't arrest Trump." People who think only Trump of the two should suffer consequences are asking for the application of law to be actively biased against their enemies.

Except for the fact that Trump's actions concerned far more documents marked at a higher classification.

Those who believe Clinton should be jailed, and Trump not, are believing that a lesser crime should be punished and a more severe crime should not be. Those who believe Trump should be jailed, and Clinton not, are believing the opposite.

(For what it's worth, in a perfect world I'd want both of them jailed, though not for this).

 

[tstorm823]

Except for the fact that Trump's actions concerned far more documents marked at a higher classification.

For Clinton, they scoured 30,000 total emails and found 110 emails in 52 email chains with classified information.
8 chains had top secret information
36 had secret information
8 had confidential information

For Trump, they scoured 11,000 documents and found 103 documents in like a dozen boxes with classified information.
18 were marked top secret
54 were marked secret
31 were marked confidential

You can't seriously think the scale here is meaningfully different.

May I point out that Clinton was still a politician when she sent these emails

Trump is not. He took the documents and pretended he owns them after he left office.

Unless Clinton was keeping these emails for herself without permission from the Records Department, I dont find this a good analogy. She wasn't stealing. She was doing poor cybersecurity

Trump wasn't stealing. He was taking his work home with him and not returning it later.

May I point out that Trump was allowed to take his work home with him when he was president, where Clinton was never allowed to have that private server in the first place. Trump's was gross negligence, but Clinton's was actively and deliberately mishandling government information.

 

[Gordon_4]

May I point out that Trump was allowed to take his work home with him when he was president

TS/SCI material is not allowed outside its controlled environment except in very specific circumstances. It would be allowed to travel to the Oval Office for the President's review, escorted by an appropriately cleared officer. The President may be able to read the material at their leisure, and I'm sure if circumstances were extenuating enough appropriate storage at the White House could be arranged if the material were required to stay. But again there are still procedures and approvals required to facilitate this.

None of that shit had any business being in Mar-A-Lago. Saying "I forgot" is an acceptable excuse when you don't buy milk on the way home, it is not appropriate here. And if former President Trump wanted to avoid the quite correct shitstorm he now faces, he should have given it all back before the FBI had to issue a subpoena. The amount of (almost literal) get out of jail free cards they tossed his way with this material is actually quite astounding.

 

[Silvanus]

For Clinton, they scoured 30,000 total emails and found 110 emails in 52 email chains with classified information.
8 chains had top secret information
36 had secret information
8 had confidential information

For Trump, they scoured 11,000 documents and found 103 documents in like a dozen boxes with classified information.
18 were marked top secret
54 were marked secret
31 were marked confidential

You can't seriously think the scale here is meaningfully different.

And in Clinton's, 3 had classification markings, and 0 were properly and clearly marked.

You can't seriously think it isn't meaningfully different. One had 103 clear markings literally telling them it's highly classified. The other had 3, which were buried.

Trump wasn't stealing. He was taking his work home with him and not returning it later.

You have to be joking. Have to be. This is like a line from a Monty Python sketch.

 

[BrawlMan]

You have to be joking. Have to be. This is like a line from a Monty Python sketch.

You forget that this is another mindless puppet sucking the dick of their "God". Making any excuse imaginable.

 

[Cheetodust]

Trump wasn't stealing. He was taking his work home with him and not returning it later.

Ah man, you're not even trying anymore.

 

[BrawlMan]

Ah man, you're not even trying anymore.

Hey Cheeto! How have you been? I have not seen you in a long while!

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

Trump wasn't stealing. He was taking his work home with him and not returning it later.

If you're going to be a clown, could you at least be an entertaining one?

 

[SilentPony]

If you're going to be a clown, could you at least be an entertaining one?

Speak for yourself. Tstorm is a great class clown. Everything he says is either factually wrong and he doesn't care, or an incorrect interpretation of a single fact, and then he doubles down by pooping himself. It great!


Also can someone explain this special master request? I've been reading the news and Im not sure I get how its supposed to work. Usually its for when a law office is raided and they go over documents from clients unrelated to the search. But Trump isn't a lawyer, and it seems like they're asking for someone who executive privilege level access to review these...so a president? Obama? Biden? Trump himself? And I dont get why this judge is being asked for this ruling, she's not the judge on the case. She's just some random judge Trump's team went to. What's her standing? Why does she have jurisdiction on this case?

 

[davidmc1158]

Speak for yourself. Tstorm is a great class clown. Everything he says is either factually wrong and he doesn't care, or an incorrect interpretation of a single fact, and then he doubles down by pooping himself. It great!


