Gas Bandit's Political Thread V: The Vampire Likes Bats

PatrThom

PatrThom

Yes, and after you finish reading "Number of the Beast," you should read Louis L'Amour's "Haunted Mesa" and Alan Dean Foster's "To The Vanishing Point."

--Patrick
 
Covar

Covar

Don't feel like endorsing any particular site, but basically while secretary of state, Clinton wasn't using any government provided email account and was instead running a private smtp server from her home. Government emails are supposed to be archived for record.
 
GasBandit

GasBandit

Staff member
I've said it before and I'll say it again, that Hillary Clinton isn't in prison is one of the great, glaring examples of how our legal system is a sham.
 
GasBandit

GasBandit

Staff member
SpecialKO said:
Whatever else Clinton has reputedly done, apparently every Secretary of State between Colin Powell and her has done the same thing, because the State Department lets you. After she left office, they changed the rules for Kerry.
Click to expand...
Actually, that list is only Clinton and Colin Powell. Madeleine Albright and Condoleeza Rice apparently didn't use e-mail during their tenures with the State Dept.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...hecking-chuck-schumers-defense-hillary-clint/

It is interesting, however, that Hillary's reasoning (it wasn't convenient to have 2 phones, one for private e-mail, one for affairs of state) seems very flimsy. You can have multiple e-mail accounts on one phone. Additionally, she's picking and choosing which e-mails to let the committee see herself (or whoever her "we" is when she says "we" separated them out). And to add insult to injury, rather than deliver the e-mails in an electronic format, she printed out ones she deemed fit and delivered it on paper. 55,000 pages of it, sure to stymie any attempt to sort through them.

She's vociferously denying anyone else access to her private e-mail server, claiming : “The server contains personal communications from my husband and me,” she said. “The system we used was set up for President Clinton's office,” she added. “So, I think that the use of that server, which started with my husband, certainly proved to be effective and secure.”

Except Bill Clinton has sent a total of 2 e-mails in his entire life, both during his administration.

The AP is now suing for access.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money...suit-to-force-clinton-email-release/70151508/

There is a LOT of smoke here for there not to be a fire.
 
SpecialKO

SpecialKO

I think you're massively overstating the smoke, but I'm hardly against more people seeing her emails pertaining to the State Department.

Besides, unless there is actual legal smoke (I'm stretching your analogy a bit, I realize), she's 100% in the right of not being required to disclose the contents of her private emails.
 
GasBandit

GasBandit

Staff member
SpecialKO said:
I think you're massively overstating the smoke, but I'm hardly against more people seeing her emails pertaining to the State Department.

Besides, unless there is actual legal smoke (I'm stretching your analogy a bit, I realize), she's 100% in the right of not being required to disclose the contents of her private emails.
Click to expand...
And thus, she gets to decide something incriminating constitutes "private."
 
SpecialKO

SpecialKO

GasBandit said:
And thus, she gets to decide something incriminating constitutes "private."
Click to expand...
Isn't it on the government to show otherwise to the extent that a warrant could be issued before something that is ostensibly private can be forcibly made public?

She's not making it easy on them, of course, but all that says is that government departments should have never allowed the use of private emails for government business in the first place.
 
AshburnerX

AshburnerX

SpecialKO said:
Isn't it on the government to show otherwise to the extent that a warrant could be issued before something that is ostensibly private can be forcibly made public?

She's not making it easy on them, of course, but all that says is that government departments should have never allowed the use of private emails for government business in the first place.
Click to expand...
This is my thought on this. She didn't violate the law at the time by having the separate accounts, so it's up to the government to prove they have reason to believe she did something illegal with the account. Right now, they can't even prove a crime actually took place, which makes this a fishing expedition.
 
GasBandit

GasBandit

Staff member
You guys may have a point there. We'll see how this all unfolds.


Meanwhile, in other news, with a national shortage of the drugs used to perform lethal injections after european manufacturers have started refusing to sell, Utah ran out.

So what did they do?

Reinstitute death by firing squad.

Texas is about to use one of its two remaining doses to execute a hitman for the Mexican mafia. Perhaps it will do the same in the near future.
 
Null

Null

blotsfan said:
I was under the impression that the drugs for lethal injections were just a higher dose of normal anesthesia.
Click to expand...
No, most states use a combination of three drugs. First is an anesthetic, second is a paralytic, and third is lethal - usually causing cardiac arrest. In most cases, they start with sodium thiopental, which is a strong but short term barbituate, typically used for anesthesia induction or medically induced coma. Secondly, they use Pavulon, which is a non-polarizing muscle relaxant, or paralytic. This prevents the subject from thrashing, moving, and eventually leading to death by suffocation (paralysis of the diaphragm and lungs). Finally, they inject Potassium Chloride, which affects the electrical conduction of heart muscle. Electrical impulses misfire, the resting electrical resistance becomes lower than normal, and that makes the heart cells unable to prepare for their next contraction. Within minutes, the heart stops beating and the person dies.
 
AshburnerX

AshburnerX

blotsfan said:
I was under the impression that the drugs for lethal injections were just a higher dose of normal anesthesia.
Click to expand...
It depends on the state.

Basically, the reasoning behind lethal injection is that it's the most "humane and painless" way to end a human life (thus avoiding the cruel and unusual punishment clause) but even something as simple as the wrong ratio of the drugs or an incorrect dosage can turn what would normally be a simple, mostly pain free procedure into the stuff of nightmares. Personally, I believe we ether need to stop executing criminals or admit that we're alright with their suffering to begin with. I'm alright with ether result, but our inability to decide is just making it worse for everyone.
 
Bubble181

Bubble181

AshburnerX said:
It depends on the state.

Basically, the reasoning behind lethal injection is that it's the most "humane and painless" way to end a human life (thus avoiding the cruel and unusual punishment clause) but even something as simple as the wrong ratio of the drugs or an incorrect dosage can turn what would normally be a simple, mostly pain free procedure into the stuff of nightmares. Personally, I believe we ether need to stop executing criminals or admit that we're alright with their suffering to begin with. I'm alright with ether result, but our inability to decide is just making it worse for everyone.
Click to expand...
I still say the guillotine - a well-oiled and maintained one - is pretty much the most painless way to go. Snap, done.
 
Eriol

Eriol

Bubble181 said:
I still say the guillotine - a well-oiled and maintained one - is pretty much the most painless way to go. Snap, done.
Click to expand...
Supposedly not. There is "some level" of consciousness after the "snap" there (I've heard), though not for long.

I'd say hit a double-whammy here: bullet directly through the forehead, while the governor of the state pulls the trigger. There aren't THAT many executions per year in any one state. Work it into his/her schedule. Then they can decide to either pardon, or pull the trigger themselves, literally. And the brain is obliterated immediately, so no pain and/or consciousness.

I think it kills two birds with one stone. Yes that was deliberate.
 
Ravenpoe

Ravenpoe

Eriol said:
Supposedly not. There is "some level" of consciousness after the "snap" there (I've heard), though not for long.

I'd say hit a double-whammy here: bullet directly through the forehead, while the governor of the state pulls the trigger. There aren't THAT many executions per year in any one state. Work it into his/her schedule. Then they can decide to either pardon, or pull the trigger themselves, literally. And the brain is obliterated immediately, so no pain and/or consciousness.

I think it kills two birds with one stone. Yes that was deliberate.
Click to expand...
Or we could abolish the death penalty. That's an option.
 
Krisken

Krisken

What's scarier than a lunatic in charge of a super power with nuclear weapons? Not knowing if there is a power vacuum occurring in a super power with nuclear weapons.[DOUBLEPOST=1426467363,1426467329][/DOUBLEPOST]
GasBandit said:
They're claiming he's fine, healthy, and meeting the president of Kyrgyzstan tomorrow.
Click to expand...
It's really weird to say I hope so.
 
Null

Null

So, Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR), leader of the charge against Iran, apparently didn't know that Tehran is, in fact, the capital of Iran, and has been for some time.


 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top