Donald Trump

1…1617192122…541

Comments

  • bianchimoon
    bianchimoon Posts: 3,942
    Ballysmate wrote:
    FBI letter to Congress, stating that the emails had not been assessed.

    http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016 ... etter.html

    Reasons for sending the letter.


    In July, Mr. Comey told Congress that the Clinton investigation was complete but that if new information came to light, the bureau would examine it. Mr. Comey pledged to be as transparent as he could with Congress about the investigation, and has since made public hundreds of pages of documents related to the inquiry. According to senior F.B.I. officials, Mr. Comey felt that he would be breaking his pledge of transparency to Congress if he did not reveal the new information from the Weiner case. And he believed that the bureau would be accused of suppressing details to benefit Mrs. Clinton — an accusation that he believed could do lasting damage to the F.B.I.’s credibility.


    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/31/us/po ... mails.html

    So he either inform Congress and risk being accused of interfering in the election or wait until afterwards and risk being accused of a cover up to facilitate the election of a candidate.

    From the same article

    In 2015, the bureau began investigating the personal email account that Mrs. Clinton had used exclusively as secretary of state. As part of that investigation, the bureau tried to find every electronic device — phones, tablets, computers — that Mrs. Clinton and her aides used.

    Agents could not find many of them, including several of Mrs. Clinton’s cellphones and two iPads. The agents knew that those devices, and others they were not aware of, might someday surface.

    So there was a ticking bomb under Clinton, which she could have defused by handing over all the devices under her control.

    This issue could have been put to bed months ago.I still think she will be elected, but lying and evasion is her default position and has come back to bite her on the ar5e

    It's politics, if it wasn't that scandal it would have been another. You can claim lying and evasion is her default position but you must apply it to the opposition also if we're being judgemental.
    All lies and jest..still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest....
  • mrfpb
    mrfpb Posts: 4,569
    According to the BBC even the late George Harrison is complaining about Trump:

    http://bbc.in/2eoHgFH
  • pinno
    pinno Posts: 52,150
    Can they sue for infringement of copyright laws?
    seanoconn - gruagach craic!
  • orraloon
    orraloon Posts: 13,227
    mrfpb wrote:
    According to the BBC even the late George Harrison is complaining about Trump:

    http://bbc.in/2eoHgFH
    There's a bloke works down the chip shop swears he's George Harrison...
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    So FBI have come out & said they couldn't find any evidence of criminal wrong doing.
    _
  • orraloon
    orraloon Posts: 13,227
    Strange days. Strange times in which we live. Mr R Rainbow's latest opus offers a sombre tone. God bless America, whichever choice of deity you favour help us all.

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=G19s4OmvFw8
  • Pross
    Pross Posts: 43,297
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    So FBI have come out & said they couldn't find any evidence of criminal wrong doing.

    And are therefore part of a corrupt system whereas a week or so back they were bastions of truth and justice who were going to send Clinton to jail.

    Are Presidential candidates exempt from libel / slander laws a bit like Parliamentary privilege over here? They seem able to make all sorts of allegations in public without anything to back them up.
  • RideOnTime
    RideOnTime Posts: 4,712
    Pross wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    So FBI have come out & said they couldn't find any evidence of criminal wrong doing.

    And are therefore part of a corrupt system whereas a week or so back they were bastions of truth and justice who were going to send Clinton to jail.

    Are Presidential candidates exempt from libel / slander laws a bit like Parliamentary privilege over here? They seem able to make all sorts of allegations in public without anything to back them up.

    Yes it's amazing, complete radio silence on the issue of challenging a rigged election until the FBI concludes no criminal investigation against HC then straight back to the this election is rigged...
  • bianchimoon
    bianchimoon Posts: 3,942
    Pross wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    So FBI have come out & said they couldn't find any evidence of criminal wrong doing.

    And are therefore part of a corrupt system whereas a week or so back they were bastions of truth and justice who were going to send Clinton to jail.

    Are Presidential candidates exempt from libel / slander laws a bit like Parliamentary privilege over here? They seem able to make all sorts of allegations in public without anything to back them up.
    american freedom of speech laws protected by first amendment, you can get away with most things
    All lies and jest..still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest....
  • smoggysteve
    smoggysteve Posts: 2,909
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    So FBI have come out & said they couldn't find any evidence of criminal wrong doing.

