PDA

View Full Version : Yet another government hack.. When will they learn?



garhkal
07-10-2015, 04:25 AM
Today's news was rife with yet another government agency getting hacked, compromising the SSN and many other 'data points' for Millions of federal agents/workers/people who had backround checks.

When the heck will these dunderheads learn, STOP keeping the dam data on computer systems accessible to the outside world like this?

SomeRandomGuy
07-10-2015, 12:37 PM
Today's news was rife with yet another government agency getting hacked, compromising the SSN and many other 'data points' for Millions of federal agents/workers/people who had backround checks.

When the heck will these dunderheads learn, STOP keeping the dam data on computer systems accessible to the outside world like this?

The worst part is that background investigations have been halted. We just hired two new employees and neither one can get a CAC card because they don't have a clearance yet. The contract is firm fixed price so the government pays them anyways even though they are literally useless right now. I'm hearing other contractors are raising a stink about this. If people can't get clearances the contracts can possibly go into default since the contractor can no longer provide the people required. They said it could be a couple of months before these clearances get done.

SeaLawyer
07-10-2015, 01:18 PM
Yet another example of the out-sourcing pitfalls!

Rainmaker
07-10-2015, 01:21 PM
If people can't get clearances the contracts can possibly go into default since the contractor can no longer provide the people required. They said it could be a couple of months before these clearances get done.

If a contractor is unable to perform a contract due to something beyond the control of the contractor (i.e. Govt delay in clearing employees) then they should not be held in default.

In many cases the contractor may even be entitled to a compensable delay, so looking at the bright side you could be getting a bigger Christmas bonus this year!.....

If so, you can send a Big Thank You card to the Bush/Clinton/Bush/Obama charlatans for allowing technology transfers to the Communists in exchange for Corporate campaign donations and kickbacks

Rainmaker
07-10-2015, 01:30 PM
Yet another example of the out-sourcing pitfalls!

More Transnational Chickens coming home to roost.....

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
07-10-2015, 02:34 PM
Another big Eff-You from the incompetent, inept, Obama administration. When is the destruction of our country going to stop?

Absinthe Anecdote
07-10-2015, 03:12 PM
Another big Eff-You from the incompetent, inept, Obama administration. When is the destruction of our country going to stop?

You seem to think the Executive Branch of our government runs the computer security programs at individual government agencies.

Rainmaker
07-10-2015, 03:25 PM
When is the destruction of our country going to stop?

It's not. Because, this is all by design.

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
07-10-2015, 03:41 PM
You seem to think the Executive Branch of our government runs the computer security programs at individual government agencies.

I seem to think that the Executive Branch is responsible for holding its own administration accountable. Where is the accountability AA?

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
07-10-2015, 03:43 PM
It's not. Because, this is all by design.

Of course it is. It's not an accident that our country is in decline. It's deliberate.

Bos Mutus
07-10-2015, 03:44 PM
Of course it is. It's not an accident that our country is in decline. It's deliberate.

So, what you're saying is the Obama Administration is not inept...it's brilliant?

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
07-10-2015, 03:49 PM
You do have a point. He's not a stupid man. He's getting away with exactly what he wants to do.

Rainmaker
07-10-2015, 03:51 PM
So, what you're saying is the Obama Administration is not inept...it's brilliant?

It's most likely just a vast right-wing conspiracy to make Obama look bad, because White People are all Priori raciss yo.

Rainmaker
07-10-2015, 04:00 PM
Of course it is. It's not an accident that our country is in decline. It's deliberate.

We have limited resources, At least they are keeping people safe from those scary Confederate Flags.

Absinthe Anecdote
07-10-2015, 04:06 PM
I seem to think that the Executive Branch is responsible for holding its own administration accountable. Where is the accountability AA?

Are you claiming that the people who run the IT department at the Office of Personnel Management are part of the Obama Administration?

Weren't you a field grade officer?

Surely you know more about our government than that.

The accountability for the security breach lies within the OPM's IT department. I would not want any presidential administration getting involved with discipline and work performance issues at that level.

There is a structure in place for handling matters like this. Other than someone from the administration bringing in the chief of the OPM to brief the Whitehouse on what happened, what exactly do you expect?

I can understand your frustration with the Obama Administration, but let's not be absurd with our claims about it.

Absinthe Anecdote
07-10-2015, 04:15 PM
We have limited resources, At least theyare keeping people safe from those scary Confederate Flags.

Who is they?

Rainmaker
07-10-2015, 04:33 PM
Who is they?

What have you been living under a rock? Oh, that's right. Rainmaker forgot. you were probably very busy reading CNN and accruing overtime hours keeping me safe from the ISIL boogeyman hiding under the bed last weekend. By the way did you guys happen to check in the Mosque down the street from you yet?

Anyhow, I cherry picked this article from your favorite open source so you can catch up on current events....

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2015/06/sc-legislature-debate-confederate-flag

Absinthe Anecdote
07-10-2015, 04:34 PM
Another big Eff-You from the incompetent, inept, Obama administration. When is the destruction of our country going to stop?


Of course it is. It's not an accident that our country is in decline. It's deliberate.


So, what you're saying is the Obama Administration is not inept...it's brilliant?


You do have a point. He's not a stupid man. He's getting away with exactly what he wants to do.

WTF?

