Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
uote=mimimomx3;5330366]I don't care to convince you. She was using her yahoo account for government business so that it could never be subpoaened. The Bush White House does the same. I think that's wrong. You can use moral relativism all you want.
I don't really think that was the reason she was using it, SINCE THERE WAS REALLY NOTHING IN THERE THAT AMOUNTED TO ANYTHING.
The Bush White House does the same? Uh...where is your proof of that? Never heard of that. This sort of attitude "it's okay if it was a Democrat kid" is ridiculous. You people think it's okay that the kid hacked her email. If it were a Republican's son hacking Obama's emajl you'd be calling for his head on a platter. HYPOCRITS![/quote]
You really should get out more and not rely on CD for your news. ABC News: Experts Don't Yahoo! Over Palin's E-Mail Practices from the article: Lawyer Meredith Fuchs of the Washington, D.C.-based National Security Archive has experience on this issue, having fought with the Bush White House over how it preserved emails, and why it allowed key personnel to use private email accounts controlled by the Republican National Committee. She believes Palin's email habits echo the worst practices of the Bush administration. Have you not read my posts where I say the kid who did it should be punished according to the law? Do you just make stuff up?
The Bush White House e-mail controversy surfaced in 2007, during the controversy involving the dismissal of eight U.S. attorneys. Congressional requests for administration documents while investigating the dismissals of the U.S. attorneys required the Bush administration to reveal that not all internal White House emails were available, because they were sent via a non-government domain hosted on an e-mail server not controlled by the federal government. Conducting governmental business in this manner is a possible violation of the Presidential Records Act of 1978, and the Hatch Act.[1] Over 5 million e-mails may have been lost or deleted.[2][3] Recently, Greg Palast claims to have come up with 500 of the Karl Rove lost emails, leading to damaging allegations.
Thank you for posting that. I had read it recently on the ABC news website, but yours is much more complete. It's scary to think that after these most corrupt 8 years anyone would want to sign up for more with a man who's voted with him 95% of the time. A real maverick.
Thank you for posting that. I had read it recently on the ABC news website, but yours is much more complete. It's scary to think that after these most corrupt 8 years anyone would want to sign up for more with a man who's voted with him 95% of the time. A real maverick.
You are completely missing the point, I really don't think you are that daft but maybe I'm wrong. The point is not that government officials instantly make all communications public, but that they are stored on GOVERNMENT servers to be recalled and inspected if needed. ALSO to protect any sensitive information that might be in the "consideration" stages. You don't mind being kept in the dark and if that's what works for you then God Bless.
Daft? Well, that's odd because I was responding to YOUR assertion that, yes, the people should know everything in decision-making processes.
Everything reported in the Yahoo account would be considered in the "consideration" states, as you put it. She DOES use the GOVERNMENT (your emphasis) servers for the official business. So what's the problem you have, again?
High and mighty classy posters....is this ok with you?
Well, why don't you go back and read the FIRST post in this vein. Smd was simply responding to one of your gang who was trying to equate felony hacking with a Republican girl getting pregnant.
1) The boy is an idiot who just screwed up his life for nothing IF he did it. But I do still believe in innocent until proven guilty or at least innocent until a dang arrest is made.
2) Palin is also an idiot by a degree lesser than the boy, barely or perhaps more than. An adult over 40 should know better. So should boy-o but 20 is ruled by the adage young and stupid.
3) To the best of my knowledge there has never been a case brought before the courts for someone hacking internet email. That's far more interesting to me than the rest of this soap opera. Alaska state laws don't apply and I'm curious to see which Federal laws they'll try to apply since technically he didn't break into any one computer but a server owned by a 3rd party.
I do not think Palin or McCain will have grounds to file charges in criminal court. He hacked her account yet in rights and ownership he didn't. You may use webmail but ownership in regards to being hacked is probably still held by Yahoo. Yahoo will have to file charges if they so desire.
You sign a EULA for any and all web email services as well as most programs. Most people usually don't read them. Yahoo's in particular is one of the biggest EULA's (End user license agreement) on the net. For that matter, its big and inclusive enough that if Palin was using it for business to avoid certain prying eyes and paper trails then they have a right to end her services without warning. Then again they have that right regardless.
Anyway, Palin could perhaps sue in civil court but filing criminal charges is another matter since he didn't hack her directly but instead cracked her password on a server owned by someone other than her.
4) I can't believe I'm hearing disparaging Dem comments in regards to of course he's a liberal, Obama probably had his hand in it blah blah blah. And Republicans then wonder, moan and cry over the 'non Republican' reaction to little Bristol being pregnant. When you keep placing your ickle little pedestals up as if stupidity is limited to one party then don't act surprised at the reaction when Reps get caught with their hand in the cookie jar.
Well, why don't you go back and read the FIRST post in this vein. Smd was simply responding to one of your gang who was trying to equate felony hacking with a Republican girl getting pregnant.
Make a stupid assertion; get an absurd response.
The son of a Tennessee state Senator. I wonder if the GOP will blame his father for the actions of the son?
Gateway Pundit: FATHER OF HACKER Is Tennessee Dem State Rep!!!!! ...Update: Name- David Kernell ...Update: He's Been Contacted by Feds!
How's Palin's grandkid doing these days?
I don't really equate that with "Not going to happen, most dem sons are welfare trash."
But I suppose beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Everything reported in the Yahoo account would be considered in the "consideration" states, as you put it. She DOES use the GOVERNMENT (your emphasis) servers for the official business. So what's the problem you have, again?
ROTFL, I have no problems whatsoever however your post is a huge tell on how many problems you have but are clueless about. Good luck to you and I'll just add you to my ignore list.
3) To the best of my knowledge there has never been a case brought before the courts for someone hacking internet email.
Then you haven't done any research.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