    Does anyone else think the sheer volume of emails (650,000) seems an impossibly large figure? Trump says the the FBI could no way of checked them all. What gets me is how the hell one or even a handful of people if you include her office team could have even written 650,000 mails in the first place. Don't forget this is meant to be another "batch" on top of the previous emails already checked through. The numbers could be well over a million. I find it hard to believe that a few people could have that many mails sat on a private server - not including the ones probably on the official classified server. I know I can get through a few mails a day at work but F*ck me - over half a million . No chance. Its all made up BS I am sure of it.
  • bianchimoon
    bianchimoon Posts: 3,942
    SmoggySteve wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    So FBI have come out & said they couldn't find any evidence of criminal wrong doing.

    Does anyone else think the sheer volume of emails (650,000) seems an impossibly large figure? Trump says the the FBI could no way of checked them all. What gets me is how the hell one or even a handful of people if you include her office team could have even written 650,000 mails in the first place. Don't forget this is meant to be another "batch" on top of the previous emails already checked through. The numbers could be well over a million. I find it hard to believe that a few people could have that many mails sat on a private server - not including the ones probably on the official classified server. I know I can get through a few mails a day at work but F*ck me - over half a million . No chance. Its all made up BS I am sure of it.

    I can easily believe it, all the forwards CC's bcc's etc, soon build up, she was secretary of state getting copied in to other depts mails as well I would say
    All lies and jest..still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest....
  • RideOnTime
    RideOnTime Posts: 4,712
    bianchimoon wrote:
    SmoggySteve wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    So FBI have come out & said they couldn't find any evidence of criminal wrong doing.

    Does anyone else think the sheer volume of emails (650,000) seems an impossibly large figure? Trump says the the FBI could no way of checked them all. What gets me is how the hell one or even a handful of people if you include her office team could have even written 650,000 mails in the first place. Don't forget this is meant to be another "batch" on top of the previous emails already checked through. The numbers could be well over a million. I find it hard to believe that a few people could have that many mails sat on a private server - not including the ones probably on the official classified server. I know I can get through a few mails a day at work but F*ck me - over half a million . No chance. Its all made up BS I am sure of it.

    I can easily believe it, all the forwards CC's bcc's etc, soon build up, she was secretary of state getting copied in to other depts mails as well I would say

    + bike radar circulars, all adds up
  • smoggysteve
    smoggysteve Posts: 2,909
    RideOnTime wrote:
    bianchimoon wrote:
    SmoggySteve wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    So FBI have come out & said they couldn't find any evidence of criminal wrong doing.

    Does anyone else think the sheer volume of emails (650,000) seems an impossibly large figure? Trump says the the FBI could no way of checked them all. What gets me is how the hell one or even a handful of people if you include her office team could have even written 650,000 mails in the first place. Don't forget this is meant to be another "batch" on top of the previous emails already checked through. The numbers could be well over a million. I find it hard to believe that a few people could have that many mails sat on a private server - not including the ones probably on the official classified server. I know I can get through a few mails a day at work but F*ck me - over half a million . No chance. Its all made up BS I am sure of it.

    I can easily believe it, all the forwards CC's bcc's etc, soon build up, she was secretary of state getting copied in to other depts mails as well I would say

