Where Colorado Buffalo alumni, fans and friends come to chat all things CU. Go Buffs!

Off Topic Message Board


Joined: 09/01/1996 Posts: 15178
Likes: 2585


those three emails that had INTERNAL markings off (c) were, in fact, not only not classified, they had to do with a birthday party or the like

All of which has been discussed, verified, and known by the FBI, the HOUSE, and evereybody who has LOOKED at this

It happens that the "redacted" classified emails had single words often blacked out, bu=ecause that topic was classified, none of the information was.

In FACT, as Gates concluded, the amount of redaction would be seen as NORMAL if emails of correspondence were looked at in the strictest sense that these were

I had TS/SCI clearance at the CIA for over three years, and got read into (SWORN INTO) several SCI areas. I know what I'm talking about. For me to tell you WHAT I was sworn into, even the names of half of them would be a breach. As I left the CIA, I was SWORN OUT of each of these areas. So I never say any of them, as my knowledge is to be kept silence by me.. If I told you what each one was about would be a breach, but if I did you would already know a lot about them because of the public knowledge of much of what goes on in intelligence.

THis area is no joke, but to understand the difficulty in working in this environment in today's fast moving events, TOPICS will be MENTIONED in emails. BFD.

What Bob Gates said is what I already believed happened all along, and I like the fact he publically agrees.

(In response to this post by SamSpade)

Posted: 07/29/2016 at 8:27PM


Insert a Link

Enter the title of the link here:

Enter the full web address of the link here -- include the "http://" part:

Current Thread:
Close race -- buffdad 07/29/2016 3:03PM
  I don't get what was misreported. -- 93Buff 07/29/2016 3:15PM
  This was under reported.... -- SamSpade 07/29/2016 7:25PM
  Can't read the link -- buffdad 07/29/2016 3:26PM
  Here you go... -- SamSpade 07/29/2016 7:31PM
  I've read that like I said, -- buffdad 07/29/2016 7:42PM
  Factcheck.org... -- SamSpade 07/29/2016 8:06PM
  Yep -- buffdad 07/29/2016 8:27PM
  Need a link of that statement. -- 93Buff 07/29/2016 4:01PM
  Yeah I read that before -- buffdad 07/29/2016 4:17PM
  Re: Yeah I read that before -- Gateway 07/29/2016 4:24PM
  Because the election is based on her honesty -- buffdad 07/29/2016 4:56PM
  Re: Can't read the link -- Gateway 07/29/2016 3:29PM
  In fact, they did retrieve them from a backup ** -- buffdad 07/29/2016 3:31PM
  Completely agree. Someday, some historian will write -- Buffs4Ever 07/29/2016 3:11PM