Is the reason the US is now a laughing stock.

[Phil1111 1,192]

John Bolton's personal residence was raided by the FBI today. Kash Patel's storm troopers are on the move.

Case closed.

[gowlerk 2,283]

46 minutes ago, Phil1111 said:

John Bolton's personal residence was raided by the FBI today. Kash Patel's storm troopers are on the move.

Case closed.

Probably because he is so darn woke. And liberal.

[dogyks 18]

It kinda baffles me how the rules are applied regarding classified info.

I never had a security clearance, and was informed that there was a zero tolerance policy regarding mishandling of secret information.  The rules were unambiguous, and people who fell afoul of them were seemingly held accountable. 

Declassification required a defined process, and anything marked classified was regulated until then.

When politicians mishandled classified info, it appeared to be rather cut and dried.  Some people give a pass to one side of the aisle or another, which I don't get.  The rules supposedly apply equally to any political party.

Hillary's use of an unsecured server was clearly in violation of regulations with which she was fully familiar.  Trump's retention of secret documents was definitively illegal.  Biden's stashing secret documents in the garage was entirely proscribed, regardless of the progress of his dementia.

There are people who wound up in Federal lockup for less egregious transgressions, so I have a real problem with the idea that the rules don't apply to one class of people or another.

In this case, there may be grounds to suspect Bolton of following Clinton's or Trump's lead.  Whether or not that is the case, the capricious nature of enforcement is problematic.

 

[Phil1111 1,192]

37 minutes ago, dogyks said:

.....  Biden's stashing secret documents in the garage was entirely proscribed, regardless of the progress of his dementia.....

 

I take it the definition of dementia and its effects has slipped your mind?

[normiss 903]

40 minutes ago, dogyks said:

It kinda baffles me how the rules are applied regarding classified info.

I never had a security clearance, and was informed that there was a zero tolerance policy regarding mishandling of secret information.  The rules were unambiguous, and people who fell afoul of them were seemingly held accountable. 

Declassification required a defined process, and anything marked classified was regulated until then.

When politicians mishandled classified info, it appeared to be rather cut and dried.  Some people give a pass to one side of the aisle or another, which I don't get.  The rules supposedly apply equally to any political party.

Hillary's use of an unsecured server was clearly in violation of regulations with which she was fully familiar.  Trump's retention of secret documents was definitively illegal.  Biden's stashing secret documents in the garage was entirely proscribed, regardless of the progress of his dementia.

There are people who wound up in Federal lockup for less egregious transgressions, so I have a real problem with the idea that the rules don't apply to one class of people or another.

In this case, there may be grounds to suspect Bolton of following Clinton's or Trump's lead.  Whether or not that is the case, the capricious nature of enforcement is problematic.

 

Your "facts" are off for starters.

 

[dogyks 18]

1 minute ago, normiss said:

Your "facts" are off for starters.

 

Thanks for the detailed clarification.

[normiss 903]

2 minutes ago, dogyks said:

Thanks for the detailed clarification.

You've repeatedly proven not worth the time and effort.

[dogyks 18]

21 minutes ago, normiss said:

You've repeatedly proven not worth the time and effort.

Thus the time and effort to vent your spleen.  Got it.

[normiss 903]

5 minutes ago, dogyks said:

Thus the time and effort to vent your spleen.  Got it.

Nah, just pointing out your putrid continual stream of disinformation and lies.

[dogyks 18]

49 minutes ago, normiss said:

Nah, just pointing out your putrid continual stream of disinformation and lies.

You fail to get specific, not that it matters.

[normiss 903]

22 minutes ago, dogyks said:

You fail to get specific, not that it matters.

Just returning the favor, not that I actually give a fuck.

[dogyks 18]

1 hour ago, normiss said:

Just returning the favor, not that I actually give a fuck.

So all you have to add is vitriol and abuse.  I suppose that enhances your credibility.

[billvon 3,131]

4 hours ago, Phil1111 said:

I take it the definition of dementia and its effects has slipped your mind?

Not at all.  The modern accepted definition of dementia for conservatives is "Biden, not Trump."

[JoeWeber 2,967]

2 hours ago, normiss said:

Hillary's use of an unsecured server was clearly in violation of regulations with which she was fully familiar.  Trump's retention of secret documents was definitively illegal.  Biden's stashing secret documents in the garage was entirely proscribed, regardless of the progress of his dementia.

There are people who wound up in Federal lockup for less egregious transgressions, so I have a real problem with the idea that the rules don't apply to one class of people or another.

Sure, but in law the issue of intent usually determines the level of criminality. Hillary was doofy, Biden was dizzy, Trump flat out absconded with secret materials, hid them in his crapper, and then lied about it all. I'm saying they aren't equivalent wrongs or equally prosecutable.

[billvon 3,131]

8 hours ago, dogyks said:

It kinda baffles me how the rules are applied regarding classified info.

I never had a security clearance, and was informed that there was a zero tolerance policy regarding mishandling of secret information.  The rules were unambiguous, and people who fell afoul of them were seemingly held accountable.

