Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Comment Re:Likely misdemeanor mishandling of classified in (Score 1) 421 421

Yes. And that's why it is illegal to remove any facts associated with a warrant or subpoena. The subject of an investigation doesnt get to choose which facts he/she thinks are relevant and hide or destroy the rest. Law enforcement and the judge/court/CONGRESS that issues the warrant or subpoena do. And any act that appears to circumvent that process is in itself an act of deviance of the legal process.

And it's not supposed to matter if you're a former Secretary of State, or a Senator, or a janitor, or a former gang member with half a dozen felony convictions.

There's a phrase for this very process in government: Litigation Hold.
When Congress or a court litigating a lawsuit issues a warrant or a subpoena, the whole system in which the data exists is frozen. Period. Every document, email, memo, system eventlog down to when the machines were patched, and who last launched a web browser from them. And from that point forward any person who so much as logs in to the system to look has to be specifically and separately cataloged and the event recorded to ensure the highest levels of "chain of custody" which are then provided to the requesting body. This is to ensure that no evidence is being tampered with, and any data there is later determined to be relevant by the officials doing the data search. You often cant even add data to the machine after the fact, depending on the severity of the case. .

Comment Re:Likely misdemeanor mishandling of classified in (Score 1) 421 421

And we're supposed to take whose word on that exactly? That's like saying that if the police have a warrant to search your house for some incriminating documents, and you are burning some in your fireplace as they come through the door they should be perfectly satisfied when you say, "Well, yes, but I only burned things you wouldnt be interested in.".

Comment Re: Can't be true (Score 2) 173 173

Just like the United Nations and the United States Department of Agriculture?

Here's that link from the article again...

So which is it? The USDA and UN are just as unreliable as Stats Canada and the Daily caller, and the NYT is the pinnacle of non-partisan reporting, or...

Comment Re:Obama's Justice Dept. will get right on it (Score 4, Insightful) 421 421

It's less a comment about effectiveness, and more about integrity.

Hell, even if the Obama administration were to prosecute or less likely convict Clinton, Obama would probably pardon her. I dont know if that's more or less sad that that the media would dismiss it, and that millions of intellectually lazy would still be happy to vote for her.

Comment Re: "The Ego" (Score 1) 553 553

She also served successfully as secretary of state in an essentially scandal free administration, no matter how much republicans wish it were otherwise.

Wait, ... what? That's like saying that Nixon would have had a scandal free administration if they'd just avoided proving the allegations...

Comment Re:Never a good idea (Score 1) 105 105

Show me someone who's actually saying that, and we'll have a common ground. But I don't know anyone who believes who argues against creating fewer pollutants, managing resources more wisely, or pursuing more efficient and sustainable energy.

See, this is precisely why you have such resistance. For people like you it's not about a logical progression of technology, or a measured response to possible or even likely impacts, You behave as though you have the one single whole and true answer, and that anyone who deviates from your position by even 5 degrees is a flat-earther who obviously eats babies for sport. You come across as a cultist zealot rather than an even marginally reasonable person, and it does far more harm to your cause than good.

Comment Re:Never a good idea (Score 2) 105 105

What's being argued, right now, is that we don't have a sufficient grasp on the technology, or a suitably unified scientific/sociopolitical agenda.

We dont even have a sufficient grasp of what is happening, what the true root causes are and what percentage of impact each has, or to what degree the global ecosystem is able to offset the impacts. How the hell do you build a "solution" to a problem you cant even fully quantify?

Arent people getting tired of these egocentric asshats that he repeatedly tell us, "Well, yeah, we were wrong about that. And that, and that, ... and that. And that outcome wasnt quite what we predicted. But we're exactly right this time! And you'd be a fool not to completely endorse everything we say and do precisely as we say or the world is going to end!"

Comment Re:Hell No Hillary (Score 1) 676 676

Ah, I see. So it's not that we aren't entitled to read the bill before we are held accountable to following it. It's that we're just too stupid to understand it, and only elected elites have whit sufficient to appreciate or comprehend its content.

No matter what spin you put on it, the statement pronounces that there are those in power who are allowed to be a part of the process, and the rest of us just need to shut up and be told what's good for us.

Comment Re:Hell No Hillary (Score 1) 676 676

And a google search on "Bush stupid" really does return fifty-two million, eight hundred thousand results.

That doesn't prove that the Bush's are actually any more stupid that any number of Democrats. It just proves the press gets a stiffy every time they get a whiff of another Republican foible they can beat to death.

Conversely, if you google actual stupid shit said by Democrats (like the one in my sig...) the vast majority of hits you'll see are explanations about how it was taken out of context, how it was just a honest slip, or how it's a trumped up scandal. The Vice President can suggest firing off a few shotgun blasts from your porch to ward off intruders, and that's fine. The President can suggest he's been to all 57 states, and that's just fine. But if a Republican says something dumb, you'd think they just punched a preschooler.

In these matters the only certainty is that there is nothing certain. -- Pliny the Elder