So, you really, really, really hate Trump

[SmokingFap]

The last thing that Biden was on top of was his daughter...

Oh. You're one of those morons. Dismissed.

 

[dmallord]

18 USC 1924;

(a)
Whoever, being an officer, employee, contractor, or consultant of the United States, and, by virtue of his office, employment, position, or contract, becomes possessed of documents or materials containing classified information of the United States, knowingly removes such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both.

Good job!

That's the statute. But could it possibly be applied in Biden's case?

Did Hur determine that Biden knowingly removed such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location?

The bold words are the key ingredients to the matter. You might get @HisArpy to proffer an opinion. Though he is not an expert on military classifications/handings. He is a frequent source here.

Laws and statutes are funny sometimes. They seem crystal clear on the surface, yet they are hard to apply because they require people to interpret them.

You seem to look at this as 'shall be imprisoned' but not look at the 'intent element' or 'knowingly kept' elements.

Hur felt he couldn't prove that Biden knowingly or intended to retain the documents. Those documents were among papers spanning many years of relocations during Biden's numerous government roles. Recall that both Biden and Trump, at one point, claimed others packed those boxes, and he had no knowledge of their contents. Biden invited the FBI to search his home. One can assume a criminal wouldn't knowingly invite such an action if he knew he had documents stashed there. Thus, the imprisonment and other elements of the statute were not applicable.

End of story.

 

[icanhelp1]

Good job!

That's the statute. But could it possibly be applied in Biden's case?

Did Hur determine that Biden knowingly removed such documents or materials without authority and with the intent to retain such documents or materials at an unauthorized location?

The bold words are the key ingredients to the matter. You might get @HisArpy to proffer an opinion. Though he is not an expert on military classifications/handings. He is a frequent source here.

Laws and statutes are funny sometimes. They seem crystal clear on the surface, yet they are hard to apply because they require people to interpret them.

You seem to look at this as 'shall be imprisoned' but not look at the 'intent element' or 'knowingly kept' elements.

Hur felt he couldn't prove that Biden knowingly or intended to retain the documents. Those documents were among papers spanning many years of relocations during Biden's numerous government roles. Recall that both Biden and Trump, at one point, claimed others packed those boxes, and he had no knowledge of their contents. Biden invited the FBI to search his home. One can assume a criminal wouldn't knowingly invite such an action if he knew he had documents stashed there. Thus, the imprisonment and other elements of the statute were not applicable.

End of story.

Please!!! stop the bullshit. You can’t walk out of a SCIF with a document in your hand, especially after being briefed on proper procedures and tell me you didn’t realize you had a document in your hand. Personally I don’t give two craps if Biden gets prosecuted or not, what I give a shit about if fair and equal application of the law. If precedent deems that prosecutions don’t happen then apply the law fairly. Don’t sick the DOJ or FBI on something that could be handled in house and stop with the setting the table hoping to prosecute process crimes. The FBI is infamous for that tactic.

 

[dmallord]

Please!!! stop the bullshit. You can’t walk out of a SCIF with a document in your hand, especially after being briefed on proper procedures and tell me you didn’t realize you had a document in your hand. Personally I don’t give two craps if Biden gets prosecuted or not, what I give a shit about if fair and equal application of the law. If precedent deems that prosecutions don’t happen then apply the law fairly. Don’t sick the DOJ or FBI on something that could be handled in house and stop with the setting the table hoping to prosecute process crimes. The FBI is infamous for that tactic.

Back up a bit.

No one has specified that a couple of top-secret documents found at Biden's residence were stamped SCIF.

You don't know that they were. I'm looking for some sources to clarify. So far, sources point to the Top Secret classification w/o SCIF markings noted in those reports for Biden.

 

[icanhelp1]

Back up a bit.

No one has specified that a couple of top-secret documents found at Biden's residence were stamped SCIF.

You don't know that they were. I'm looking for some sources to clarify. So far, sources point to the Top Secret classification w/o SCIF markings noted in those reports for Biden.

