Just one question:

[progressive hunter]

Wasn't a stretch at all. Different things have different classifications and different "shelf life". Ship's schedules are basically declassified as the ship makes various port visits as everyone knows when they were there (because they pulled in and let the crew go on liberty). Procedures for stuff on exams could still be current several years later, depending on what tech is replaced and what is kept.

Tom Clancy got a visit from the Secret Service when he wrote "Hunt for Red October" since he was so dead on as to how procedures are done on submarines. And he got his information from a lot of different sources that were declassified, but managed to put them together as to how they were actually done when he wrote his book. The US Navy had to change they way they did some things on subs because of his book.

the laws been posted several times and it doesnt say anything about that,,

since the first day of possession that he was out of office it is in violation of the crime,,

 

[Devils_Advocate]

Again, you would have to go over all the documents, see what was contained in each of them and determine what kind of threat each document was to our national security. Classified information isn't a "one size fits all" kind of thing.

Ship's schedules? Generally classified at confidential until the ship completes the schedule, because by then everyone knows where the ship visited since they let the crew off for liberty.

Information concerning procedures and other details for how various ratings do their jobs (which is part of the exams btw)? Classified until the procedures or details are changed or superseded by newer stuff, since some ratings are classified because of the various jobs they do.

Information I had when I was on active duty? Useless, since I've been retired for 20 years now. Information that a person currently on active duty has? Useful, since they are still in the loop.

Here’s the difference you and the President are two different people and have different access to materials.

Again, he broke the law by having those documents no matter what was in them, so if Trump is guilty so is he.

The punishment can be argued but the crime is there and there is no doubt this hurt the DOJ case badly.

 

[ABikerSailor]

the laws been posted several times and it doesnt say anything about that,,

since the first day of possession that he was out of office it is in violation of the crime,,

Crime? Maybe. But, just like there are various levels of crime (fines, misdemeanors, levels of felony, etc.), it would depend on the severity of the damage to security to determine the level of the crime committed.

 

[progressive hunter]

Crime? Maybe. But, just like there are various levels of crime (fines, misdemeanors, levels of felony, etc.), it would depend on the severity of the damage to security to determine the level of the crime committed.

on the first day the crime as you stated it was at the highest level,,

no matbe to it,,

 

[ABikerSailor]

Here’s the difference you and the President are two different people and have different access to materials.

Again, he broke the law by having those documents no matter what was in them, so if Trump is guilty so is he.

The punishment can be argued but the crime is there and there is no doubt this hurt the DOJ case badly.

Again, it depends on what was in the documents in question. If it was information on a treaty that was being worked on while Biden was in office? Probably old news by now, and not damaging to national security, so while it might be a crime, it isn't a serious one.

Information on spies that we currently have overseas who are still active and deep cover? Definitely damaging to security and a severe crime.

 

[ABikerSailor]

on the first day the crime as you stated it was at the highest level,,

no matbe to it,,

Didn't say any such thing. Said that it depended on what was in the documents and the level of damage to our national security to determine the level of the crime.

 

[progressive hunter]

Didn't say any such thing. Said that it depended on what was in the documents and the level of damage to our national security to determine the level of the crime.

and I said the first day he had them out of office was the crime and puts it at the highest standard under your narrative,, even though thats not what the law says,,

 

[progressive hunter]

Again, it depends on what was in the documents in question. If it was information on a treaty that was being worked on while Biden was in office? Probably old news by now, and not damaging to national security, so while it might be a crime, it isn't a serious one.

Information on spies that we currently have overseas who are still active and deep cover? Definitely damaging to security and a severe crime.

it was serious the first day he had them even if they might not be now,, but the law isnt about that, its about possession,

why is that so hard for you to understand??

 

[Devils_Advocate]

Again, it depends on what was in the documents in question. If it was information on a treaty that was being worked on while Biden was in office? Probably old news by now, and not damaging to national security, so while it might be a crime, it isn't a serious one.

Information on spies that we currently have overseas who are still active and deep cover? Definitely damaging to security and a severe crime.

No it does not depend what was in the documents!

Him having the documents illegally make it a crime period!

You can’t say there is no crime just because what was in the documents and you know this!

What you are trying to do is what the punishment should be and that is up to Congress and not us if they impeach him, but a crime has actually been committed and that is why the DOJ turned it over to someone on the outside to see if there is enough to convict and get removal or not enough for anything but a crime has been committed.

The punishment is the question to you and you believe he may not have done anything for punishment.

 

[ABikerSailor]

and I said the first day he had them out of office was the crime and puts it at the highest standard under your narrative,, even though thats not what the law says,,

No, under my narrative (if you had bothered to read and comprehend it) said that it depended on what was in the documents in question.

Something with no impact on our national security and just a dumb shit move on his part? Crime, but at the level of a speeding ticket.

Something with a serious impact on our national security and could have serious consequences? Serious crime, at the level of armed robbery or murder.

