• @utopianfiat
    link
    English
    91 year ago

    2016 got me reading a lot about the Availability Heuristic and Availability Cascades. It looks like a novelty until you’re watching the truth be rewritten in front of you by people who keep talking about Her Emails, who can’t tell you what’s wrong with them but who believe it’s chock full of corruption because lots of other people keep talking about corruption when they talk about them.

    It’s astounding how many of the Bernie Sanders supporters at the time would bet their dominant arm that there was real evidence of corruption in her emails without ever being able to identify a single instance of it. Not to knock them but just to say I think a lot of them didn’t realize that the manufactured availability cascade was straight up mind control and despite how paranoid a lot of them were at the time very few of them figured out that they were being puppeted.

    • @flossdaily
      link
      English
      51 year ago

      Whoa… Strong disagree. This was not about Bernie supporters.

      Bernie let her off the hook entirely with this as a primaries issue with his line “I’m tired of hearing about her damned emails.”

      He made it a non-issue in the debates, and the primaries were focused on POLICY.

      AND let’s just have one second to acknowledge that while Hillary didn’t do very much wrong regarding the emails, she wasn’t completely without fault. She was certainly NEGLIGENT in keeping sensitive government communications secured.

      The problem was that she couldn’t simply admit to that and move on with a slap on the wrist.

      Why?

      Because the law was VERY clear that conviction for NEGLIGENCE ALONE was enough to bar her from HOLDING OFFICE.

      It was an overly broad law with no room for nuance.

      Even when James Comey came out and “exonerated” her, the substance of his press conference was EXACTLY him describing how her behavior has all the elements of NEGLIGENCE. He even used a synonym for gross negligence, without ever saying the actual words. Then he muddied the waters by concluding this speech about negligence with a declaration that there would be no charges because she had no INTENT to commit a crime.

      What he didn’t mention was that a charge of NEGLIGENCE does not have ANYTHING TO DO WITH INTENT.

      As an attorney watching that play out, I was utterly fascinated that he wasn’t called out for such a naked dodge.

      Anyway… I wanted Bernie, but voted for Hillary in the end, and I didn’t really care about her emails. But I’m absolutely certain she was guilty of the overly broad law governing negligence. I also understand why it would have been insane to charge her for it. No one wanted to derail a political giant over a technicality.

      • @utopianfiat
        link
        English
        4
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        AND let’s just have one second to acknowledge that while Hillary didn’t do very much wrong regarding the emails, she wasn’t completely without fault. She was certainly NEGLIGENT in keeping sensitive government communications secured.

        Thanks for proving my point. None of the information on Hillary’s email server was classified.

        Because the law was VERY clear that conviction for NEGLIGENCE ALONE was enough to bar her from HOLDING OFFICE.

        You can’t be grossly negligent in handling something that was retroactively classified after you handled it. This is an absurd proposition.

        This is exactly the kind of stuff people were saying in 2015. Hillary did nothing wrong. Even Bernie admitted it, but it didn’t make a difference to folks like you, you took the bait, and it encouraged a lot of people to stay home or vote for the fascist.

        • @flossdaily
          link
          English
          21 year ago

          I’m sorry. You’re just flat wrong.

          According to the FBI’s investigation, a small number of the emails that were sent or received through Clinton’s private server were classified at the time they were sent or received.

          • @utopianfiat
            link
            English
            41 year ago

            No, this is false. There was no classified information that was sent over that system. There were seven email threads in which aides discussed the existence of classified information, which they determined “should have been marked classified” as a result- but that’s not the same as sending classified information over the system. Nothing marked classified was sent on the system, and that’s a fact.

            • @flossdaily
              link
              English
              11 year ago

              No. Direct from the FBI:

              “From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were “up-classified” to make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the e-mails were sent.”

              • @TokenBoomer
                link
                English
                11 year ago

                See, she was guilty. Lock her up! /s I enjoyed the discussion and explanations.

    • HubertManne
      link
      fedilink
      31 year ago

      I was a bernie supporter and much like bernie himself I could give a fuck about the emails thing. I mean maybe a small fuck as it was a bs thing that should not have been but it was not a major scandal or something to effect my vote.

    • @PeleSpirit
      link
      English
      2
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      deleted by creator