You really don't give a damn about making sense with you posts do you?

Absinthe Anecdote
07-10-2015, 04:39 PM
What have you been living under a rock? Oh, that's right. Rainmaker forgot. you were probably very busy reading CNN and accruing overtime hours keeping me safe from the ISIL boogeyman hiding under the bed last weekend.

Anyhow, I cherry picked this article from your favorite open source for you. catch up on current events man.

http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2015/06/sc-legislature-debate-confederate-flag

You chimed in with your comment about the Confederate Flag amid a conversation about the Obama Administration.

The decision to remove the flag was a state-level issue.

I guess you think that your posts are humorous, they aren't humorous or even close to being accurate.

Rainmaker
07-10-2015, 04:43 PM
Well Abs.... Since, this bloated government bureaucracy can't protect its information, I think what we really need to do here is to give them even more Billions of tax dollars so, they can let contracts to hire the same technical gurus they hired to roll out the Obama Care website.

That and an "E-Patriot act" to create more bureaucracy and further subvert the constitution to protect us from evil Chinese Hacker Jihadis should probably do it. Gnomesayin?

Absinthe Anecdote
07-10-2015, 05:38 PM
And here is your accountability...


Katherine Archuleta announced Friday that she is stepping down as the director of the Office of Personnel Management, following a breach of databases that hold federal workers' personal information.

Katherine Archuleta, the head of Office of Personnel Management who's been under fire since revelations that millions of people's personal data was compromised by hackers, is resigning.

Around midday Friday, Archuleta released a statement saying, "This morning, I offered, and the President accepted, my resignation."

She went on to explain that it's "best for me to step aside and allow new leadership to step in, enabling the agency to move beyond the current challenges and allowing the employees at OPM to continue their important work."

Calls for Archuleta's resignation began last month, as the scope of the intrusions into the OPM's databases became evident. At the same time, critics pointed out that showed that the federal agency's inspector general had warned that the systems were very vulnerable.

Archuleta is stepping down after weeks of scrutiny — and one day after her agency said the data breach was worst than many expected.

Rainmaker
07-10-2015, 05:57 PM
And here is your accountability...

Well that makes it all better for the 22 million people whose financial and possible physical security has been compromised. Nothing to see here folks. Back over to you Brian Williams

Bos Mutus
07-10-2015, 06:07 PM
At the same time, critics pointed out that showed that the federal agency's inspector general had warned that the systems were very vulnerable.

If only they listened to the Obama Administration, this wouldn't have happened.

Rainmaker
07-10-2015, 06:11 PM
If only they listened to the Obama Administration, this wouldn't have happened.

Who is they? Thankfully, OPM had the co-founder of the Latina Initiative at the helm or this could've been much worse. Afterall, It's much more important to have a diverse Federal workforce than one that actually knows how to get anything done

It's always a comfort knowing that we have the most qualified professionals governing us subjects during this dangerous time.

Bos Mutus
07-10-2015, 06:26 PM
Who is they?

You know....they...them...the illumi-(na(zi)on)ists...they were ruining the country on purpose and Obama tried to warn them.

Rainmaker
07-10-2015, 07:15 PM
Obama tried to warn them.


Oh did he?

https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2013/11/04/welcoming-katherine-archuleta-first-latina-director-office-personnel-management

"She will be the first Latina to hold this position. Katherine shares President Obama’s vision for diversity and inclusion in the federal workforce, which the President said helps “create more effective policymaking and better decision-making [for me], because it brings different perspectives to the table.”

Diversity is our Greatest Strength Yo.

There is a price to be paid when you continue to elect a bunch of Leftist Ideologues who govern based on some Utopian fantasy of fairness rather than actual results.

Affirmative Action is a train wreck across the Nation, Which, is most obvious in Government agencies. This type of Gross incompetence and stupid shit is why pretty much every Local, State and Federal .gov agency in the once great USSA is a clusterfuck.

Bos Mutus
07-10-2015, 08:00 PM
Oh did he?

https://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2013/11/04/welcoming-katherine-archuleta-first-latina-director-office-personnel-management

"She will be the first Latina to hold this position. Katherine shares President Obama’s vision for diversity and inclusion in the federal workforce, which the President said helps “create more effective policymaking and better decision-making [for me], because it brings different perspectives to the table.”

Diversity is our Greatest Strength Yo.

There is a price to be paid when you continue to elect a bunch of Leftist Ideologues who govern based on some Utopian fantasy of fairness rather than actual results.

But oh...I though elections had nothing to do with it.

Who would you elect? Other than Jesus, I mean, he's not running.


Affirmative Action is a train wreck across the Nation, Which, is most obvious in Government agencies. This type of Gross incompetence and stupid shit is why pretty much every Local, State and Federal .gov agency in the once great USSA is a clusterfuck.

Yeah, this never would've happened if white people were in charge.

Hashtag, VA data breach. Hashtag, Bush. Hashtag Jim Nicholson Hashtag, Let's keep it a secret for three weeks and hope nobody notices.

Okay...so now you insert some anti-Bush rhetoric to show that you didn't support him, so that wasn't your fault. Basically, you support no one and nothing so that anytime anything goes wrong you can pontificate your bullshit and say, "see I told you so" only the Baby Jesus can save us.


