Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
I assume that it's worthless for me to try and convince you that maybe the FBI director could simply be a commited public servant who genuinely doesn't think this is worth pursuing? Instead of being someone who sees a situation like this simply as a way to advance their own political career regardless of morality or legality.
We could but it's been judged that it's not worth the effort, you'd have to jail half the state department if you did that. This level of leakage just kinda happens, some people need a kick up the butt but that's it.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ Cyranedited 5th Jul '16 10:15:20 AM by Bense
Bill Clinton has a habit of having talks with people he shouldn't and turning up at places he shouldn't. I think he genuinely just likes to chat with people and put his side across, but he seems to forget that he's a former president and that him just dropping by to chat is a big thing with repucutions.
“And the Bunny nails it!” ~ Gabrael “If the UN can get through a day without everyone strangling everyone else so can we.” ~ CyranIf Hillary should be in jail for using that server, then it was right of police to throw black people in prison back in the 60s for trying to eat at white only restaurants (this isn't necessarily the exact same situation, but it's the first one that came to mind when it comes to breaking the law for a good reason). There are laws that, if followed, have horrible consequences. Hillary needed a better server to conduct government business, and shouldn't be thrown in jail for doing it.
![]()
I sincerely doubt that someone who held such a high office would make that sort of gaffe, certainly not on a regular basis.
I'd put these laws more in the category in the many laws and customs of warfare that the US decided did not apply to it over the years, and which in the present day merely exist as a tool to give the US the appearance of having the moral high ground when it denounces war crimes that it has been guilty of itself in the recent past or that it supported up until the point when the perpetrator started acting independently from Washington. Something that really should be enforced, but isn't, and probably won't be for the foreseeable future.
edited 5th Jul '16 10:20:14 AM by CaptainCapsase
![]()
Well, in a sense, the police "were" right- like in those circumstances, the point of the civil disobedience was to be arrested/imprisoned to bring attention to bad laws.
This situation is more like driving over the speed limit in situations where it is the norm and thus actually safer than obeying the limit.
edited 5th Jul '16 10:17:58 AM by Hodor2
It's a combination of things:
You're supposed to have all E-Mails like her's for government business done on government systems for security reasons and for preservation of documentation for government records.
You're supposed to only use basically NSA vetted/secured systems to avoid the Chinese and Russians and other political antagonists from gaining access to sensitive information.
You're not supposed to delete E-Mails (which she and her staff did), because again, you're supposed to keep E-Mails for public record and security reasons.
Part of the problem however is the State and the NSA and most of the other Alphabet departments are comically underfunded and insist on years to decades old technology because of under-funding from Congress because lol starve the beast
Like Hillary or Obama wanted also a Smartphone but the NSA kept on insisting on him and her using an out of date Blackberry.
edited 5th Jul '16 10:20:32 AM by PotatoesRock
If the police enforce a bad law, in all but the most extreme cases the police aren't in the wrong per say. What's actually wrong is that the bad law exists in the first place-it's the fault of law makers, not law enforcement. We do not want police officers disregarding laws in favor of doing what their gut tells them is right.
Leviticus 19:34Political witch hunts aside: mishandling of classified information should at the very least be investigated. If the police (or FBI, or whoever's supposed to investigate) found no wrongdoing, then the case should be dropped. If there was wrongdoing, then it should go to trial.
On empty crossroads, seek the eclipse -- for when Sol and Lua align, the lost shall find their way home.Also, this isn't an argument Sec. Clinton herself or her lawyers has ever made. Why not?

When someone believes the laws don't apply to him or her I don't think he or she should become the person in charge of enforcing the law.
I work for a bank. If I ignore the rules and send e-mail with customer information from my private e-mail server, I get fired when the bank finds out. It doesn't matter if the bank's e-mail system is clunky and more difficult to use than my private e-mail. Since I signed an agreement saying I would follow the rules, the bank would be perfectly justified in firing me.
edited 5th Jul '16 10:05:42 AM by Bense