And so the Worm turns

[Comshaw]

Come on AJ, Ish, we need some defense in here! It seems the Vice President elect is trying to hide his emails, emails that should be released to the public under full disclosure.

We need some defense here! Other then a motorboat that is. Let's here it. This should be very interesting.

What's Mike Pence hiding in his emails?



Comshaw

 

[Ms_Ann]

If the dems want to know what it says maybe they can pay the Chinese to hack it.

 

[domroger]

If the dems want to know what it says maybe they can pay the Chinese to hack it.

Have to the Chinese because the GOP has the Russians .

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Why am I being called out?

:shrug:

I have never once voted for Pence...

 

[Colonel Hogan]

Come on AJ, Ish, we need some defense in here! It seems the Vice President elect is trying to hide his emails, emails that should be released to the public under full disclosure.

We need some defense here! Other then a motorboat that is. Let's here it. This should be very interesting.

What's Mike Pence hiding in his emails?



Comshaw

Did you even read your own link?

In the case, Indianapolis attorney William Groth is appealing a decision handed down by Marion Superior Court in April, which decided that redactions the administration made to a public record could not be second-guessed by the court. The focal point in the*case is a political “white paper” that had been excluded from Groth’s public records request.

Pence’s legal defense team claims the white paper is*attorney work product protected by Indiana’s Access to Public Records Act —*and at the end of the day, matters of public records are not for a court to decide.

In other words, Mike Pence isn't "hiding" anything contrary to public records law as currently ruled upon by an Indiana court. WTF is wrong with you?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

He wants payback...


:shrug:

 

[Comshaw]

Did you even read your own link?



In other words, Mike Pence isn't "hiding" anything contrary to public records law as currently ruled upon by an Indiana court. WTF is wrong with you?

Did you even take time to think about my post? Are you that obtuse and narrow in view that you interpret a phrase through a preconceived bias? Did I say anything about public records laws? I said,"...emails that should be released to the public under full disclosure."

Full disclosure as in the public should have a right to know what their representatives are doing and how they are conducting public business. Whether or not the state court said they don't have to be released, should they? Of course they should, unless there is something to hide.

This isn't about the law, it's about what should be, about public business being conducted behind closed doors without the over site of the public. Wasn't one of the huge screams from the conservatives about Obama and transparency? So why the tremendous effort to hide these emails? If there is nothing to hide, why try to keep them secret? As was quoted many, many times during the Hillary email debacle, where there's smoke there's fire. I am so damned glad I live here. We have public records laws just for this type of thing. Almost everything is subject to those laws. I like it that way.

Comshaw

 

[Liar]

Have to the Chinese because the GOP has the Russians .

That's the wrong way round.

 

[RoryN]

Are you that obtuse and narrow in view that you interpret a phrase through a preconceived bias?

*nod* x1,000,000

 

[domroger]

That's the wrong way round.

Too true .

 

[Wrong Element]

Eh, they didn't care when Bush deleted millions of emails; they won't care now. Trying to embarrass them into intellectual honesty never works, which is why I stopped trying.

 

[twistedsickmind]

Did you even take time to think about my post? Are you that obtuse and narrow in view that you interpret a phrase through a preconceived bias? Did I say anything about public records laws? I said,"...emails that should be released to the public under full disclosure."

Full disclosure as in the public should have a right to know what their representatives are doing and how they are conducting public business. Whether or not the state court said they don't have to be released, should they? Of course they should, unless there is something to hide.

This isn't about the law, it's about what should be, about public business being conducted behind closed doors without the over site of the public. Wasn't one of the huge screams from the conservatives about Obama and transparency? So why the tremendous effort to hide these emails? If there is nothing to hide, why try to keep them secret? As was quoted many, many times during the Hillary email debacle, where there's smoke there's fire. I am so damned glad I live here. We have public records laws just for this type of thing. Almost everything is subject to those laws. I like it that way. [/SIZE]

Comshaw

I agree. I'll look over those emails right after I finish reading Obama's thesis. Oh damn, nobody ever wanted to release that either. Wonder why?

 

[Hypoxia]

I agree. I'll look over those emails right after I finish reading Obama's thesis. Oh damn, nobody ever wanted to release that either. Wonder why?

Obama's 'Sealed' Records

Claim #3, thesis paper. Obama did write a paper on nuclear disarmament for an honors course in American foreign policy during his senior year, but it wasn’t the sort of “thesis” that some colleges require for graduation and keep on file in their libraries, like those that Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama released. During the 2008 campaign, reporters were told that Columbia had not retained a copy of Obama’s 1983 paper, and that Obama didn’t have a copy, either. NBC News contacted his former professor, Michael Baron, who said he looked for his copy but couldn’t find it, and thought he probably tossed it out eight years earlier in a move.
NBC quoted Baron as saying the paper likely would have disappointed Obama’s critics. “The course was not a polemical course, it was a course in decision making and how decisions got made,” Baron told NBC. “None of the papers in the class were controversial.”

Have you retained all your college papers? Just in case?

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Eh, they didn't care when Bush deleted millions of emails; they won't care now. Trying to embarrass them into intellectual honesty never works, which is why I stopped trying.

http://media.tumblr.com/f9806e179a6c1374185061c7b1967345/tumblr_inline_mlj8meVRpn1qz4rgp.gif

Obama's 'Sealed' Records Have you retained all your college papers? Just in case?

http://media.tumblr.com/tumblr_masbg6e1eD1qa6g1m.gif

 

[Colonel Hogan]

Did you even take time to think about my post? Are you that obtuse and narrow in view that you interpret a phrase through a preconceived bias? Did I say anything about public records laws? I said,"...emails that should be released to the public under full disclosure."

Full disclosure as in the public should have a right to know what their representatives are doing and how they are conducting public business. Whether or not the state court said they don't have to be released, should they? Of course they should, unless there is something to hide.

This isn't about the law, it's about what should be, about public business being conducted behind closed doors without the over site of the public. Wasn't one of the huge screams from the conservatives about Obama and transparency? So why the tremendous effort to hide these emails? If there is nothing to hide, why try to keep them secret? As was quoted many, many times during the Hillary email debacle, where there's smoke there's fire. I am so damned glad I live here. We have public records laws just for this type of thing. Almost everything is subject to those laws. I like it that way. [/SIZE]

Comshaw

http://images.viralnova.com/000/121/207/dog-chasing-own-tail.gif

Unbelievable. If you hadn't written it, I would not have thought it was possible for someone to be so blatantly self-contradictory within a single paragraph.

So despite your contempt for public records laws generally in view of what "should be" you happen to think YOUR open records laws up there in the PAC NW are just swell.

Well, guess what. The people of Indiana presumably feel the same way about theirs since they were enacted by their state legislative representatives just like yours were. In a democracy, or even a democratic republic, LAW IS what "should be." And what "should be" in such a representative system is SOOOO fucking important that it tends to get ensconced as LAW.

It's why "LAW" has all that legal shit in it!!!

Fucking Christ on a cructch.