Jump to content

Far left loonies in the Jan 6 committee release personal Social Security numbers of political opponents


Recommended Posts

What actually happened, as per the link... "When the House Jan. 6 committee released hundreds of documents from its investigation online at the end of the year, it inadvertently made public nearly 2,000 Social Security numbers belonging to high-profile individuals who visited the White House in December 2020, according to a report."

 

I'm not sure why the OP is so hysterical, but it makes me wish he wasn't.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Downvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

And now the faceless US government functionaries are just "leftists" ?

Conservatives used to believe in taking responsibility for one's statements back in my day.

These hysterical paranoids really should post elsewhere IMO

 

Why do you waste so many posts making excuses for the transgressions of Libbies?

Also...who the fck do you think you are telling members they should go to another site?

Mike...if you're so butt-hurt and have such a huge issue with people who oppose your rather interesting brand of "conservatism",

YOU can go to another site.

I'm pretty sure no one would mind.

Edited by Nationalist
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

1. Why do you waste so many posts making excuses for the transgressions of Libbies?

2. Also...who the fck do you think you are telling members they should go to another site?

3. Mike...if you're so butt-hurt and have such a huge issue with people who oppose your rather interesting brand of "conservatism",

1. You are saying that the US Government, which includes the US Government under Trump since he didn't fire/rehire the entire apparatus, is "libbie".  It doesn't stand up to sane analysis.
2. I guess I touched a nerve.  Let me explain, respectfully: posters who post nonsense, without regard for providing evidence, and bring the value of the forum down are not welcome, at least by me.
3. You seem to take issue with my assessment that Conservatism entails something called "responsibility".  And now you're riding in on your white horse to save the two posters I was commenting on.  I guess you do believe in collective action after all, at least on some level.
 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Why do you waste so many posts making excuses for the transgressions of Libbies?

Also...who the fck do you think you are telling members they should go to another site?

Mike...if you're so butt-hurt and have such a huge issue with people who oppose your rather interesting brand of "conservatism",

YOU can go to another site.

I'm pretty sure no one would mind.

Why don’t you take personal responsibility?

According to the article, “The Government Publishing Office (GPO), which was responsible for publishing the file, does not appear to have notified any of the individuals whose private information was released, the report said.”

You don’t know the political affiliation or opinions of the people in the GPO who made this mistake.  You don’t even know their names. So take personal responsibility and admit that you’re mistaken. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. You are saying that the US Government, which includes the US Government under Trump since he didn't fire/rehire the entire apparatus, is "libbie".  It doesn't stand up to sane analysis.
2. I guess I touched a nerve.  Let me explain, respectfully: posters who post nonsense, without regard for providing evidence, and bring the value of the forum down are not welcome, at least by me.
3. You seem to take issue with my assessment that Conservatism entails something called "responsibility".  And now you're riding in on your white horse to save the two posters I was commenting on.  I guess you do believe in collective action after all, at least on some level.
 

1. It is real Conservatives who are trying to find out the truth of the matter.

2. Then YOU might wanna go to REDDIT, where they simply adore people who call themselves "conservative", yet promote all Libbie talking points. Hell Mike...they'll love you to pieces there.

3. My horse is a mustang. My responsibility is to promote truth. When I smell a rat, it's my responsibility to call it a rat...not a harmless kitty.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Rebound said:

Why don’t you take personal responsibility?

According to the article, “The Government Publishing Office (GPO), which was responsible for publishing the file, does not appear to have notified any of the individuals whose private information was released, the report said.”

You don’t know the political affiliation or opinions of the people in the GPO who made this mistake.  You don’t even know their names. So take personal responsibility and admit that you’re mistaken. 

Lol...take your horse kaka and shove right where the sun don't shine.

It is blatantly obvious that these institutions have lost all trust.

Edited by Nationalist
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. You are saying that the US Government, which includes the US Government under Trump since he didn't fire/rehire the entire apparatus, is "libbie".  It doesn't stand up to sane analysis.

 

This is flat out wrong.  There are tens of thousands of administrative, clerical and executive personnel in the US government that remain regardless of which party the president belongs to.  And these workers have political affiliations, I’m surprised you need to be made aware of this.

What the OP suggests is entirely possible.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, sharkman said:

This is flat out wrong.  There are tens of thousands of administrative, clerical and executive personnel in the US government that remain regardless of which party the president belongs to.  And these workers have political affiliations, I’m surprised you need to be made aware of this.

What the OP suggests is entirely possible.  

Sure many have personal political affiliations but we have no idea what they are. Nor do we have any idea of their motivations or even whether they had any. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

No. But nothing you spew forth can restore any trust in any bureaucracy. 