The statute doesn’t specify SCIF, having never been in a SCIF I couldn’t tell you if documents are stamped SCIF or not but they are stamped with their classification.

 

[dmallord]

Please!!! stop the bullshit. You can’t walk out of a SCIF with a document in your hand, especially after being briefed on proper procedures and tell me you didn’t realize you had a document in your hand.

Personally I don’t give two craps if Biden gets prosecuted or not, what I give a shit about if fair and equal application of the law. If precedent deems that prosecutions don’t happen then apply the law fairly. Don’t sick the DOJ or FBI on something that could be handled in house and stop with the setting the table hoping to prosecute process crimes. The FBI is infamous for that tactic.

Yikes! You seem so miffed, more than usual, at this point of the day. Clean your glasses; see the distinction and stop with the unequal treatment bullshit yourself.

Precedent is being applied equally to high-ranking individuals. In cases where documents were found, and the person holding them returned those documents, they were let off the hook. Biden is an example; he cooperated. Pence is an example; he cooperated. Trump is the counter-example; he failed to cooperate.

Tell me, is there not a distinction noted between the way Biden and Pence responded and Trump's response to the request for returning the documents? That distinction on Trump's part subjected him to further scrutiny and charges.

Biden's case could not definitively determine whether he knowingly and willingly kept the documents. He gave them back when they were found, and Pence did the same when they searched his place.

Trump had the opportunity to return them, knowingly lied about them, hid them, and added more damning evidence by attempting to coerce some IT guy to erase the video surveillance tapes.

It is easy to distinguish between them and see that this was not the same precedent application needed to secure the documents.

If you don't give a shit about it, then let it go. It's not good for you.

 

[adrina]

 

[dmallord]

The statute doesn’t specify SCIF, having never been in a SCIF I couldn’t tell you if documents are stamped SCIF or not but they are stamped with their classification.

SCIF documents are so stamped.

I don't know what more to add than to say you have wandered into a sinkhole, and no one has a rope to pull you out.

Our discussion has revolved around your assertion that it is a felony to take a stamped SCIF document outside of its confines. Let's dig deeper into this point.

You don't know if Biden's documents were stamped SCIF, but you claimed it was a felony to take them out of that secure environment. Now, you don't even know if the two Top-Secret documents were in a SCIF at all. They could have followed other security protocols for reading and transmitting them. Processes that are less formally handled. For all we know, those could have been transmitted by a security courier to his office. If he retained them, one would assume he had a safe in his office. We don't know. [We know in Trump's case at Mar-a-Lago, those classified documents were in boxes in unlocked storage or on a stage and in a bathroom.]

So, we are left with dealing with possessing classified information and how it should have been treated. We covered that above in other posts, with my comments on how that went. In the end, the FBI retrieved them; Hur declined to prosecute based on his findings.

SCIF may not have been a factor at all.

 

[icanhelp1]

SCIF documents are so stamped.

I don't know what more to add than to say you have wandered into a sinkhole, and no one has a rope to pull you out.

Our discussion has revolved around your assertion that it is a felony to take a stamped SCIF document outside of its confines. Let's dig deeper into this point.

You don't know if Biden's documents were stamped SCIF, but you claimed it was a felony to take them out of that secure environment. Now, you don't even know if the two Top-Secret documents were in a SCIF at all. They could have followed other security protocols for reading and transmitting them. Processes that are less formally handled. For all we know, those could have been transmitted by a security courier to his office. If he retained them, one would assume he had a safe in his office. We don't know. [We know in Trump's case at Mar-a-Lago, those classified documents were in boxes in unlocked storage or on a stage and in a bathroom.]

So, we are left with dealing with possessing classified information and how it should have been treated. We covered that above in other posts, with my comments on how that went. In the end, the FBI retrieved them; Hur declined to prosecute based on his findings.

SCIF may not have been a factor at all.

