F
Fred Bloggs
Guest
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/24/politics/pence-classified-documents-fbi/index.html
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
First on CNN: Classified documents found at Penceâ s Indiana home...
R
Ralph Mowery
Guest
In article <4c5763f9-3941-4942-9381-38774a6e90b0n@googlegroups.com>,
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com says...
If they found any at Pences house he must not be very bright. He should
have ran them through a shreader when some were found at Bidens house.
bloggs.fredbloggs.fred@gmail.com says...
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/24/politics/pence-classified-documents-fbi/index.html
If they found any at Pences house he must not be very bright. He should
have ran them through a shreader when some were found at Bidens house.
F
Fred Bloggs
Guest
On Tuesday, January 24, 2023 at 3:06:08 PM UTC-5, Ralph Mowery wrote:
Well, we know he\'s not very bright. By his recollection he NEVER possessed any classified documents. Then he thought the better of it and sent some of his lawyers (female staff members) to check the files at his home, they found the documents and notified the FBI or archives or whoever.
In article <4c5763f9-3941-4942...@googlegroups.com>,
bloggs.fred...@gmail.com says...
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/24/politics/pence-classified-documents-fbi/index.html
If they found any at Pences house he must not be very bright. He should
have ran them through a shreader when some were found at Bidens house.
Well, we know he\'s not very bright. By his recollection he NEVER possessed any classified documents. Then he thought the better of it and sent some of his lawyers (female staff members) to check the files at his home, they found the documents and notified the FBI or archives or whoever.
T
three_jeeps
Guest
On Tuesday, January 24, 2023 at 3:30:31 PM UTC-5, Fred Bloggs wrote:
These clowns should be publically flogged for this \'oversight\'. I live with one foot in this world and it is made abundantly clear about handling, managing, and storing any sort of classified doc. Mandatory training and refresher sessions are given yearly or every 6 months, depending on circumstances.
Also made extremely clear are the consequences for not following the rules.. \'Public servents\' no matter what position they have are not exempt from any of this, including POTUS.
What is disturbing here is that the discoveries suggest that many of the elected officials are lax wrt following the rules...
On Tuesday, January 24, 2023 at 3:06:08 PM UTC-5, Ralph Mowery wrote:
In article <4c5763f9-3941-4942...@googlegroups.com>,
bloggs.fred...@gmail.com says...
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/24/politics/pence-classified-documents-fbi/index.html
If they found any at Pences house he must not be very bright. He should
have ran them through a shreader when some were found at Bidens house.
Well, we know he\'s not very bright. By his recollection he NEVER possessed any classified documents. Then he thought the better of it and sent some of his lawyers (female staff members) to check the files at his home, they found the documents and notified the FBI or archives or whoever.
These clowns should be publically flogged for this \'oversight\'. I live with one foot in this world and it is made abundantly clear about handling, managing, and storing any sort of classified doc. Mandatory training and refresher sessions are given yearly or every 6 months, depending on circumstances.
Also made extremely clear are the consequences for not following the rules.. \'Public servents\' no matter what position they have are not exempt from any of this, including POTUS.
What is disturbing here is that the discoveries suggest that many of the elected officials are lax wrt following the rules...
D
Don Y
Guest
On 1/25/2023 12:56 PM, three_jeeps wrote:
Why isn\'t there a REGISTRY of who-has-what maintained? So, someone
could examine that at any time and contact the folks involved
to ascertain why they STILL have said document(s) out?
Even public libraries possess this \"advanced technology\"...
These clowns should be publically flogged for this \'oversight\'. I live
with one foot in this world and it is made abundantly clear about handling,
managing, and storing any sort of classified doc. Mandatory training and
refresher sessions are given yearly or every 6 months, depending on
circumstances. Also made extremely clear are the consequences for not
following the rules. \'Public servents\' no matter what position they have
are not exempt from any of this, including POTUS.
What is disturbing here is that the discoveries suggest that many of the
elected officials are lax wrt following the rules...
Why isn\'t there a REGISTRY of who-has-what maintained? So, someone
could examine that at any time and contact the folks involved
to ascertain why they STILL have said document(s) out?
