Support NeoGAF

[Poodlestrike]

It had to have. Especially with that many people crossing political lines in their responses. The media blasting them the entire time had to have helped. It was pretty widely distributed that their move was unprecedented.

About the only person I saw defend the move was Meta.

Agreed, but seeing a numbers breakdown of exactly how badly they screwed up would be entertaining.

They took it after the 47 letter to Iran happened.

Interesting. Fair to assume that the letter increased the percentages of people willing to negotiate, then. This whole thing really has blown up in their faces; it's tough not to gloat.

 

[reggieandTFE]

It's really crazy that Schock resigned. Someone put together a comprehensive oppo campaign to destroy the guy. They clearly had something even bigger than the mileage fraud because the farmers in the district loved their little closeted superstar and he still could have won reelection easily.

 

[Black Mamba]

Seems the American people hate America:




http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/...a-administration-s-diplomatic-talks-with-Iran

I don't understand the GOP opposition, anyway.

I mean, there are only 3 options on the table.

1. negotiate.

2. war.

3. harsher sanctions to force iran to negotiate.

I mean, sure, you could argue for 3 to give the US more leverage, but the sanctions already brought them to the table. Isn't that the whole point? Iran isn't going to react to the sanctions by abandoning the program without it being part of a negotiation.

That really means you want war or negotiations. So it's no surprise that the poll is 70-30 in favor of negotiations. 30% of this country will oppose anything Obama does and the other 70% is either with him or open minded and sure as fuck don't want war.

 

[B-Dubs]

I don't understand the GOP opposition, anyway.

I mean, there are only 3 options on the table.

1. negotiate.

2. war.

3. harsher sanctions to force iran to negotiate.

I mean, sure, you could argue for 3 to give the US more leverage, but the sanctions already brought them to the table. Isn't that the whole point? Iran isn't going to react to the sanctions by abandoning the program without it being part of a negotiation.

That really means you want war or negotiations. So it's no surprise that the poll is 70-30 in favor of negotiations. 30% of this country will oppose anything Obama does and the other 70% is either with him or open minded and sure as fuck don't want war.

The GOP is still in "We can't give Obama a single victory" mode. If he manages to pull this off and it works, that'd be like the biggest foreign policy victory of the last 20 years. Maybe longer. I mean they say Reagan beat the Soviets, but everyone knows the timeline doesn't match up.

 

[Poodlestrike]

The GOP is still in "We can't give Obama a single victory" mode. If he manages to pull this off and it works, that'd be like the biggest foreign policy victory of the last 20 years. Maybe longer. I mean they say Reagan beat the Soviets, but everyone knows the timeline doesn't match up.

Cuba, Iran... Obama may end up being our best foreign policy president in something like 20-30 years. Maybe longer.

 

[Cat]

Texas legislature is currently considering expanding open carry to allow concealed carry license holders to be able to display handguns in public. People with long guns like AR-15s are already allowed to do this. I really, really resent the governor and my state senator as they brag about endangering so many people with this stupidity in the name of second amendment rights.

Oh and allowing guns on campuses is another bill being discussed too.

 

[Jooney]

No discussion on the sex trafficking bill? Failed filibuster 55-45. GOP didn't want the funds raised from fees incurred on the traffickers to pay for victims' abortions.

Not money raised from the taxpayer. It's money from the perpetrators. What's the problem?

 

[Poodlestrike]

Texas legislature is currently considering expanding open carry to allow concealed carry license holders to be able to display handguns in public. People with long guns like AR-15s are already allowed to do this. I really, really resent the governor and my state senator as they brag about endangering so many people with this stupidity in the name of second amendment rights.

Oh and allowing guns on campuses is another bill being discussed too.

I have to admit, I almost want Texas to become a zero gun control experiment state like Kansas was for trickle down economics, just to see how it plays out.

 

[Metaphoreus]

No discussion on the sex trafficking bill? Failed filibuster 55-45. GOP didn't want the funds raised from fees incurred on the traffickers to pay for victims' abortions.