For normal people who might be reading:

Okay...so the real take....data breaches suck. It is a battle between the good guys and the bad guys...the bad guys being criminals...whether that be your personal data, private companies, govt. organizations...sometimes the bad guys win and that's unfortunate...but it has happened to everyone, white people included. We all have to continually get better, stronger faster...and it will be a continuing fight.

Rainmaker
07-10-2015, 08:27 PM
Who would you elect? Other than Jesus, I mean, he's not running.

Not yet


Basically, you support no one and nothing so that anytime anything goes wrong you can pontificate your bullshit and say, "see I told you so" only the Baby Jesus can save us.

No Rainmaker don't support either of the two parties because, they have both been complicit in Globalism which is the offshoring of our Nation's industrial base to Hostile countries that use slave labor while at the same time Flooding our country with 30 million illegal third worlders.

Contrary to what you and Abs and the other Godless Atheists on here worshipping the government's cock (because you're beholden to it) may think. Globalism is not some naturally occurring phenomenon. It is the direct result of Corrupt politicians that've been passing laws and policies to the detriment of the American Citizenry. That is the sentiment Trump is tapping into. Now whether he's a Communist plant to split the vote or the real deal, time will tell.

Now, If they continue to push this insanity to the point Where the dollar collapses Then In that day the forces they are unleashing will be hunting them down like the dogs they are and Afterwards the true history of how a small clique of power lusting conspirators that tried to destroy this Nation just so they could snort coke, fuck whores, and have fancy apartments will be written. It'd be a really cool book. But, Nevertheless Rainmaker hopes that doesn't happen. Amen.


For normal people who might be reading:

Define Normal. what does that even mean when you have a government that strikes the term "man and wife" from all its laws?

Bos Mutus
07-10-2015, 08:45 PM
Not yet



No Rainmaker don't support either of the two parties because, they have both been complicit in Globalism which is the offshoring of our Nation's industrial base to Hostile countries that use slave labor while at the same time Flooding our country with 30 million illegal third worlders.

Contrary to what you and Abs and the other Godless Atheists on here worshipping the government's cock (because you're beholden to it) may think. Globalism is not some naturally occurring phenomenon. It is the direct result of Corrupt politicians that've been passing laws and policies to the detriment of the American Citizenry. That is the sentiment Trump is tapping into. Now whether he's a Communist plant to split the vote or the real deal, time will tell.

Now, If they continue to push this insanity to the point Where the dollar collapses Then In that day the forces they are unleashing will be hunting them down like the dogs they are and Afterwards the true history of how a small clique of power lusting conspirators that tried to destroy this Nation just so they could snort coke, fuck whores, and have fancy apartments will be written. It'd be a really cool book. But, Nevertheless Rainmaker hopes that doesn't happen. Amen.



Define Normal. what does that even mean when you have a government that strikes the term "man and wife" from all its laws?

That megalomanical media-whore is your guy? Nice.

If America falls, it probably would be economically...but not because of any globalism...it'll be because we've spent our fortunes chasing boogeymen.

Rainmaker
07-10-2015, 09:00 PM
That megalomanical media-whore is your guy? Nice.


No. Rainmaker could never vote for Hillary

Bos Mutus
07-10-2015, 10:09 PM
No. Rainmaker could never vote for Hillary

Me neither!

UncaRastus
07-10-2015, 10:39 PM
How about that Bernie Sanders?

He sounds as if he is right up your alley of thinking, Rainy!

Rainmaker
07-10-2015, 11:10 PM
How about that Bernie Sanders?

He sounds as if he is right up your alley of thinking, Rainy!

Lulz.Just when you think this shitshow can't get any more crazy.......

A labor Zionist posing as an independent and seeking to turn the White House into a kibbutz shows up

garhkal
07-11-2015, 03:53 AM
Well Abs.... Since, this bloated government bureaucracy can't protect its information, I think what we really need to do here is to give them even more Billions of tax dollars so, they can let contracts to hire the same technical gurus they hired to roll out the Obama Care website.

That and an "E-Patriot act" to create more bureaucracy and further subvert the constitution to protect us from evil Chinese Hacker Jihadis should probably do it. Gnomesayin?

Well, he HAS put in Tzars in many other government positions. This could be yet another for king obama to fill with yet another flunky.


And here is your accountability...


So she is stepping down. Is she keeping her pension or other benefits? IF she got FIRED, i MIGHT consider that accountability. But when we see people who have had equally massive screw ups still holding office just somewhere else, it does NOT give me great confidence that she has had ANY accountability. Just that she might have been told "Here's a golden handshake and parachute. Now resign publicly, so we can save face.

Also, What of the person who was in charge of the IT department, or the security manager?

Bos Mutus
07-11-2015, 07:48 AM
Well, he HAS put in Tzars in many other government positions. This could be yet another for king obama to fill with yet another flunky.


since there are no official Tsars in the US govt....I can only assume you are you using this term in the colloquial sense... Are you referring to the 38 so-called czars of the Bush Administration or the 8 appointed by Obama? Do you have names and positions that you feel are czar-like?


So she is stepping down. Is she keeping her pension or other benefits? IF she got FIRED, i MIGHT consider that accountability. But when we see people who have had equally massive screw ups still holding office just somewhere else, it does NOT give me great confidence that she has had ANY accountability. Just that she might have been told "Here's a golden handshake and parachute. Now resign publicly, so we can save face.

