The American (USA) 2016 presidential elections thread?

[oldrider]

The presidential bullshit is just a distraction (a circus) to keep attention away from the real issues basically just like magicians use to safeguard their tricks! (dirty tricks in this case)

[Viking01]

I sarted thinking about a reply: the number of indictments, the number of people behind bars, and the fact that Trump's campaign chief goes on trial this week.
But no, I can recognise a 'sealion' when I see one.

Thanks for the reply.

Yes, many in his political vicinity has been indicted, and there
have been several convictions. But did that necessarily make
Trump responsible?

His campaign chief may be going on trial next week (charged
with what ?).

Trump's previous attorney has chosen to "betray his client's
confidence". For whatever reason.

But I'm still none the wiser what it is that Trump himself has
been proven to have done in the way of breaking laws.

I'm not saying that he is necessarily innocent - I'd just like to
know what he has been found guilty of.

It's just that some of his accusers may not have a squeaky clean
history themselves, and I'm struggling to give them the benefit
of the doubt.

And while they may not have been prosecuted, I'm not sure that
makes them any less "guilty".

e.g.

- Hillary Clinton : Endorsing the NATO overthrow of Gaddafi and
the existing Libyan regime, where international law rejects the
right to overthrow the governing regime of a sovereign country

http://theduran.com/julian-assange-e...destroy-libya/

- Barack Obama : Authorisation of drone assassinations ; his
failure to (honour his campaign pledge to) close Guantanamo Bay
prison and to release inmates (not even presented for trial during
Obama's two terms in power)

- Robert Mueller (FBI) : Iraqi supposed weapons of mass destruction
prior to 2003 Iraq invasion

https://www.rt.com/usa/421838-mueller-iraq-wmd-trump/

- James Clapper (NSA) : Testifying before Congress regarding the
monitoring of US citizen communication and collection of personal
data

http://thefederalist.com/2018/05/22/...ut-nsa-spying/

- John Brennan (CIA) : Investigation into CIA's techniques for
interrogation ; Accusation of treason against Trump following the
Helsinki summit with Putin

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...=.caed5fb5dab5
https://www.globalresearch.ca/u-s-fo...idency/5565825

I'll keep a weather eye out for "sealions" ....

[husaberg]

You are rebutting something I've not said - Whilst it may be a breach of current US state policy (which I've not said anything in reference to) in pure IT Security terms - a cloud based email service is more secure than a private server that is not properly configured.

The evidence for the improper configuration is that a large amount of data was able to be permanently deleted.

Looking at the IG report, it shows that previous investigative efforts and reports were headed by people who had political biases and were vocal about these and made statements that show their work was not of an unbiased nature.

The rest comes down to you making lay-person assumptions about details, whereas I happen to have 10+ years real world experience in this area and can make inferences (based on experience) on those details.

refer to the first paragraph of my reply.

- I'd be willing to bet that there is a similar provision - that deliberately bypassing IT Security Policy is grounds for severe action(s)

All I'm going to say is this:

Regardless of what may or may not have been on the Clinton private email server, in ANY corporate Organization that I have worked in - deliberately bypassing the Corporate IT security Policy is grounds for instant dismissal (and I have been involved a couple of times in gathering the proof of such things that has directly results in people having their employment terminated).

As i have pointed out to you It wasn't in the rules but it sure as shit is now.
As i have pointed out to you multiple times it is against state department rules for anyone now to send official state department emails on their own email.......anyone.
No mater what you think about it this, these are the rules.
But feel free to ignore what i have clearly spelled out to you 8 times and waffle on how your vast experience somehow overrides state department rules.
Because the only person you will convice is yourself.
In regards to Hilary's server Unless you know more or a a better authority about state department rules than the FBI. or the US inspector general The choice is you either accept the ruling or prove them to be wrong.
You endless waffle about what you think as a IT administrator does not do this.

A hotly anticipated inspector general report about then-FBI Director James Comey’s handling of the Hillary Clinton email investigation is finally complete. It was released publicly Thursday afternoon — and is guaranteed to become a lightning rod in President Trump’s clashes with his own Justice Department.

