Jump to content


Hillary and the classified emails


Recommended Posts

 

 

Does anybody in government read the rules before the step into their positions?

Awww, it's cute that you think rules apply to people in the government.

 

:P

 

The current regime is simply taking the DGAF attitude that's been prevalent in many aspects of our government for the last 16 or so years, and allowing it to become more unabashed and unchecked.

 

I don't disagree, but isn't that one of the main issues Trump ran on?

 

Of course, and people believed it. While Hillary would have been more along the lines of the last few presidents with the slow increase of government power creep, Trump and company are just more brazen about it, because they're amateurs. And they really DGAF.

Link to comment

Reading back through this thread, seeing all the names of HB members who were demanding Hillary's prosecution over using a private email server - not just sending classified info, but using a private email server for government business - I can't wait to see all those same folks come in here and wring their hands that Pence won't be prosecuted, either.

 

I'll get comfy and wait.

 

4HsrLGb.gif

  • Fire 2
Link to comment

Reading back through this thread, seeing all the names of HB members who were demanding Hillary's prosecution over using a private email server - not just sending classified info, but using a private email server for government business - I can't wait to see all those same folks come in here and wring their hands that Pence won't be prosecuted, either.

 

I'll get comfy and wait.

 

4HsrLGb.gif

He won't, even though he absolutely should. Because laws don't apply to people in power.

Link to comment

Correct me if I'm wrong, but what Pence did doesn't appear to even have been a breach of protocol. There's no law against it and they archived everything as required.

 

Our email/security/etc; these are things where technology and policy both need to be upgraded and streamlined in government. Isn't that a much more sensible explanation than a government full of nefarious actors? Sure, they may be for other reasons; I'm clearly not a fan of Pence in the slightest, but it's not his darn email usage that should be any sort of scandal.

Link to comment

When it became murky whether or not Clinton knowingly sent classified information via private email, the narrative pivoted to outrage over simply using a private email server.

 

So while what Pence did may not be any more prosecutable than what Clinton did, that's not the issue. The issue is how very differently this will be treated by conservative media and those who couldn't possibly support Clinton because of the email scandal - but who will have no problem supporting Pence.

Link to comment

When it became murky whether or not Clinton knowingly sent classified information via private email, the narrative pivoted to outrage over simply using a private email server.

 

So while what Pence did may not be any more prosecutable than what Clinton did, that's not the issue. The issue is how very differently this will be treated by conservative media and those who couldn't possibly support Clinton because of the email scandal - but who will have no problem supporting Pence.

Both sides will flip flop their stances as it becomes convenient.

Link to comment

I do agree with that: this is about the disparity in political reaction.

 

On the email question itself, though, I favor "neither is a particularly scandalous issue" over "both deserve to be prosecuted, but they won't because The Man".

Link to comment

I do agree with that: this is about the disparity in political reaction.

 

On the email question itself, though, I favor "neither is a particularly scandalous issue" over "both deserve to be prosecuted, but they won't because The Man".

I think the second part is important because if it was just some low level employee, they'd get hammered.

  • Fire 1
Link to comment

 

I do agree with that: this is about the disparity in political reaction.

 

On the email question itself, though, I favor "neither is a particularly scandalous issue" over "both deserve to be prosecuted, but they won't because The Man".

I think the second part is important because if it was just some low level employee, they'd get hammered.

 

Exactly. I said all along Hillary would never get prosecuted for this scandal. Pence won't either, but we all know Bob the Peon would have been walked out the door with his possessions in a box already.

  • Fire 2
Link to comment

Hammered? Fired, maybe -- but low-level employees are fired for small offenses just because they are replaceable. Why keep someone you know relatively nothing about other than they made this screw up already? It's not a gross injustice that the boss can show up thirty minutes late to a meeting, whereas a guy doing that in his first week will get canned.

 

Prosecuted and jailed?...I find it somewhat hard to believe that this would actually happen for a low-level employee, even if they did use AOL. If it does happen, then I don't think it should. So the answer becomes "nobody should get hammered" for me, not "everyone".

 

The Obama administration did go after whistleblowers harshly, but that too is different; those are intentional spreading of secrets, not a boneheaded brush-up against curmudgeonly government tech policy. And, again, the criticism against him on that count is fair.

Link to comment

Hammered? Fired, maybe -- but low-level employees are fired for small offenses just because they are replaceable. Why keep someone you know relatively nothing about other than they made this screw up already? It's not a gross injustice that the boss can show up thirty minutes late to a meeting, whereas a guy doing that in his first week will get canned.

I like how Dan Carlin has summarized this argument before.

 

Your boss is paying you. You work for him.

 

Politicians are paid by the people, because they are public servants. They (are supposed to) work for us.

Link to comment

Yes, and we are (supposed to be) able to discern between treason and skirting policy.

 

That we were not is why we now have a deranged, incompetent, and corruptible rabble-rouser running the executive branch.

Allowing people to skirt policy (or continually rewrite the law in favor of themselves) unabated for years is part of what allowed Trump to get elected in the first place. That's part of the pushback against the status quo.

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...