Also, What of the person who was in charge of the IT department, or the security manager?
What do you suppose was ms. Archuleta's actual day to day responsibilities for computer security?

Bos Mutus
07-11-2015, 07:51 AM
Well, he HAS put in Tzars in many other government positions. This could be yet another for king obama to fill with yet another flunky.



So she is stepping down. Is she keeping her pension or other benefits? IF she got FIRED, i MIGHT consider that accountability. But when we see people who have had equally massive screw ups still holding office just somewhere else, it does NOT give me great confidence that she has had ANY accountability. Just that she might have been told "Here's a golden handshake and parachute. Now resign publicly, so we can save face.

Also, What of the person who was in charge of the IT department, or the security manager?
Can you name a single supporter of Obama who has ever revered him as King, savior, God, etc?

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
07-11-2015, 12:08 PM
Can you name a single supporter of Obama who has ever revered him as King, savior, God, etc?

Barbara Walters, on air admitted she believed Obama was going to be their next Messiah when he was first elected.

Fast forward to 1:45... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9YWKkgjK7Y


Also, my base BX put on sale picture of the white House with a ghostly image of Obama's head floating over the white house, only three days after he was elected. I've only seen that kind of picture with prominent black figures, like MLK. The BX likes to sell that kind of stuff.

TJMAC77SP
07-11-2015, 01:01 PM
since there are no official Tsars in the US govt....I can only assume you are you using this term in the colloquial sense... Are you referring to the 38 so-called czars of the Bush Administration or the 8 appointed by Obama? Do you have names and positions that you feel are czar-like?



35 under Bush, 32 under Obama

http://cdn.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/Czars.pdf

Bos Mutus
07-11-2015, 05:00 PM
Barbara Walters, on air admitted she believed Obama was going to be their next Messiah when he was first elected.

Fast forward to 1:45... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9YWKkgjK7Y


lol....you don't think she was talking metaphorically do ya?




Also, my base BX put on sale picture of the white House with a ghostly image of Obama's head floating over the white house, only three days after he was elected. I've only seen that kind of picture with prominent black figures, like MLK. The BX likes to sell that kind of stuff.

...and?

Bos Mutus
07-11-2015, 05:02 PM
35 under Bush, 32 under Obama

http://cdn.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/Czars.pdf

Thank you...

Rainmaker
07-11-2015, 06:08 PM
Well, he HAS put in Tzars in many other government positions. This could be yet another for king obama to fill with yet another flunky.



So she is stepping down. Is she keeping her pension or other benefits? IF she got FIRED, i MIGHT consider that accountability. But when we see people who have had equally massive screw ups still holding office just somewhere else, it does NOT give me great confidence that she has had ANY accountability. Just that she might have been told "Here's a golden handshake and parachute. Now resign publicly, so we can save face.

Also, What of the person who was in charge of the IT department, or the security manager?

If it so pleases the benevolent Emperor (peace be upon him) he will find another position to leverage the talents of this wise Latina.

We can never have enough anti whites in government.

Diversity is our Greatest Strength.

http://thefederalist.com/2015/07/06/the-new-totalitarians-are-here/

garhkal
07-12-2015, 07:23 AM
Can you name a single supporter of Obama who has ever revered him as King, savior, God, etc?

It's more how i feel he acts. Not an actual person who has said that is what he is.

With his seeming to almost ignore congress, and badger the Judicial (SCOTUS) it seems he is doing away with out triumvate of power, consolidating it all into one, the Executive. Which is in essence what a king is.

MikeKerriii
07-12-2015, 04:18 PM
It's more how i feel he acts. Not an actual person who has said that is what he is.

With his seeming to almost ignore congress, and badger the Judicial (SCOTUS) it seems he is doing away with out triumvate of power, consolidating it all into one, the Executive. Which is in essence what a king is.

Did you feel the same way with Iran-Contra? Where the law was broken completely?

Rainmaker
07-12-2015, 04:35 PM
Did you feel the same way with Iran-Contra? Where the law was broken completely?

It's Reagan's fault.

garhkal
07-13-2015, 08:39 AM
Did you feel the same way with Iran-Contra? Where the law was broken completely?

Yes i did. And i did feel that Regan should have gotten smacked with Impeachment for it. Just like i feel Obama has done MORE than enough to deserve getting Impeached.

SeaLawyer
07-13-2015, 11:24 AM
More Transnational Chickens coming home to roost.....

Bwaaaaaaaaaaak Bwak Bwak Bwaaaaaak!!!

MikeKerriii
07-13-2015, 10:29 PM
Yes i did. And i did feel that Regan should have gotten smacked with Impeachment for it. Just like i feel Obama has done MORE than enough to deserve getting Impeached.

Just out of curiosity what "high crime or misdemeanor' has Obama committed? As in what statue did he violate?

garhkal
07-14-2015, 05:56 AM
Just doing a quick search,
"President Barack Obama violated the Constitution when he bypassed the Senate last year to appoint three members of the National Labor Relations Board, a federal appeals court ruled Friday in a far-reaching decision that could severely limit a chief executive's powers to make recess appointments."

