|
"meh". if all you have on someone in a presidential election is poor data security practices, it's gonna be a bad election for you.
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 00:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 03:42 |
|
|
onlypaidforscatpix posted:"meh". Thx for your hot take. 5 cents has been deposited on your Panera gift card!
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 00:11
|
|
|
onlypaidforscatpix posted:"meh". True. As the NSA proved to Europe, it doesn't matter how strong a chief executive's email protection is. That poo poo is getting hacked.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 00:15
|
|
|
Glad to hear the arcana of American security rules and regulations are a big hit abroad.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 00:18
|
|
|
Must be a cushy job to be spokesperson for the entirety of Non-america.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 00:27
|
|
|
NoEyedSquareGuy posted:Must be a cushy job to be spokesperson for the entirety of Non-america. Where do I apply
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 06:43
|
|
|
as a not american i completely agree, who cares shillary's email security is probably still better than that of 90% of our government
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 10:00
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
People who care don't think that the leaking of the emails is so much a scandal in itself, but that now someone will inevitably find the chain of emails where she orders the death of private Ben Ghazi. e: 
Doc Hawkins fucked around with this message at 10:53 on Sep 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 10:50
|
|
|
Hillary is the not-Trump candidate, right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 11:58
|
|
|
It's a thing that for any other State Department employee would end their career, result in the loss of their security clearance, and likely result in jail time. The disappointing bit is that this is a gigantic, flashing "THE RULES DO NOT APPLY TO RICH PEOPLE" sign that'll get ignored by a full half of the country and harped about with zero actual action by the other half because partisan politics.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 11:58
|
|
|
Warbadger posted:It's a thing that for any other State Department employee would end their career, result in the loss of their security clearance, and likely result in jail time. The disappointing bit is that this is a gigantic, flashing "THE RULES DO NOT APPLY TO RICH PEOPLE" sign that'll get ignored by a full half of the country and harped about with zero actual action by the other half because partisan politics. Maybe we should reform the State Department rules instead, specifically the ones about using lovely internet security.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 16:13
|
|
|
Hillary Clinton is the one that got arrested for having a 'blow job' in the nineties, right?
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 16:24
|
|
|
She has a shockingly hard time telling the truth, is a problem.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 16:28
|
|
|
Infidelity can get your security clearance pulled.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 16:29
|
|
|
Warbadger posted:It's a thing that for any other State Department employee would end their career, result in the loss of their security clearance, and likely result in jail time. The bolded part is patently untrue.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 18:21
|
|
|
A reminder of how incompetent our own politicans are at data security.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
Periodiko posted:The bolded part is patently untrue. And honestly so is the rest of it. Most security clearance regulations are hilariously unrealistic given the workloads of people working in many of those kinds of positions. Its pretty much an unspoken rule that it all gets ignored as long as you don't do anything too stupid. A lowly peon who did this probably wouldn't even draw criticism from his higher ups as long as it was just that. People who view our governments security as this vast, unassailable, tightly controlled program are dumb. James Bond and the Bourne Whatevers are movies, don't confuse the way that poo poo is depicted with real life. Even Burn After Reading gives our security apparatus too much credit.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
TROIKA CURES GREEK posted:She has a shockingly hard time telling the truth, is a problem. Hillary Clinton isn't exactly the most truthful person ever but I think she's probably the most believable out of literally any of the major players out of this election
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 19:14
|
|
|
Aesop Poprock posted:Hillary Clinton isn't exactly the most truthful person ever but I think she's probably the most believable out of literally any of the major players out of this election Yeah. When the choice is between Donald "I'm too incoherent to be capable of lying, also more money for me and gently caress you" Trump and power hungry Shillary, then it's Shillary every day.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 19:19
|
|
|
Oh even though he's incoherent donald trump still manages to lie almost every single time he opens his mouth. Like there's saying "you shouldn't say it's ok for your candidate to do it just because mine does it" and then there's "your candidate does nothing but provably lie with every sentence he produces"
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 19:28
|
|
|
Trump never knows if he means something he says or not at any given moment, so it is impossible for him to lie. This of course also means that it's impossible for him to tell the truth, because he doesn't know what that is.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 19:37
|
|
|
Aesop Poprock posted:Hillary Clinton isn't exactly the most truthful person ever but I think she's probably the most believable out of literally any of the major players out of this election
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 19:38
|
|
|
It's funny how so many of the republicans who decry Hillary as corrupt and power hungry to the point of murdering her political opponents also have a weird boner for Putin.
