• 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!

Which is worse? Tell me what you think is the worst security violation from past/present Administrat

Which is worse?

  • The Bush Administration -- using a GOP server for official business. Lost 23 M emails.

    Votes: 1 4.0%

  • The Trump Adm. -- 50 employees without security clearance having access to secret/classified info.

    Votes: 16 64.0%

  • The Obama Administration -- Hillary losing 10-15 thousand email and used a private server.

    Votes: 8 32.0%
  • Total voters
    25
Middleground

Middleground

2-Lipped Beaver!
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 15, 2005
Messages
28,133
Reaction score
15,017
Location
Canada's Capital
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Progressive


Tell me what you think is the worst security violation from past/present Administrations. No other option -- just the one you think is the worst out of the three and why.
 
The hypocrisy of the Trump administration cannot be matched when Trump himself demanded the imprisonment of Hilary Clinton for mishandling classified information, when in his first year as President, has an administration that has constantly mishandled classified information.
 
Well, naturally the Trump one sounds worse but I think Obama's letting Hillary off for the Benghazi debacle was even worse than that. None of them are probably criminal, though Clinton must agonize over the photos of the Libyan Ambassador's death. The rest are politicized dumb decisions.
 
They are all horrible. But the Trump one is happening NOW so that is the one we need to be making the most fuss over.
 
grip said:
Well, naturally the Trump one sounds worse but I think Obama's letting Hillary off for the Benghazi debacle was even worse than that. None of them are probably criminal, though Clinton must agonize over the photos of the Libyan Ambassador's death. The rest are politicized dumb decisions.
Click to expand...

How is that possibly worst than Dubya et al. DOING THE EXACT same thing? Not only were more people involved, they used a GOP Server (think about that for a second) and lost almost 25 million email. How is that better?
 
Middleground said:


Tell me what you think is the worst security violation from past/present Administrations. No other option -- just the one you think is the worst out of the three and why.
Click to expand...

Seeing as Hillary was able to get away with far more then that, this is a pretty cut and dry decision for me.
 
Middleground said:


Tell me what you think is the worst security violation from past/present Administrations. No other option -- just the one you think is the worst out of the three and why.
Click to expand...

You left out the weaponization of the IRS, the DOJ and the FBI under Obama to attack political opponents of Obama.

That would be the one that I would pick.
 
Middleground said:
How is that possibly worst than Dubya et al. DOING THE EXACT same thing? Not only were more people involved, they used a GOP Server (think about that for a second) and lost almost 25 million email. How is that better?
Click to expand...

Were there law on the books at the time during the W Administration regulating email as there were when Hillary was SOS?
 
CMPancake said:
The hypocrisy of the Trump administration cannot be matched when Trump himself demanded the imprisonment of Hilary Clinton for mishandling classified information, when in his first year as President, has an administration that has constantly mishandled classified information.
Click to expand...

Link?
 
grip said:
Well, naturally the Trump one sounds worse but I think Obama's letting Hillary off for the Benghazi debacle was even worse than that. None of them are probably criminal, though Clinton must agonize over the photos of the Libyan Ambassador's death. The rest are politicized dumb decisions.
Click to expand...

Obama was a part of the Benghazi mismanagement, abandonment and cover up.
 
Skeptic Bob said:
They are all horrible. But the Trump one is happening NOW so that is the one we need to be making the most fuss over.
Click to expand...

Who are these folks and are they violating the protocols even if they do not have the clearances?
 
Middleground said:


Tell me what you think is the worst security violation from past/present Administrations. No other option -- just the one you think is the worst out of the three and why.
Click to expand...

Your numbers are a little off. Hillary 'lost' over 30,000 emails. That said, I think they are all bad
 
Well this is novel, a whataboutism poll designed so we can have another whine and bitch thread about Trump.
 
code1211 said:
Who are these folks and are they violating the protocols even if they do not have the clearances?
Click to expand...

First, I read it was 30-40 employees, and they are working with 'interim' clearance. Second, not that it's ok, but the backlog for security clearance investigation backlog was already at 190,000 cases in August 2014 and skyrocketed to more than 709,000 by September 2017.