You’re making shit up. There is no such thing as a SCIF document. A SCIF is a secure location designed to allow access to classified documents for study. A SCIF could be flying in a C-17 at 40;000 ft. You’re meandering all over the place. Documents are rated by level of classification, Confidential, Secret and Top Secret. I’m not confused! you are. You’re conflating classification with security clearance such as TI/SCI. Biden’s documents were stamped Top Secret. As a senator he was not allowed access to those documents outside of a secure location. They certainly weren’t secure in his garage. Secondly, he sold secrets to a ghost writer to produce a book without getting clearance from NSA. As far as digital communications those devices are encrypted and usually scrutinized and controlled by SS.

Military has their own encryption systems and protocols.

 

[LeeKee]

I never joke. There's been a concerted propaganda push on the right to portray President Biden as being in cognitive decline to counter the bad press of Donald Trump's obvious mental issues. If you actually listen to Biden speak, he's totally on top of things.

Noone has to push an image of hom being in cognitive decline. He achieves that himself. You can't be serious...for real...

 

[dkovic77]

If you listed or provided videos of all of Biden's gaffs lit's platform would probably crash.

Hey fry guy… at least when there is a gaff you know there is substance behind it.

Yours doesn’t even know what his staff has given him phonetically to say…

Those Yo Sem ites.

Do you have themed months for your fries? Maybe you could suggest some names that the Orange Jesus has said…

 

[dkovic77]

You’re making shit up. There is no such thing as a SCIF document. A SCIF is a secure location designed to allow access to classified documents for study. A SCIF could be flying in a C-17 at 40;000 ft. You’re meandering all over the place. Documents are rated by level of classification, Confidential, Secret and Top Secret. I’m not confused! you are. You’re conflating classification with security clearance such as TI/SCI. Biden’s documents were stamped Top Secret. As a senator he was not allowed access to those documents outside of a secure location. They certainly weren’t secure in his garage. Secondly, he sold secrets to a ghost writer to produce a book without getting clearance from NSA. As far as digital communications those devices are encrypted and usually scrutinized and controlled by SS.

Military has their own encryption systems and protocols.

What kind of encryption do they use for the recipe for the secret sauce at your place?

Do they trust the fry guy with that info?

 

[dmallord]

You’re making shit up. There is no such thing as a SCIF document. A SCIF is a secure location designed to allow access to classified documents for study. A SCIF could be flying in a C-17 at 40;000 ft. You’re meandering all over the place. Documents are rated by level of classification, Confidential, Secret and Top Secret. I’m not confused! you are. You’re conflating classification with security clearance such as TI/SCI. Biden’s documents were stamped Top Secret. As a senator he was not allowed access to those documents outside of a secure location. They certainly weren’t secure in his garage. Secondly, he sold secrets to a ghost writer to produce a book without getting clearance from NSA. As far as digital communications those devices are encrypted and usually scrutinized and controlled by SS.

Military has their own encryption systems and protocols.

