Hillary and the Law

[raykeller]

Hillary and the Law

Date: July 18, 2016 at 7:08:42 PM MST




Former United States Attorney General Michael Mukasey tells MSNBC that
not only is Hillary Clinton's private email server illegal, it
"disqualifies" her from holding any federal office. Such as, say, President
of the United States. Very specifically points to one federal law, Title 18.
Section 2071.


Subject:

U S CODE, TITLE 18, SECTION 2071

Word for word from the Cornell Law Library

For those of us who do not have United States Code committed to
memory, here's what it says:

(a) Whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates,
obliterates, or destroys, or attempts to do so, or, with intent to do so
takes and carries away any record, proceeding, map, book, paper, document,
or other thing, filed or deposited with any clerk or officer of any court of
the United States, or in any public office, or with any judicial or public
officer of the United States, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned
not more than three years, or both.


(b) Whoever, having the custody of any such record, proceeding, map,
book, document, paper, or other thing, willfully and unlawfully conceals,
removes, mutilates, obliterates, falsifies, or destroys the same, shall be
fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both; and
shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under
the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office” does
not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed
Forces of the United States.”


Yes, it explicitly states "shall forfeit his office and be
disqualified from holding any office under the United States."



Shouldn't voters know that? The media won't tell them.


So it's up to us. Can you help hold Hillary accountable?

Pass this on, please.

[Mr. B1ack]

On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 20:22:38 -0700, "raykeller"
<whiney_will_have_his_nose_in_my_ass_in_3_2_1@leftards_are_loosers.com>
wrote:


> Hillary and the Law

Law ???

Laws don't apply to CLINTONS ! I'm sure it's
in the constitution somewhere ....

[Wayne]

"Mr. B1ack" wrote in message
news:cu0vob5fi0hes0e1f...@4ax.com...

There's been a lot of scrambling around trying to justify Mrs. B. J.
Clinton's "extremely careless" handling of classified material.

But when one is "extremely careless" handling classified material, you can
be assured that a felony is involved!
Hell, a felony would be involved with only "careless".

[Greg Stearns]

> the United States. As used in this subsection, the term “office†does

> not include the office held by any person as a retired officer of the Armed

> Forces of the United States.â€

>
>
> Yes, it explicitly states "shall forfeit his office and be
> disqualified from holding any office under the United States."
>
>
>
> Shouldn't voters know that? The media won't tell them.
>
>
> So it's up to us. Can you help hold Hillary accountable?
>
> Pass this on, please.

Little keeler fucks it up again. The qualifications for the office of
president and vice-president are exhaustively specified in the
Constitution in Article II. No mention is made of any past allegations
of misconduct.

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 20:22:38 -0700, in talk.politics.guns "raykeller"
<whiney_will_have_his_nose_in_my_ass_in_3_2_1@leftards_are_loosers.com>
wrote:

>Former United States Attorney General Michael Mukasey tells MSNBC that
>not only is Hillary Clinton's private email server illegal, it
>"disqualifies" her from holding any federal office. Such as, say, President
>of the United States. Very specifically points to one federal law, Title 18.
>Section 2071.

I absolutely agree that your point is perfectly valid and supported by
US code.

Go convict her in federal court and get back to us when you have done
that, OK? The devil is in the details; she has a constitutional right
to her day in court. When you've dotted *that* little 'i', we'll
discuss the rest. Hillary has a right to present her defense.

Jones

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 10:01:11 -0400, in talk.politics.guns Mr. B1ack
<now...@nada.net> wrote:

> Law ???
>
> Laws don't apply to CLINTONS ! I'm sure it's
> in the constitution somewhere ....

What *IS* in the constitution, somewhere, is a right to due process.

1) The federal authorities file a criminal complaint

2) A grand jury indicts her

3) A federal court convicts her

OK, let's start with #1 because that's "in the constitution somewhere"
... have you got that yet? What? No? Well, that's pretty important,
don't you think?

It doesn't matter *why* you don't have it if you don't have it. The
law applies... she's just better at the law than your people are. Of
course, she pays off legislators with political favors, but is that
wrong? The NRA has been doing that for decades; what's so different
about *this* time? It sounds like the usual politics to me.

Jones

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 08:59:16 -0700, in talk.politics.guns "Wayne"
<mygarb...@verizon.net> wrote:

>There's been a lot of scrambling around trying to justify Mrs. B. J.
>Clinton's "extremely careless" handling of classified material.

No, there hasn't; although, I would admit that "extremely careless
handling of classified material" certainly applies... but she wasn't
charged; therefore, there is no need for *her* to "scramble around".

Your side of the matter had best get scrambling, though, and come up
with something new because *that* round goes decisively to Hillary as
it stands now. If you want it changed, then it's incumbent upon you
to do so... so scramble!

Jones

[Greg Stearns]

On 7/20/2016 9:57 AM, !Jones wrote:
> X-NO-IDIOTS
>
> On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 20:22:38 -0700, in talk.politics.guns "raykeller"
> <whiney_will_have_his_nose_in_my_ass_in_3_2_1@leftards_are_loosers.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Former United States Attorney General Michael Mukasey tells MSNBC that
>> not only is Hillary Clinton's private email server illegal, it
>> "disqualifies" her from holding any federal office. Such as, say, President
>> of the United States. Very specifically points to one federal law, Title 18.
>> Section 2071.
>
> I absolutely agree that your point is perfectly valid and supported by
> US code.

Then you're another idiot.

[Just Wondering]

On 7/20/2016 10:57 AM, !Jones wrote:

> On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 in talk.politics.guns "raykeller" wrote:
>
>> Former United States Attorney General Michael Mukasey tells
>> MSNBC that not only is Hillary Clinton's private email server
>> illegal, it "disqualifies" her from holding any federal office.
>> Such as, say, President of the United States. Very specifically
>> points to one federal law, Title 18. Section 2071.
>
> I absolutely agree that your point is perfectly valid and
> supported by US code.
>
> Go convict her in federal court and get back to us when you have done
> that, OK? The devil is in the details; she has a constitutional right
> to her day in court. When you've dotted *that* little 'i', we'll
> discuss the rest. Hillary has a right to present her defense.
>

Does the statute say a criminal conviction is required to
disqualify a perpetrator from office?

[PaxPerPoten]

For a fact in the real world... Not so in Klintons world.