    + bike radar circulars, all adds up

    Well if she has them on there she deserves to get sent down. Especially if any are from them MTB scumbags
  • smoggysteve
    smoggysteve Posts: 2,909
    I get the CC part and she would no doubt be CC'd into a hell of a lot of mail but if thats incoming thats not her fault. The issue is with the sender.
  • bianchimoon
    bianchimoon Posts: 3,942
    SmoggySteve wrote:
    I get the CC part and she would no doubt be CC'd into a hell of a lot of mail but if thats incoming thats not her fault. The issue is with the sender.
    It's because she was receiving, sending and storing them on her own server, rather than to official government one, the sender would send to her official .gov address, but they would be automatically forwarded to her home unsecured server
    All lies and jest..still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest....
  • mrfpb
    mrfpb Posts: 4,569
    edited November 2016
    Mr Weiner - the sexter - allegedly had 650k e-mails on his laptop (big hard drive there, to store that many) and some of these were thought to be emails sent from HCs private server relating to US gov't business - and FBI hoped/suspected they might include the 33,000 she deleted before turning over her servers to them. A classic exercise in clutching at straws by the FBI, and not good for Mr Comey's reputation. I can't see either candidate wanting to work with him in the future.
  • TheBigBean
    TheBigBean Posts: 21,636
    I have 41k e-mails (sent, received etc.) from 8 years. I don't really send that many in the grand scheme of things, so I could imagine that someone that spends hours and hours each day e-mailing and receiving would get to 650k quite quickly.
  • ballysmate
    ballysmate Posts: 15,930
    Clinton was never ever going to be charged with any wrongdoing. In order to do so, the US would have had to state in court the substance of the relevant classified emails. Never gonna happen.


    I don't know what was on her server,it could have been all Ebay traffic for all I know. But I think she acted in her usual manner when confronted. Even Joe Biden thinks she didn't react in a straightforward manner.

    If I were to put a foil hat on, I would wonder how a member of the US government equivalent to our Foreign Sec, perhaps 4th in line to the Presidency, behind the PreZ, VP and Leader of House of Reps, received no classified info. It is what was not on her server which I think is intriguing.
  • pinno
    pinno Posts: 52,150
    You haven't got your tin foil hat on Bally?! 'Kin ell, you're brave.
    seanoconn - gruagach craic!
  • mamba80
    mamba80 Posts: 5,032
    As i said earlier, how did HC get to build an email server in her front room? who did it? why were classified emails allowed to be sent to her private address? if fwd from the state dept, who authorized this forwarding?

    Now i m assuming HC isnt some sort of IT guru, but it appears that what she had was nt something built from a US version of Maplins, she d need a server, an OS, MSexchange, firewalls, encryption certificates, some form of SIP trunk or the US equivalent and someone to maintain it all.
    Or was this a hosted mail server? in which case, surely the FBI would have cloned it long before telling HC and giving her a chance to delete 30k worth of mails.

    i just dont get how the state dept IT security allowed all this? to me, they are the ones who have messed up.

    plus side is that unlike a public well known set up, like the state dept, few would have known about Clintons server and you cant hack what you dont know about, was her email acc hacked? and has any secret info been compromised?
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    Why are you so anti Hilary Bally?

    Beyond the conspiracy theories.
    _
  • mrfpb
    mrfpb Posts: 4,569
    mamba80 wrote:
    As i said earlier, how did HC get to build an email server in her front room? who did it? why were classified emails allowed to be sent to her private address? if fwd from the state dept, who authorized this forwarding?

    Now i m assuming HC isnt some sort of IT guru, but it appears that what she had was nt something built from a US version of Maplins, she d need a server, an OS, MSexchange, firewalls, encryption certificates, some form of SIP trunk or the US equivalent and someone to maintain it all.
    Or was this a hosted mail server? in which case, surely the FBI would have cloned it long before telling HC and giving her a chance to delete 30k worth of mails.

    i just dont get how the state dept IT security allowed all this? to me, they are the ones who have messed up.

    plus side is that unlike a public well known set up, like the state dept, few would have known about Clintons server and you cant hack what you dont know about, was her email acc hacked? and has any secret info been compromised?

    Hillary Clinton has not been a private citizen or business woman for decades. She has a massive personal staff which would include IT experts who know about cyber security. Her personal e-mail will be firewalled possibly more than the emails of our employers. She is also, allegedly, not the first Secretary of State to manage her personal and work emails in this way, just the first to go on and run for President.
  • ballysmate
    ballysmate Posts: 15,930
    mamba80 wrote:
    As i said earlier, how did HC get to build an email server in her front room? who did it? why were classified emails allowed to be sent to her private address? if fwd from the state dept, who authorized this forwarding?