Not money raised from the taxpayer. It's money from the perpetrators. What's the problem?

Still public revenues. See every Republican Party platform since 1984.

 

[PhoenixDark]

Texas legislature is currently considering expanding open carry to allow concealed carry license holders to be able to display handguns in public. People with long guns like AR-15s are already allowed to do this. I really, really resent the governor and my state senator as they brag about endangering so many people with this stupidity in the name of second amendment rights.

Oh and allowing guns on campuses is another bill being discussed too.

Does it endanger people? Most gun violence doesn't have anything to do with open carry laws.

 

[Cat]

I have to admit, I almost want Texas to become a zero gun control experiment state like Kansas was for trickle down economics, just to see how it plays out.

Given that I live here, I do not. One doesn't have to wait for the experiment to see just how bad it is already. There is no shortage of gun violence stories in numerous Texas cities. This week alone, a night club owner was murdered, and a police officer shot and killed an unarmed man. Months ago, some road rage incident on the highway happened. I didn't witness it thankfully, but it was near where I live, and my family was driving in that area around the time it happened. NO CHARGES. That's all San Antonio. Recently, three kids in the Houston area unintentionally shot or killed themselves or others too.

 

[Cat]

Does it endanger people? Most gun violence doesn't have anything to do with open carry laws.

Guns are dangerous period. We already have open carry, which I am no fan of, but this is for handguns. Handguns are indeed, as I understand it, the most common type used in gun violence. I'm not exactly interested in waiting around to see how many people are injured/killed, with enhanced open carry to boot, before it's recognized as an actual problem.

 

[Wilsongt]

No discussion on the sex trafficking bill? Failed filibuster 55-45. GOP didn't want the funds raised from fees incurred on the traffickers to pay for victims' abortions.

Not money raised from the taxpayer. It's money from the perpetrators. What's the problem?

Metopod made a thread and spun it to blame the Democrats. He was quickly destroyed, but didn't listen, of course.

 

[Metaphoreus]

Metopod made a thread and spun it to blame the Democrats. He was quickly destroyed, but didn't listen, of course.

It's astonishing how differently your partisan blinders cause you to view the world.

 

[Wilsongt]

It's astonishing how differently your partisan blinders cause you to view the world.

I admit that Democrats did overlook that portion about the abortion, but the GOP is now being fully GOP about it and about Lynch. I'm sorry, but this is not a "both partie are the same" issue. That is not partisan blinders, that is the truth of this issue.

 

[Jooney]

Still public revenues. See every Republican Party platform since 1984.

Thanks.

While I won't pretend to understand the full implication of the Hyde Amendment, it does say that federal funds can be provisioned for abortion in cases of rape. Is sex trafficking not rape, multiple times per day, under the threat of violence? What these women (and sometimes, young girls) go through is abhorrent. If these women were impregnated under coercion, what recourse do they have, other than to bring unwanted baby to term?

 

[Jooney]

Metopod made a thread and spun it to blame the Democrats. He was quickly destroyed, but didn't listen, of course.

Didn't see the thread. Might check it out later today, thanks.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

@PeterBeinart 1m1 minute ago
kudos to @RepAdamSchiff who's on @CNN now saying US won't veto Palestinian UN resolutions if Israeli govt doesn't back Palestinian state

 

[PhoenixDark]

https://twitter.com/JRubinBlogger/status/577960461850775552

so fucking obnoxious. I follow her mainly for election tears. She's winning right now, midterms+Bibi win. 2016 will be another story.

She is 100% on board the "Hillary can't win" train.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

https://twitter.com/JRubinBlogger/status/577960461850775552

so fucking obnoxious. I follow her mainly for election tears. She's winning right now, midterms+Bibi win. 2016 will be another story.

She is 100% on board the "Hillary can't win" train.

Does she think that played any part but rather his statements about arabs and no palestinian state (considering who he took votes from?)