--
"...I am committed against every thing which in my judgement, may
weaken, endanger, or destroy [The constitution]...and especially against
all extension of Executive power; and I am committed against any attempt
to rule the free people of this country by the power of the Government
itself... --Daniel Webster

[Mr. B1ack]

On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 12:14:06 -0500, !Jones <︰on...@fubahor.com> wrote:

>X-NO-IDIOTS
>
>On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 08:59:16 -0700, in talk.politics.guns "Wayne"
><mygarb...@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>>There's been a lot of scrambling around trying to justify Mrs. B. J.
>>Clinton's "extremely careless" handling of classified material.
>
>No, there hasn't; although, I would admit that "extremely careless
>handling of classified material" certainly applies... but she wasn't
>charged; therefore, there is no need for *her* to "scramble around".

Untrue actually ... because everybody *knows* the
fix was in, that she got extra-special handling by the
feds and justice dept.

Nixon was never actually convicted of being a crook,
but everybody *knew* he was.

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 10:38:28 -0700, in talk.politics.guns Greg Stearns
<jerk.jaqu...@alllll.the.time> wrote:

>Then you're another idiot.

"WHOOSH!" Right over your head like a high-velocity onomontapia

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 10:38:28 -0700, in talk.politics.guns Greg Stearns
<jerk.jaqu...@alllll.the.time> wrote:

>Then you're another idiot.

"WHOOSH!" Right over your head like a high-velocity onomatopoeia.

(I meant to correct the spelling, but fat-fingered it.)

Jones

[Jim Wilkins]

"!Jones" <ĄJo...@fubahor.com> wrote in message
news:m9k0pb9d1qke0fc4m...@4ax.com...

I wonder if anyone else noticed.

[Verdine White]

"!Jones" wrote in message
news:c7k0pb13q74g7jaff...@4ax.com...

#######
A new word you used wrong. Jones.

You remind me of Jerry , that fast food retard, and "Deep Doo Doo!


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjHUuS-ed34&feature=player_embedded

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 17:43:26 -0400, in talk.politics.guns Mr. B1ack
<now...@nada.net> wrote:

> Untrue actually ... because everybody *knows* the
> fix was in, that she got extra-special handling by the
> feds and justice dept.
>
> Nixon was never actually convicted of being a crook,
> but everybody *knew* he was.

I don't *know* that and neither do you. It wouldn't surprise me;
however, I see no evidence that a "fix" was in; she certainly *could*
easily have been charged and probably would have been had there been
any direct precedent. Now, you really *want* to believe that Clinton
received "extra-special handling by the feds and justice dept";
therefore, this is what you will believe. Most people believe that
she *did* have an unauthorized server and just got off with a warning.

That *kind* of stuff happens every day; it differs only in scope from
a rogue wireless access point that someone installs in their office
because they have poor reception or a dial-up connection to their
machine... people do that... they usually simply get shown the door if
they're caught. I don't think that anyone has yet been charged with a
federal crime *simply* for having a rogue wireless access point.

The other point is that somebody had to configure the state
department's routers on the inside and (I'm guessing) put her server
on a VPN; that, in and of itself, does not violate security given that
the machine is checked regularly; however, if it had another
interface, then somebody dropped the ball! Was *that* person charged?
I don't believe that they did anything beyond generating a few resumes
from their IT people; therefore, I see no evidence of special
treatment.

Jones

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

The dictionary says it's derived from the Latin; I suppose it would be
an "onomatopoem", then? Interesting: the word "poem" has the same
root.

Jones

[rbowman]

On 07/21/2016 07:16 AM, !Jones wrote:
> The other point is that somebody had to configure the state
> department's routers on the inside and (I'm guessing) put her server
> on a VPN; that, in and of itself, does not violate security given that
> the machine is checked regularly;

As I understand it the machine(s) were SMTP servers. There would be no
reason for routers to be configured or a VPN established. The state
department's mail servers would just need to allow relaying to
hrc_secret_server.com.

I've worked with sites that had the Exchange server locked down to the
point where nothing could be relayed out of the local domain. That
usually lasts about a day after some IT guy gets religion and configures
the server. If you want to email j...@google.com, tough.

The problem with very secure networks is they are a major pain in the
ass and people being people...

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:46:23 -0600, in talk.politics.guns rbowman
<bow...@montana.com> wrote:

>As I understand it the machine(s) were SMTP servers. There would be no
>reason for routers to be configured or a VPN established. The state
>department's mail servers would just need to allow relaying to
>hrc_secret_server.com.
>
>I've worked with sites that had the Exchange server locked down to the
>point where nothing could be relayed out of the local domain. That
>usually lasts about a day after some IT guy gets religion and configures
>the server. If you want to email j...@google.com, tough.
>
>The problem with very secure networks is they are a major pain in the
>ass and people being people...

Yes, I agree; however, setting up an email relay is ten times worse
than a VPN... a thousand times worse! If she were receiving email to
hillary@hrc_secret_server.com, it wouldn't need to go through
government servers at all. Essentially, you have "email relay" when
you can write port 25 (or whatever it is on an exchange server) with a
message going out of the domain; every email server is locked down out
of the box against that. Besides, the egress filter had better kill
it and log it or it's not doing its job.

Someone set up a VPN; therefore, her machine was actually on the state
department's domain... then, she (or, more likely, her techie) stuck
another interface card in it and accepted connections from devices
with a 32-bit seed space... i.e.: a Blackberry. That's how *I* would
have done it, anyway, and I'm willing to bet that's what her people
did. Dunno why the State's vulnerability scanners didn't knock off
the dual interface for so long, though; they're perfectly detectable.

(I bet they're looking for 'em *now*, huh?)

Jones

[Greg Stearns]

On 7/20/2016 9:35 PM, !Jones wrote:

>> Then you're another idiot.
>
> "WHOOSH!" Right over your head

No. You are an idiot just like the original idiot keeler. The USC does
not in any way state that someone convicted of the charges of which
Hillary Clinton is merely accused is ineligible for the office of president.

[Rudy Canoza]

On 7/21/2016 3:00 AM, Jim Wilkins wrote:
> "!Jones" <¡Jo...@fubahor.com> wrote in message

I noticed his illiteracy, yes. His original spelling - "onomontapia" -
can't even be called a typo. It was more like a shit hemorrhage.

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Thu, 21 Jul 2016 09:38:16 -0700, in talk.politics.guns Greg Stearns
<jerk.jaqu...@alllll.the.time> wrote:

>No. You are an idiot just like the original idiot keeler. The USC does
>not in any way state that someone convicted of the charges of which
>Hillary Clinton is merely accused is ineligible for the office of president.

Obviously, my point was lost on you because you chose to snip it...
and you didn't even read it, did you? ... did you?

I mean, had you read that which you snipped, you would not be writing
this *I* am an idiot? *I* am not snipping your postings and replying
only to the first line. Go back, read my initial posting, and then
quote it here; say whatever you want... my meaning is clear in the
context of my entire missive.

Gwad! It pisses me off when morons snip and then utterly misinterpret
the semantics... of course, I'm using words like "semantics" which are
clearly beyond your vocabulary, hey?

Oh, well, let's put it to bed, shall we? You are correct: "The USC

does not in any way state that someone convicted of the charges of
which Hillary Clinton is merely accused is ineligible for the office
of president."

Your point.

Jones

[Greg Stearns]

On 7/21/2016 9:56 AM, !Jones wrote:
> X-NO-IDIOTS
>
> On Thu, 21 Jul 2016 09:38:16 -0700, in talk.politics.guns Greg Stearns
> <jerk.jaqu...@alllll.the.time> wrote:
>
>> No. You are an idiot just like the original idiot keeler. The USC does
>> not in any way state that someone convicted of the charges of which
>> Hillary Clinton is merely accused is ineligible for the office of president.
>
> Obviously, my point was lost on you because you chose to snip it...
> and you didn't even read it, did you? ... did you?
>
> I mean, had you read that which you snipped

I read it. You still claim that if convicted under that law, Clinton
would be ineligible for the presidency. You're wrong - and an idiot.

[Frank]

You'd have to be dumb and blind not to see what happened.
The fix was in. Obama was not going to allow it and had clearly
signaled his intent. We're like a banana republic under him.

[Rudy Canoza]

No president would encourage his AG to prosecute someone he had
appointed to an important cabinet post when that person was running to
succeed the president. However, Loretta Lynch looks more like a servile
lap dog than most AGs.

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

And again you snip that to which you reply. I claimed absolutely no
such thing. I essentially said that the question "what if Eleanor
Roosevelt could fly" is irrelevant because Hillary wasn't even charged
with any crime, let alone indicted or convicted.

Go on with you, sir! I'm done with it.

Jones

[Greg Stearns]

On 7/21/2016 12:08 PM, !Jones wrote:

> And again you snip that to which you reply.

I snip the crap.

You agreed with the contention that a conviction under the specific law
mentioned would make Clinton ineligible for the office of president.
That makes you an idiot.

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Thu, 21 Jul 2016 14:29:42 -0400, in talk.politics.guns Frank
<"frank "@frank.net> wrote:

>You'd have to be dumb and blind not to see what happened.
>The fix was in. Obama was not going to allow it and had clearly
>signaled his intent. We're like a banana republic under him.

Any fool can see what happened; security got in her way. She couldn't
use the device she wanted to use so she got the techs to set it up so
that she could. People do that every day, so what?

The techs had to have set that up for her. Somebody on the inside had
to have configured it; Hillary wouldn't know a VPN from the ACLU. Did
we charge that person? (No?) What she did is essentially the same as
installing a rogue wireless access point, which people *do*! They
want to have a meeting in a room with poor reception, so they bring a
wireless router from home and plug it in. Lots of people have been
fired over that... has anyone ever been charged with a federal crime?
(No??? Isn't it a federal crime? Hint: "yes"... I guess)

Tell you what: email is over and settled. Forget it and I will not
mention Melania's speech again... deal? They're both dead issues.

Jones

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

May I add a new term to your vocabulary?

Irony

the expression of one's meaning by using language that normally
signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect.
"'Don't go overboard with the gratitude,' he rejoined with heavy
irony"

synonyms: sarcasm, causticity, cynicism, mockery, satire, sardonicism
"that note of irony in her voice"

a state of affairs or an event that seems deliberately contrary to
what one expects and is often amusing as a result.

plural noun: ironies

"the irony is that I thought he could help me"

synonyms: paradox, incongruity, incongruousness
"the irony of the situation"

a literary technique, originally used in Greek tragedy, by which the
full significance of a character's words or actions are clear to the
audience or reader although unknown to the character.

noun: dramatic irony

(All of this will be on the test, sir; study it carefully!)

Jones

[Just Wondering]

POTUS takes an oath to faithfully execute the laws. So if Hiliary
became president, her first official duty should be to instruct the
attorney general's office to prosecute herself.

[Rudy Canoza]

On 7/21/2016 12:23 PM, !Jones wrote:
> X-NO-IDIOTS
>
> On Thu, 21 Jul 2016 14:29:42 -0400, in talk.politics.guns Frank
> <"frank "@frank.net> wrote:
>
>> You'd have to be dumb and blind not to see what happened.
>> The fix was in. Obama was not going to allow it and had clearly
>> signaled his intent. We're like a banana republic under him.
>
> Any fool can see what happened; security got in her way. She couldn't
> use the device she wanted to use so she got the techs to set it up so
> that she could. People do that every day, so what?

Bullshit. It was all about personal control of the data from beginning
to end.

You are completely full of shit.

[Greg Stearns]

You're another idiot.

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Thu, 21 Jul 2016 13:53:19 -0700, in talk.politics.guns Greg Stearns
<jerk.jaqu...@alllll.the.time> wrote:

>You're another idiot.

Don't worry about it; it's over... let it drop.

Fact: she did violate the law and admitted it.

Fact: she could have been prosecuted.

Fact: nobody else was prosecuted; however, I would be willing to bet
that more than a few resumes were generated.

Fact: Hillary Clinton was not prosecuted... largely because she
admitted that she fucked up and said that she won't do it again.

Fact: it's over; you don't need to worry about it any further.

Jones

[Frank]

Aw, poor helpless female, not expected to be as technically astute as a
male.

The Melania thing is like comparing a parking ticket to a murder.

You are terminally dense if you think the general public is that stupid.

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

Well, you know how women are.

Actually, the speech and the email server are real comparable.
Clinton admitted it and it's over. Had the Trump camp done likewise,
"speech-gate" (NO! I didn't really write that... my computer must have
a virus!) should have been over in an hour.

I think that the general public is *unbelievably* stupid! Shall I
give some reasons why I think this is so?

Jones

[Frank]

Of course they are. They proved it by voting for Obama twice.

[Just Wondering]

On 7/21/2016 5:26 PM, !Jones wrote:
> X-NO-IDIOTS
>
> On Thu, 21 Jul 2016 18:48:27 -0400, in talk.politics.guns Frank
> <"frank "@frank.net> wrote:
>
>> Aw, poor helpless female, not expected to be as technically astute as a
>> male.
>>
>> The Melania thing is like comparing a parking ticket to a murder.
>>
>> You are terminally dense if you think the general public is that stupid.
>
> Well, you know how women are.
>
> Actually, the speech and the email server are real comparable.
> Clinton admitted it and it's over. Had the Trump camp done likewise,
> "speech-gate" (NO! I didn't really write that... my computer must have
> a virus!) should have been over in an hour.
>

One difference (among many) - There was no risk of Melania's speech
resulting in the unlawful dissemination of confidential information
sensitive to national security.

[PaxPerPoten]

That is a lot of words to Justify HRC's high crimes.


--
"...I am committed against every thing which in my judgement, may
weaken, endanger, or destroy [The constitution]...and especially against
all extension of Executive power; and I am committed against any attempt
to rule the free people of this country by the power of the Government
itself... --Daniel Webster

[PaxPerPoten]

On 7/21/2016 7:24 AM, Verdine White wrote:
>
>
> "!Jones" wrote in message
> news:c7k0pb13q74g7jaff...@4ax.com...
>
> X-NO-IDIOTS
>
> On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 10:38:28 -0700, in talk.politics.guns Greg Stearns
> <jerk.jaqu...@alllll.the.time> wrote:
>
>> Then you're another idiot.
>
> "WHOOSH!" Right over your head like a high-velocity onomontapia
>
> #######
> A new word you used wrong. Jones.
>
> You remind me of Jerry , that fast food retard, and "Deep Doo Doo!

Good grief, Rudy...Do you really believe that no one recognizes y0our
Psycho-babble? Half this NG is your damned sock puppets.
>
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjHUuS-ed34&feature=player_embedded

[PaxPerPoten]

Rudy...Rudy...Rudy...When will you ever learn?

[PaxPerPoten]

It was a great way to neutralize security so that classified information
could be released without any traceability.We have had and do have many
people in our Government that traffic in our classified information. The
Klintons have long been Opportunists without a drop of honor or
patriotism. China has backed the Klintons financially and it tends to
make one wonder what the Klintons gave them in return.

[PaxPerPoten]

Could be the fix was in there also.

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Thu, 21 Jul 2016 19:54:09 -0500, in talk.politics.guns PaxPerPoten
<P...@USA.org> wrote:

>That is a lot of words to Justify HRC's high crimes.

OK, how about just a few: it's over; get used to it.

Jones

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Thu, 21 Jul 2016 19:56:28 -0400, in talk.politics.guns Frank
<"frank "@frank.net> wrote:

>Of course they are. They proved it by voting for Obama twice.

They have *really* proven it this cycle, huh?

Jones

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Thu, 21 Jul 2016 20:13:12 -0500, in talk.politics.guns PaxPerPoten
<P...@USA.org> wrote:

>It was a great way to neutralize security so that classified information
>could be released without any traceability.We have had and do have many
>people in our Government that traffic in our classified information. The
>Klintons have long been Opportunists without a drop of honor or
>patriotism. China has backed the Klintons financially and it tends to
>make one wonder what the Klintons gave them in return.

Oh, it was all perfectly tracable; very little isn't these days.

It's over; forget about it... you're not going to vote for Hillary and
that's fine; get over it! We are.

Jones

[Terry Coombs]

PaxPerPoten wrote:
> On 7/21/2016 7:24 AM, Verdine White wrote:
>>
>>
>> "!Jones" wrote in message
>> news:c7k0pb13q74g7jaff...@4ax.com...
>>
>> X-NO-IDIOTS
>>
>> On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 10:38:28 -0700, in talk.politics.guns Greg
>> Stearns <jerk.jaqu...@alllll.the.time> wrote:
>>
>>> Then you're another idiot.
>>
>> "WHOOSH!" Right over your head like a high-velocity onomontapia
>>
>> #######
>> A new word you used wrong. Jones.
>>
>> You remind me of Jerry , that fast food retard, and "Deep Doo Doo!
>
>
> Good grief, Rudy...Do you really believe that no one recognizes y0our
> Psycho-babble? Half this NG is your damned sock puppets.
>>
>>
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjHUuS-ed34&feature=player_embedded

That ain't Rud-e . I know the guy from other groups .

--
Snag
Hi Pan !

[PaxPerPoten]

Nope! Justice will eventually prevail.

[rbowman]

On 07/21/2016 08:56 AM, !Jones wrote:
> Essentially, you have "email relay" when
> you can write port 25 (or whatever it is on an exchange server) with a
> message going out of the domain; every email server is locked down out
> of the box against that. Besides, the egress filter had better kill
> it and log it or it's not doing its job.

It varies but for SMTP typically you connect to 587 and parse out the
server's reply. If it supports TLS (SSL) then you send the STARTTLS
command and renegotiate an encrypted connection. That's for message
submission. The servers use other ports to talk amongst themselves. IMAP
and POP3 also have encrypted capabilities.

I'm thinking extreme carelessness by some IT nerd that didn't want to
piss off the Dragon Lady but you know the details will never see the
light of day in our oh so transparent administration.

[rbowman]

On 07/21/2016 01:23 PM, !Jones wrote:
> They
> want to have a meeting in a room with poor reception, so they bring a
> wireless router from home and plug it in. Lots of people have been
> fired over that... has anyone ever been charged with a federal crime?
> (No??? Isn't it a federal crime? Hint: "yes"... I guess)

Speaking of which I read where, as an experiment, there were a number of
open hotspots with innocuous sounding names set up around the RNC
convention -- and they had a lot of clueless attendees connect. It was
just a white hat demo so they didn't capture any data from people
accessing their email or government sites. Of course.

[rbowman]

Trump was hard enough to take but Pence? I can't wait to see what
Clinton comes up with. There's speculation she'll go for a nice, safe
centrist as a final 'fuck you' for the Bernie Bros.

[rbowman]

On 07/21/2016 08:18 PM, PaxPerPoten wrote:
>
> Nope! Justice will eventually prevail.

Right. I have a devout Christian friend who takes solace in them all
winding up in hell. I lean more toward the Groundhog Day concept.
Clinton better lay in a massive supply of Xanax because the next months
aren't going to be a Milquetoast Romney style campaign.

[PaxPerPoten]

Same Headers....

