It's there. There's no "to some degree" about it. This is in many ways even worse from a security perspective, and there's plenty of time to retroactively classify everything they said in those emails too.
I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt. You know, the doubt that they are functioning humans who are able to accept facts like "this is de-facto State Department policy and has been since the adoption of email".
Actually he's pretty much won this by pointing out that the American right was demanding that Hillary face punishment for this, then when she wasn't punished they started doing the exact same thing. This means two possible things:
1: what Hillary did was legally fine, so this is legally fine, and the entire emails scandal was a blatant GOP snark-hunt. Thus the failure to address the legal environment that made it fine is a failure of the American right.
2: what Hillary did was not fine, so this is not fine, and the entire emails scandal was a very real threat to national security that the GOP was correct to pursue. Thus the failure to correct the not fine behaviour is the height of hypocrisy and is a failure of the American right.
They very much are law enforcement. They actually have an expanded remit with regard to fraud, counterfeiting and other financial crimes compared to when they were founded.
Same avenues are available in either case, and the understanding of the law for either police or police union are, or should be, effectively identical.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by Teknogrot.
Re: Re: The bigger picture here
Have you played it? Because if you have I'm not sure you'd be asking for that game.
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Ah the old "if the market was free this wouldn't happen" ignoring that the market paid for the regulations that benefit those on top.
Weird how libertarians never notice that little thing.
Re: Funny...but
Looks like he asked for personal help with a very personal matter to me.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Apparently not illegal
It's there. There's no "to some degree" about it. This is in many ways even worse from a security perspective, and there's plenty of time to retroactively classify everything they said in those emails too.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Apparently not illegal
I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt. You know, the doubt that they are functioning humans who are able to accept facts like "this is de-facto State Department policy and has been since the adoption of email".
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Apparently not illegal
Actually he's pretty much won this by pointing out that the American right was demanding that Hillary face punishment for this, then when she wasn't punished they started doing the exact same thing. This means two possible things:
1: what Hillary did was legally fine, so this is legally fine, and the entire emails scandal was a blatant GOP snark-hunt. Thus the failure to address the legal environment that made it fine is a failure of the American right.
2: what Hillary did was not fine, so this is not fine, and the entire emails scandal was a very real threat to national security that the GOP was correct to pursue. Thus the failure to correct the not fine behaviour is the height of hypocrisy and is a failure of the American right.
Make sense?
Re: Re:
Or just mash space, escape, backspace and enter. The days in which that would close a game are long gone.
Re: Re: Re: Is one of these things not like the other?
They very much are law enforcement. They actually have an expanded remit with regard to fraud, counterfeiting and other financial crimes compared to when they were founded.
Re:
Same avenues are available in either case, and the understanding of the law for either police or police union are, or should be, effectively identical.