Third, the reason it's taking so long as many in this administration have not had previous investigations, as most had in previous administrations. So they are starting 'fresh'. And since there are so many with significant business backgrounds, the investigating is not what they are used to.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/09/politics/trump-officials-pending-security-clearances/index.html
 
holbritter said:
First, I read it was 30-40 employees, and they are working with 'interim' clearance. Second, not that it's ok, but the backlog for security clearance investigation backlog was already at 190,000 cases in August 2014 and skyrocketed to more than 709,000 by September 2017.

Third, the reason it's taking so long as many in this administration have not had previous investigations, as most had in previous administrations. So they are starting 'fresh'. And since there are so many with significant business backgrounds, the investigating is not what they are used to.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/02/09/politics/trump-officials-pending-security-clearances/index.html
Click to expand...

So it's just a function of trying to get something done in the face of pretty obstinate red tape.
 
code1211 said:
So it's just a function of trying to get something done in the face of pretty obstinate red tape.
Click to expand...

Definitely appears that way. But it doesn't really excuse the recent 'miss' with Porter.
 
code1211 said:
Who are these folks and are they violating the protocols even if they do not have the clearances?
Click to expand...

Well, it isn’t them. it is the White House and ultimately Trump. The problem is it doesn’t really matter if they are violating protocols unless they are violating the law. The President is the ultimate classifying authority and in the end if he allows unvetted people access to classified information it is technically legal. But just because something may be technically legal doesn’t mean it isn’t a threat to national security. We already know that White House leaks like a sieve. It seems naive to me to think the media is the only one having information leaked to it. One way to combat that is to properly vet people and those who do not have permanent security clearances have not been properly vetted.

So yeah, it is definitely a violation of protocol but a president’s hands aren’t tied by protocols that have been established by the executive branch. So it is a problem but there isn’t much recourse other than putting public pressure on the White House.
 
code1211 said:
You left out the weaponization of the IRS, the DOJ and the FBI under Obama to attack political opponents of Obama.

That would be the one that I would pick.
Click to expand...

I could add a laundry list of **** the Bush and Trump administration have done too, but they're not up for discussion here. The only thing your post proved was your incredible bias and inability to see wrong done "by your side." Pretty sad.
 
code1211 said:
Were there law on the books at the time during the W Administration regulating email as there were when Hillary was SOS?
Click to expand...

You need laws to show how wrong it is to use a GOP server for official WH business? Really?
 
- As a historian, losing so much factually based material is absolutely disgusting. But our history is full of official document destruction. Who knows what we will never know because the government and our leaders bury truths. This is why our understanding and the narratives of history get revised as new material is discovered or released.

- As a twenty year Marine who has dealt with crypto, plenty of other sensitive material, and its routine official destruction at many different levels since the rank of Lance Corporal, a President's rag-tag clan of uncleared workers handling sensitive material is pathetic.

Privates are normally able to get clearances out of MOS schools before they join with their first parent commands. It is not absolute, but we are talking about young 18/19 year-old adults who are somewhat trusted after months of training. So waiting a few more weeks to months after attaching to that parent command is well enough controlled and their handlings are limited. But these very grown civilian-minded people at the White House levels, who see national level material, are fresh out of nowhere. And in our present day environment of Wikileakers, Snowdens, and Russian hackeries, it should be a concern that so many are still awaiting their clearances.
 
Last edited:
Hillary most likely did not risk the national security as it is not know if there was secret and highly damaging information on her private server (that could risk the safety of the US).

Having 50 officials without security clearance means you risk people having access to secret and highly damaging information for which they do not have clearance and for which it is not known whether or not they are going to respect the secrecy or maybe even be at risk of being blackmailed into giving those secrets to the enemies of the US. It is just hard to believe that that many people have access without security clearance, it just is unacceptable.

If that happened in my country that prime minister would be tendering his resignation or the person responsible for clearing those people would offer his/her resignation.
 
Clinton - People with a security clearance knowingly mishandled classified information.
 
Peter King said:
Hillary most likely did not risk the national security as it is not know if there was secret and highly damaging information on her private server (that could risk the safety of the US).

Having 50 officials without security clearance means you risk people having access to secret and highly damaging information for which they do not have clearance and for which it is not known whether or not they are going to respect the secrecy or maybe even be at risk of being blackmailed into giving those secrets to the enemies of the US. It is just hard to believe that that many people have access without security clearance, it just is unacceptable.

If that happened in my country that prime minister would be tendering his resignation or the person responsible for clearing those people would offer his/her resignation.
Click to expand...

Actually, it's a fact that classified material was found to have been on the server.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom