• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her securit

zimmer

Educating the Ignorant
Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Dec 19, 2008
Messages
24,380
Reaction score
7,805
Location
Worldwide
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
The State Department has opened a formal inquiry into whether former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and her aides mishandled classified information while she was the nation’s top diplomat... Despite being under investigation, Clinton and her staffers still have security clearances to access sensitive government information.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, confirmed to Fox News the department’s formal inquiry.

State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her security clearance | Fox News
"...whether" she mishandled classified information??? It's a 2-tier justice system. That woman should be in jail serving time.

The sad thing in all this for Demokrats is it would likely end her chance at running for a 3rd term.
 
Re: State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her sec

Two things

Hilary should most definitely be serving jail time for mishandling classified information and should be revoked of her security clearance. However, just because Hilary Clinton presently has a security clearance it does not mean she can freely access classified information now that she is a private citizen who, as far as I know, is unemployed. If she were to pick up a contracting job, or a line of work that would need a security clearance, she would only have access to the classified intelligence required of her job. The fact that this Fox News article intentionally highlighted that she still has a clearance is fear mongering at worse, or ignorance at best.
 
Re: State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her sec

Two things

Hilary should most definitely be serving jail time for mishandling classified information and should be revoked of her security clearance. However, just because Hilary Clinton presently has a security clearance it does not mean she can freely access classified information now that she is a private citizen who, as far as I know, is unemployed. If she were to pick up a contracting job, or a line of work that would need a security clearance, she would only have access to the classified intelligence required of her job. The fact that this Fox News article intentionally highlighted that she still has a clearance is fear mongering at worse, or ignorance at best.

"The fact that this Fox News article intentionally highlighted that she still has a clearance is fear mongering at worse, or ignorance at best."

No fear mongering at all, of course Fox highlighted the security clearances, it's what the State Department's formal inquiry is about.
 
Re: State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her sec

"The fact that this Fox News article intentionally highlighted that she still has a clearance is fear mongering at worse, or ignorance at best."

No fear mongering at all, of course Fox highlighted the security clearances, it's what the State Department's formal inquiry is about.

The formal inquiry is regarding if Clinton mishandled classified information, not about the status of Clinton and her staffers' clearances. The article adds "Clinton and her staffers still have security clearances to access sensitive government information." Again, I need to stress that just having a clearance means nothing unless you have a need to know and work in either a public agency, or work for private contractors that require access to that information.
 
Re: State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her sec

"...whether" she mishandled classified information??? It's a 2-tier justice system. That woman should be in jail serving time.

The sad thing in all this for Demokrats is it would likely end her chance at running for a 3rd term.

Whether or not she misandled classified material ?
Of-course they did. I thought Comey made this explicitly clear.
 
Re: State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her sec

It also shows that the country would still be mired in scandal had Clinton won.
Also, add to it the recent story that beginning in 2010 China began to smash the CIA operations in that country. The CIA has yet to figure out how..
 
Re: State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her sec

The formal inquiry is regarding if Clinton mishandled classified information, not about the status of Clinton and her staffers' clearances. The article adds "Clinton and her staffers still have security clearances to access sensitive government information." Again, I need to stress that just having a clearance means nothing unless you have a need to know and work in either a public agency, or work for private contractors that require access to that information.
I think this is just highlighting the fact that this is a person who should not, STILL, have ANY security clearences before, during or after the absolute disaster of her state dept tenure.

And yes, ol cankles Hill should right now be wearing an orange, in homage to the President, jumpsuit. The left, after going so hard after our top guy, the President, without any real cause except hate, and even less evidence, will not be in a position to complain when the President finally opens the floodgates and they start going after true wrong doers, i.e., Comey, Rice, Lynch, Brennan, Clapper, Hill, Billy and ol Barry Insane himself.

Made their own bed, now...
 
Re: State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her sec

The formal inquiry is regarding if Clinton mishandled classified information, not about the status of Clinton and her staffers' clearances. The article adds "Clinton and her staffers still have security clearances to access sensitive government information." Again, I need to stress that just having a clearance means nothing unless you have a need to know and work in either a public agency, or work for private contractors that require access to that information.

And if it's determined she and or staff mishandled classified information they'll loose their clearances. This is no different than reporting a crime trial and informing the readership of the punishment involved.
 