|
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 19:43
|
|
|
Schizotek posted:And honestly so is the rest of it. Most security clearance regulations are hilariously unrealistic given the workloads of people working in many of those kinds of positions. Its pretty much an unspoken rule that it all gets ignored as long as you don't do anything too stupid. A lowly peon who did this probably wouldn't even draw criticism from his higher ups as long as it was just that. People who view our governments security as this vast, unassailable, tightly controlled program are dumb. While you are correct that life is not a Hollywood spy movie, you also very clearly don't know what you're talking about. If you're talking from actual experience and have also worked with the DoS for any length of time I'd be shocked if you hadn't seen people losing clearances for mishandling classified materials - even loving up a few times with bog standard PII can result in a lost clearance and thus get you canned. There's a reason for the burgeoning clearance-related legal field in the DC-Metro area. https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...19b1_story.html Periodiko posted:The bolded part is patently untrue. Given the specific case of willfully avoiding the secure and internally audited system to pass all work related correspondence including a bunch of Classified stuff across a personal system for an extended amount of time because ~it's easier~ I wouldn't entirely rule jail time out had this been some random middle manager or whatever. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 21:37 on Sep 3, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 3, 2016 19:58
|
|
|
Periodiko posted:The bolded part is patently untrue. While that is one possible interpretation, people are much less willing to indulge the convenient fiction that setting up a private server and storing a bunch of classified on it was just a big misunderstanding, that you were advised by your (unindicted) subordinates that it was OK, that you were confused by the classification headings, that none of this constituted a deliberate attempt to evade government rules, when you aren't a senior administration official and party power player.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 00:51
|
|
|
Wasn't she just continuing the status quo established by her predecessor at State? ~non-American spokesperson for Caribbean Nations Terrified of Trump
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 01:01
|
|
|
doverhog posted:Trump never knows if he means something he says or not at any given moment, so it is impossible for him to lie. This of course also means that it's impossible for him to tell the truth, because he doesn't know what that is. There's a difference between knowing and caring. Trump doesn't give a poo poo about any stance at all unless it effects his image or bottom line. I'm sure he's aware he's lying at least some of the time, considering he'll do poo poo like blatantly lie about him and Pena a day after they talked. He knew not to push the wall payment during the meeting and he knew he was lying the next day about it. It just doesn't matter to him cause he holds no real positions at all other than "aknowledge me"
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 02:12
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:While that is one possible interpretation, people are much less willing to indulge the convenient fiction that setting up a private server and storing a bunch of classified on it was just a big misunderstanding, that you were advised by your (unindicted) subordinates that it was OK, that you were confused by the classification headings, that none of this constituted a deliberate attempt to evade government rules, when you aren't a senior administration official and party power player. Hrm, guess the FBI is smarter than you and those people.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 02:16
|
|
|
Aesop Poprock posted:Hillary Clinton isn't exactly the most truthful person ever but I think she's probably the most believable out of literally any of the major players out of this election I'm so scandal-fatigued on Clinton that I immediately disbelieve any accusation against her. What has she actually lied about to be considered "not exactly the most truthful person ever"? Edit: I changed my mind, I am defending her. I'm not convinced she's done anything that makes her shadier than any other politician. She's held to an incredibly high standard and nothing has stuck. I'd love to learn about actual dishonesty from her, though. Wayne Knight fucked around with this message at 02:47 on Sep 4, 2016 |
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 02:30
|
|
|
Can we get a non-american opinion of hilary's pantsuits?
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 02:33
|
|
|
Lots of Americans actually want Trump to win but they are bitch pussies and won't admit it because they know it is shameful, so they make up idiotic storms in teacups instead to assuage the lagging realisation that they are wearing the horns.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 02:55
|
|
|
the right wing has spent 25 years calling hillary clinton a criminal which now in the present day overrides the common sense vacant truism 'where there's smoke, there's fire' by basically generating a giant amount of smoke i remember learning anti hillary slogans on the playground in elementary school, as kids would repeat what their parents said. republicans hate a strong woman, big whoop
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 04:27
|
|
|
smg77 posted:Can we get a non-american opinion of hilary's pantsuits? Popular Thug Drink posted:the right wing has spent 25 years calling hillary clinton a criminal which now in the present day overrides the common sense vacant truism 'where there's smoke, there's fire' by basically generating a giant amount of smoke
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 06:24
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:What hosed-up place do you come from that kids on playgrounds regurgitate political talking points from a foreign country? america
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 06:26
|
|
|
Dead Reckoning posted:While that is one possible interpretation, people are much less willing to indulge the convenient fiction that setting up a private server and storing a bunch of classified on it was just a big misunderstanding, that you were advised by your (unindicted) subordinates that it was OK, that you were confused by the classification headings, that none of this constituted a deliberate attempt to evade government rules, when you aren't a senior administration official and party power player. Its ok if you're connected ok?
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 06:39
|
|
|
I saw a Hillary the other day. Horrible creatures!
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 06:42
|
|
|
I' support Clinton but I wish she'd handed over the server and come clean about everything in a press conference before this turned into a major talking point. It would have blown over and by now the public, with its goldfish-like memory, would have moved on to other scandals. The press response has not been fair or proportionate but that is entirely predictable. However, the "Clinton is dishonest" narrative that is being sold is ridiculous; her opponent is a pathological liar. If the press gave as much press to each lie that either candidate made, we'd only be hearing about Trump. When all is said and done, she is a highly competent public servant who was part of the administration that killed Osama bin Laden. If he had been killed by a Republican administration that's all we'd ever hear about.
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 06:50
|
|
|
RZA Encryption posted:I'm so scandal-fatigued on Clinton that I immediately disbelieve any accusation against her. What has she actually lied about to be considered "not exactly the most truthful person ever"? Low-effort answer: http://www.politifact.com/personalities/hillary-clinton/statements/byruling/false/ More serious answer: "shadier than any other politician" is an incredibly low standard. She's certainly more honest than Trump; that doesn't make her "the most truthful person ever."
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 06:50
|
|
|
Doc Hawkins posted:People who care don't think that the leaking of the emails is so much a scandal in itself, but that now someone will inevitably find the chain of emails where she orders the death of private Ben Ghazi. Clearly a fake Ramirez. Nothing's labeled "DEBT".
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 07:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 24, 2024 03:42 |
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:america
|
|
#
?
Sep 4, 2016 07:30
|
|