 

[Metaphoreus]

I admit that Democrats did overlook that portion about the abortion, but the GOP is now being fully GOP about it and about Lynch. I'm sorry, but this is not a "both partie are the same" issue. That is not partisan blinders, that is the truth of this issue.

Who said "both parties are the same"? The Democrats are the ones filibustering a human trafficking law until it permits government funding of abortion, which funding they care so little about that they've permitted its prohibition in every annual appropriations bill since 1976.

Thanks.

While I won't pretend to understand the full implication of the Hyde Amendment, it does say that federal funds can be provisioned for abortion in cases of rape. Is sex trafficking not rape, multiple times per day, under the threat of violence? What these women (and sometimes, young girls) go through is abhorrent. If these women were impregnated under coercion, what recourse do they have, other than to bring unwanted baby to term?

My guess is that the money offered under the bill is available even after a person is no longer involved in trafficking. If a woman becomes pregnant through rape, then the Hyde Amendment (which is really just a type of provision rather than a single law) won't prohibit federal funds from being used to pay for an abortion.

 

[Dan]

How recent is the poll? I'd be interested in seeing how/if the whole 47 senators thing influenced people.

The poll was conducted by phone from March 13-15. So it definitely includes that.

 

[benjipwns]

Given that I live here, I do not. One doesn't have to wait for the experiment to see just how bad it is already. There is no shortage of gun violence stories in numerous Texas cities. This week alone, a night club owner was murdered, and a police officer shot and killed an unarmed man. Months ago, some road rage incident on the highway happened. I didn't witness it thankfully, but it was near where I live, and my family was driving in that area around the time it happened. NO CHARGES. That's all San Antonio. Recently, three kids in the Houston area unintentionally shot or killed themselves or others too.

You live in the second largest state in the union by population. Houston is one of the six largest cities or something like that.

Guns are dangerous period. We already have open carry, which I am no fan of, but this is for handguns. Handguns are indeed, as I understand it, the most common type used in gun violence. I'm not exactly interested in waiting around to see how many people are injured/killed, with enhanced open carry to boot, before it's recognized as an actual problem.

Why would more people be killed by licensed guns open carried than ones concealed?

 

[benjipwns]

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media...daily-caller-after-tucker-carlson-204135.html

The blogger Mickey Kaus has quit his job at The Daily Caller after the conservative site's editor-in-chief, Tucker Carlson, pulled a critical column about Fox News from the site, Kaus told the On Media blog on Tuesday.

"It's pretty simple," Kaus said in an interview, "I wrote a piece attacking Fox for not being the opposition on immigration and amnesty -- for filling up the airwaves with reports on ISIS and terrorism, and not fulfilling their responsibility of being the opposition on amnesty and immigration.... I posted it at 6:30 in the morning. When I got up, Tucker had taken it down. He said, 'We can't trash Fox on the site. I work there.'"

Carlson, who co-founded The Daily Caller in 2010, is a conservative contributor to Fox News and the host of its weekend edition of "Fox & Friends."

Kaus says when he told Carlson he needed to be able to write about Fox, Carlson told him it was a hard-and-fast rule, and non-negotiable.

"He said it was a rule, and he wouldn't be able to change that rule. So I told him I quit," Kaus explained. "I just don't see how you can put out a publication with that kind of giant no-go area. It's not like we're owned by Joe's Muffler Shop, so we just can't write about Joe's Muffler shop."

...

Kaus will now publish his columns exclusively on Kausfiles, a blog that was previously featured on Slate. But he said that Fox News' influence over The Daily Caller was indicative of a larger problem in conservative media.

"It's a larger problem on the right: Everybody is scared of Fox," he said. "Fox is their route to a high-profile public image and in some cases stardom. Just to be on a Fox show is a big deal. And I think that's a problem on the right, Fox's monopoly on star-making power."

I guess Tucker hasn't been reading Kaus' Fox bashing for the last year and a half.