Then there was
"For Illegally Changing Obamacare: It doesn't matter if the Affordable Care Act is called "Obamacare;" Barack Obama doesn't have the authority to unilaterally change the law. Changes to the law have to be made by Congress and then signed into law by the President. Barack Obama has broken the law repeatedly by making at least 23 unilateral changes to the law. Saying, "The Republicans won't work with us," or more disturbingly, "It's politically convenient," is not an excuse for overriding the Constitution of the United States. "

"2) Engaging In An Illegal War In Libya: While the President is the Commander-in-Chief, the Constitution gives Congress the ability to declare war. In the modern era, that has just meant an authorization of force from Congress, which Obama did not pursue. Additionally, we've tended to give Presidents the benefit of the doubt when American lives are at stake. However, in Libya, Obama didn't seek the permission of Congress and we had no national security interest in Libya."

Then
"3) Lying To Sell Obamacare To The American People: When Barack Obama told the public if they liked their plan, they could keep their plan, he was lying. When he told Americans if they liked their doctor, they could keep their doctor, he knew it wasn't so. When he told Americans Obamacare would cut costs by $2,500 for the average family, he was deliberately misleading the public. For a President of the United States to PERSONALLY spend months telling deliberate falsehoods to the American people in order to convince them to support something as massive as a government takeover of the health care system is beyond the pale. If the willful lies Barack Obama told to sell Obamacare don't merit impeachment, then there are no lies that a President could tell to the American people big enough to merit impeachment"

then
"4) Violating Immigration Law And Illegally Implementing The DREAM ACT: Simply put, Barack Obama has ceased to enforce most immigration law. As Senator Jeff Sessions has noted, “at least 99.92% of illegal immigrants and visa overstays without known crimes on their records did not face removal.” In other words, we've already stopped deporting anyone other than SOME hardcore criminals and gang members. Additionally, when the DREAM ACT didn't make it through Congress, Obama simply implemented it ANYWAY. Not only is he explicitly telling illegal aliens they can stay in the United States, he's illegally giving them work permits that he has zero right to offer."

And lastly the whole debacle with turning over 5 high ranking Taliban officers for Bo Bergdahl.
"Barack Obama was legally required to alert Congress 30 days before he released terrorists from Gitmo."

garhkal
07-14-2015, 05:59 AM
Just doing a quick search,
"President Barack Obama violated the Constitution when he bypassed the Senate last year to appoint three members of the National Labor Relations Board, a federal appeals court ruled Friday in a far-reaching decision that could severely limit a chief executive's powers to make recess appointments."

Then there was
"For Illegally Changing Obamacare: It doesn't matter if the Affordable Care Act is called "Obamacare;" Barack Obama doesn't have the authority to unilaterally change the law. Changes to the law have to be made by Congress and then signed into law by the President. Barack Obama has broken the law repeatedly by making at least 23 unilateral changes to the law. Saying, "The Republicans won't work with us," or more disturbingly, "It's politically convenient," is not an excuse for overriding the Constitution of the United States. "

"2) Engaging In An Illegal War In Libya: While the President is the Commander-in-Chief, the Constitution gives Congress the ability to declare war. In the modern era, that has just meant an authorization of force from Congress, which Obama did not pursue. Additionally, we've tended to give Presidents the benefit of the doubt when American lives are at stake. However, in Libya, Obama didn't seek the permission of Congress and we had no national security interest in Libya."

Then
"3) Lying To Sell Obamacare To The American People: When Barack Obama told the public if they liked their plan, they could keep their plan, he was lying. When he told Americans if they liked their doctor, they could keep their doctor, he knew it wasn't so. When he told Americans Obamacare would cut costs by $2,500 for the average family, he was deliberately misleading the public. For a President of the United States to PERSONALLY spend months telling deliberate falsehoods to the American people in order to convince them to support something as massive as a government takeover of the health care system is beyond the pale. If the willful lies Barack Obama told to sell Obamacare don't merit impeachment, then there are no lies that a President could tell to the American people big enough to merit impeachment"

then
"4) Violating Immigration Law And Illegally Implementing The DREAM ACT: Simply put, Barack Obama has ceased to enforce most immigration law. As Senator Jeff Sessions has noted, “at least 99.92% of illegal immigrants and visa overstays without known crimes on their records did not face removal.” In other words, we've already stopped deporting anyone other than SOME hardcore criminals and gang members. Additionally, when the DREAM ACT didn't make it through Congress, Obama simply implemented it ANYWAY. Not only is he explicitly telling illegal aliens they can stay in the United States, he's illegally giving them work permits that he has zero right to offer."

And lastly the whole debacle with turning over 5 high ranking Taliban officers for Bo Bergdahl.
"Barack Obama was legally required to alert Congress 30 days before he released terrorists from Gitmo."

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
07-14-2015, 04:39 PM
lol....you don't think she was talking metaphorically do ya?



...and?

I have no idea what she was thinking when she said it. I only know what she SAID. Do you suggest I give her the benefit of the doubt and assume she doesn't have radical leftist views?

Bos Mutus
07-14-2015, 04:45 PM
I have no idea what she was thinking when she said it. I only know what she SAID.

We all you know you are not so intellectually deficient as to be unable to recognize metaphor, sarcasm, satire, and other non-literal figures of speech...so, why play this game?


Do you suggest I give her the benefit of the doubt and assume she doesn't have radical leftist views?

I would rather suggest you apply a little common sense and maybe half an ounce of critical thought and realize she was not actually declaring Obama to be the Messiah.

