Evil Avatar  



Go Back   Evil Avatar > Geek Love > Totally Off Topic

» Sponsored Links


» Recent Threads
Doctor Who: Series 11...
Last post by wunshot
Today 01:21 PM
18 Replies, 1,662 Views
Liberals gone wild
Last post by SpectralThundr
Today 11:30 AM
1,997 Replies, 216,947 Views
The story of Thrill...
Last post by karaliusbronius
Today 11:02 AM
7 Replies, 806 Views
What's behind Nintendo's...
Last post by Chimpbot
Today 08:37 AM
27 Replies, 1,816 Views
Coin hive Error
Last post by AlfredT
Today 08:22 AM
4 Replies, 308 Views
Microtransactions have...
Last post by xplics
Today 06:18 AM
7 Replies, 820 Views
Picts - Waiting to...
Last post by BeardedSonOfNel
Today 05:21 AM
18,122 Replies, 2,814,672 Views
Four years after it was...
Last post by Wizzkidd
Today 05:03 AM
9 Replies, 1,191 Views
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 06-22-2018, 01:36 PM   #1741
Eats
Developer
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Terran View Post
Because setting up your own unsecure server for government correspondence is idiotic and illegal.
Because sending and receiving government correspondence from a hostile foreign state on your unsecured server is idiotic.
Are you saying she intentionally wanted her server to be insecure? That doesn't make any sense at all.
Eats is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 01:36 PM   #1742
VenomUSMC
Evil Dead
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 8,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eats View Post
I assume her IT people advised her to do it and/or did it.
This assumption of yours requires ignoring, well, everything. Hillary warned others at the State Dept. not to use private email, she never asked for permission to setup the private server(s), the State Dept. - when she was leading it - notified all State Dept. that they were barred from using private emails, and she was warned about the risks.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CNBC
"Clinton sent out an all-staff cable that personal email should not be used day-to-day for business purposes and that personal email is not secure, so do not use them for business purposes," according to an FBI report released as part of a 100-page document dump. "After Clinton's time as Secretary of State, there was also State guidance that if State employees had to use their personal email for business purposes they should send a carbon copy (Cc) to their ".gov" work email as well."
Hillary Clinton's BlackBerry envy failed to impress the NSA
Back when she was secretary of state, Clinton couldn't get the secure phone she wanted, so she continued to use her own

NSA wanted Hillary Clinton to use this secure Windows phone


The facts show that she didn't listen to techies, doing simply as she pleased.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eats View Post
You imply that you think Hillary is computer savvy when I doubt she could tell you the difference between a browser and the internet and google. If she is anything like my parents or most old people those are probably all the same thing to her, and she doesn't even know what SMTP is. I wouldn't expect Trump to know that stuff either.

It doesn't really make sense that she intended to have an insecure email server.
I didn't imply that Hillary was computer savvy, the joke was that your excuse is hilariously bad -- Hillary was no stranger to the rules about handling classified information, as she spent 6 years on the Senate Armed Services Committee handling classified information. Suddenly she didn't know that she wasn't supposed to do what she did? There is proof she was advised against doing what she did, but it's all just an "accident."

Would your parents have told NSA to go pound sand and continued to use unsecured devices? Would your parents have thought to setup a private server in their own home to send, store, and received information on as head of an intelligence agency? If your parents would, they're dumb. The big difference is this: your parents would be in prison if they had down what she did.

It makes complete sense that she had her own private server because she valued one thing beyond protecting classified information and turning over official government records: her own secrecy.

Quote:
Inspector General Steve Linick, appointed by President Obama, said he couldn’t find any evidence that Mrs. Clinton received approval for her odd email arrangement, and when lower-level staffers pressed the issue, saying she was skirting open-records laws, they were ordered “never to speak of the secretary’s personal email system again.”