 

[RustyNails]

About the only person I saw defend the move was Meta.

I think I seen a few bring up Pelosi's visit to Syria and a few Dem congressmen going to Iraq in 2002. Apparently in their heads, diplomacy efforts to stave off a destructive war is the same as being a warmongering idiot.

 

[Fenderputty]

https://twitter.com/JRubinBlogger/status/577960461850775552

so fucking obnoxious. I follow her mainly for election tears. She's winning right now, midterms+Bibi win. 2016 will be another story.

She is 100% on board the "Hillary can't win" train.

You put up with that for election tears once every four years? Dude ....

 

[Ecotic]

http://www.politico.com/blogs/media...daily-caller-after-tucker-carlson-204135.html

I guess Tucker hasn't been reading Kaus' Fox bashing for the last year and a half.

He's right about Fox News's ISIS obsession, I turn to it often enough for a minute just to see what they're pushing and it's always ISIS in primetime. I can't imagine how their audience stomachs the same O'Reilly program every night. The left got really tired of Bridgegate really quick, and that was a flash in the pan next to ISIS' past and future longevity.

America has got to break its middle east obsession. If someone could make a cartogram of the areas of the world that the media mentions in a week you'd have the Middle East be the size of the whole of Eurasia and South America the size of a grape.

 

[Plinko]

That GOP budget plan. I mean, come on.

Privatizing Medicare would be a huge disaster. Also, quit telling me you will "replace" Obamacare with something when you clearly don't have a backup plan. It's quite obvious since they never provide any details whatsoever. Their "replacement" would basically be the same destroyed system we had where nothing was in place to keep costs from skyrocketing every year.

 

[benjipwns]

Kaus' is a Democrat btw for anyone who doesn't know, the only thing he really disagrees with them "from the right" is on immigration, he was pushing for Medicare for All for example.

America has got to break its middle east obsession. If someone could make a cartogram of the areas of the world that the media mentions in a week you'd have the Middle East be the size of the whole of Eurasia and South America the size of a grape.

Mexico would be pretty big though. Especially on Lou Dobbs' show.

 

[benjipwns]

Law Professor Compares Obamacare To Slavery In NYT Op-Ed

This idea may seem radical, but it has a strong legal pedigree. Judicial authority, or jurisdiction, is case-specific and person-specific. That is true even of the Supreme Court, which the Constitution gives “judicial power” to decide “cases” and “controversies.” It is reaffirmed by Marbury v. Madison (1803), which affirmed the power of judicial review by relying on the Supreme Court’s duty to decide “particular cases.”

President Obama could also take a page from President Lincoln. In his first inaugural address, Lincoln discussed a recent Supreme Court decision about slavery. He forswore “any assault upon the court,” but stressed that “the policy of the Government upon vital questions affecting the whole people” ought not be “irrevocably fixed” by a single suit brought by only a few. He said that Supreme Court opinions were thus “entitled to very high respect and consideration in all parallel cases” but were ultimately limited to “the parties to a suit as to the object of that suit.” If the Obama administration thinks the stakes are high enough, it can take the same path.

But luckily the Constitution supplies a contingency plan, even if the administration doesn’t know it yet: If the administration loses in King, it can announce that it is complying with the Supreme Court’s judgment — but only with respect to the four plaintiffs who brought the suit.

This announcement would not defy a Supreme Court order, since the court has the formal power to order a remedy only for the four people actually before it. The administration would simply be refusing to extend the Supreme Court’s reasoning to the millions of people who, like the plaintiffs, may be eligible for tax credits but, unlike the plaintiffs, did not sue.

...

The real obstacle to this contingency plan is not legal, but political. Invoking this constitutional prerogative forces the president to spend substantial political capital, and it is easier to shift the blame. That may be a broader pattern in modern politics. For instance, the administration has called on Congress to reduce unjust sentences even though the president could simply commute them on his own constitutional authority.