    Now i m assuming HC isnt some sort of IT guru, but it appears that what she had was nt something built from a US version of Maplins, she d need a server, an OS, MSexchange, firewalls, encryption certificates, some form of SIP trunk or the US equivalent and someone to maintain it all.
    Or was this a hosted mail server? in which case, surely the FBI would have cloned it long before telling HC and giving her a chance to delete 30k worth of mails.

    i just dont get how the state dept IT security allowed all this? to me, they are the ones who have messed up.

    plus side is that unlike a public well known set up, like the state dept, few would have known about Clintons server and you cant hack what you dont know about, was her email acc hacked? and has any secret info been compromised?

    Apparently for 3 months there was NO encryption. :shock:

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ ... t-security

    Can't hack what you don't know? Her email was clintonemail.com. Don't you reckon that security services around the world may have tried that at some stage. I am no IT guru, but you are. Would that facilitate access to her server?
  • ballysmate
    ballysmate Posts: 15,930
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Why are you so anti Hilary Bally?

    Beyond the conspiracy theories.

    It is not just her, it is the whole thing with the Clintons. I am trying not to judge her by her husband, but I really do think they are a well matched pair. The stench around the Clinton Foundation for instance is nauseating.
    We all know that politicians lie, but she even lies when she doesn't have to. Landing under fire for example.
    Even this business with her emails, Joe Biden, the Democrat VP thinks she was evasive. That's just her default position.
  • orraloon
    orraloon Posts: 13,227
    Calm down Bally, she was advised / put up to it by Colin Powell, that well known lefty.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... department
  • pinno
    pinno Posts: 52,150
    Ballysmate wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Why are you so anti Hilary Bally?

    Beyond the conspiracy theories.

    It is not just her, it is the whole thing with the Clintons. I am trying not to judge her by her husband, but I really do think they are a well matched pair. The stench around the Clinton Foundation for instance is nauseating.
    We all know that politicians lie, but she even lies when she doesn't have to. Landing under fire for example.
    Even this business with her emails, Joe Biden, the Democrat VP thinks she was evasive. That's just her default position.

    Nixon, Clinton(s), Bush(s)... All the same. The Elite in America is for the Elite.
    seanoconn - gruagach craic!
  • mamba80
    mamba80 Posts: 5,032
    The point your missing is who allowed this? not that it cant be done, sure she has the money and the contacts but she is also watched like a hawk, protected by a team of security bods.
    Yes others like rice and Powell have run up personal servers but again, who the 4x is allowing this?

    the secure encryption certificates isnt that the contents of a particular email is encrypted or not, in any case, anything top secret i/c to her account should be if its from the state dept? which means she d need some sort of decrypt at her end.... who gave her that?
  • thebikeboy16
    thebikeboy16 Posts: 108
    What did I see Donald Trump do on TV earlier?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a5wBY6D7V34

    First comment: why don't you just do one on Hillary Clinton you douche.
  • ballysmate
    ballysmate Posts: 15,930
    orraloon wrote:
    Calm down Bally, she was advised / put up to it by Colin Powell, that well known lefty.

    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/201 ... department

    Been known from day one that Powell told her to be careful what she was doing. Not news.
  • rick_chasey
    rick_chasey Posts: 75,661
    Ballysmate wrote:
    Rick Chasey wrote:
    Why are you so anti Hilary Bally?

    Beyond the conspiracy theories.

    It is not just her, it is the whole thing with the Clintons. I am trying not to judge her by her husband, but I really do think they are a well matched pair. The stench around the Clinton Foundation for instance is nauseating.
    We all know that politicians lie, but she even lies when she doesn't have to. Landing under fire for example.
    Even this business with her emails, Joe Biden, the Democrat VP thinks she was evasive. That's just her default position.

    What's the issue around the Clinton foundation?

    Honestly I don't know.

    I always understood Hilary to be a very capable governor who is particularly strong on two fronts: she's a decent technocrat and gets the beaucratic levers you need to pull to get the desired tinkering, and she's got a decent track record of getting stuff through (a genuine issue Obama had).

    She's more hawkish on FP than Obama, but then his doctrine was literally "don't do bad stuff" so that's not hard.

    In my mind the two strengths are desirable in a governor. Then you look at her political makeup and decide if that matches closely.
    _

Categories