I worked with about a dozen people who had a security clearance - and no, it was not zero tolerance.  If people made a mistake (and they did, all the time) then they'd get a lecture and told not to do it again.  The severity of the lecture was proportional to the risk the mistake posed.

Left a page from a confidential manual on the copier?  It would be returned to your desk with a "be more careful" Post-It.

Emailed something confidential about work on AOL instead of Arpanet SMTP?  You'd get a public lecture with much finger wagging.

Dropped a page with STALO frequencies (secret, not confidential) outside the building?  That would be a closed door meeting with a director.

Stole a dozen boxes of top secret information, lied about it, told your lawyers to pretend you didn't have it, then showed them to a random journalist?  You have to be Trump to get away with that.

[wmw999 2,600]

8 hours ago, dogyks said:

I never had a security clearance, and was informed that there was a zero tolerance policy regarding mishandling of secret information.  The rules were unambiguous, and people who fell afoul of them were seemingly held accountable. 

I have held a security clearance. I never actually dealt with secure materials (I was system support, so had godlike access to everything, including the secure areas), but yes, mistakes were addressed, and didn't lead to jail. 

If something was important enough in our world (which was proposals generally), a Chinese wall was set up to physically prevent any sharing. It seemed to work.

Wendy P.

[nigel99 641]

12 hours ago, normiss said:

Your "facts" are off for starters.

 

 

[richravizza 28]

17 hours ago, nigel99 said:

 

Now that is Ironic. Pardon me and my family.

On 8/22/2025 at 10:28 AM, billvon said:

Not at all.  The modern accepted definition of dementia for conservatives is "Biden, not Trump."

Bill why is it, you always talk about what Conservatives think,but never actually hear what they said,you must get your perspective of conservatives via a New Liberal.

I told you before,You wouldn't know Us, If we bit you on your ass.lol

Talk about a negative cognitive bias.

Can we work on this?

I'll admit Trump is showing signs of age related onset.his had is looking like bidens neck,and his feet and ankles are showing signs of oedema.

You'll need to give me a bone,lol at least one consolation,that the last President is our baseline for our comparisons,if not, How can we take you seriously if you can't simply say, Biden was in sharp decline.Just watch the last debate, the contrast is clear. 

Trump, "I don't know what he said,I don't think he knows what he said, either."lol

As far as the physical aspect. I think Joe's in the lead,3-0 in the gravity works event.

Edited 9 hours ago by richravizza

[richravizza 28]

On 8/22/2025 at 5:41 AM, dogyks said:

It kinda baffles me how the rules are applied regarding classified info.

I never had a security clearance, and was informed that there was a zero tolerance policy regarding mishandling of secret information.  The rules were unambiguous, and people who fell afoul of them were seemingly held accountable. 

Declassification required a defined process, and anything marked classified was regulated until then.

When politicians mishandled classified info, it appeared to be rather cut and dried.  Some people give a pass to one side of the aisle or another, which I don't get.  The rules supposedly apply equally to any political party.

Hillary's use of an unsecured server was clearly in violation of regulations with which she was fully familiar.  Trump's retention of secret documents was definitively illegal.  Biden's stashing secret documents in the garage was entirely proscribed, regardless of the progress of his dementia.

There are people who wound up in Federal lockup for less egregious transgressions, so I have a real problem with the idea that the rules don't apply to one class of people or another.

In this case, there may be grounds to suspect Bolton of following Clinton's or Trump's lead.  Whether or not that is the case, the capricious nature of enforcement is problematic.

 

 Bravo Sir, Capricious, nice way of saying it. 

 Any member of  any Military Branch would be stripped and in Prison for life, in a Hillery's situation.In the Military we have additional laws, the UCMJ.A double jeopardy of sorts with harsher penalties ie.a firing squad; compared to civilian bureaucrats and politicians.It is Rules for thee situation. 

Crew members of Boomer type weapon systems, mission info and intell  with "classified"  just may require a different Standard,zero tolerance.

Clinton and Bolton were not Presidents, so Yes the Rules are definitely different.Which leads us to the Marlago Raid the first ever,which set a Precedent.Then when wrongdoing was discovered in Bidens case as it was unsecured and an unauthorized ghostwriter had access.

The Hurr Report concluded that Biden was so forgetful,and couldn't remember what year his son died,and concluded,{cough},that no jury would convict such a forgetful old man.A highlight to Bills perception and NCB and our concerns in our CinC.

 

[richravizza 28]

On 8/22/2025 at 11:53 AM, JoeWeber said:

Sure, but in law the issue of intent usually determines the level of criminality. Hillary was doofy, Biden was dizzy, Trump flat out absconded with secret materials, hid them in his crapper, and then lied about it all. I'm saying they aren't equivalent wrongs or equally prosecutable.

Oh that Is Hilarious. Thanks for the laughs.

Can I use it ? "Hillary was doofy, Biden was dizzy." and not a "smidgin of corruption".lol 

Perhaps you can ask the author Who's laughing now.

Edited 9 hours ago by richravizza