Please, see if this helps your understanding: https://news.clearancejobs.com/2020...fication label,access to this SCI information.

~~~~~

Sure, I make shit up. Read my stories; nearly all of them are fictional for the most part.

But, I didn't make up the SCIF label markings or meander all over the place. It's not my fault you can't keep up. The next time you find yourself painted into a corner–just sit there until the paint dries and casually walk away. Don't come back pushing shit you don't understand.

'SCIF documents' refer to markings/labels for their contents; in addition to the content classifications, the added label specifies that the document is to be viewed within the secured area. The structure itself is also referenced as a SCIF; you got the second part right.

What you have incorrect is that Top Secret docs are not always read within a SCIF - if they are not so marked to be read with the SCIF. Top Secret documents are highly monitored, and their transport requires a courier to hold the same level as the contents. The docs are 'double wrapped'. The exterior cover is 'benign' and masks the interior coversheet with Top Secret stamped on it. [So, do all other classification cover sheets with the appropriate cover level marked.] Each and every page of the document is stamped as well. The coversheet alerts anyone who sees it to what the content classification is. That alerts the viewer not to view the document if it is not his/her classification level AND if they do not need to know the contents. That second part is also vital to know. To clarify, TS docs can be viewed out a SCIF. What cannot be viewed outside are TS or other docs marked/stamped/identified by codes that restrict viewing and will bear markings like SCIF-only documents.

As far as we know, Biden's conversations with his biographer were based on Biden's personal notes, which contained sensitive information, not the Top Secret documents themselves. That information is in Hur's report. It was also found within the audio tapes recovered from the ghostwriter. Biden didn't sell the documents to the ghostwriter–that's ridiculous on the face of it. He shared info to write a book. Sure, a ghostwriter gets paid to write, but that's money from Biden to him, not the reverse. Boy, did you get that messed up?

Biden didn't wave the actual documents or show them to staffers or reporters, as Trump was heard to do on the audio tapes regarding those Mar-a-Lago docs. You may recall how Trump chuckled about not being able to share them since they were classified - but he could have declassified them before he left the WH, but didn't.

At any rate, I hope you get some rest. You must be mind-blown over all this secret stuff.

 

[Bray123]

There are many classifications beyond Sensitive/Secret/Top Secret etc. Both sub-classifications and specific relating to conditions of viewing etc.

The first rule of Three Letter Agencies (TLAs) is that people who are in that environment never mention it.

 

[icanhelp1]

Please, see if this helps your understanding: https://news.clearancejobs.com/2020/03/19/how-is-sensitive-compartmented-information-scimarked/#:~:text=SCI is a classification label,access to this SCI information.

~~~~~

Sure, I make shit up. Read my stories; nearly all of them are fictional for the most part.

But, I didn't make up the SCIF label markings or meander all over the place. It's not my fault you can't keep up. The next time you find yourself painted into a corner–just sit there until the paint dries and casually walk away. Don't come back pushing shit you don't understand.

'SCIF documents' refer to markings/labels for their contents; in addition to the content classifications, the added label specifies that the document is to be viewed within the secured area. The structure itself is also referenced as a SCIF; you got the second part right.

What you have incorrect is that Top Secret docs are not always read within a SCIF - if they are not so marked to be read with the SCIF. Top Secret documents are highly monitored, and their transport requires a courier to hold the same level as the contents. The docs are 'double wrapped'. The exterior cover is 'benign' and masks the interior coversheet with Top Secret stamped on it. [So, do all other classification cover sheets with the appropriate cover level marked.] Each and every page of the document is stamped as well. The coversheet alerts anyone who sees it to what the content classification is. That alerts the viewer not to view the document if it is not his/her classification level AND if they do not need to know the contents. That second part is also vital to know. To clarify, TS docs can be viewed out a SCIF. What cannot be viewed outside are TS or other docs marked/stamped/identified by codes that restrict viewing and will bear markings like SCIF-only documents.

As far as we know, Biden's conversations with his biographer were based on Biden's personal notes, which contained sensitive information, not the Top Secret documents themselves. That information is in Hur's report. It was also found within the audio tapes recovered from the ghostwriter. Biden didn't sell the documents to the ghostwriter–that's ridiculous on the face of it. He shared info to write a book. Sure, a ghostwriter gets paid to write, but that's money from Biden to him, not the reverse. Boy, did you get that messed up?

Biden didn't wave the actual documents or show them to staffers or reporters, as Trump was heard to do on the audio tapes regarding those Mar-a-Lago docs. You may recall how Trump chuckled about not being able to share them since they were classified - but he could have declassified them before he left the WH, but didn't.

At any rate, I hope you get some rest. You must be mind-blown over all this secret stuff.

[TR]
[TD]In a classified operating environment, all unclassified items must be marked in addition to all classified items. For instance: In areas where any classified equipment such as servers, client workstations, printers, routers, crypto, etc. are being used - all classified equipment, media and documents must be properly marked with classification levels and handling caveats - AND ALL UNCLASSIFIED equipment (servers, client workstations, printers, routers, crypto, etc.), media and documents must also be properly marked as unclassified and with handling caveats such as FOUO, when appropriate. This total marking of all assets in a classified environment eliminates the assumption that anything not marked is unclassified. Hence, all equipment, media and documents within SCIFs, Vaults, Secure Rooms and classified Controlled Access Areas (CAA) must be marked with classification levels and handling caveats.

