[ExI] The Debates

Fri Sep 16 19:08:49 UTC 2016

On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 12:48 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:

>
>> > 
>> …She could have set up a Gmail account using a phony name in about 45
>> seconds, but instead she instructed her ISIS friends to Email their
>> sinister plans on how to destroy America to clintonemail.com. What is
>> wrong with this picture?
>
>
> > 
> What is wrong with this picture is that this account would fail to follow
> the law on retention of records in about 45 seconds,
>

My point was if she wanted to conduct nefarious business why on earth
would she instruct her evil cronies to contact her at
clintonemail.com
 rather than a Gmail acount under a phony name? It makes no sense! On the
other hand if she set up a private E-mail server because it would be
less hassle than going through the clumsy state department server it does
make sense. Yes it turned out to be a bad idea but I can at least follow
her line of reasoning, however if she did it to protect her illegal
activities from the light of day it just makes no sense.

That's the way I do it. W
henever somebody puts in a bid for one of my black market H-bombs
 or ISIS wants to buy some of the human organs I have stockpiled from
aborted fetuses
or one of my bitches wants to know which street corner she should work
tonight they send
all
 correspondence to a Gmail account with a phony name, and NOT to
johnkclarkmail.com.  

John K Clark

 which is needed to comply with Freedom of Information Act in about 45
seconds.

>
>
>
> *>…* *On Behalf Of *John Clark
> *Subject:* Re: [ExI] The Debates
>
>
>
>
>
> On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 10:26 PM, spike <spike66 at att.net> wrote:
> 
>
> > >…Powell demonstrated he knew he was breaking the law…
>
>
>
> >…I knew I was breaking the law when I gave an account of a baseball game
> without the express written consent of Major League Baseball…
>
>
>
> I see, and did you ever take an oath of office to uphold the law?  Neither
> did I.  Neither did Trump.  Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Powell did.
>
>
>
> >… Do you see a moral equivalence there?
>
>
>
> No, sure don’t.  If you had taken an oath of office and defied the law,
> then you, Sec. Powell and Sec. Clinton should be impeached forthwith.
>
>
>
> >>… She couldn’t use the encrypted dot gov account that was actually set
> up for this sort of thing, because she would be accountable.
>
>
>
> >…She could have set up a Gmail account using a phony name in about 45
> seconds, but instead she instructed her ISIS friends to Email their
> sinister plans on how to destroy America to clintonemail.com. What is
> wrong with this picture?
>
>
>
> What is wrong with this picture is that this account would fail to follow
> the law on retention of records in about 45 seconds, which is needed to
> comply with Freedom of Information Act in about 45 seconds.
>
>
>
> Note that it isn’t called Freedom of Information Suggestion, or Freedom of
> Information If Convenient.  There is no ‘please’ or ‘thank you’ anywhere in
> that law, the term “frigging” is nowhere to be found in that act.  It’s the
> law.  High office holders take an oath and sign agreements on that.  They
> have no option to “frigging” them away.   It’s the law.
>
>
>
> Had Mrs. Clinton put the State Department on bcc on everything into
> auto-archive, every sneaky account, every communication from every
> electronic device accidently smashed to shards with a hammer, every email
> including the actual literal yoga (if there is any of that) then we would
> never have needed any of this huge taxpayer expense and utter chaos that
> has already happened, is happening, and is yet to come, chaos which
> threatens to destabilize a nuclear-enabled government.
>
>
>
> Had our own Secretary of State followed the law she took an oath to
> uphold, we would know who attacked the embassy and why; we would deal with
> the problem instead of blaming some hapless schmendrick who had nothing to
> do with it, resulting in the US government apologizing to the Middle East
> for something it did not do and cannot control.
>
>
>
> John do you need more things wrong with this picture?  I have a list, but
> it is tedious.  I am working towards brevity.
>
>
>
> > >…I am not excusing Trump for his craziness.
>
>
>
> >…I don't think so Spike, if you vote for Johnson I think you are
> excusing Trump for his craziness, you are helping to give the keys to a
> Trident Nuclear Submarine to a madman…
>
>
>
> Using that line of reasoning, voting for Johnson is excusing Mrs. Clinton
> for criminality and helping give the submarine keys to a lying criminal.
> The logic is strained, even disregarding the free states where we vote for
> whoever we want without risk of influencing who gets those keys.  If the
> election is even close in California, New York or Texas, the other
> candidate has already won by a nearly historic landslide.  Most of the US
> population is in free states.
>
>
>
> I have heard that a vote for Johnson is equivalent to a half a vote for
> Trump, but the same argument would hold it is also half a vote for
> Clinton.  I rather think of it as a full vote against the both of them.
>
>
>
> > >…Hear the footsteps.
>
>
>
> >…Look at the mushroom clouds.  John K Clark 
>
>
>
> Note the previous time that argument was used, we got the Vietnam war out
> of the deal.
>
>
>
> Johnson doesn’t wish to nuke anyone.  He is our best shot at securing
> those nukes.  He seems like the type who would not only hand over the keys,
> but would read the constitution and argue this authority never should have
> been in the executive branch to start with.
>
>
>
> Hear the footsteps.
>
>
>
> spike
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/extropy-chat
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20160916/5142913c/attachment.html>