i guess in closing, i'll say this. woody pretty much accurately portrayed the Average American Voter. likeable enough, doesn't take politics too seriously and will be seen as the good guy in this interaction with adding pretty much nothing to the conversation and effectively derailed the thread for a few pages and hours. people would vote for a guy like woody. i wonder why our leaders in DC seem to be ineffective.

good god, man. get it together

Lol

Someone please just kiss someone already.

Reply to doc: I'm two hours behind, but your point stands.

On a separate note, SK, are you ok?

Also, woody, please stop derailing democracy. K thx

SK790 wrote:

Woody wrote:I'm not deflecting I just wanted you to prove my point

3 posts, 0 facts. i'd rather be insufferable than worthless.

I represent that remark.

drsmooth wrote:

Woody wrote:Yeah, most days you're all insufferable

I suffer in succotash

Likes.

I'm sure it's been discussed before, but, is Hillary the first SoS to do what she's being lambasted for doing? It certainly doesn't make it right, or excuse the misleading statements about the behavior. But, seriously, is she the first?

Also, the GOP will now hold hearings on this? What, a 10th Benghazi hearing is too many?

I think the tech changing all the time doesn't help people to know what is and isn't "legal." Seems like she messed up, not a huge mess up, but she has lied about it. That's not surprising given that it wasn't a criminal offense and it was being blown out of proportion, imo. Still, she's been dishonest about it and it will be yet another reason for some people to believe what the GOP is saying and vote against her.

My concern for the election is what people will do behind a closed curtain is not necessarily what they'll say in public. I could see many people debunking Trump when talking to family and friends, but voting for him in the privacy of the voting booth where people can let their secret fears have a voice. The more Hillary is disliked or not trusted, the more likely a Trump polling boost will happen, imo.

PhillieMooDo wrote:I'm sure it's been discussed before, but, is Hillary the first SoS to do what she's being lambasted for doing? It certainly doesn't make it right, or excuse the misleading statements about the behavior. But, seriously, is she the first?

Also, the GOP will now hold hearings on this? What, a 10th Benghazi hearing is too many?

she's not the first to use private email. she is the first to have her own server to store said emails.

What have we learned from this? That baby boomers and technology don't mix?

I can't imagine my mom understanding even remotely how encrypted email and server technology works. She can't even save a picture from Facebook

Woody wrote:I can't imagine my mom understanding even remotely how encrypted email and server technology works. She can't even save a picture from Facebook

You can save pictures from Facebook?!

Werthless wrote:

drsmooth wrote:

Woody wrote:Yeah, most days you're all insufferable

I suffer in succotash

Likes.

ain't it the truth, ain't it the TRUTH

pacino wrote:

PhillieMooDo wrote:I'm sure it's been discussed before, but, is Hillary the first SoS to do what she's being lambasted for doing? It certainly doesn't make it right, or excuse the misleading statements about the behavior. But, seriously, is she the first?

Also, the GOP will now hold hearings on this? What, a 10th Benghazi hearing is too many?

she's not the first to use private email. she is the first to have her own server to store said emails.

A relevant part of the CFR was also updated in 2009 to say “Agencies that allow employees to send and receive official electronic mail messages using a system not operated by the agency must ensure that Federal records sent or received on such systems are preserved in the appropriate agency recordkeeping system.”

One thing I don't get is that Comey says that:

"Our investigation looked at whether there is evidence classified information was improperly stored or transmitted on that personal system, in violation of a federal statute making it a felony to mishandle classified information either intentionally or in a grossly negligent way, or a second statute making it a misdemeanor to knowingly remove classified information from appropriate systems or storage facilities."

But then he only discusses her actions in terms of intent, never bringing up gross negligence again. Literally the word "negligence" doesn't come up again in his statement. I admittedly haven't followed this very closely, can someone explain what is going on here?

Monkeyboy wrote: The more Hillary is disliked or not trusted, the more likely a Trump polling boost will happen, imo.

Polls be damned. No non-institutionalized adult of voting age can rationally cast a vote for drumpf. There is no justification for it. At all. not any. not privately. not in any fashion. If you (not you, but "you") even consider such a thing, Consider also that in even considering such an action you evidence your loathing for your children, your parents, your family members, your country with an ugly contempt that cannot be cleansed.

In a just universe, people even considering in the abstract doing such a thing would spontaneously combust.

The only vote that can be cast "for" drumpf is a vote "for" deporting him, with extreme prejudice.

MoBettle wrote: ....can someone explain what is going on here?

I'd simply say "politics is going on here", but that doesn't explain much. And Comey, ambitious career public official, rock-ribbed Republican, adroitly threading a political needle with his handling of this case, is politics in its most elegant & appalling & unavoidable form.

drsmooth wrote:

MoBettle wrote: ....can someone explain what is going on here?

I'd simply say "politics is going on here", but that doesn't explain much. And Comey, ambitious career public official, rock-ribbed Republican, adroitly threading a political needle with his handling of this case, is politics in its most elegant & appalling & unavoidable form.

So you're saying there isn't statute that calls for a standard of gross negligence?