Re: State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her sec

I think this is just highlighting the fact that this is a person who should not, STILL, have ANY security clearences before, during or after the absolute disaster of her state dept tenure.

And yes, ol cankles Hill should right now be wearing an orange, in homage to the President, jumpsuit. The left, after going so hard after our top guy, the President, without any real cause except hate, and even less evidence, will not be in a position to complain when the President finally opens the floodgates and they start going after true wrong doers, i.e., Comey, Rice, Lynch, Brennan, Clapper, Hill, Billy and ol Barry Insane himself.

Made their own bed, now...

How do you manage to make such a cringe-worthy post like this?

And if it's determined she and or staff mishandled classified information they'll loose their clearances.

That's not how that works. Like, at all. The Defense Security Service has guidelines they follow to determine if someone should have their security clearance revoked.

This is no different than reporting a crime trial and informing the readership of the punishment involved.

No. I am giving the author the benefit of the doubt because like yourself, he is most likely not-informed of the nuances that go with security clearances. However what the author did know was stating that Clinton can access classified information would stir readers. Either ignorance or knowingly lying, the author is willingly influencing and manipulating the readers by alluding to Hilary's security clearance like it gives her a key to Area 51.
 
Re: State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her sec

How do you manage to make such a cringe-worthy post like this?



That's not how that works. Like, at all. The Defense Security Service has guidelines they follow to determine if someone should have their security clearance revoked.



No. I am giving the author the benefit of the doubt because like yourself, he is most likely not-informed of the nuances that go with security clearances. However what the author did know was stating that Clinton can access classified information would stir readers. Either ignorance or knowingly lying, the author is willingly influencing and manipulating the readers by alluding to Hilary's security clearance like it gives her a key to Area 51.

I'm well aware of the "nuances", you're not educating me. I just disagree with your "fear mongering" assertion.
 
Re: State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her sec

I'm well aware of the "nuances", you're not educating me.

No, you're clearly not. Do you have a security clearance by chance? What's the highest classified document you've ever had to handle?

I just disagree with your "fear mongering" assertion.

You're only disagreeing with it because you're partisanship is demanding you to be so obtuse right now.
 
Re: State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her sec

How do you manage to make such a cringe-worthy post like this?



That's not how that works. Like, at all. The Defense Security Service has guidelines they follow to determine if someone should have their security clearance revoked.



No. I am giving the author the benefit of the doubt because like yourself, he is most likely not-informed of the nuances that go with security clearances. However what the author did know was stating that Clinton can access classified information would stir readers. Either ignorance or knowingly lying, the author is willingly influencing and manipulating the readers by alluding to Hilary's security clearance like it gives her a key to Area 51.
You mean calling it straight out like it oughta be?

After years and years of being pretty much called about as many forms of bigot as imaginable merely for standing up for normal and reasoned patriotic norms, I might be suffering from a bit of "had it up to here" ( see hand over the head ) syndrome.

Especially now that the idiots from the other side are screaming, "Impaaaach, Impaaaach 45" (true bumbling idiot, congresswoman Maxed out Waters ), where there is absolutely NO evidence, none, never was...

And yet we see before us, those of us that are of intellectually integrity anyhow, so many actual laws broken and subverted, going unnoticed now?

Ignored. For what reason?

And yet, all the focus of the big air raid spotlights are on an ostensibly squeaky clean Trump team... cause you know after at least ten months of legal investigation by the world's preeminent investigative entity, or formerly holding that now questionable slot, and as well as, there is little doubt now, illegal investigating being perpetrated (hmmmm, who coulda/woulda been doing that, ya think ? ) , then add what now appears completely manufactured, by the veritable ironclads of "truth" reporting tons and tons of what can only be properly termed (I had this confirmed by 420 intelligence agencies , tho sure, only anonymous sources, but its true, all true, cross my heart ) "fake news" on steriods as they sink under the weight of squandered fidelity.

Cringe to your hearts content, bro

Sent from my SM-J700M using Tapatalk
 
Re: State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her sec

It is about time something was done.
She is not a special cookie that can break the law and get away with it.

That was one of the biggest black marks on both the FBI and the doj that I can remember.
It is absolutely and should be open to investigation exactly what happened and why she was not prosecuted
Presidential nominee or not.
 