SPECIAL NOTE FOR MONITORS: Monitors connected to SIPRNet/NIPRNet are inert items of equipment in that they do not store/retain classified data. Typically, in a mixed classified/unclassified environment it is appropriate to physically label a monitor classification based on the system to which it is connected.

If a classification banner is displayed on an active monitor screen then the physical monitor is not required to have a SF 710 (unclassified) or SF 707 (secret) sticker. Regardless, there is no prohibition against also using the SF labels as an additional identifier but it is not required.

Typically, most monitor screens connected to the DISN do have classification banners displayed - so placement of SF stickers on monitors is practically a non-issue.

Also, consider that many workstations are using KVM switches to share monitor screens between NIPRNet and SIPRNet. Hence, the single monitor will be unclassified or classified depending on the network it is connected to at a particular moment; making placement of physical classification labels impractical.

TACTICAL ENVIRONMENT: This check is applicable in a tactical environment if classified documents or media are created/extracted from the SIPRNet. The only exception will be for urgent (short term) tactical operations or other contingency situations where fixed facilities and equipment are not yet present or incapable of being used. All deployed SIPRNet equipment should already contain applicable classification markings/labels. [/TD]
[/TR]


[TR]
[TH]Fix Text (F-35848r4_fix)[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Ensure ALL equipment/media/documents in the areas housing SIPRNet assets contain proper classification markings. In a classified operating environment, all unclassified items must be marked in addition to all classified items. For instance: In areas where any classified equipment such as servers, client workstations, printers, routers, crypto, etc. are being used - all classified equipment, media and documents must be properly marked with classification levels and handling caveats - AND ALL UNCLASSIFIED equipment (servers, client workstations, printers, routers, crypto, etc.), media and documents must also be properly marked as unclassified and with handling caveats such as FOUO, when appropriate. This total marking of all assets in a classified environment eliminates the assumption that anything not marked is unclassified. Hence, all equipment, media and documents within SCIFs, Vaults, Secure Rooms and classified Controlled Access Areas (CAA) must be marked with classification levels and handling caveats. [/TD]
[/TR]

 

[Bn2f]

^^^^^^^^^^
Who you expecting to read this crap?
My eyes hurt just scanning.

You’re not a business driven entrepreneurial conservative at all. Here, lemme help you skip the middle man.

https://forum.literotica.com/thread...rumps-conviction.1611390/page-2#post-98944187

 

[dkovic77]

[TR]
[TD]In a classified operating environment, all unclassified items must be marked in addition to all classified items. For instance: In areas where any classified equipment such as servers, client workstations, printers, routers, crypto, etc. are being used - all classified equipment, media and documents must be properly marked with classification levels and handling caveats - AND ALL UNCLASSIFIED equipment (servers, client workstations, printers, routers, crypto, etc.), media and documents must also be properly marked as unclassified and with handling caveats such as FOUO, when appropriate. This total marking of all assets in a classified environment eliminates the assumption that anything not marked is unclassified. Hence, all equipment, media and documents within SCIFs, Vaults, Secure Rooms and classified Controlled Access Areas (CAA) must be marked with classification levels and handling caveats.

SPECIAL NOTE FOR MONITORS: Monitors connected to SIPRNet/NIPRNet are inert items of equipment in that they do not store/retain classified data. Typically, in a mixed classified/unclassified environment it is appropriate to physically label a monitor classification based on the system to which it is connected.

If a classification banner is displayed on an active monitor screen then the physical monitor is not required to have a SF 710 (unclassified) or SF 707 (secret) sticker. Regardless, there is no prohibition against also using the SF labels as an additional identifier but it is not required.