In one instance in 2011, Mrs. Clinton’s tech guru thought the server was being hacked and shut it down for a few minutes. Months later, Mrs. Clinton feared yet another hack attack was underway — yet never reported the incident to the department, in another breach of department rules.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anenome View Post
Many cultures of the world marry girls off after their first menses, around 13 years old. I can't say that's inherently immoral, no.
VenomUSMC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 01:37 PM   #1743
Eats
Developer
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by Booda View Post
If you can't figure that one out then there really isn't much hope for you.
So she wanted her server to be hacked and her emails dumped out publicly. That is what you are saying?
Eats is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 01:37 PM   #1744
VenomUSMC
Evil Dead
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 8,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eats View Post
Are you saying she intentionally wanted her server to be insecure? That doesn't make any sense at all.
No, she wanted the ability to destroy her records far more than she gave two shits about properly handling classified documents or turning over work related documents.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anenome View Post
Many cultures of the world marry girls off after their first menses, around 13 years old. I can't say that's inherently immoral, no.
VenomUSMC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 01:42 PM   #1745
Terran
Evil Dead
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 12,442
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eats View Post
Are you saying she intentionally wanted her server to be insecure?
Clearly she cared more about avoiding public record laws and public FOIA or congressional review of her work documents than about security. After all, she was supposed to win, and nobody would have been able to present an IG report AT ALL on the biased kid-glove treatment she got from the FBI, lol.

Do you get dizzy trying the spin cycle so hard?
__________________
Why would Republicans pass such a terrible tax law? lol...

Giving people more of their own money...WHY WOULD YOU DO THIS? :D
Terran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 01:48 PM   #1746
Eats
Developer
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 505
I think we are talking past each other. I agree with you guys about this:

"she wanted the ability to destroy her records"

"she cared more about avoiding public record laws and public FOIA or congressional review of her work documents"

Also convenience.

I said she accidentally failed to secure her emails. The whole premise of her doing these things in the quotes above also requires her to be able to secure her emails, or else they will all come out.

These things we are talking about are different from intentionally undermining the US and our strategic interests like for example, trying to give Ukraine to Russia in exchange for nothing. Pretending like Russia isn't trying to undermine our country and hack its infrastructure. Continuing to essentially run a company that is taking foreign money while in office and doing what appear to be strange deals around it.

Last edited by Eats; 06-22-2018 at 02:47 PM..
Eats is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 01:55 PM   #1747
Terran
Evil Dead
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 12,442
James Woods bringing the Dems out back to the woodshed, lol.



Interesting story behind the young girl in the photo. She wasn't separated from her mom. Her dad confirmed this. Her mom took her (leaving three other children behind) without telling the dad. She paid $6,000 to coyotes (drug runners) to get across the border, a sum made possible by the fact that she comes from a comfortable family back home.

Yup...a tragedy made possible by a parent's terrible choices. FAKE NEWS from progtardian media elites.
__________________
Why would Republicans pass such a terrible tax law? lol...

Giving people more of their own money...WHY WOULD YOU DO THIS? :D
Terran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 04:31 PM   #1748
SpectralThundr
Evil Dead
 
SpectralThundr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Bawwston
Posts: 7,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by Whimbrel View Post
I see you have popped back up to show us all that you are still confused. Welcome back!

Now, maybe go back and find out what actually happened in that uranium deal.
Oh good more useless hot air from little whimple. We know what happened, the Obama administration with Clinton as SoS sold uranium illegally. They continue to go against congress. She also illegally handled classified information on purpose, if you're that stupid to think it was accidental, then I have some swamp land to sell you, real cheap.
SpectralThundr is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 04:54 PM   #1749
Eats
Developer
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 505
Quote:
Originally Posted by SpectralThundr View Post
the Obama administration with Clinton as SoS sold uranium illegally.
In what sense was it illegal?

