Trump Presidency

Status
Not open for further replies.
J

jprue24

Well-known member
Messages
2,895
Reaction score
3,245
Blazers46 said:
Let’s focus on “everyone else”. If I were just simply asked for my government issued phone back because of an investigation and I sent it back after I hammered it to dust, then scrubbed all my personal devices and hammered those as well… I would be in jail for something. Guaranteed.
Click to expand...
Let me ask this, what happens to that phone when it gets replaced/upgraded?

I assume from your annual experience with Tina and Jeff (yes, I know they just changed the CBT) you would know the answer is that you turn it into the program/security manager, they fill out a 1348 and turn it in to DRMO (sorry, "DLA Disposition Services" now), where they get wiped and destroyed. Did her team severely lack IT knowledge? Yup. Did they screw up by not disposing of the phones correctly? Maybe, destruction is the most important thing (link below articulates that). Was using a program like bleach bit insufficient for wiping a gov cell phone? Yup. Would you go to jail for that? Nope. Lose you clearance? Maybe. Could you lose your job? Maybe. The DoD would probably handle the situation differently than DoS, I've never been involved with the DoS so I don't know, only speculating.

Here is a link with guidence from NSA about device destruction.

nsa.gov/resources/media-destruction-guidance/FAQs

Now that I answered your fantasy scenario, I want to point out Clinton did not ask for them back to destroy. Her team did not keep track of the devices that had been linked to those phone numbers, because they had already been replaced (not ok). You don't hang on to devices because there is a non zero chance they get subpoenaed for an investigation. You destroy them. So, I'm not sure why you build a scenario that, right from the start, is not the same. Seems disingenuous to me, but #1 may swoop in and wag his finger at me for being a big meany so I won't go that far yet.


You also know that if you forwarded an email chain, with no classification identifiers, but that had spillage somewhere in it, you wouldn't be charged with a crime, like Hillary.
 
Blazers46

Blazers46

Adjectives: wise/brilliant/handsome.
Messages
8,109
Reaction score
5,460
jprue24 said:
Let me ask this, what happens to that phone when it gets replaced/upgraded?

I assume from your annual experience with Tina and Jeff (yes, I know they just changed the CBT) you would know the answer is that you turn it into the program/security manager, they fill out a 1348 and turn it in to DRMO (sorry, "DLA Disposition Services" now), where they get wiped and destroyed. Did her team severely lack IT knowledge? Yup. Did they screw up by not disposing of the phones correctly? Maybe, destruction is the most important thing (link below articulates that). Was using a program like bleach bit insufficient for wiping a gov cell phone? Yup. Would you go to jail for that? Nope. Lose you clearance? Maybe. Could you lose your job? Maybe. The DoD would probably handle the situation differently than DoS, I've never been involved with the DoS so I don't know, only speculating.

Here is a link with guidence from NSA about device destruction.

nsa.gov/resources/media-destruction-guidance/FAQs

Now that I answered your fantasy scenario, I want to point out Clinton did not ask for them back to destroy. Her team did not keep track of the devices that had been linked to those phone numbers, because they had already been replaced (not ok). You don't hang on to devices because there is a non zero chance they get subpoenaed for an investigation. You destroy them. So, I'm not sure why you build a scenario that, right from the start, is not the same. Seems disingenuous to me, but #1 may swoop in and wag his finger at me for being a big meany so I won't go that far yet.


You also know that if you forwarded an email chain, with no classification identifiers, but that had spillage somewhere in it, you wouldn't be charged with a crime, like Hillary.
Click to expand...
jprue24 said:
Let me ask this, what happens to that phone when it gets replaced/upgraded?

I assume from your annual experience with Tina and Jeff (yes, I know they just changed the CBT) you would know the answer is that you turn it into the program/security manager, they fill out a 1348 and turn it in to DRMO (sorry, "DLA Disposition Services" now), where they get wiped and destroyed. Did her team severely lack IT knowledge? Yup. Did they screw up by not disposing of the phones correctly? Maybe, destruction is the most important thing (link below articulates that). Was using a program like bleach bit insufficient for wiping a gov cell phone? Yup. Would you go to jail for that? Nope. Lose you clearance? Maybe. Could you lose your job? Maybe. The DoD would probably handle the situation differently than DoS, I've never been involved with the DoS so I don't know, only speculating.