Probably too much to ask, I guess.

Okay, fine..she believes Obama is the Jewish Messiah, Garhkah believes him to King of America and Rainmaker merely believes him to be a benevolent emperor.

Carry on....this board has become beyond stupid...

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
07-14-2015, 04:51 PM
I would rather suggest you apply a little common sense and maybe half an ounce of critical thought and realize she was not actually declaring Obama to be the Messiah.

Probably too much to ask, I guess.

If she said she believed he was going to be a Messiah, then that's pretty powerful. In your opinion, how do you think she viewed Obama, if she so easily elevated him to god-like stature?

Bos Mutus
07-14-2015, 05:17 PM
If she said she believed he was going to be a Messiah, then that's pretty powerful. In your opinion, how do you think she viewed Obama, if she so easily elevated him to god-like stature?

AT the time she made this statement...she was talking about the disappointment in him. She wasn't actually elevating him to god-like stature any more than someone calling Eric Clapton a Rock God is elevating him to god-like stature...o referring to Lebron James as King James is elevating him to the monarch of our country.

She was saying, "we had such high hopes...but we've been disappointed." metaphor, hyperbole....that's what I think. She was explaining how she had such high hopes for him and he's been a disappointment. She was trying to say he's not a failure, but compared to the high hopes she had, she's disappointed.

FLAPS, USAF (ret)
07-14-2015, 05:26 PM
AT the time she made this statement...she was talking about the disappointment in him. She wasn't actually elevating him to god-like stature any more than someone calling Eric Clapton a Rock God is elevating him to god-like stature...o referring to Lebron James as King James is elevating him to the monarch of our country.

She was saying, "we had such high hopes...but we've been disappointed." metaphor, hyperbole....that's what I think. She was explaining how she had such high hopes for him and he's been a disappointment. She was trying to say he's not a failure, but compared to the high hopes she had, she's disappointed.

I don't disagree with you. However, you asked WHO viewed Obama as like a God, saviour, etc. The answer is, Barbara Walters, at least until after he dissapointed her. Am I wrong?

Bos Mutus
07-14-2015, 05:35 PM
I don't disagree with you. However, you asked WHO viewed Obama as like a God, saviour, etc. The answer is, Barbara Walters, at least until after he dissapointed her. Am I wrong?

I think you're getting a little carried when someone uses literary devices.

MikeKerriii
07-16-2015, 01:47 AM
Just doing a quick search,
"President Barack Obama violated the Constitution when he bypassed the Senate last year to appoint three members of the National Labor Relations Board, a federal appeals court ruled Friday in a far-reaching decision that could severely limit a chief executive's powers to make recess appointments."

Then there was
"For Illegally Changing Obamacare: It doesn't matter if the Affordable Care Act is called "Obamacare;" Barack Obama doesn't have the authority to unilaterally change the law. Changes to the law have to be made by Congress and then signed into law by the President. Barack Obama has broken the law repeatedly by making at least 23 unilateral changes to the law. Saying, "The Republicans won't work with us," or more disturbingly, "It's politically convenient," is not an excuse for overriding the Constitution of the United States. "

"2) Engaging In An Illegal War In Libya: While the President is the Commander-in-Chief, the Constitution gives Congress the ability to declare war. In the modern era, that has just meant an authorization of force from Congress, which Obama did not pursue. Additionally, we've tended to give Presidents the benefit of the doubt when American lives are at stake. However, in Libya, Obama didn't seek the permission of Congress and we had no national security interest in Libya."

Then
"3) Lying To Sell Obamacare To The American People: When Barack Obama told the public if they liked their plan, they could keep their plan, he was lying. When he told Americans if they liked their doctor, they could keep their doctor, he knew it wasn't so. When he told Americans Obamacare would cut costs by $2,500 for the average family, he was deliberately misleading the public. For a President of the United States to PERSONALLY spend months telling deliberate falsehoods to the American people in order to convince them to support something as massive as a government takeover of the health care system is beyond the pale. If the willful lies Barack Obama told to sell Obamacare don't merit impeachment, then there are no lies that a President could tell to the American people big enough to merit impeachment"

then
"4) Violating Immigration Law And Illegally Implementing The DREAM ACT: Simply put, Barack Obama has ceased to enforce most immigration law. As Senator Jeff Sessions has noted, “at least 99.92% of illegal immigrants and visa overstays without known crimes on their records did not face removal.” In other words, we've already stopped deporting anyone other than SOME hardcore criminals and gang members. Additionally, when the DREAM ACT didn't make it through Congress, Obama simply implemented it ANYWAY. Not only is he explicitly telling illegal aliens they can stay in the United States, he's illegally giving them work permits that he has zero right to offer."

And lastly the whole debacle with turning over 5 high ranking Taliban officers for Bo Bergdahl.
"Barack Obama was legally required to alert Congress 30 days before he released terrorists from Gitmo."

So you can't name a single actual criminal statute that he broke?

garhkal
07-16-2015, 07:06 AM
How do you consider #1, 2 and 4 NOT violations of law?

#3 i agree is not a LEGAL violation unless lying to congress about what Obama care is considered perjury.

MikeKerriii
07-16-2015, 09:12 PM
How do you consider #1, 2 and 4 NOT violations of law?