But we should not let the president avoid responsibility by abdicating his powers. If the administration believes that a Supreme Court loss would be egregious and disastrous, it ought to consider taking the political heat to limit it.

 

[Oblivion]

You guys following the Israeli election? The NYT says Bibi's currently marginally ahead.

Aside from the obvious reason of supporting Bibi losing, I'd love to see how the Right will suddenly treat Israel if it was under the godless liberal party.

 

[thepotatoman]

You guys following the Israeli election? The NYT says Bibi's currently marginally ahead.

Aside from the obvious reason of supporting Bibi losing, I'd love to see how the Right will suddenly treat Israel if it was under the godless liberal party.

EDIT: Nevermind. Unless one of the parties that supported him previously change their support, Netanyahu is definitely going to be the PM.

 

[benjipwns]

You guys following the Israeli election? The NYT says Bibi's currently marginally ahead.

Aside from the obvious reason of supporting Bibi losing, I'd love to see how the Right will suddenly treat Israel if it was under the godless liberal party.

Only half of the Zionist Union is the openly secular party. Likud and Yisrael Beiteinu are considered secular parties too.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu claimed victory in Israel's election after exit polls showed he had erased his center-left rivals' lead with a hard rightward shift in which he abandoned a commitment to negotiate a Palestinian state.

Difficult coalition talks still lie ahead. Isaac Herzog, Netanyahu's chief opponent and head of the center-left Zionist Union, said "everything is still open" and that he already had spoken to party leaders about forming a government.

But after days in which Zionist Union appeared poised to defeat Netanyahu's Likud, the exit polls late on Tuesday put the two parties in a dead heat. Netanyahu could have the easier path to forming a cabinet, which would put him on course to becoming Israel's longest serving leader.

A new centrist party led by former communications minister Moshe Kahlon could be the kingmaker in coalition talks. After the balloting ended, he said he did not rule out a partnership with either Likud or Zionist Union.

The exit polls gave right-wing and religious parties - Netanyahu's traditional partners - about 54 seats, and left-leaning factions, 43 - both figures still short of a governing majority in the 120 seat parliament.

Turnout was around 72 percent, higher than the last election in 2013.

No party has ever won an outright majority in Israel's 67-year history, and it may be weeks before the country has a new government. Netanyahu will remain prime minister until a new administration is sworn in.

Naftali Bennett, leader of the ultranationalist Jewish Home party, said he had spoken with Netanyahu within minutes of the exit polls and agreed to open "accelerated" coalition talks with him.

"The nationalist camp won," Bennett, who advocates annexing parts of the occupied West Bank, told supporters.

If the center-left is to assemble a government, it will also need the support of ultra-Orthodox parties, which the polls said would win 13-14 seats.

 

[Metaphoreus]

About the only person I saw defend the move was Meta.

I guess you missed The New Republic's Brian Beutler, huh?

Law Professor Compares Obamacare To Slavery In NYT Op-Ed

Nice fake title. I've seen a number of responses to Baude's article--I recognize him from The Volokh Conspiracy. Here are some of the responses:

With all respect, this is not correct. This exact same issue has already played out in the Halbig litigation as I discussed in this post last March. The D.C. Circuit has consistently held that striking down a regulation has a “nationwide” effect, and DOJ was not able to marshall any persuasive precedents to the contrary. I will quote from that post at length.

While Will is correct on the law, I think that this would be a terrible idea. There are many problems with our Constitution, but “not enough executive discretion” does not strike me as one of them. I would note also that such an act would be unprecedented. Yes, Lincoln suggested the same thing with respect to Dred Scott. But there’s a big gap between that and a Supreme Court decision construing the Affordable Care Act.

Will’s right on the narrow, technical legal point, as I explained in a post from last March. Under the Administrative Procedure Act, courts must “set aside” agency action that is “not in accordance with law.” The D.C. Circuit has construed that to mean that an unlawful rule is a legal nullity not just to the parties before the court, but to anyone and everyone in the country. The Supreme Court, however, has never endorsed that interpretation and it’s not obvious that it would.