Here is a link with guidence from NSA about device destruction.

nsa.gov/resources/media-destruction-guidance/FAQs

Now that I answered your fantasy scenario, I want to point out Clinton did not ask for them back to destroy. Her team did not keep track of the devices that had been linked to those phone numbers, because they had already been replaced (not ok). You don't hang on to devices because there is a non zero chance they get subpoenaed for an investigation. You destroy them. So, I'm not sure why you build a scenario that, right from the start, is not the same. Seems disingenuous to me, but #1 may swoop in and wag his finger at me for being a big meany so I won't go that far yet.


You also know that if you forwarded an email chain, with no classification identifiers, but that had spillage somewhere in it, you wouldn't be charged with a crime, like Hillary.
Click to expand...
Can you print me a certificate of completion so I can send in for credit…
 
Blazers46

Blazers46

Adjectives: wise/brilliant/handsome.
Messages
8,109
Reaction score
5,460
jprue24 said:
Let me ask this, what happens to that phone when it gets replaced/upgraded?

I assume from your annual experience with Tina and Jeff (yes, I know they just changed the CBT) you would know the answer is that you turn it into the program/security manager, they fill out a 1348 and turn it in to DRMO (sorry, "DLA Disposition Services" now), where they get wiped and destroyed. Did her team severely lack IT knowledge? Yup. Did they screw up by not disposing of the phones correctly? Maybe, destruction is the most important thing (link below articulates that). Was using a program like bleach bit insufficient for wiping a gov cell phone? Yup. Would you go to jail for that? Nope. Lose you clearance? Maybe. Could you lose your job? Maybe. The DoD would probably handle the situation differently than DoS, I've never been involved with the DoS so I don't know, only speculating.

Here is a link with guidence from NSA about device destruction.

nsa.gov/resources/media-destruction-guidance/FAQs

Now that I answered your fantasy scenario, I want to point out Clinton did not ask for them back to destroy. Her team did not keep track of the devices that had been linked to those phone numbers, because they had already been replaced (not ok). You don't hang on to devices because there is a non zero chance they get subpoenaed for an investigation. You destroy them. So, I'm not sure why you build a scenario that, right from the start, is not the same. Seems disingenuous to me, but #1 may swoop in and wag his finger at me for being a big meany so I won't go that far yet.


You also know that if you forwarded an email chain, with no classification identifiers, but that had spillage somewhere in it, you wouldn't be charged with a crime, like Hillary.
Click to expand...
Circling back, that is a fair assessment. I guess I am basing my knowledge off the idea they were subpoenaed, then destroyed. If the opposite it totally makes sense.
 
J

jprue24

Well-known member
Messages
2,895
Reaction score
3,245
Yeah, they couldn't account for what happened to something like 13 devices linked to 2 phone numbers. which is no good, but also not necessarily criminal (intent, intent, intent). I would be very surprised if the person responsible for the devices could ever get a clearance again.
 
GATTACA!

GATTACA!

It's about to get gross
Messages
15,113
Reaction score
12,949
Blazers46 said:
Can you print me a certificate of completion so I can send in for credit…
Click to expand...
hqdefault.jpg
 
IRISHDODGER

IRISHDODGER

Blue Chip Recruit
Messages
8,046
Reaction score
6,120
Ordinarily, I think Dimon would get a ton of eye rolls if he were mentioned as a POTUS candidate but w/ the likelihood of another Biden vs Trump option staring Americans in the face, he may be a dark horse but would he run as a Republican?

Dimon donates primarily to the Democratic Party.[42] In May 2012, he described himself as "barely a Democrat"[43] stating,

I've gotten disturbed at some of the Democrats' anti-business behavior, the attacks on work ethic and successful people. I think it's very counterproductive. ... It doesn't mean I don't have their values. I want jobs. I want a more equitable society. I don't mind paying higher taxes. ... I do think we're our brother's keeper but I think that attacking that which creates all things, is not the right way to go about it.[43]
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

i know I’m putting the cart ahead of the horse & he likely isn’t going to run. But this quote has picked up some buzz and just shows how desperate folks are for a rational, sane, mentally lucid option.