This is like saying what happened with Trump and ZTE was illegal. That is actually far more sketchy and the links are less tenuous, but there is no real smoking gun.
Eats is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 06:05 PM   #1750
VenomUSMC
Evil Dead
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 8,635
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eats View Post
I think we are talking past each other. I agree with you guys about this:

"she wanted the ability to destroy her records"

"she cared more about avoiding public record laws and public FOIA or congressional review of her work documents"

Also convenience.

I said she accidentally failed to secure her emails. The whole premise of her doing these things in the quotes above also requires her to be able to secure her emails, or else they will all come out.
Here is the quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eats
Because accidental failure to properly secure emails and treason are equally concerning...
It's no accident, as the links and quotes above illustrate that she was warned that the path she made the conscientious choice to travel down a path she was warned was not secure. So, it's no accident.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eats View Post
These things we are talking about are different from intentionally undermining the US and our strategic interests like for example, trying to give Ukraine to Russia in exchange for nothing. Pretending like Russia isn't trying to undermine our country and hack its infrastructure. Continuing to essentially run a company that is taking foreign money while in office and doing what appear to be strange deals around it.
She was willing to risk classified information:
Quote:
The U.S. classification of information system has three classification levels -- Top Secret, Secret, and Confidential -- which are defined in EO 12356.2 Those levels are used both for NSI and atomic energy information (RD and FRD). Section 1.1(a) of EO 12356 states that:

(a) National Security Information (hereinafter "classified information") shall be classified at one of the following three levels:
(1) "Top Secret" shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause exceptionally grave damage to the national security.
(2) "Secret" shall be applied to information, the unauthorized disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause serious damage to the national security.
She intentionally chose to pursue a strategy which she was warned - herself was worried that she'd been hacked - would cause "exceptionally grave damage to the national security" because she wanted her own personal secrecy.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anenome View Post
Many cultures of the world marry girls off after their first menses, around 13 years old. I can't say that's inherently immoral, no.
VenomUSMC is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 06:17 PM   #1751
Eats
Developer
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 505
She definitely intended for her emails to not get hacked. It is foolish to suggest that she wanted to be hacked.

Even suggesting it undermines your previous point:
"she wanted the ability to destroy her records"

This makes no sense if all her emails could get hacked and leaked.
Eats is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 07:24 PM   #1752
Terran
Evil Dead
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 12,442
She made a decision that the risk that her e-mails would be publicly revealed was greater if they were actually housed on secure government devices and servers rather than if they were obtainable by foreign entities and enemies of the state who would surely not bend to a FOIA or congressional committee request for discovery.

lol...she was so self-interested and protective she chose to allow American state secrets to be available to enemies of our nation rather than its own citizens.
__________________
Why would Republicans pass such a terrible tax law? lol...

Giving people more of their own money...WHY WOULD YOU DO THIS? :D
Terran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 07:32 PM   #1753
Eats
Developer
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 505
She thought she could secure them, which I'm sure her IT people told her they could.

This just is not even on the same level as actual treason, though if she was president we would be talking about impeachment probably.

If Cohen flips we will probably be actually seeing impeachment early next year.
Eats is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 07:33 PM   #1754
Terran
Evil Dead
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 12,442
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eats View Post
This just is not even on the same level as actual treason
You're right. That would be Obama. You know, the guy with "flexibility" toward Russia. The guy who told Romney the 80s called and wanted its foreign policy back. The treasonous bastard. Obama.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Eats View Post
If Cohen flips we will probably be actually seeing impeachment early next year.
Don't care. President Pence. Whatever. TDS is fun to watch as it works its way through your addled brains.
__________________
Why would Republicans pass such a terrible tax law? lol...

Giving people more of their own money...WHY WOULD YOU DO THIS? :D
Terran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 07:49 PM   #1755
Eats
Developer
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 505
Treason isn't whatever you want it to be. It isn't just decisions that you don't like.
Eats is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 07:53 PM   #1756
Terran
Evil Dead
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 12,442
Obama betrayed the nation's security by literally telling his cybersecurity staff to 'stand down' and do nothing in the face of Russian attempts to infiltrate and impact our electoral process. TREASON.