#3 i agree is not a LEGAL violation unless lying to congress about what Obama care is considered perjury.


And again what statute does any of them break? To be Impeached you need to commit a crime, to commit a crime you have to break a criminal law. What criminal law was broken?

Mjölnir
07-17-2015, 12:27 AM
And again what statute does any of them break? To be Impeached you need to commit a crime, to commit a crime you have to break a criminal law. What criminal law was broken?

Not entirely correct, the Constitution stipulates that impeachment is for "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors" but does not further define those "high crimes" and that interpretation is left to the House.

Some examples:
-President Johnson: impeached (not convicted) for violating the Tenure of Office Act.
-President Clinton: impeached (not convicted) for perjury and obstruction of justice.
-Congressman Hastings: impeached & convicted as a Federal Judge for taking bribes and perjury; later elected to the House of Representatives from Florida.

I am not really in favor of impeaching President Obama; I believe the Chief Executive has significant leeway with the Executive Branch. Of most of the arguments I have heard and discussed with friends, violating the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act seems to be the most clear cut (& I am familiar with since I worked on the bill.) President Obama signed the Act into law and one part of it required notification to Congress no less than 30 days of all and any prisoner releases from the Guantanamo Facility. President Obama admitted he did not follow that law due to the expediency needed based on information pertaining to Sgt Bergdahl's safety. Even Senator Feinstein broke with the Administration and said this violated the law ... but I don't think this rises to the extent of being an impeachable offense.


Yes i did. And i did feel that Regan should have gotten smacked with Impeachment for it. Just like i feel Obama has done MORE than enough to deserve getting Impeached.

If you are talking cumulatively, that comes across as sour grapes -- "I don't like him nor his policy so he should go." If we could pin one issue to a violation of law, ethics etc ... then sure.

To tie to the thread & OPM, I don't think President Obama having a poor manager leading OPM really rises to the level of removing the President from office. Now, what we can see overall through the administration (OPM, ACA rollout, VA mismanagement, Executive Branch decision to not back Syrian Rebels before they morphed into ISIS, IRS issue/scandal, issues with law enforcement at the federal level etc.) you can see what many describe as a lack of executive ability. Many of these issues I seriously doubt the President is personally involved in, but he is the President ... he sets the tone and there seems to be less of a level of accountability for things than we have sen in the past. I think the President on some issues has some great ideas, turning that bright idea into a solid & executable policy and then putting it into action seems to be a weak point.

MikeKerriii
07-17-2015, 01:56 AM
Not entirely correct, the Constitution stipulates that impeachment is for "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors" but does not further define those "high crimes" and that interpretation is left to the House.

Some examples:
-President Johnson: impeached (not convicted) for violating the Tenure of Office Act.
-President Clinton: impeached (not convicted) for perjury and obstruction of justice.
-Congressman Hastings: impeached & convicted as a Federal Judge for taking bribes and perjury; later elected to the House of Representatives from Florida.

I am not really in favor of impeaching President Obama; I believe the Chief Executive has significant leeway with the Executive Branch. Of most of the arguments I have heard and discussed with friends, violating the 2013 National Defense Authorization Act seems to be the most clear cut (& I am familiar with since I worked on the bill.) President Obama signed the Act into law and one part of it required notification to Congress no less than 30 days of all and any prisoner releases from the Guantanamo Facility. President Obama admitted he did not follow that law due to the expediency needed based on information pertaining to Sgt Bergdahl's safety. Even Senator Feinstein broke with the Administration and said this violated the law ... but I don't think this rises to the extent of being an impeachable offense.



If you are talking cumulatively, that comes across as sour grapes -- "I don't like him nor his policy so he should go." If we could pin one issue to a violation of law, ethics etc ... then sure.

To tie to the thread & OPM, I don't think President Obama having a poor manager leading OPM really rises to the level of removing the President from office. Now, what we can see overall through the administration (OPM, ACA rollout, VA mismanagement, Executive Branch decision to not back Syrian Rebels before they morphed into ISIS, IRS issue/scandal, issues with law enforcement at the federal level etc.) you can see what many describe as a lack of executive ability. Many of these issues I seriously doubt the President is personally involved in, but he is the President ... he sets the tone and there seems to be less of a level of accountability for things than we have sen in the past. I think the President on some issues has some great ideas, turning that bright idea into a solid & executable policy and then putting it into action seems to be a weak point.

Two of the three examples were for actual criminal acts, and Johnson Impeachment was pretty much a political hit job. Johnston was one of our worst Presidents but did nothing worthy of impeachment. But I get your point.

Mjölnir
07-17-2015, 02:32 AM
Two of the three examples were for actual criminal acts, and Johnson Impeachment was pretty much a political hit job. Johnston was one of our worst Presidents but did nothing worthy of impeachment. But I get your point.

Congress is a wierd monster; but ... they do make their own rules & they know it. But for all the talk in the George W. Bush Administration from some Democrats on impeachment, Speaker Pelosi and Senator Reid never really considered it, in large part out of a fear of setting off a constant tit for tat when the President is from one party and the majority in Congress is from another; it just isn't productive.