Typically, most monitor screens connected to the DISN do have classification banners displayed - so placement of SF stickers on monitors is practically a non-issue.

Also, consider that many workstations are using KVM switches to share monitor screens between NIPRNet and SIPRNet. Hence, the single monitor will be unclassified or classified depending on the network it is connected to at a particular moment; making placement of physical classification labels impractical.

TACTICAL ENVIRONMENT: This check is applicable in a tactical environment if classified documents or media are created/extracted from the SIPRNet. The only exception will be for urgent (short term) tactical operations or other contingency situations where fixed facilities and equipment are not yet present or incapable of being used. All deployed SIPRNet equipment should already contain applicable classification markings/labels. [/TD]
[/TR]


[TR]
[TH]Fix Text (F-35848r4_fix)[/TH]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD]Ensure ALL equipment/media/documents in the areas housing SIPRNet assets contain proper classification markings. In a classified operating environment, all unclassified items must be marked in addition to all classified items. For instance: In areas where any classified equipment such as servers, client workstations, printers, routers, crypto, etc. are being used - all classified equipment, media and documents must be properly marked with classification levels and handling caveats - AND ALL UNCLASSIFIED equipment (servers, client workstations, printers, routers, crypto, etc.), media and documents must also be properly marked as unclassified and with handling caveats such as FOUO, when appropriate. This total marking of all assets in a classified environment eliminates the assumption that anything not marked is unclassified. Hence, all equipment, media and documents within SCIFs, Vaults, Secure Rooms and classified Controlled Access Areas (CAA) must be marked with classification levels and handling caveats. [/TD]
[/TR]

Had to do it so fast you can’t even provide a source…?

You gotta tell that boss of yours you need more time to try to own those libs, those hashbrowns taste better cooked a little longer anyway.

 

[dkovic77]

DING!

Don’t let them burn though.

 

[icanhelp1]

Had to do it so fast you can’t even provide a source…?

You gotta tell that boss of yours you need more time to try to own those libs, those hashbrowns taste better cooked a little longer anyway.

You shouldn't attempt to read the document provided, it's way WAY over your head. Stick to hash browns and french fries.

 

[dkovic77]

You shouldn't attempt to read the document provided, it's way WAY over your head. Stick to hash browns and french fries.

A bunch of random stuff with no source attributed, most likely just copied off some blog that you adore and makes your butt hole feel good. Yeah, didn’t read it.

I can see how you like it.

 

[icanhelp1]

A bunch of random stuff with no source attributed, most likely just copied off some blog that you adore and makes your butt hole feel good. Yeah, didn’t read it.

I can see how you like it.

Unlike you you I don’t always post to be argumentative, sometimes I post just to be informative in friendly conversation.

Most of what you post must be to make your butt hole feel good because there’s no other utility in anything you post.

 

[dkovic77]

Unlike you you I don’t always post to be argumentative, sometimes I post just to be informative in friendly conversation.

Most of what you post must be to make your butt hole feel good because there’s no other utility in anything you post.

Informative? With actual information?

You??

Nope- you constantly are looking to own the libs-goes back to your family roots owning other people I’m sure.

DING hashbrowns!

 

[icanhelp1]

^^^^^^^^^^
Who you expecting to read this crap?
My eyes hurt just scanning.

You’re not a business driven entrepreneurial conservative at all. Here, lemme help you skip the middle man.

https://forum.literotica.com/thread...rumps-conviction.1611390/page-2#post-98944187

Not you! Mallard,

 

[YDB95]

Unlike you you I don’t always post to be argumentative,

 

[icanhelp1]

Informative? With actual information?

You??

Nope- you constantly are looking to own the libs-goes back to your family roots owning other people I’m sure.

DING hashbrowns!

Own libs?? Most of my posts are targeted to constitutional issues. Equal application of the law, equal protection under the law and due process. The reason your less than average intellectual capacity can’t understand why I post the material I post is because you can’t process any information outside the *ORANGE MAN BAD* concept, or you’re suffering from acute indigestion from consuming too many French fries.