It is inconceivable, however, that the Obama administration would confine the Supreme Court’s holding to the four plaintiffs. The problem is political, as Will appreciates. By limiting the Court’s decision, the administration would be bucking a tradition that venerates the Court as the supreme arbiter of statutory meaning. In our political culture, the President would pay a stiff political price—and even risk impeachment—for his perceived flouting of the Court. It’s just not a viable approach.

EDIT: Forgot one:

It reveals much about the Obamacare movement that some would be willing to sacrifice the rule of law in order to thrust the Affordable Care Act upon an unwilling public. After all, if Obamacare really enjoyed broad public support, the solution to a Supreme Court ruling that gutted subsidies for federal exchanges would be simple: amend the law. But apparently Mr. Baude thinks that Obamacare is so unpopular that if the Supreme Court rules against the feds, the law cannot be saved in a legal or democratic way. I’m with him there. But it’s shocking that any Obamacare fan would urge the administration to defy the Supreme Court to revive a law that most Americans oppose. I side with John Adams, who believed that he and the other founding fathers had created “a government of laws, and not of men.” I also believe in the seminal Supreme Court case that declared, “It is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.” America deserves an executive branch that honors this basic notion of separated powers.

 

[Chichikov]

You guys following the Israeli election? The NYT says Bibi's currently marginally ahead.

Aside from the obvious reason of supporting Bibi losing, I'd love to see how the Right will suddenly treat Israel if it was under the godless liberal party.

He's winning pretty handily, much more than anything that was predicted by the polls.
My life choices are validated.

Only half of the Zionist Union is the openly secular party. Likud and Yisrael Beiteinu are considered secular parties too.

The zionist union is a secular party.

 

[benjipwns]

The zionist union is a secular party.

I thought it was just a one-time alliance? Didn't know it was a full new party.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

He's winning pretty handily, much more than anything that was predicted by the polls.
My life choices are validated.



The zionist union is a secular party.

I really can't see Israel righting its course. It seems destined for international isolation. Until the world forces its hand which seems like the only chance at this point for it to save itself

 

[Oblivion]

He's winning pretty handily, much more than anything that was predicted by the polls.
My life choices are validated.

On the plus side, Jeb's decided to use the brilliant strategy of campaigning against the federal minimum wage:

At an event in South Carolina on Tuesday, Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush was asked whether he thinks the country should raise the minimum wage or whether the wage should be left up to private companies.

“We need to leave it to the private sector,” he responded. “I think state minimum wages are fine. The federal government shouldn’t be doing this.” He went on, “The federal government doing this will make it harder and harder for the first rung of the ladder to be reached, particularly for young people, particularly for people that have less education.”

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2015/03/17/3634877/jeb-bush-minimum-wage/

Not sure how you can be okay with states enacting minimum wage laws, while only supporting the idea of the "private sector" doing so on its own. Last I checked, state governments are part of government.

 

[Chichikov]

I thought it was just a one-time alliance? Didn't know it was a full new party.

It's a union of two secular parties, as much as you can call whatever Tzipi Livni was a heading a party.

I really can't see Israel righting its course. It seems destined for international isolation. Until the world forces its hand which seems like the only chance at this point for it to save itself

Yeah, I said it for the longest time that the only thing that can change that is serious international pressure/sanctions.
BDS might not be perfect, but it's the only movement that gets any traction on this issue.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

It's a union of two secular parties, as much as you can call whatever Tzipi Livni was a heading a party.


Yeah, I said it for the longest time that the only thing that can change that is serious international pressure/sanctions.
BDS might not be perfect, but it's the only movement that gets any traction on this issue.

I'm not going to support BDS because I think their a bunch of antisemites and all around horrible people who do nothing for peace or Palestinians. But I really don't know how to argue against EU sanctions of the west bank and golan.