The report contradicts President Trump’s often-expressed belief that the investigation was rigged to get Clinton off the hook. Justice Department inspector general Michael Horowitz found little affirmative evidence on the whole that political bias affected officials’ handling of the probe itself. (You can read the full text at this link.)https://www.vox.com/2018/6/14/174555...-comey-clinton

Indeed, FBI director Christopher Wray — appointed by Trump to replace Comey last year — said at a Thursday afternoon press conference that “this report did not find any evidence of political bias or improper considerations actually impacting the investigation under review.”

For you to suggest that the FBI cant investigate hilary as they are biased, is rather stupid, especially considering you have overlooked that trump appointed his own people to the FBI and they still find issues with what he does until he fires them anyway.......
Or did you not notice that.............

Although I don't know the US Government IT setup - I'd posit a series of educated guesses - it's probably Microsoft, backed by AD and with an Exchange server. I'd be very surprised if she didn't automatically have a domain email account.

Blackberries are interesting because they don't support Activesync - you need to use the very homosexual BES - which does require a server to run... BUT! BES is a bit of middleware - it's backed by something like an Exchange server (or other compatible Mail platform) - which again, makes me skeptical that she didn't have an official email address.

As i have pointed out but you chose to ignore and waffle on so that no one notices.
the domain name was clear she did have only one email address and it was clearly displayed onto anyone who responded to her email.

she never set up a domain that tried to emulate the official .state address.
Again i will ask you who is it who would have set up her .state email address. thats right the IT department would have.

Note

The report found that while dozens of State Department employees used personal email accounts periodically over the years, including Ms. Mills and Mr. Sullivan, only three officials were found to have used it “exclusively” for day-to-day operations: Mrs. Clinton; Mr. Powell, and Jonathan Scott Gration, who was ambassador to Kenya from 2011 to 2012.

Secretary of State John Kerry also acknowledged to the inspector general that he had used a personal account at times, but “began primarily using his department email account to conduct official business.” Mr. Kerry said that while he still occasionally responded to people who emailed him on his personal account, he would preserve the emails for the record..

Note 2

Department officials never directly told Mrs. Clinton or Mr. Powell that they needed to end their use of personal email, the report found, but in Mr. Gration’s case, they did. In 2011, officials warned him that he was not authorized to use personal email for government business in Kenya. He continued doing so, and the department initiated disciplinary action over “his failure to follow these directions” and several other undisclosed infractions, the report said. He resigned in 2012 before any action was taken.

[yokel]

"The Storm" is coming.....

Check out @realDonaldTrump’s Tweet: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...974625280?s=09

[yokel]

Like it or not - yokel called it all the way - not bad for someone that most of you think is stupid! . bunch of losers!

Stupid is what stupid does.
I told all the stupids that the MSM polls were all bullshit like brexit.
And after the 9/11 collapse she was finished.

If it wasn't for the MSM Hillary couldn't even be elected local dog catcher.

It's amazing really the number of people now saying they predicted a Trump victory. Some people expressed concerns, but I only know of one "pundit" who predicted the outcome correctly. A professor in the States who didn't use polls, he had his own set of indicators which he said were aligned for Trump. A week or so ago the Washington Post went back to him and asked if he wanted to change his mind, but no, he "doubled down". And he was right.*

Anne Coulter claimed she was right, but she was just spouting her extreme right wing rhetoric, which is different to predicting an outcome. Sort of like Yokel posting a load of clips ranging from the slightly unhinged to the outright insane. That's not a prediction either.

Mike Hosking, Newstalk ZB's resident bimbo referred this morning to "that saying about interesting times".
Actually it is reputedly Chinese although that is unlikely. "May you live in interesting times". It is supposedly a curse.

Whatever, we do seem to be living in interesting times.

*
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...t-draw8&wpmm=1

Oh the memories......
You Kunts have no clues what's coming.

[Woodman]

Oh the memories......
You Kunts have no clues what's coming.

How about you tell us.

[pritch]

"The Storm" is coming.....

Check out @realDonaldTrump’s Tweet: https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/...974625280?s=09

That rant, as usual, is rubbish.