Also can someone explain this special master request? I've been reading the news and Im not sure I get how its supposed to work. Usually its for when a law office is raided and they go over documents from clients unrelated to the search. But Trump isn't a lawyer, and it seems like they're asking for someone who executive privilege level access to review these...so a president? Obama? Biden? Trump himself? And I dont get why this judge is being asked for this ruling, she's not the judge on the case. She's just some random judge Trump's team went to. What's her standing? Why does she have jurisdiction on this case?

As I understand it, the Special Master is simply someone of appropriate security clearance who is both neutral to both parties and acceptable to both parties as well. They are meant to look through the documents before the FBI does and set aside anything which would be protected by attorney-client privilege and the like.

The judge that the Trump team went to is apparently a Trump appointee who really has no standing and has nothing to do with the case. They just thought they could get a loyalist to intervene on their behalf, I guess. Her ability to rule in this case is one of those things that will have to get shaken out in the court system, I think. Most judges do NOT like other judges poking their noses into cases they aren't associated with, especially when it is not through the appeals process.

EDIT: Just because I came across this just after posting and it seems relevant.

 

[SilentPony]

As I understand it, the Special Master is simply someone of appropriate security clearance who is both neutral to both parties and acceptable to both parties as well. They are meant to look through the documents before the FBI does and set aside anything which would be protected by attorney-client privilege and the like.

The judge that the Trump team went to is apparently a Trump appointee who really has no standing and has nothing to do with the case. They just thought they could get a loyalist to intervene on their behalf, I guess. Her ability to rule in this case is one of those things that will have to get shaken out in the court system, I think. Most judges do NOT like other judges poking their noses into cases they aren't associated with, especially when it is not through the appeals process.

Oh okay, yeah I was wondering if this was just naked judicial corruption, and yup. Just an attempt to find evidence of Jared's leaks.

 

[Trunkage]

For Clinton, they scoured 30,000 total emails and found 110 emails in 52 email chains with classified information.
8 chains had top secret information
36 had secret information
8 had confidential information

For Trump, they scoured 11,000 documents and found 103 documents in like a dozen boxes with classified information.
18 were marked top secret
54 were marked secret
31 were marked confidential

You can't seriously think the scale here is meaningfully different.

Trump wasn't stealing. He was taking his work home with him and not returning it later.

May I point out that Trump was allowed to take his work home with him when he was president, where Clinton was never allowed to have that private server in the first place. Trump's was gross negligence, but Clinton's was actively and deliberately mishandling government information.

The scale is not important. It's a different type of issue

Laziness/not understanding computer security is not stealing. Trump, as president, was known to do the exact thing with emails as Clinton. He emails from private hosts, not from protected ones

Regardless, this should be a 'get your act together' or 'remove you from position' response. Ban Trump and Clinton from having a privste email account at the extreme. Not a jail thing. I'm pretty sure I said this at the time about Trump. I wouldn't claim that poor decision from Trump as the same as this situation

And please don't. You know its stealing. Otherwise Julian Assange wouldn't be so worried about coming back to America. Taking a pen from work is still stealing. It's just not worth being charged over. Stealing 11 secret herb and spices documents is worth charging someone over (and KFC has done that mulitple time). This could be too.

If you want to go on about 'it not worth being charged', that's fine. I would have had much more respect for Trump if he put all this on wiki leaks. But he didn't. It looks like he did this for his own benefit.

 

[tstorm823]

TS/SCI material is not allowed outside its controlled environment except in very specific circumstances.

SCI material is handled in specific facilities. TS isn't necessarily. The two can be written together as a clearance designation because the same process is used to grant TS and SCI clearances. Something labeled "TS/SCI" doesn't actually tell you that there is an SCI document inside.

 

[Cheetodust]

Hey Cheeto! How have you been? I have not seen you in a long while!

Hey man! Doing good, just had to finish up school. Hope you're well.

 

[Schadrach]

And in Clinton's, 3 had classification markings, and 0 were properly and clearly marked.

It's apparently difficult to do proper document control on documents on a private server you don't control. I. am. shocked.

To be clear here, lock em both up. Based on what we know, Trump for longer.

Trump/Clinton for Prison 2024. Cause it'll take at least that long to get through the courts.

 

[Casual Shinji]

So Trump fans, can you tell us why a president would steal up to 11.000 classified documents and why this is totally normal?

Dude, you're asking people who were already beyond the pale 2 years ago.