-Nixon -- would have been impeached, would very VERY likely have been convicted and removed from office. -President Clinton -- for his personal faults did lie under oath; I don't like it but he certainly isn't the first President to have lied or stretched the truth ... under oath ... not so sure really.
-President George W. Bush -- unpopular with many people many for his policies but within that leeway afforded the President wasn't egregiously breaking the law.
-President Obama -- polarizing president, his biggest 'high crime' seems to be an administration that hits every bump in the road & even creates some for itself. Not really a smooth running operations, but doesn't warrant his removal.

garhkal
07-17-2015, 03:48 AM
N Even Senator Feinstein broke with the Administration and said this violated the law ... but I don't think this rises to the extent of being an impeachable offense..

Then what good is the law if you don't enforce it when it gets broken?

UncaRastus
07-17-2015, 02:29 PM
When the USA has a House of Congress that seems to do their lobbyists urgings, rather than to actually serve as the spokes piece for their citizens, wouldn't it be egregious for them to go ahead and impeach a POTUS?

Rainmaker
07-17-2015, 03:31 PM
To be Impeached you need to commit a crime, to commit a crime you have to break a criminal law. What criminal law was broken?

Completely false. Impeachment is for political offenses.

Obama could've been impeached for usurpation of power for using the IRS as a weapon to target political opponents or for deliberately creating a humanitarian crisis on the border.

It wasn't done because we're living in a 2 party corporate dictatorship. The GOP wants to do the same thing.

The precident for all the shit this imposter has done was laid down by Bush who stole the 2000 election as well.

Rainmaker
07-17-2015, 03:37 PM
Then what good is the law if you don't enforce it when it gets broken?

There's no law when you don't enforce it. The first American republic is dead. And We're In a post constitution empire now.

The only question is will the second American republic be installed peacefully or not.

It's only a matter of time. When Trannies are getting "courage awards" on ESPN. We are Rome.

Rainmaker
07-17-2015, 03:51 PM
When the USA has a House of Congress that seems to do their lobbyists urgings, rather than to actually serve as the spokes piece for their citizens, wouldn't it be egregious for them to go ahead and impeach a POTUS?

They took the mid terms based on all the issues Trump is appealing to. But, the GOP does nothing (except invite their master Bibi to remind Obummer who writes their ticket)

MikeKerriii
07-17-2015, 04:26 PM
Completely false. Impeachment is for political offenses. Only in your sad frightened fantasies


Obama could've been impeached for usurpation of power for using the IRS as a weapon to target political opponents or for deliberately creating a humanitarian crisis on the border.
That would true if the accusation was not based on the delusions of terrified trolls.
[/QUOTE]


It wasn't done because we're living in a 2 party corporate dictatorship. The GOP wants to do the same thing.

The precident for all the shit this imposter has done was laid down by Bush who stole the 2000 election as well. Poor sad little guy, do you need a hug?

Absinthe Anecdote
07-17-2015, 04:29 PM
They took the mid terms based on all the issues Trump is appealing to. But, the GOP does nothing (except invite their master Bibi to remind Obummer who writes their ticket)

Ahh! The Jews are running the GOP.

Got any new material? This crap is getting stale.

MikeKerriii
07-17-2015, 04:30 PM
Then what good is the law if you don't enforce it when it gets broken?

That's why you have courts to force the administration to follow the law, You do recognize that there is a difference between criminal and civil law don't you?

Rainmaker
07-17-2015, 04:43 PM
Ahh! The Jews are running the GOP.

Got any new material? This crap is getting stale.

About as stale as your dozens of anti Christian diatribes you post each month.

Rainmaker
07-17-2015, 04:52 PM
Only in your sad frightened fantasies

That would true if the accusation was not based on the delusions of terrified trolls

Poor sad little guy, do you need a hug?

There's nothing more pathetic than aging hippie radicals.

Maybe your kids can roll your wheelchair out in the street to watch the chaos when it ensues

Absinthe Anecdote
07-17-2015, 05:12 PM
About as stale as your dozens of anti Christian diatribes you post each month.

Thanks for reminding me it is time for me to post another one.

Rainmaker
07-17-2015, 05:12 PM
That's why you have courts to force the administration to follow the law, You do recognize that there is a difference between criminal and civil law don't you?

Can you send a message to Hasbara HQ and have them draft up a post for you explaining the difference?

Just don't try to do it yourself "Nelson", Because whenever you're posting disinformation about something this important, it needs to be legible.

Rainmaker
07-17-2015, 05:15 PM
Thanks for reminding me it is time for me to post another one.

See why you need me here?

garhkal
07-17-2015, 05:18 PM
That's why you have courts to force the administration to follow the law, You do recognize that there is a difference between criminal and civil law don't you?

And have we seen any courts try to 'force' them to follow the law that were successful?

MikeKerriii
07-18-2015, 03:50 AM
There's nothing more pathetic than aging hippie radicals.

Maybe your kids can roll your wheelchair out in the street to watch the chaos when it ensues
this is not lawn, and I won't get off of it. Little is more pity full than a terrified little troll pretending that he is not.

MikeKerriii
07-18-2015, 03:53 AM
And have we seen any courts try to 'force' them to follow the law that were successful?
Yes pretty successfully, the the courts have overturn Obama a number of times including cases involving Obama care. the proble is tht the courts view of the law and some conservative views of the law are often at a consflicrt andf the courts win those arguments unless you can amend the Constitution

try watching the SC the administration loses amost half the case brought. Did you miss the Hobby Lobby and Citizens United cases?