They've earned the mistrust of the public.

Was it a “far left looney” who released the social security numbers, or was it a small group of possibly overworked people who were asked to review over 1,000 pages of documents in few days who may have made a mistake?  
 

Maybe you think you’re Superman, but here in the real world, we have human beings and they make mistakes. It doesn’t make them loonies. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Rebound said:

Was it a “far left looney” who released the social security numbers, or was it a small group of possibly overworked people who were asked to review over 1,000 pages of documents in few days who may have made a mistake?  
 

Maybe you think you’re Superman, but here in the real world, we have human beings and they make mistakes. It doesn’t make them loonies. 

Really?

Yet you were OK with a 4100 page omnibus bill that the reps had only 4 days to review.

BTW...I have worked in a government bureaucracy. Something like this is not a "mistake".

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Aristides said:

Sure many have personal political affiliations but we have no idea what they are. Nor do we have any idea of their motivations or even whether they had any. 

We can assume that almost half vote Dem and almost half vote Rep, with small minorities of independents and libertarians thrown in, just like the general population.

And a small percentage of each group are activist enough to do something naughty when they think they can get away with it. Why is this difficult for you to grasp?

Back in 2001, when Bush was set to take the White House, all of the “w” keys were removed from keyboards by these same types of people.  Some kind of pointless conspiracy.  I provide this example only to demonstrate to you that this kind of behaviour is possible.  Not to suggest that the two are the same, which would be wrong.

Edited by sharkman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, sharkman said:

We can assume that almost half vote Dem and almost half vote Rep, with small minorities of independents and libertarians thrown in, just like the general population.

And a small percentage of each group are activist enough to do something naughty when they think they can get away with it. Why is this difficult for you to grasp?

I can grasp it but I don't just assume it. This does need to be looked into. The administration was trying to get as much stuff through before the Dems lost control of the House and the Jan, 6  Committee was trying to get its report released before a Rep House choked it off. It is not hard to imagine that short cuts were taken and this is a result.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Really?

Yet you were OK with a 4100 page omnibus bill that the reps had only 4 days to review.

BTW...I have worked in a government bureaucracy. Something like this is not a "mistake".

No, actually, I think it makes sense to give Congresspeople 72 hours to read a bill before a vote, as long as that doesn’t mean a 72 hour delay for every single amendment. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Rebound said:

No, actually, I think it makes sense to give Congresspeople 72 hours to read a bill before a vote, as long as that doesn’t mean a 72 hour delay for every single amendment. 

Hmm...so in 3 days the congress should be able to understand 4100 pages, but in a longer period it's also OK for bureaucrats to make a mistake of this magnitude?

Do you realize how completely illegal this was?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Nationalist said:

Hmm...so in 3 days the congress should be able to understand 4100 pages, but in a longer period it's also OK for bureaucrats to make a mistake of this magnitude?

Do you realize how completely illegal this was?

It wasn't illegal at all but nor is it reasonable. When you have administrations trying to ram things through before they lose control of the House, it is bound to happen regardless who is in power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Why do you waste so many posts making excuses for the transgressions of Libbies?

Also...who the fck do you think you are telling members they should go to another site?

Mike...if you're so butt-hurt and have such a huge issue with people who oppose your rather interesting brand of "conservatism",

YOU can go to another site.

I'm pretty sure no one would mind.

Yes.. now its my fault for being upset about having a bunch of conservatives private info released

He's one of the apologists for the hacking of the convoy givesendgo and subsequent release of info on cbc.. 

Just accept the vile lefty tactics is his message and don't get upset or YOU are the issue

Edited by West
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, West said:

Yes.. now its my fault for being upset about having a bunch of conservatives private info stored.. 

He's one of the apologists for the hacking of the convoy givesendgo and subsequent release of info on cbc.. 

Just accept the vile lefty tactics is his message and don't get upset or YOU are the issue

Again, how do you know the political beliefs of the civil servant(s) who mistakenly failed to redact this information?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Nationalist said:

Really?

Yet you were OK with a 4100 page omnibus bill that the reps had only 4 days to review.

BTW...I have worked in a government bureaucracy. Something like this is not a "mistake".

Doxxing is the libbie way sadly

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Rebound said:

Again, how do you know the political beliefs of the civil servant(s) who mistakenly failed to redact this information?

Do you know how many levels of approval/review these types of things have to go through before release? 

Chances this was a "mistake" is none.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,765
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    CouchPotato
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Five of swords earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • gatomontes99 went up a rank
      Mentor
    • Matthew went up a rank
      Enthusiast
    • Matthew earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • User went up a rank
      Veteran
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...