 
NorthDakota

NorthDakota

Grandson of Loomis
Messages
15,705
Reaction score
6,010
If Dimon ran in 2024 it would have to be as a republican, wouldn't it? Dems aren't going to let anyone challenge Biden. Could he do the Ross Perot thing? If the ballot has Trump and Biden on it I would not be shocked to see a third option get a decent chunk of votes...
 
ulukinatme

ulukinatme

Carr for QB 2026!
Messages
31,523
Reaction score
17,410
NorthDakota said:
If Dimon ran in 2024 it would have to be as a republican, wouldn't it? Dems aren't going to let anyone challenge Biden. Could he do the Ross Perot thing? If the ballot has Trump and Biden on it I would not be shocked to see a third option get a decent chunk of votes...
Click to expand...
Hopefully Republican. 3rd party just doesn't work in this country. There's too much money in both parties. Whichever side a 3rd party candidate closely aligns with will mostly just steal votes from that party in the election.
 
GATTACA!

GATTACA!

It's about to get gross
Messages
15,113
Reaction score
12,949
ulukinatme said:
Hopefully Republican. 3rd party just doesn't work in this country. There's too much money in both parties. Whichever side a 3rd party candidate closely aligns with will mostly just steal votes from that party in the election.
Click to expand...
It’s because we don’t have ranked choice voting. If you didn’t have to worry about “throwing away your vote” on someone you like better but believe doesn’t stand a chance maybe we could actually get momentum for more than 2 parties.
 
J

jprue24

Well-known member
Messages
2,895
Reaction score
3,245
ulukinatme said:
Hopefully Republican. 3rd party just doesn't work in this country. There's too much money in both parties. Whichever side a 3rd party candidate closely aligns with will mostly just steal votes from that party in the election.
Click to expand...
It's more than that. The winner take all nature of our elections push candidates into the two strongest parties because that's how you can get shit done. Secondary parties can get wins here or there, but that is more about the candidate than the party. Secondary parties will not rise without the fall of one of the two strongest.

To make more than two parties a real option, the US needs to move towards a parliamentary system, but that would involve changes that, as you have highlighted, the money would never let that happen under the present status quo. Party takeovers and self sorting need assimilation or marginalization of the "threat".
 
Irish#1

Irish#1

Livin' Your Dream!
Staff member
Messages
44,617
Reaction score
20,101
I don’t think we’ll ever see a viable third party. I’ve been hearing about one since I was a pup and I’m sure it’s been discussed before then. Not having a third party is one thing the D’s and R’s agree on.
 
Bishop2b5

Bishop2b5

SEC Exchange Student
Messages
8,939
Reaction score
6,161
Not sure where else to put this, but it starts with Will Smith griping about Trump, so here it is. The commentator just lights Will up though, and it's hilarious.

 
Irish#1

Irish#1

Livin' Your Dream!
Staff member
Messages
44,617
Reaction score
20,101
GATTACA! said:
www.rollingstone.com

Trump Tried to Delete Mar-a-Lago Security Footage to Thwart Investigators

The Justice Department has charged a third man in connection with their investigation into former President Donald Trump’s mishandling of classified documents.
www.rollingstone.com www.rollingstone.com

Whoops
Click to expand...
If true, not surprised.

Fast forward to 2040............In breaking news, new charges have been filed against former president Donald Trump. Trump, who has been dead for 8 years......................................
 
GATTACA!

GATTACA!

It's about to get gross
Messages
15,113
Reaction score
12,949
Irish#1 said:
If true, not surprised.

Fast forward to 2040............In breaking news, new charges have been filed against former president Donald Trump. Trump, who has been dead for 8 years......................................
Click to expand...
We have 9 more years of this shit?
 
Irish#1

Irish#1

Livin' Your Dream!
Staff member
Messages
44,617
Reaction score
20,101
This is going to drag out for a long time. There's a good chance he becomes president before there is a verdict. If found guilty, can they remove him at that time or do they have to wait until he is no longer president?

If found guilty, I'll be surprised if he spends a day in jail.
 
J

jprue24

Well-known member
Messages
2,895
Reaction score
3,245
Irish#1 said:
This is going to drag out for a long time. There's a good chance he becomes president before there is a verdict. If found guilty, can they remove him at that time or do they have to wait until he is no longer president?

If found guilty, I'll be surprised if he spends a day in jail.
Click to expand...
According to the DOJ, Congress has to do it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top