Quote:
The Obama White House’s chief cyber official testified Wednesday that proposals he was developing to counter Russia’s attack on the U.S. presidential election were put on a “back burner” after he was ordered to “stand down” his efforts in the summer of 2016.
__________________
Why would Republicans pass such a terrible tax law? lol...

Giving people more of their own money...WHY WOULD YOU DO THIS? :D
Terran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 07:57 PM   #1757
Eats
Developer
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 505
Having a strategy you don't like is not the definition of treason.
Eats is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 08:00 PM   #1758
Terran
Evil Dead
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 12,442
lol, the 2016 election worked out just fine. Obama's policies leading into it were a clusterfuck, the DNC's approach to the primary was perfect, and Hillary's campaign was impeccable. All worked out in the end!

__________________
Why would Republicans pass such a terrible tax law? lol...

Giving people more of their own money...WHY WOULD YOU DO THIS? :D
Terran is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-22-2018, 10:51 PM   #1759
vallor
Michael Bay Fanboi
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 6,955
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eats View Post
Treason isn't whatever you want it to be. It isn't just decisions that you don't like.
Hi Pot, have you met Kettle? Treason isn't whatever you want it to be. It isn't just someone and an agenda you don't like.

The unfortunate thing is there is currently abundant proof of the complicity of Hillary and Obama, and many in their administration, in diverting (and perverting) Justice and directly weakening the national security of the United States to further their whims and agenda (stand down on cyber security, allowing unmasking, using unauthorized devices and private hardware and unsecured lines of communication).

Yet there is still little proof, just a lot of conjecture, innuendo, and hope something will materialize showing Trump's so called "treason".
vallor is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 06-23-2018, 02:38 AM   #1760
vallor
Michael Bay Fanboi
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 6,955
ACLU makes it official: Less Civil Rights More Social Justice

Quote:
This week, an internal ACLU memo showed that the famed civil rights organization was making protection of the First Amendment a secondary concern, balancing it instead with issues of “racial justice, reproductive freedom, or a myriad of other rights, where the content of the speech we seek to protect conflicts with our policies on those matters, and/or otherwise is directed at menacing vulnerable groups of individuals.”

This is stunning language. This is the group that once defended Nazis marching in Skokie, Ill., under the terms of the First Amendment, and won. The ACLU website brags, “The notoriety of the case caused some ACLU members to resign, but to many others the case has come to represent the ACLU's unwavering commitment to principle.” Yet, now the ACLU would presumably decline the case, stating that it might be too damaging to their other social justice priorities.
It isn't like this is a big surprise, it has been pretty clear for at least a decade that the ACLU was far more invested in the progressive side of things than protecting civil liberties and constitutional law.

The ACLU for the last 10 years has been paying lip-service to being fair and equitable to who they defend and take as clients but they've started dodging anyone they judge as being "bad" for their Social Justice image.

Much like how the Supreme court has been avoiding taking certain types of cases for some reason (like ones which are setting dangerous precedents around firearm ownership like which effectively negate the 2nd amendment) "you can't open carry and you can't constitutional carry. You have to get a concealed carry permit and can apply but the Sheriff has never actually issued one."

But technically the option is there so the Supreme Court doesn't take the case. Seems like a pretty basic violation of Heller. But it just doesn't seem like a good time to take a 2nd Amendment case I guess.

EDIT:
A perfect example of the ACLU's SocJus activisim: Lawsuit against the Government to force removal of a question on the 2020 census asking if a person is a US citizen. They are ascard it would be used to cross reference illegals! We might figure out more accurately how many felony border jumpers and visa overstays are in the country! OH NOS!

They use the 5th amendment as one of the arguments however I don't believe the 5th applies to non-citizens. These people went to law school?
vallor is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:46 PM.