First of all, Hillary is not an IT expert and may have received slipshod advice. Second, the gov't servers may not have been so great either. Why should she just automatically trust gov't systems?
You don't conduct federal business on a private email account. That seems to clearly have been violated...
The law only appears to require it be archived on (copied to) a federal system, NOT that it originate on a federal system. If she always sent and/or CC'd to at least one gov't account when doing gov't business, then technically she may be following the law as written.
Now, there was a State Department policy guideline against using a private account/server to send such messages, but it is not a "law", per se. It's roughly comparable to an employee manual saying, "All receptionists must wear a tie".
At least this is how I understand the legal situation based on reading multiple sources. If anybody has a specific law or document that says otherwise, please quote and link it.
Rarely do politicians outright lie; they typically bend the truth. For example, most people could keep their existing doctor under ACA. But O should have qualified his statement with "most" rather than make it sound open-and-shut with "you can keep your doctor".
A "true" lie would be "everyone will be able to keep their doctor". That would be objectively and blatantly false. I prefer trying to save the word "lie" for a real lie rather than dilute it by over-using it for ambiguous word-play: AKA, "spin". Foreplay is not intercourse (even though you may get an STD anyhow:-)
The visa claims are generally that there is a shortage of technical workers, period. It's not a claim that there is shortage of hard-working techies or a shortage of techies with sufficient people skills or a shortage of techies without attitudes, etc. Even IF those were true, it's not the justification the shortage claimers use.
What I see is organizations trying to find an excuse to have more choice without paying a premium for that choice. Whether that's "fair" to citizens or not, is not something they are concerned about; they are just lobbying to get as much choice at the lowest cost. Impact on society be damned.
2017 cannot come fast enough. The current administration...
If you think the other party is anti-imported-labor, you will be in for a second surprise. Both parties do it because the Plutocrats pay them to, and not enough voters know or care about the issue to override the influence of legalized bribery.
The available election choices kind of remind me of our family's ISP choices: Company A offers spotty connections and Company B keeps putting bogus "fees" on our bill, like insurance we never asked for. Company C only offers satellite TV, no Internet.
I wish we could vote on specific Federal issues, not just representatives.
Party Shmarty. All known politicians are spinners. Mr. Carter was probably the closest we had to an honest prez in recent history, and he was booted largely for saying things people didn't want to hear.
Honesty doesn't fly in our system. Voters want to be told they can have their cake AND eat it too. Mention difficult trade-offs, and you are dead meat.
Quick fix: send written* letters with solid facts to his staunchest critics in the other party. They have been very quick and eager to contradict him on other issues. Take advantage of such behavior and motivation.
In particular, Senators Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama) have shown skepticism about "techie shortages".
* Paper tends to carry more weight (no pun intended) over email because it takes more effort to prepare, acting as a bit of a riff-raff filter, and thus screening staff pay more attention to it.
Slashdot Mirror
Stop correcting ethnic details, you are ruining good bar jokes
because the Chinese had to outsource it to Vietnam to get profitable labor rates
First of all, Hillary is not an IT expert and may have received slipshod advice. Second, the gov't servers may not have been so great either. Why should she just automatically trust gov't systems?
The law only appears to require it be archived on (copied to) a federal system, NOT that it originate on a federal system. If she always sent and/or CC'd to at least one gov't account when doing gov't business, then technically she may be following the law as written.
Now, there was a State Department policy guideline against using a private account/server to send such messages, but it is not a "law", per se. It's roughly comparable to an employee manual saying, "All receptionists must wear a tie".
At least this is how I understand the legal situation based on reading multiple sources. If anybody has a specific law or document that says otherwise, please quote and link it.
The usual: moon complains that its partner is obese and breaks off the relationship.
I bet you'll soon see job ads like:
"Must have at least 6 years experience on the next-big-thing of next month."
They must be fake, iMaps works right.
I once saw a "Relox" watch. I didn't catch the letter difference at first. I was temped to buy one, at least as a semi gag piece.
What happens if your company name is very similar to another that makes the same category of products?
I'm thinking of setting up Aple.com, Slushdot.com, Googel.com, Yooha.com, Micrasoft.com, Diice.com, Yuotube.com, Amozon.com, facebok.com, fakebook.com, eBuy.com, and Pinterist.com.
(Uh, don't try any of those, some go to "shady" places. Dadgummit, they beat me to it.)
"kiss my massive black hole, humans"
He just happens to collect pics of "bigger bars"
We all put on a little weight in middle age
iBling
That's how I feel now with typical smart-phones. It's like they were designed for a hand 2/3 the size of mine.
I'm from the future; we don't have thumbs anymore, you insensitive clod!
If you have the bucks, try the Voyager probe's "golden disk" approach.
Just don't put anything that may tick off aliens or time travelers.
Bad H! She should have used them gov't servers, which are D-
is to tax it. That makes it a money drain if you just sit on it.
Aliens with fans
The flip side is that gravity is about 1/3 Earth's there. That means it's easier for thin winds to move particles.
Rarely do politicians outright lie; they typically bend the truth. For example, most people could keep their existing doctor under ACA. But O should have qualified his statement with "most" rather than make it sound open-and-shut with "you can keep your doctor".
A "true" lie would be "everyone will be able to keep their doctor". That would be objectively and blatantly false. I prefer trying to save the word "lie" for a real lie rather than dilute it by over-using it for ambiguous word-play: AKA, "spin". Foreplay is not intercourse (even though you may get an STD anyhow :-)
The visa claims are generally that there is a shortage of technical workers, period. It's not a claim that there is shortage of hard-working techies or a shortage of techies with sufficient people skills or a shortage of techies without attitudes, etc. Even IF those were true, it's not the justification the shortage claimers use.
What I see is organizations trying to find an excuse to have more choice without paying a premium for that choice. Whether that's "fair" to citizens or not, is not something they are concerned about; they are just lobbying to get as much choice at the lowest cost. Impact on society be damned.
He didn't have to work that hard, lobbyists probably did the pulling for him. (Pulling, not "polling".)
I'm sure they wrangled the numbers together using some "creative interpreting" of semi-respectable sources.
If you think the other party is anti-imported-labor, you will be in for a second surprise. Both parties do it because the Plutocrats pay them to, and not enough voters know or care about the issue to override the influence of legalized bribery.
The available election choices kind of remind me of our family's ISP choices: Company A offers spotty connections and Company B keeps putting bogus "fees" on our bill, like insurance we never asked for. Company C only offers satellite TV, no Internet.
I wish we could vote on specific Federal issues, not just representatives.
Party Shmarty. All known politicians are spinners. Mr. Carter was probably the closest we had to an honest prez in recent history, and he was booted largely for saying things people didn't want to hear.
Honesty doesn't fly in our system. Voters want to be told they can have their cake AND eat it too. Mention difficult trade-offs, and you are dead meat.
Quick fix: send written* letters with solid facts to his staunchest critics in the other party. They have been very quick and eager to contradict him on other issues. Take advantage of such behavior and motivation.
In particular, Senators Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Jeff Sessions (R-Alabama) have shown skepticism about "techie shortages".
* Paper tends to carry more weight (no pun intended) over email because it takes more effort to prepare, acting as a bit of a riff-raff filter, and thus screening staff pay more attention to it.