The problem wasn't the DMV. The problem was requiring different form of identification and being told different things by different people. It was not getting an ID because the name you use to pay your bills is Elli but your birth certificate says Ellie. You have to then go back to the state in which your birth certificate was made and get it changed. After dealing with that, you have to come back and then get an ID. Or you have to prove that your current residence is a permanent one if you have not lived there for X months. This is just to vote.
Oh that is blatantly corrupt. Fix that shit but, still make it easier to get an ID even if it's not necessary. If anything it's good to have an ID if you lose your wallet some nice person might call you and return it.
Now you've really stepped into it. The screeching from a move like that would be deafening. "Why are my tax dollars being used to keep offices open for slackers? If they can't make it during normal hours, then they deserve it! Just keep going, it would be endless. You're missing the point, the goal behind this entire madness is discrimination and reduction of the voter pool by those who most likely would not be supported by the voters in question. End of discussion - it's discrimination.
Being a political atheist, I know I don't fit in here, but when it comes to the personal server issue all I have to say is: How many of you have had a secret clearance? How many know what a red or green sticker-ed device is? How many have had to run around and change com-sec frequencies because an ANCZ-10 was lost or a SINCGARS was compromised? How many have had to sign waivers that you wouldn't take monetary gain for secret info because your credit wasn't great? I supported neither candidate because the two I liked were Rand Paul and Gary Johnson. all I am saying is that even if one piece of classified info went through that server, whether a complete document or a sentence in one unclassified was classified, that is wrong and if not judiciously punished by time spent, should have been administratively punished by pulling of any and all clearances. If others have done it in the then it does not make it right either and the practice of I'm above the law needs to be stopped. The ones to bear the brunt of those decisions will be my brothers who wore and still wear the uniform. Have at me if you will I ll be waiting for an intelligent discussion.
I don't disagree. I'm just saying an idea made for bad reasons doesn't necessarily mean it doesn't make some sense. The elections are a fundamental part of our democracy doesn't it make sense to have the same requirements for voting as it does to enter a night club?
No, it is a bad idea because it is a bad idea AND unnecessary. No, it does make sense to have "same requirements" to enter a night club. Another false equivalent.
who's paying for that? no. for one, that would violate the constitution, which extends the franchise to citizens at the age of 18. for another, you already attest to your identity when you register to vote, and are verified against the voter rolls at the polling place. The sole and only point of voter ID is to place an obstacle between citizens and the franchise. It's Jim Crow shit. as has been amply pointed out, 1. your assumptions are worn, and 2. you're probably not the target. You shouldn't be so blase about the government abridging rights of citizenship.
It would be that if any classified document or classified sentence/paragraph in an unclassified document was sent through it, it violates operational security. People have been sentenced to time for much smaller infractions. I would have to dig up exact statutes and codes, and I will, but want to give you exact wording. One thing that a lot of people don't know is that even if you have a clearance you may not be privy to information because it becomes a need to know and if you don't need to know you won't. I can tell you I was grilled during the process of obtaining a clearance, what should have a supposed easy process turned into a 2 year deal, credit report, wife born in Germany even though she had a Dept. of State birth certificate and so on. I will get back to you Bunge either later today or tomorrow
I'm tired of politicians. Can we please have some statesmen like Adlai Stevenson, or Paul Simon, or Dwight Eisenhower?
18 US Code 798/US Code 793(793F)/36 CFR 1236.22/CFR 1236.10 I agree with you GH, politicians are used car salesmen, promise the the world and deliver very little
FBI investigators never found massive quantities of exposed classified material, and they also did not turn up evidence that Clinton intended to be disloyal to the United States or that she intended to obstruct justice. The FBI indicated the Department of Justice should not attempt to prosecute Clinton because there just wasn't enough evidence that she intentionally mishandled classified information. The irony here is that if Clinton had used a State Department email address, it’s highly probable that it would have been hacked. The State Department email system has been hacked (more than once) and the NY Times has reported that some State Department employees turned to private email addresses at least temporarily in order to avoid hacker disruptions.
nope nope nope nope and that's not my conclusion, that's the conclusion of a Clinton hating FBI director.
I think you might have posted this in the wrong forum. Understandable. The wasteland that is College Football discussion on Bigsoccer is here: http://forums.bigsoccer.com/threads/2016-college-football.2035112/. Since no one goes there but dragons, you'd probably get a better response to this if you find a dedicated Michigan forum to get banned from. Thanks for being a great mod, and have a nice day!
Whether she broke any laws, I have no idea. The FBI seems to be saying no. I'll trust their word on it until something changes. That said, whether she broke any laws or not, she did share emails that basically nobody denies contained classified information. people lose their security clearance (and as a result, basically the ability to work for the government) for far less. That, combined with at least the appearance of skirting transparency laws (whether or not she actually did) are a legitimate issue when asking about who should be president. Especially given how much has been said about the Russians hacking and attempting to influence the future of US politics, unless you can convince me that clintonemail.com was as secure as the State Department's servers.
I think everyone just prefers his songwriting. Besides, he had a much more successful career after they split:
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-cybersecurity-statedept-idUSKCN0J11BR20141117 http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/10/politics/state-department-hack-worst-ever/ Not to mention just giving away your gmail password: http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/28/politics/phishing-email-hack-john-podesta-hillary-clinton-wikileaks/ Can you imagine the kind of havoc you could wreck with the password to @RealDonaldTrump?