[PaxPerPoten]

On 7/21/2016 8:21 PM, !Jones wrote:
> X-NO-IDIOTS
>
> On Thu, 21 Jul 2016 20:13:12 -0500, in talk.politics.guns PaxPerPoten
> <P...@USA.org> wrote:
>
>> It was a great way to neutralize security so that classified information
>> could be released without any traceability.We have had and do have many
>> people in our Government that traffic in our classified information. The
>> Klintons have long been Opportunists without a drop of honor or
>> patriotism. China has backed the Klintons financially and it tends to
>> make one wonder what the Klintons gave them in return.
>
> Oh, it was all perfectly tracable; very little isn't these days.

Nope!

>
> It's over; forget about it... you're not going to vote for Hillary and
> that's fine; get over it! We are.

Sooo? You have a mouse in your pocket? Or a split personality....??
Maybe she could use your 80 wpm typing skills?
>
> Jones

[PaxPerPoten]

Pence did a Hell of a nice job turning the economic mess in his state
around. He is at least very popular in his home state...How does Hillary
stand up in Arkansas? of New York for that matter?

[PaxPerPoten]

The Dems already believe Trump is the Devil and Trump towers is the Hell
he hangs out in.

[Bradley K. Sherman]

In article <nms33d$7lj$7...@dont-email.me>, PaxPerPoten <P...@USA.org> wrote:
> ...

>Pence did a Hell of a nice job turning the economic mess in his state
>around. He is at least very popular in his home state...How does Hillary
>stand up in Arkansas? of New York for that matter?

> ...

Pence is a laughingstock and was about to lose the governorship
to a Democratic challenger. He doesn't agree with Trump on any
significant issue, but he was desperate for a new job.

--bks

[PaxPerPoten]

Just goes to show how fucked up you are. Pence hauled his state out of
the financial toilet. We need that at the federal level. Personally I
had never known much about him except for his successes in his own
state. I wonder.. Do you even know where he is Governor? Isn't he also
term limited out?
>
> --bks

[Bradley K. Sherman]

|
| Mike Pence was a young lawyer on the rise, challenging a
| longtime Democratic congressman in a Republican-leaning
| Indiana district.
|
| And then, scandal.
|
| Campaign finance records from the 1990 effort showed that
| Pence, then 31, had been using political donations to pay
| the mortgage on his house, his personal credit card bill,
| groceries, golf tournament fees and car payments for his
| wife.
| ...
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/mike-pence-used-campaign-funds-to-pay-his-mortgage--and-it-cost-him-an-election/2016/07/15/90858964-49ed-11e6-bdb9-701687974517_story.html>

--bks

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Thu, 21 Jul 2016 20:51:24 -0600, in talk.politics.guns rbowman
<bow...@montana.com> wrote:

>I'm thinking extreme carelessness by some IT nerd that didn't want to
>piss off the Dragon Lady but you know the details will never see the
>light of day in our oh so transparent administration.

Oh, yeah; in my racket, the major threats are the deans from English
or anthropology. But it's better than it was 10 years ago when all we
did was run around putting out fires... it's all a trade off. What's
the old saying? "If you make it impossible for the enemy to get in,
you can't get out." Well, that's most deffo true. Nowadays, IT runs
the place; yet, they still want to stay in the good graces of the
secretary of state, I'm sure. Push came to shove, she'd have lost...
and ultimately did.

Jones

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Thu, 21 Jul 2016 21:18:33 -0500, in talk.politics.guns PaxPerPoten
<P...@USA.org> wrote:

>Nope! Justice will eventually prevail.

Yeah, when Jesus returns, I'm sure... but it never has; why is this
time so special? The world isn't fair; get over it. RHIP.

Jones

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Thu, 21 Jul 2016 21:07:23 -0600, in talk.politics.guns rbowman
<bow...@montana.com> wrote:

>Right. I have a devout Christian friend who takes solace in them all
>winding up in hell. I lean more toward the Groundhog Day concept.
>Clinton better lay in a massive supply of Xanax because the next months
>aren't going to be a Milquetoast Romney style campaign.

Our fearless leader wannabe #1 was feeding his base the red meat
tonight. I had it on in the other room. I think we'd all best start
taking drugs because *one* of those clowns will be our next president!

How great does *that* make you feel?

Jones

[PaxPerPoten]

On 7/21/2016 10:40 PM, Bradley K. Sherman wrote:
> |
> | Mike Pence was a young lawyer on the rise, challenging a
> | longtime Democratic congressman in a Republican-leaning
> | Indiana district.
> |
> | And then, scandal.
> |
> | Campaign finance records from the 1990 effort showed that
> | Pence, then 31, had been using political donations to pay
> | the mortgage on his house, his personal credit card bill,
> | groceries, golf tournament fees and car payments for his
> | wife.

If that were true...Why isn't he in Federal prison...That is considered
theft and Money laundering by the Federal Government. We lost a Sheriff
to Federal prison the same way at about the same time! Right now Hillary
Klinton is giving herself a $250,000 a year salary from her Political
donations. Also she is spending more on personal things while
campaigning. I think they all do that. Our ex-Governor got to keep his
surplus donations..$2.4 Million.
m
> | ...
> <https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/mike-pence-used-campaign-funds-to-pay-his-mortgage--and-it-cost-him-an-election/2016/07/15/90858964-49ed-11e6-bdb9-701687974517_story.html>

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Thu, 21 Jul 2016 22:22:17 -0500, in talk.politics.guns PaxPerPoten
<P...@USA.org> wrote:

>The Dems already believe Trump is the Devil and Trump towers is the Hell
>he hangs out in.

It sounded the other way around tonight; Donald spent more time
railing at Hillary, Obama, and dems in general than he did talking
about his policies.

I recall in '08, both candidates laid out what they planned to
acomplish and stated *how* they were going to do it. This time it's:
"Starting on January 20 when I take the oath of office, the people
committing violent crimes will be put on notice..." Yeah, right. I
don't think either of 'em has a clue.

Jones

[PaxPerPoten]

You do need to read the Book: "The Power Of Positive Thinking"!
You are waaaay too negative.

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Thu, 21 Jul 2016 21:02:01 -0600, in talk.politics.guns rbowman
<bow...@montana.com> wrote:

>Trump was hard enough to take but Pence? I can't wait to see what
>Clinton comes up with. There's speculation she'll go for a nice, safe
>centrist as a final 'fuck you' for the Bernie Bros.