Re: State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her sec

"...whether" she mishandled classified information??? It's a 2-tier justice system. That woman should be in jail serving time.

The sad thing in all this for Demokrats is it would likely end her chance at running for a 3rd term.

I can't find another source for this story with a date line later than July of 2016.
 
Re: State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her sec

No, you're clearly not. Do you have a security clearance by chance? What's the highest classified document you've ever had to handle?



You're only disagreeing with it because you're partisanship is demanding you to be so obtuse right now.

1) Oh yes, I'm fully aware and whether or not I've had, will have or ever had security clearances is totally irrelevant and no more than distraction.

2) You're the first to bring up partisanship, I just simply disagree that the Fox reporter was fear mongering.
 
Re: State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her sec

She should have lost her clearance long ago. It doesn't take long at all to strip someone's clearance.
 
Re: State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her sec

1) Oh yes, I'm fully aware and whether or not I've had, will have or ever had security clearances is totally irrelevant and no more than distraction.

It's completely relevant to the discussion. If you've never dealt with classified materials, you would belong in a majority of people that have no idea how they work and could potentially fall under the emotional manipulation that is being attempted by the Fox News editor.

2) You're the first to bring up partisanship, I just simply disagree that the Fox reporter was fear mongering.

I call it like I see it. If you had an objective bone in your body, you wouldn't lie about your knowledge regarding security clearances (in your case, lack thereof.) And wouldn't continue to back-peddle the way you have been throughout this thread when I press you. However, since Fox News has a conservative lean, you react without hesitation to defend the platform. But no, you're not a sensible adult, because a sensible adult would look at the evidence being presented to him and go "Know what, he's got a point. I'll take that into consideration." You're wasting my time.
 
Re: State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her sec

It's completely relevant to the discussion. If you've never dealt with classified materials, you would belong in a majority of people that have no idea how they work and could potentially fall under the emotional manipulation that is being attempted by the Fox News editor.



I call it like I see it. If you had an objective bone in your body, you wouldn't lie about your knowledge regarding security clearances (in your case, lack thereof.) And wouldn't continue to back-peddle the way you have been throughout this thread when I press you. However, since Fox News has a conservative lean, you react without hesitation to defend the platform. But no, you're not a sensible adult, because a sensible adult would look at the evidence being presented to him and go "Know what, he's got a point. I'll take that into consideration." You're wasting my time.

1) It's not relevant to OUR discussion, which is about supposed Fox fear mongering.

2) I don't lie and have back-peddled no where. I simply disagree with your assertion that the news report was fear mongering. I've stated this four frickin times now.

You need to seek out whomever pissed in your Wheaties this morning and rant your nonsense toward them. Geebus.
 
Re: State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her sec

Why would a former government employee still have security clearance?
 
Re: State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her sec

The same way Flynn still had security clearance. It's usually renewed (or not depending on circumstances) every five years as a courtesy to flag officers and high government officeholders..
 
Re: State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her sec

"...whether" she mishandled classified information??? It's a 2-tier justice system. That woman should be in jail serving time.

The sad thing in all this for Demokrats is it would likely end her chance at running for a 3rd term.

It's not so much that you don't like a corrupt and tiered legal system, you would just like it to always be corrupt in the manner you like.
 
Re: State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her sec

Um -- what year is this? Why are they just now doing this?
 
Re: State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her sec

I call it like I see it. If you had an objective bone in your body, you wouldn't lie about your knowledge regarding security clearances (in your case, lack thereof.) And wouldn't continue to back-peddle the way you have been throughout this thread when I press you. However, since Fox News has a conservative lean, you react without hesitation to defend the platform. But no, you're not a sensible adult, because a sensible adult would look at the evidence being presented to him and go "Know what, he's got a point. I'll take that into consideration." You're wasting my time.
Ever considered taking your own advice? Ever think he might have a point, too? And, matter of fact he does.

Additional factual information is to be desired, not hidden. You have to fear the truth for truth to be fear mongering...

Common sense, right?

Oh and, btw, since I haven't heard a response back on my post, were you gonna, you know, say to yourself, self, I am a sensible adult and, well, GC does have a point, I am just gonna have to take that into consideration...