 

[Metaphoreus]

Not sure how you can be okay with states enacting minimum wage laws, while only supporting the idea of the "private sector" doing so on its own. Last I checked, state governments are part of government.

Clearly the second part of his comment, concerning state minimum wage laws, clarifies (by way of correcting) the first. The first part is the same kind of rhetorical imprecision we always expect in unplanned oral communication.

That's why the emails aren't a big deal. No wrong doing, not even a rule broken. It's definitely not the smoking gun republicans were hoping for.

Edit: nobody is saying the criticisms are without merit. It was stupid, with that said, she wasn't told she couldnt do it. It's not like she used private email in spite of the law.

I wanted to follow up on this, since the former "director of the Justice Department’s Office of Information and Privacy" thinks that Hillary's Email Defense Is Laughable (and in violation of federal law):

For anyone considering this sad tale carefully—including the media, members of Congress and the public at large, whether from “inside the Beltway” or not—some basic points of both law and reality should be borne in mind.

First, while it is accurate for Secretary Clinton to say that when she was in office there was not a flat, categorical prohibition on federal government officials ever using their personal email accounts for the conduct of official business, that’s a far different thing from saying (as she apparently would like to) that a government official could use his or her personal email account exclusively, for all official email communications, as she actually did. In fact, the Federal Records Act dictates otherwise.

That law, which applies to all federal agency employees who are not within the White House itself, requires the comprehensive documentation of the conduct of official business, and it has long done so by regulating the creation, maintenance, preservation and, ultimately, the disposition of agency records. When it comes to “modern-day” email communications, as compared to the paper memoranda of not so long ago, these communications now are themselves the very means of conducting official business, by definition.

To be sure, this cannot as a practical matter be absolute. When Obama administration officials came into office in 2009, the Federal Records Act certainly allowed room for the occasional use of a personal email account for official business where necessary—such as when a secretary of state understandably must deal with a crisis around the world in the middle of the night while an official email device might not be readily at hand. That just makes sense. But even then, in such an exceptional situation, the Federal Records Act’s documentation and preservation requirements still called upon that official (or a staff assistant) to forward any such email into the State Department’s official records system, where it would have been located otherwise.

This appears to be exactly what former Secretary of State Colin Powell did during his tenure, just as other high-level government officials may do (or are supposed to do) under such exceptional circumstances during their times in office. Notwithstanding Secretary Clinton’s sweeping claims to the contrary, there actually is no indication in any of the public discussions of this “scandal” that anyone other than she managed to do what she did (or didn’t) do as a federal official.

 

[Chichikov]

I'm not going to support BDS because I think their a bunch of antisemites and all around horrible people who do nothing for peace or Palestinians. But I really don't know how to argue against EU sanctions of the west bank and golan.

Everybody in BDS is an antisemite?
Come on now.

Also, sanctions against the settlements will do nothing, they mostly live on government money anyway. It's a tiny party of the economy, most people in Israel would quite literally wouldn't feel a thing.
If you want to affect change, you need sanctions against Israel as a whole.

 

[Metaphoreus]

If you want to affect change, you need sanctions against Israel as a whole.

Dis is teh 1 thyme win "effect" function as a verb, and "affect" wood typically b wrong.

Your welcome.

/Grammer Nazi

 

[NYCmetsfan]

Everybody in BDS is an antisemite?
Come on now.

Also, sanctions against the settlements will do nothing, they mostly live on government money anyway. It's a tiny party of the economy, most people in Israel would quite literally wouldn't feel a thing.
If you want to affect change, you need sanctions against Israel as a whole.

No the leaders are. How many members are there.

I don't count people who want to sanction israel as BDS automatically.

And I don't think you sanction tel aviv and Nazareth to bring about a two state solution.

 

[Chichikov]

Dis is teh 1 thyme win "effect" function as a verb, and "affect" wood typically b wrong.

Your welcome.