I think Pence helps Trump quite a bit; I was expecting him to get
someone like Palin. Heck, I wanted to vote for McCain.

To Hillary, Castro is a "centrist". I'm going to vote for Hillary;
however, I don't like the idea at all.

Jones

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Thu, 21 Jul 2016 22:14:54 -0500, in talk.politics.guns PaxPerPoten
<P...@USA.org> wrote:

>Pence did a Hell of a nice job turning the economic mess in his state
>around. He is at least very popular in his home state...How does Hillary
>stand up in Arkansas? of New York for that matter?

Well, Pax, both of those loons have *very* negative numbers; the
election will turn on who's worse, not who's better. That's why
Donald spent almost an hour and a half ranting about how *bad* things
are. Compared to either of 'em, Pence sparkles like a diamond in a
pig's ass.

Jones

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Thu, 21 Jul 2016 22:11:45 -0500, in talk.politics.guns PaxPerPoten
<P...@USA.org> wrote:

>Nope!

Gimme a break. If they weren't logged at the bastion, how do you know
there were 30,000 of 'em?

Jones

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 03:24:58 +0000 (UTC), in talk.politics.guns
b...@panix.com (Bradley K. Sherman) wrote:

>Pence is a laughingstock and was about to lose the governorship
>to a Democratic challenger. He doesn't agree with Trump on any
>significant issue, but he was desperate for a new job.

Really? I thought the Indians liked him a lot.

Jones

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 03:40:42 +0000 (UTC), in talk.politics.guns

b...@panix.com (Bradley K. Sherman) wrote:

>Campaign finance records from the 1990 effort showed that
> | Pence, then 31, had been using political donations to pay
> | the mortgage on his house, his personal credit card bill,
> | groceries, golf tournament fees and car payments for his
> | wife.

I thought they all did that.

Jones

[rbowman]

On 07/21/2016 09:14 PM, PaxPerPoten wrote:
> Pence did a Hell of a nice job turning the economic mess in his state
> around. He is at least very popular in his home state...

He'll soothe the evangelicals but that may not play well, even in Indiana:

http://heavy.com/news/2016/07/mike-pence-approval-ratings-as-governor-indiana-rating-job-performance-numbers-poll-forty-percent-vp-trump-chosen-running-mate-vice-president-lgbt-religious-freedom-restoration-act/

I had a contract in Ft. Wayne that lasted over a year. Not bad for
something that was supposed to be three months. I've never spent a lot
of time in the Bible Belt but I was surprised by the Christian emphasis.
You'd walk into a shop and a sign would proudly proclaim it was a
Christian business. Then they would try to screw you...

It's also worth noting that Indiana was the last gasp of the Klan.

[rbowman]

On 07/21/2016 09:34 PM, PaxPerPoten wrote:
> Just goes to show how fucked up you are. Pence hauled his state out of
> the financial toilet. We need that at the federal level. Personally I
> had never known much about him except for his successes in his own state.

Then you know his current popularity in state is underwater. Replacing
Common Core with Pence Core didn't do much for him, nor did his stand on
abortion and LGBT's.

[PaxPerPoten]

What makes you think there were not many many more? Also hack attacks
usually remove their tracks.

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Thu, 21 Jul 2016 20:56:19 -0600, in talk.politics.guns rbowman
<bow...@montana.com> wrote:

>Speaking of which I read where, as an experiment, there were a number of
>open hotspots with innocuous sounding names set up around the RNC
>convention -- and they had a lot of clueless attendees connect. It was
>just a white hat demo so they didn't capture any data from people
>accessing their email or government sites. Of course.

I just signed up for Karma to use on the road... it seems pretty fast;
however, you can't lock it down or change the SSID. That's the whole
deal; any Karma user gets to use your hotspot. I wouldn't use it for
state secrets... even if I knew any.

Jones

[rbowman]

On 07/21/2016 09:22 PM, PaxPerPoten wrote:
> The Dems already believe Trump is the Devil and Trump towers is the Hell
> he hangs out in.

At least the name Hell was borrowed from pre-Christian northern European
religion, and Hel is a goddess:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hel_(being)

If anybody is running Hel it's Hellary.

[PaxPerPoten]

Apparently you and I are looking at different polls etc. I am apprised
that even the Unions like him.

[PaxPerPoten]

And here I thought it was Montana!

[rbowman]

On 07/21/2016 11:08 PM, !Jones wrote:
> Our fearless leader wannabe #1 was feeding his base the red meat
> tonight. I had it on in the other room. I think we'd all best start

> taking drugs because*one* of those clowns will be our next president!

>
> How great does*that* make you feel?

My plan has come to fruition. Vote for the worst possible candidate and
when the shit his the fan reboot the whole mess.

[PaxPerPoten]

Yes...She can go to Hel on her Broom..

[rbowman]

On 07/21/2016 11:02 PM, !Jones wrote:
> What's
> the old saying? "If you make it impossible for the enemy to get in,
> you can't get out." Well, that's most deffo true.

We have a few sites that have implemented tight security policies. The
down side is if something breaks we can't get in to fix it. So it goes...

[rbowman]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJdyfuiVw6k

"I'll be in the back of my black Cadillac
When Jesus finally comes to call his children home."

Shooter Jennings

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Thu, 21 Jul 2016 23:43:07 -0600, in talk.politics.guns rbowman
<bow...@montana.com> wrote:

>My plan has come to fruition. Vote for the worst possible candidate and
>when the shit his the fan reboot the whole mess.

All I can say is...

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 00:17:36 -0500, in talk.politics.guns PaxPerPoten
<P...@USA.org> wrote:

>You do need to read the Book: "The Power Of Positive Thinking"!
>You are waaaay too negative.

I just see no point in discussing matters that are settled. (PTL that
Melania's speech has finally blown over!) The email, while certainly
a news-worthy event once upon a time, has been settled. I'm sure you
don't *like* the settlement... others there are who would not have
liked the outcome should have the decision gone differently. If the
democratic candidate had to go into a nominating convention with
pending criminal charges, it would certainly help the republicans,
would it not? Therefore, how seriously a person takes the matter
tends to depend upon the person's party affiliation.

Jones

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Thu, 21 Jul 2016 23:29:44 -0600, in talk.politics.guns rbowman
<bow...@montana.com> wrote:

>It's also worth noting that Indiana was the last gasp of the Klan.

And their greatest, as I recall. Wasn't the largest gathering on
record (as of some point, anyway) a klan rally in or near Muncie?