Even public libraries possess this \"advanced technology\"...
F
Fred Bloggs
Guest
On Wednesday, January 25, 2023 at 2:56:31 PM UTC-5, three_jeeps wrote:
What I want to know is how they passed an audit? They\'re supposed to periodically take inventory and sign off on it. In the case of Biden and Pence it looks like they didn\'t have whole documents- it was just pages from a classified document. That doesn\'t mean the page actually contained classified information.
On Tuesday, January 24, 2023 at 3:30:31 PM UTC-5, Fred Bloggs wrote:
On Tuesday, January 24, 2023 at 3:06:08 PM UTC-5, Ralph Mowery wrote:
In article <4c5763f9-3941-4942...@googlegroups.com>,
bloggs.fred...@gmail.com says...
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/24/politics/pence-classified-documents-fbi/index.html
If they found any at Pences house he must not be very bright. He should
have ran them through a shreader when some were found at Bidens house..
Well, we know he\'s not very bright. By his recollection he NEVER possessed any classified documents. Then he thought the better of it and sent some of his lawyers (female staff members) to check the files at his home, they found the documents and notified the FBI or archives or whoever.
These clowns should be publically flogged for this \'oversight\'. I live with one foot in this world and it is made abundantly clear about handling, managing, and storing any sort of classified doc. Mandatory training and refresher sessions are given yearly or every 6 months, depending on circumstances.
Also made extremely clear are the consequences for not following the rules. \'Public servents\' no matter what position they have are not exempt from any of this, including POTUS.
What is disturbing here is that the discoveries suggest that many of the elected officials are lax wrt following the rules...
What I want to know is how they passed an audit? They\'re supposed to periodically take inventory and sign off on it. In the case of Biden and Pence it looks like they didn\'t have whole documents- it was just pages from a classified document. That doesn\'t mean the page actually contained classified information.
D
Dave Platt
Guest
In article <tqs4ug$qmdk$1@dont-email.me>,
Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:
As I understand it, when you get to the higher levels of document
classification, even the subject/title of the document is considered
to be classified. At the highest levels of security, even the
existence of a document is classified information... \"codeword\" stuff.
So, if you want to use a registry to keep track of all such things,
you\'d either have to have the registry be a highly-classified entity
(which makes it hard to use) or you\'d have to identify and track
documents only by some sort of fully-anonymized individual identifiers
with no other associations (which makes them very difficult to track).
A centralized registry could probably work for the documents at the
lower levels of classification, but when you get up to the
\"sensitive compartmented information\" level of things it\'s a lot
trickier.
And, of course, any such centralized registry would be a prime target
for espionage. It\'d be almost like putting on a Starfleet security
officer\'s uniform - bright red, with a bullseye painted on the back
in day-glow yellow.
Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:
What is disturbing here is that the discoveries suggest that many of the
elected officials are lax wrt following the rules...
Why isn\'t there a REGISTRY of who-has-what maintained? So, someone
could examine that at any time and contact the folks involved
to ascertain why they STILL have said document(s) out?
Even public libraries possess this \"advanced technology\"...
As I understand it, when you get to the higher levels of document
classification, even the subject/title of the document is considered
to be classified. At the highest levels of security, even the
existence of a document is classified information... \"codeword\" stuff.
So, if you want to use a registry to keep track of all such things,
you\'d either have to have the registry be a highly-classified entity
(which makes it hard to use) or you\'d have to identify and track
documents only by some sort of fully-anonymized individual identifiers
with no other associations (which makes them very difficult to track).
A centralized registry could probably work for the documents at the
lower levels of classification, but when you get up to the
\"sensitive compartmented information\" level of things it\'s a lot
trickier.
And, of course, any such centralized registry would be a prime target
for espionage. It\'d be almost like putting on a Starfleet security
officer\'s uniform - bright red, with a bullseye painted on the back
in day-glow yellow.
D
Don Y
Guest
On 1/26/2023 11:14 AM, Dave Platt wrote:
Numbers seem to be good identifiers. Note that a number need
not exist in a single *unified* database. I.e., a document
can be known as \"123\" in MY namespace (the list of documents
that I have \"signed out\") and \"8723\" in YOUR namespace.