BbbbWwwwhahahahaaaaaahaaaa

[emoji33]



Sent from my SM-J700M using Tapatalk
 
Re: State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her sec

Ever considered taking your own advice? Ever think he might have a point, too? And, matter of fact he does.

What point is that? Hanger isn't making a point, he's defending Fox News for no other reason but because I identified the article's attempt to emotionally sway readers with nothing more than a "nu-uh." He, and yourself show a complete lack of knowledge on the matter at hand.


Additional factual information is to be desired, not hidden. You have to fear the truth for truth to be fear mongering...

It's not additional, factual information because having a security clearance doesn't inherently grant access to classified information. I've already explained this and was promptly ignored by mouthbreathers like yourself and Hanger.

Common sense, right?

Fake news.

Oh and, btw, since I haven't heard a response back on my post, were you gonna, you know, say to yourself, self, I am a sensible adult and, well, GC does have a point, I am just gonna have to take that into consideration...

What is there to respond to when your only contribution to the thread was ranting and raving about people you don't like instead of the actual topic at hand? I've learned it's best to just treat posters like you like the crazy homeless person on the subway.

1) It's not relevant to OUR discussion, which is about supposed Fox fear mongering.

It's about fear mongering by exploiting ignorance on how security clearances work. If you had worked with classified information, you would understand that the writer was attempting to sway readers to feel a certain way regarding Clinton's status.

2) I don't lie and have back-peddled no where.

You most certainly have, but I don't expect a habitual liar to stop lying.

I simply disagree with your assertion that the news report was fear mongering. I've stated this four frickin times now.

You're objecting to the assertion because you purposefully ignoring my posts when I educate you on how security clearances work.
 
Re: State Department probes Clinton handling of government emails, could pull her sec

What point is that? Hanger isn't making a point, he's defending Fox News for no other reason but because I identified the article's attempt to emotionally sway readers with nothing more than a "nu-uh." He, and yourself show a complete lack of knowledge on the matter at hand.




It's not additional, factual information because having a security clearance doesn't inherently grant access to classified information. I've already explained this and was promptly ignored by mouthbreathers like yourself and Hanger.



Fake news.



What is there to respond to when your only contribution to the thread was ranting and raving about people you don't like instead of the actual topic at hand? I've learned it's best to just treat posters like you like the crazy homeless person on the subway.



.
Dood, so "triggered" simply by someone pointing out information we all find incredible? Chill bro.

The fact that even after the whole WORLD had it proven to us that Hillary and her staffers had been criminally negligent in the handling of highly sensitive information over an illegally set up private server, that she still somehow has a security clearence, that it, by hook or crook, has yet to be yanked for all the egregious innumerable violations is not only pertinent to the story regarding security clearences and Hillary Clinton, it is another indicator of just why it is that the faceless, unprofessional, often devious and unrepentent bureaucrats should not have so much control over our lives.

These faceless seemingly untouchable civil servants, here only to serve us, do not seem to have a real sense of legality, prudence or proper percepton of the problems.

Btw, your additional information was not ignored, it was just filed away as additional information that has little, if any, bearing on the fact that this incompent woman, who you agreed from the start should be in prison, clearly should not still be in possession of clearences.

PERIOD.

Say, for instance, if another new knuckle dragger lefty were somehow disastoriously elected to the presidency (and we have proof of this happening as you guys reinstalled that lying idiot Obombed after his first failed term), does anybody in their right (I now have to worry about those of the left mind mostly) mind not justifiably conclude that this potentially and previously described plausible knuclehead could so determine, if for only politically expedient purposes, that this thoroughly investigated and found supremely negligent incompetent woman might be qualified to recommence getting highly classified information again?

It goes against all reason...but as the "Russin collusion" episode has plainly driven home, real reason is not required. So, more rational heads fear that a lefty in power might just be that imprudent.

Common sense is not "fake news", bro.

Despite your head feints to the contrary, I am, and have been, debating the points plus explaining my rationale for some of the reasoning as to why. You know, since you tried, instead of debating the point, to portray my posts otherwise...cringe worthy I think is the manner in which you feebly mischaracterized it.

Then, when you could not develop either a defense or attack on the merits you now further ad hom it by trying to dismiss everything as a rant thus avoiding the necessity of an intelligent response.

Good luck with that "debate" tactic
 
Back
Top Bottom