Jones

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 00:31:31 -0500, in talk.politics.guns PaxPerPoten
<P...@USA.org> wrote:

>What makes you think there were not many many more? Also hack attacks
>usually remove their tracks.

The issue wasn't an off-site server given that it was physically
secure... and nobody ever said it wasn't. Assumably, somebody at
state knew of the server; their DHCP had to keep issuing it an IP
address and the techies tend to watch that sort of thing; somebody had
to have put that server on the network via a VPN.

Did the government *prosecute* the techs who set that up? (It was
probably a resume-generating event, I'd wager.) The techs were not
charged with any crime even though *they* were the ones who were
supposed to have known!

Now, here's the issue: a secure network will reject inbound
connections from any initial device that does not meet a certain level
of security and a Blackberry does not. Now, *my understanding* of
this vulnerability goes to what's called the "seed space" for the
random number generation on the Blackberry, allowing "Eve" possibly to
crack the encryption on the email. *My understanding* of what
happened is that someone installed a second network interface card
into that machine and connected to a commercial ISP.

Thus, Hillary & friends were able to connect to the commercial
interface with their Blackberries and send & receive email without
having to fool with that bothersome little security restriction. If
you want to see a bunch of techies get nervous quickly, just bridge
their secure network onto the great unwashed internet like that.

Dunno why state's vulnerability scanners didn't catch that second
interface more quickly than they did; they'd actually have to remote
into the server to see it, but so what? I'm going to guess that
Hillary's server was probably uploading its logs... I'm *way* out on a
limb here... and, in a security audit, someone noticed that the
numbers in her logs didn't agree with the numbers from the bastion
servers... just a WAG.

So, the issue was that their emails could have been intercepted and
read somewhere between the device and the server. It's essentially
why HIPAA forbids doctors to have email... period. (Well, they can
*have* it; however, they cannot use it in their practice.)

Have I answered your question, sir?

Jones

[The Voice]

On Thu, 21 Jul 2016 23:35:20 -0600, rbowman <bow...@montana.com>
wrote:

When will you prove that Hell exists anywhere except in your mind?

Until then, it's exactly as valid for anyone to claim that you're
going to Pastefarian Hell, where the beer is stale and the strippers
have sexually transmitted diseases.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flying_Spaghetti_Monster#Afterlife

[Jim Wilkins]

"!Jones" <ĄJo...@fubahor.com> wrote in message
news:gv44pb5be6ql548nl...@4ax.com...
> ...

> So, the issue was that their emails could have been intercepted and
> read somewhere between the device and the server. It's essentially
> why HIPAA forbids doctors to have email... period. (Well, they can
> *have* it; however, they cannot use it in their practice.)
>
> Have I answered your question, sir?
>
> Jones

Do you believe Guccifer and/or the Sluzhba Vneshnei Razvedki did or
didn't hack the server?

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 09:48:10 -0400, in talk.politics.guns "Jim
Wilkins" <murat...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Do you believe Guccifer and/or the Sluzhba Vneshnei Razvedki did or
>didn't hack the server?

I have no evidence upon which to base any belief one way or the other.

Jones

[rbowman]

On 07/21/2016 11:35 PM, PaxPerPoten wrote:
> On 7/22/2016 12:29 AM, rbowman wrote:
>> On 07/21/2016 09:14 PM, PaxPerPoten wrote:
>>> Pence did a Hell of a nice job turning the economic mess in his state
>>> around. He is at least very popular in his home state...
>>
>> He'll soothe the evangelicals but that may not play well, even in
>> Indiana:
>>
>> http://heavy.com/news/2016/07/mike-pence-approval-ratings-as-governor-indiana-rating-job-performance-numbers-poll-forty-percent-vp-trump-chosen-running-mate-vice-president-lgbt-religious-freedom-restoration-act/
>>
>>
>>
>> I had a contract in Ft. Wayne that lasted over a year. Not bad for
>> something that was supposed to be three months. I've never spent a lot
>> of time in the Bible Belt but I was surprised by the Christian emphasis.
>> You'd walk into a shop and a sign would proudly proclaim it was a
>> Christian business. Then they would try to screw you...
>>
>> It's also worth noting that Indiana was the last gasp of the Klan.
>
> And here I thought it was Montana!

http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/%E2%80%98gay-friendly%E2%80%99-%E2%80%98non-racist%E2%80%99-ku-klux-klan-branch-opens-montana101114/

It's the new, improved Klan... Even back when the Klan was running
Indiana it didn't get much traction in Montana:

https://bestamericanhistory.wordpress.com/2014/08/10/montanas-invisible-empire/

Wrong demographics. The SPLC reports are even more amusing. We had a
star as a hate group center for a while. It was one guy who would crawl
out of the cellar when the moon was full and put Church of the Creator
flyers on cars within a 2 block radius. I don't think his Mommy let him
cross big streets.

[rbowman]

I don't know if they held the record but they tried:

http://www.hoosierhistorylive.org/mail/2010-04-24.html

[rbowman]

On 07/21/2016 11:34 PM, PaxPerPoten wrote:
>>
>
> Apparently you and I are looking at different polls etc. I am apprised
> that even the Unions like him.

http://www.indystar.com/story/news/politics/2016/05/19/latest-poll-race-governor-remains-tight/84616830/

He does okay when it comes to the economy.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/07/politics/mike-pence-donald-trump-vp/

Like I said he will play well with the evangelicals and not so well with
the more socially liberal.

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 08:05:38 -0600, in talk.politics.guns rbowman
<bow...@montana.com> wrote:

>I don't know if they held the record but they tried:
>
>http://www.hoosierhistorylive.org/mail/2010-04-24.html

OK, New Castle it was, but Muncie is fairly close. I read an article
on it a long time ago.

Jones

[rbowman]

On 07/21/2016 11:32 PM, !Jones wrote:
> I just signed up for Karma to use on the road... it seems pretty fast;
> however, you can't lock it down or change the SSID. That's the whole
> deal; any Karma user gets to use your hotspot. I wouldn't use it for
> state secrets... even if I knew any.

I use Verizon wireless at home and when I travel I just take the MiFi
with me. DSL or cable internet ain't never gonna happen where I live so
it's 4G or screw around with sat dishes. And the MiFi is locked down.

I was at my brother's and opened up my laptop to show him a map
application I run. The thing happily connected to somebody's network. It
wasn't his since theirs was hardwired DSL. I think users have gotten a
little more sophisticated since then.