Only the keeper of the registry needs to know how to map
these to \"real\" objects.
This also prevents minimize information \"leak\" as there
would be *nothing* saying \"435 people have a copy of document ABC\".
Or, conversely, \"only ONE copy of document GHTU exists!\"
It just means that the person/entity responsible for its administration
has to be trusted. SOMEONE has to \"receive\" documents that are returned.
Why can\'t that someone also have the responsibility of verifying that the
document is, in fact, the document signed out to that person (by examining
HIS namespace of registered objects)?
See above. The entity with access to the namespace:document mappings
(for each possible namespace) can query based on the \"unmapped\" document
identifier.
If you delegate the management of different namespaces to different
persons, then you have to coordinate the searches of those namespaces.
But, you don\'t have to knock on office doors and ask, \"Senator Cotton,
do YOU have any controlled documents?\"
You know that such a list of documents already exists, somewhere.
And, there are likely documents that are never \"lent\" (must be
viewed in a secure facility). So, the problem isn\'t made worse
by tracking who has what.
Indeed, without such tracking, how can you chase down ALL copies of
\"document X\"?
Likewise, having that document checked out to an individual makes
that individual (legally?) responsible for its security. You
can\'t just claim you destroyed it and, thus, there is no further
risk of it being \"lost\".
In article <tqs4ug$qmdk$1@dont-email.me>,
Don Y <blockedofcourse@foo.invalid> wrote:
What is disturbing here is that the discoveries suggest that many of the
elected officials are lax wrt following the rules...
Why isn\'t there a REGISTRY of who-has-what maintained? So, someone
could examine that at any time and contact the folks involved
to ascertain why they STILL have said document(s) out?
Even public libraries possess this \"advanced technology\"...
As I understand it, when you get to the higher levels of document
classification, even the subject/title of the document is considered
to be classified. At the highest levels of security, even the
existence of a document is classified information... \"codeword\" stuff.
Numbers seem to be good identifiers. Note that a number need
not exist in a single *unified* database. I.e., a document
can be known as \"123\" in MY namespace (the list of documents
that I have \"signed out\") and \"8723\" in YOUR namespace.
Only the keeper of the registry needs to know how to map
these to \"real\" objects.
This also prevents minimize information \"leak\" as there
would be *nothing* saying \"435 people have a copy of document ABC\".
Or, conversely, \"only ONE copy of document GHTU exists!\"
So, if you want to use a registry to keep track of all such things,
you\'d either have to have the registry be a highly-classified entity
(which makes it hard to use)
It just means that the person/entity responsible for its administration
has to be trusted. SOMEONE has to \"receive\" documents that are returned.
Why can\'t that someone also have the responsibility of verifying that the
document is, in fact, the document signed out to that person (by examining
HIS namespace of registered objects)?
or you\'d have to identify and track
documents only by some sort of fully-anonymized individual identifiers
with no other associations (which makes them very difficult to track).
See above. The entity with access to the namespace:document mappings
(for each possible namespace) can query based on the \"unmapped\" document
identifier.
If you delegate the management of different namespaces to different
persons, then you have to coordinate the searches of those namespaces.
But, you don\'t have to knock on office doors and ask, \"Senator Cotton,
do YOU have any controlled documents?\"
A centralized registry could probably work for the documents at the
lower levels of classification, but when you get up to the
\"sensitive compartmented information\" level of things it\'s a lot
trickier.
You know that such a list of documents already exists, somewhere.
And, there are likely documents that are never \"lent\" (must be
viewed in a secure facility). So, the problem isn\'t made worse
by tracking who has what.
Indeed, without such tracking, how can you chase down ALL copies of
\"document X\"?
Likewise, having that document checked out to an individual makes
that individual (legally?) responsible for its security. You
can\'t just claim you destroyed it and, thus, there is no further
risk of it being \"lost\".
And, of course, any such centralized registry would be a prime target
for espionage. It\'d be almost like putting on a Starfleet security
officer\'s uniform - bright red, with a bullseye painted on the back
in day-glow yellow.