/Grammer Nazi

It's not wro
If you understood what I meant, it's not wrong, non-standard, maybe even vulgar, but not wrong.

I am welcomed everywhere.

/Descriptive linguist

And I don't think you sanction tel aviv and Nazareth to bring about a two state solution.

I think they can, in fact I think the threat of them would be enough, but it's hard to predict the future.
I am however pretty damn sure that a boycott only on the settlements will achieve nothing.
I'm telling you, this would not be felt inside the 67 borders.

As you yourself said, it doesn't look like Israel would change its course on its own, the only thing outside sanctions I can see doing that is an eruption of violence, which is probably on its way.

 

[NYCmetsfan]

It's not wro
If you understood what I meant, it's not wrong, non-standard, maybe even vulgar, but not wrong.

I am welcomed everywhere.

/Descriptive linguist

I think they can, in fact I think the threat of them would be enough, but it's hard to predict the future.
I am however pretty damn sure that a boycott only on the settlements will achieve nothing.
I'm telling you, this would not be felt inside the 67 borders.

As you yourself said, it doesn't look like Israel would change its course on its own, the only thing outside sanctions I can see doing that is an eruption of violence, which is probably on its way.

fist bump to the bolded though despite my horrible spelling and grammar I always get effect v affect right.

I sadly thing violence is coming to. I think fear of sanctions even if they only happen to the west bank and leaders will scare them into trying to pull something out sooner rather than later.

Who knows. I just feel so disillusioned from the whole thing. I don't know as an American jew I can feel any connection to a country that so clearly ignores the values I have. There was a part of the country and probably still is that I love. Maretz, the Joint List, lots of Labor share the kind of values I share but I don't know how they get to power with the growing right wing movement.

 

[Chichikov]

fist bump to the bolded though despite my horrible spelling and grammar I always get effect v affect right.

I usually get that one right as well, I'm aware of the "correct" use and I'm not trying to write in non-standard English (at least no usually).
But English is my 3rd language, plus I'm fucking tired.

I sadly thing violence is coming to. I think fear of sanctions even if they only happen to the west bank and leaders will scare them into trying to pull something out sooner rather than later.

You really wouldn't rather to at least try some sanctions?
Don't get me wrong, I don't think it's a great tool and it ends up hurting a lot of common people, but I don't see any other alternative.
I'm telling you, people don't love the settlements, all best Bush had to do is threaten that the US will not grant Israel loan guarantees, and it got Israel to the peace-talking table.

Who knows. I just feel so disillusioned from the whole thing. I don't know as an American jew I can feel any connection to a country that so clearly ignores the values I have. There was a part of the country and probably still is that I love. Maretz, the Joint List, lots of Labor share the kind of values I share but I don't know how they get to power with the growing right wing movement.

I barely feel a connection anymore, and I grew up there (I still of course feel connected for my friends and family though).

 

[NYCmetsfan]

I'm telling you, people don't love the settlements, all best Bush had to do is threaten that the US will not grant Israel loan guarantees, and it got Israel to the peace-talking table.

This is kinda what I'm saying. The realistic threat will force action. Its what I think action on the settlements does.

 

[benjipwns]

What if we sanctioned the Palestinians, gave aid to Iran, demanded Hezbollah build settlements and bombed Israel.

Nobody would see it coming! We'd seem totally crazy and everyone would freak out at what we might do next.

 

[BSsBrolly]

Clearly the second part of his comment, concerning state minimum wage laws, clarifies (by way of correcting) the first. The first part is the same kind of rhetorical imprecision we always expect in unplanned oral communication.



I wanted to follow up on this, since the former "director of the Justice Department’s Office of Information and Privacy" thinks that Hillary's Email Defense Is Laughable (and in violation of federal law):

Dan Metcalfe is a right wing nut job.

http://m.dailykos.com/story/2015/03/16/1371415/-eGhazi-Don-Metcalfe-appears-to-be-an-incompetent-crackpot