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 08:01:02 -0600, in talk.politics.guns rbowman
<bow...@montana.com> wrote:

>http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/%E2%80%98gay-friendly%E2%80%99-%E2%80%98non-racist%E2%80%99-ku-klux-klan-branch-opens-montana101114/
>
>It's the new, improved Klan... Even back when the Klan was running
>Indiana it didn't get much traction in Montana:
>
>https://bestamericanhistory.wordpress.com/2014/08/10/montanas-invisible-empire/
>
>Wrong demographics. The SPLC reports are even more amusing. We had a
>star as a hate group center for a while. It was one guy who would crawl
>out of the cellar when the moon was full and put Church of the Creator
>flyers on cars within a 2 block radius. I don't think his Mommy let him
>cross big streets.

I had some recent business in Missoula and was surprised how liberal
the population centers of Montana have become. The other shocker was
the terrible air quality! ... at least in that Bitterroot Valley
area.

Then, again, we were camping in the Big Hole on the way back and met
an old fart running a string of mules carrying supplies for the forest
service. He kept bringing up politics; I must have looked liberal to
him. Anyway, he was literally *begging* me to defend Obama in any
way, but I wouldn't take the bait.

Jones

[rbowman]

On 07/22/2016 06:36 AM, !Jones wrote:
> I just see no point in discussing matters that are settled. (PTL that
> Melania's speech has finally blown over!)

What amazed me about that was anybody knew what Michelle Obama said 8
years ago. Who ever listens to the candidate's wife mouthing platitudes?
Except, of course, when the candidate's wife becomes the candidate in
her own right. Now if Melania had been blathering on about planting
trees and shrubs...

[Bradley K. Sherman]

Huh? According to the latest "Official Story" from the Trump
campaign, it was Melania herself who remembered what Michelle
said and read it on the phone to the speech writer.

I admit that with the nonstop lying coming out of the Trump
camp it's hard to keep up.

--bks

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

What attracted me to Karma is that I'm on an old cellular prepaid by
the minute contract that costs about $10/month or so based on my
average use, but no data. Karma, while expensive if you're drinking
bandwidth, is truly a pay only for what you use plan ($15/gig).

The plan isn't bad at all (I guess; haven't really used it much);
however, if I were close, you'd see my hotspot and could connect. The
upside is that you'd have to log in or sign up and, if you sign up on
my hotspot, *my* account gets some *free data*!!! (Three bytes, I
think!!!)

Jones

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 08:13:33 -0600, in talk.politics.guns rbowman
<bow...@montana.com> wrote:

>Like I said he will play well with the evangelicals and not so well with
>the more socially liberal.

A "socially liberal" republican???

[!Jones]

X-NO-IDIOTS

On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 08:26:38 -0600, in talk.politics.guns rbowman
<bow...@montana.com> wrote:

>What amazed me about that was anybody knew what Michelle Obama said 8
>years ago. Who ever listens to the candidate's wife mouthing platitudes?
>Except, of course, when the candidate's wife becomes the candidate in
>her own right. Now if Melania had been blathering on about planting
>trees and shrubs...

It doesn't surprise me that *somebody* would check... *I* wouldn't
bother, of course. She could have begun: "Ask not what your
country..." and I wouldn't even have heard it.

I just don't care for pep rallies; never have. They could do what
they need to do on the first night, *then* have the pep rally... of
course, everyone would go home. I wonder why Cruz even agreed to
speak? He clearly stepped on his dick by doing so.

There isn't anything of substance that ever comes out of a convention
speech... by the time Trump finally shut up, I felt like his kid. I
do hope Hillary doesn't think she has to beat him by talking longer
than he did.

Jones

[Rudy Canoza]

On 7/21/2016 5:54 PM, PaxPerPoten wrote:

> On 7/21/2016 8:16 AM, !Jones wrote:
>> X-NO-IDIOTS
>>

>> On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 17:43:26 -0400, in talk.politics.guns Mr. B1ack
>> <now...@nada.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Untrue actually ... because everybody *knows* the
>>> fix was in, that she got extra-special handling by the
>>> feds and justice dept.
>>>
>>> Nixon was never actually convicted of being a crook,
>>> but everybody *knew* he was.
>>
>> I don't *know* that and neither do you. It wouldn't surprise me;
>> however, I see no evidence that a "fix" was in; she certainly *could*
>> easily have been charged and probably would have been had there been
>> any direct precedent. Now, you really *want* to believe that Clinton
>> received "extra-special handling by the feds and justice dept";
>> therefore, this is what you will believe. Most people believe that
>> she *did* have an unauthorized server and just got off with a warning.
>>
>> That *kind* of stuff happens every day; it differs only in scope from
>> a rogue wireless access point that someone installs in their office
>> because they have poor reception or a dial-up connection to their
>> machine... people do that... they usually simply get shown the door if
>> they're caught. I don't think that anyone has yet been charged with a
>> federal crime *simply* for having a rogue wireless access point.
>>
>> The other point is that somebody had to configure the state
>> department's routers on the inside and (I'm guessing) put her server
>> on a VPN; that, in and of itself, does not violate security given that
>> the machine is checked regularly; however, if it had another
>> interface, then somebody dropped the ball! Was *that* person charged?
>> I don't believe that they did anything beyond generating a few resumes
>> from their IT people; therefore, I see no evidence of special
>> treatment.
>>
>> Jones
>
> That is a lot of words to Justify HRC's high crimes.

He isn't trying to "Justify" [sic] any "high [sic] crimes." Until she
is tried and convicted, there's no legal implication from her use of a
personal server for e-mail. There could be a political implication.

[Rudy Canoza]

On 7/21/2016 5:58 PM, Poxed Impotence diddled herself with:
> On 7/21/2016 7:24 AM, Verdine White wrote:
>>
>>
>> "!Jones" wrote in message
>> news:c7k0pb13q74g7jaff...@4ax.com...
>>
>> X-NO-IDIOTS
>>
>> On Wed, 20 Jul 2016 10:38:28 -0700, in talk.politics.guns Greg Stearns
>> <jerk.jaqu...@alllll.the.time> wrote:
>>
>>> Then you're another idiot.
>>
>> "WHOOSH!" Right over your head like a high-velocity onomontapia
>>
>> #######
>> A new word you used wrong. Jones.
>>
>> You remind me of Jerry , that fast food retard, and "Deep Doo Doo!
>
>
> Good grief, Rudy...Do you really believe that

I didn't post the above, Poxed Impotence.