See the difference? No, classified information isn't a "one size fits all" kind of thing, and neither is crime, there are varying levels.

 

[ABikerSailor]

No it does not depend what was in the documents!

Him having the documents illegally make it a crime period!

You can’t say there is no crime just because what was in the documents and you know this!

What you are trying to do is what the punishment should be and that is up to Congress and not us if they impeach him, but a crime has actually been committed and that is why the DOJ turned it over to someone on the outside to see if there is enough to convict and get removal or not enough for anything but a crime has been committed.

The punishment is the question to you and you believe he may not have done anything for punishment.

I even said that if you'd found classified documents in my storage after I'd transferred, it would depend on the level of the information on those documents.

Ships schedule? Yeah, guilty of having stuff I shouldn't and it would be considered a crime, but not something serious, since it was no longer valid and actually in the history books. If something like that happened, I'd probably just get a butt chewing and maybe a fine.

Relevant exam materials of classified jobs and the procedures were still in effect and relevant? Serious crime, and I'd probably be looking at losing rank, being kicked out and possibly put in Leavenworth.

Like I said, depends on the level of classification and what it was about.

If you and Progressive Hunter had actually worked with classified information, you would understand the differences I'm talking about.

 

[progressive hunter]

No, under my narrative (if you had bothered to read and comprehend it) said that it depended on what was in the documents in question.

Something with no impact on our national security and just a dumb shit move on his part? Crime, but at the level of a speeding ticket.

Something with a serious impact on our national security and could have serious consequences? Serious crime, at the level of armed robbery or murder.

See the difference? No, classified information isn't a "one size fits all" kind of thing, and neither is crime, there are varying levels.

your narrative means anything as the law doesnt say anything about it,,

 

[progressive hunter]

I even said that if you'd found classified documents in my storage after I'd transferred, it would depend on the level of the information on those documents.

Ships schedule? Yeah, guilty of having stuff I shouldn't and it would be considered a crime, but not something serious, since it was no longer valid and actually in the history books. If something like that happened, I'd probably just get a butt chewing and maybe a fine.

Relevant exam materials of classified jobs and the procedures were still in effect and relevant? Serious crime, and I'd probably be looking at losing rank, being kicked out and possibly put in Leavenworth.

Like I said, depends on the level of classification and what it was about.

then explain why the sailor spent yrs in jail for a picture that shoed nothing of a top secret submarine??

face it your narrative is bullshit,,

 

[mak2]

I have had a security clearance. I can tell from ABikerSailor's post he has, or at least has very good understanding, but what about Peace and progressive hunter. You guys ever had a security clearence?

 

[ABikerSailor]

then explain why the sailor spent yrs in jail for a picture that shoed nothing of a top secret submarine??

face it your narrative is bullshit,,

Got a link to what you are talking about, with the full story about what happened and why? I'd like to see it. Unlike you (probably, because you appear to not know the differences between levels of classification) I actually worked with classified material for most of the 20 years I was in the Navy.

 

[ABikerSailor]

I have had a security clearance. I can tell from ABikerSailor's post he has, or at least has very good understanding, but what about Peace and progressive hunter. You guys ever had a security clearence?

Had to have at least a Confidential clearance for my job as a Personnelman, since I was handling the service records for everyone onboard the command. Was upgraded to Secret and Top Secret halfway through my career when I volunteered for various things, which is what led to my 2 back to back tours on independent duty, filling a Chief billet (both times) as an E-6.

Going home on leave after they decided to up my clearance to TS was fun. EVERYONE that I knew (as well as some of my neighbors) wanted to know why there were nice men in suits coming around and asking about me.

 

[progressive hunter]

Got a link to what you are talking about, with the full story about what happened and why? I'd like to see it. Unlike you (probably, because you appear to not know the differences between levels of classification) I actually worked with classified material for most of the 20 years I was in the Navy.

and yet you continue to tell me what the law says instead of showing me,, while all the time the law has been posted several times proving you wrong,,

I will give you that what you say might effect the sentence but not the conviction for the crime

 

[mak2]

Had to have at least a Confidential clearance for my job as a Personnelman, since I was handling the service records for everyone onboard the command. Was upgraded to Secret and Top Secret halfway through my career when I volunteered for various things, which is what led to my 2 back to back tours on independent duty, filling a Chief billet (both times) as an E-6.

I knew you knew what you were talking about.

 

[ABikerSailor]

and yet you continue to tell me what the law says instead of showing me,, while all the time the law has been posted several times proving you wrong,,

I will give you that what you say might effect the sentence but not the conviction for the crime

So, where's the link for what you claimed, or are you just gonna bitch about what you think you know, when it's readily apparent that you don't?

I actually held a security clearance most of my career in the military, what are your qualifications again?

 

[progressive hunter]

So, where's the link for what you claimed, or are you just gonna bitch about what you think you know, when it's readily apparent that you don't?

I actually held a security clearance most of my career in the military, what are your qualifications again?

wheres you link to where the law backs up your claim??