The investigators are mostly registered Republicans and have served Republican presidents, some were appointed by Republican presidents. Mueller could not ask the guys he appointed to his team about their political affiliation anyway, that is against the law.

The investigation started weeks before the Steele dossier* came to light. Steele, the author, is a former member of British intelligence and is apparently considered reliable by the allied intelligence community. So calling the dossier fake is a stretch.

The investigation was started when one of Trump's staff, George Papadopolis, boasted to an Australian embassy official while pissed. The Australian diplomat contacted US officials and informed them of the conversation. That was something like two months prior to the Steele dossier surfacing.

Ninety odd indictments, two people jailed, twelve Russians charged - so far. Hell of a "witch hunt". And now Mueller is interviewing Trump's money man which is quite possibly what prompted todays flurry of increasingly desperate tweets.

That's just one investigation though, there are other investigations under way, it's the Southern District of New York prosecutor's office that is investigating Cohen, Trump's former lawyer. The New York State prosecutors are considering charges relating to Trump's allegedly fraudulent charity foundation.

From a justice perspective my money is on Mueller et al. From a political perspective I'm not placing any bets though, because the politicians are bought and paid for.

We'll see.



* In case y'all forgot, that's the golden showers one.

[pritch]

IIRC Manafort, Trump's former campaign manager goes on trial this week possibly tonight our time. This video explains who he is, his history, and what he has been charged with. At some fifteen minures it not be brief anough for some?

The video is toward top right of the page, but how long for, who knows? "The spectacular rise and fall of Paul Manafort."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/?wpisrc=nl_most&wpmm=1

[Viking01]

.....

From a justice perspective my money is on Mueller et al. From a political perspective I'm not placing any bets though, because the politicians are bought and paid for.

We'll see.

* In case y'all forgot, that's the golden showers one.

When you say "justice" perspective, I take it you mean (il)legal ?
As in "having broken the law" ?

I'm not sure you'll be able to separate out the two perspectives,
in the "land of the best justice that money can buy". Or was that
politicians ?

https://russia-insider.com/en/it-beg...iagate/ri23518

[Viking01]

IIRC Manafort, Trump's former campaign manager goes on trial this week possibly tonight our time. This video explains who he is, his history, and what he has been charged with. At some fifteen minures it not be brief anough for some?

The video is toward top right of the page, but how long for, who knows? "The spectacular rise and fall of Paul Manafort."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/?wpisrc=nl_most&wpmm=1

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...rt-trial-trump

[pritch]

When you say "justice" perspective, I take it you mean (il)legal ?
As in "having broken the law" ?

I'm not sure you'll be able to separate out the two perspectives,
in the "land of the best justice that money can buy". Or was that
politicians ?

By "justice" I mean the various investigations be they Justice Dept, a US Attorney's office, or New York State. All of which are in progress.

Problem is the investigators cant begin the impeachment/prosecution process without the approval of the politicians. That would take a two thirds majority vote in the senate, which on current form is exceedingly unlikely.

Something could change, eg Manafort's trial may implicate Trump somehow.

The US press need to upskill on matters legal though, they are missing the fine detail. Manafort (and Flynn) face/d charges under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). The alleged Russion spy is also reported as facing charges under FARA, to be fair her lawyer keeps saying that too. That is not correct. Mariia Butina faces charges under a different section, put simply, she is charged with spying. "Espionage lite." Her trial too could potentially change things.

Oh, and Mariia Butina is the third person to be put behind bars as a result of this "witch hunt".

[Katman]

Manafort (and Flynn?) faced charges under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA).

As should every Jewish lobby group.

[pritch]

As should every Jewish lobby group.

FARA is about registration, or the lack thereof. Interesting where they draw the line. But yes, there are some US ploiticians who are very well paid to be in Israels corner.

[Katman]

FARA is about registration, or the lack thereof.

And AIPAC isn't registered.

[husaberg]

As should every Jewish lobby group.

So What about the other multiple lobby groups for religions? or for abortions? or for conservation? or Animal welfare? or oil companies,or Pharmaceuticals ?
Or is it just one group you are worried about? and they just happen to be Jewish