Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > Comey

Comey (Page 7)
Thread Tools
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 17, 2018, 12:27 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
In the 20/20 clip he says his wife and daughters voted for HRC and participated in the 1/21 march.
And when you see "lifelong Republicans" doing things like that, what's your interpretation? Are they quitters? Were they wooed by false promises and fake news? Deceived by lies? I know some "lifelong Republicans" that have been voting that way for 50 years that voted Democrat for the first time in their lives in 2016. Self-made millionaires that have supported conservative, moral, Republican values their entire lives that couldn't stomach what they were seeing from the Republican party.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Apr 17, 2018, 12:29 PM
 
I blame their wives and daughters.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 17, 2018, 08:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Is it not readily apparent this argument hinges on knowledge of Hillary’s innocence?
This is true of any criminal investigation, isn't it? That's why usually investigations should be kept under wraps. If through no fault of your own you get erroneously suspected of possessing child pornography and this leaks out, then this may have disastrous consequences even if you are cleared of all charges later on.

This is what happened to Clinton during the election: the email affair drowned out all policy discussion.
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Comey did not have this information available to him when he made the decision.
He did not have what information available? Whether or not Clinton should be prosecuted? If so, that's my entire point: shut up until, and only say something if the accusations are strong enough to warrant prosecution.
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
In the 20/20 clip he says his wife and daughters voted for HRC and participated in the 1/21 march.
And? Do you require your wife to vote Republican just because you identify as one? I hope not. Moreover, party membership is not a contract that forces the member to vote for the party's candidate. I know plenty of people who belong to a party but have voted for another party's candidate in exceptional circumstances.

In any case, you connect the fact that Comey's wife voted for Clinton with Comey not being able to do his job, which is non-sense.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2018, 11:34 AM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
This is true of any criminal investigation, isn't it? That's why usually investigations should be kept under wraps. If through no fault of your own you get erroneously suspected of possessing child pornography and this leaks out, then this may have disastrous consequences even if you are cleared of all charges later on.

This is what happened to Clinton during the election: the email affair drowned out all policy discussion.
Is this arguing Comey and Lynch were mistaken in making the original announcement?

I’m not asking about the Weiner laptop announcement days before the election. I’m talking about the original announcement her emails were an “FBI matter”?
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2018, 11:55 AM
 
chongos posts in this thread remind me of an outdated joke from the 90s:

"A man can **** all the women he wants, but if he sucks one dick he's gay forever."
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2018, 12:03 PM
 
I always heard it as “if you **** one goat...”
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2018, 02:18 PM
 
oh no! women not voting the way their menfolk decree! Quick, stone them! But wait, OR DID THEY OBEY?!?!?!

     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2018, 04:44 PM
 
Or did he obey?
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2018, 05:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Or did he obey?
Cuck!
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2018, 08:37 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Is this arguing Comey and Lynch were mistaken in making the original announcement?

I’m not asking about the Weiner laptop announcement days before the election. I’m talking about the original announcement her emails were an “FBI matter”?
I think both were problematic, but the “re-opening” in particular.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2018, 10:49 PM
 
What made the original less so?
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2018, 10:51 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Or did he obey?
By spilling on the new investigation days before the election?
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 18, 2018, 11:38 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
What made the original less so?
What makes it worse is that it is a repeated mistake, ignoring the consequences (by confirming the existence just before the actual election). The election coverage was already dominated by the Clinton email scandal, and the main allegation — mishandling of classified information — had nothing to do with the actual content of the emails. There was no bombshell email amongst the ones discovered on Weiner's laptop, and even if new evidence relevant to the FBI investigation turned up, Comey should have followed protocol rather than do what was politically expedient.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2018, 01:03 AM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
and the main allegation — mishandling of classified information — had nothing to do with the actual content of the emails.
I’m chewing on this post, but this part confuses me. Can I bother you for a rephrase?
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2018, 02:12 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I’m chewing on this post, but this part confuses me. Can I bother you for a rephrase?
What mattered for the investigation was whether classified information was mishandled, and whether that mishandling should result in criminal charges against Clinton. What was not relevant was infighting amongst Democrats, strategizing as far as the election goes and pasta recipes. Plus all the gossip about Weiner. The only question about the content is whether or not amongst the emails on Weiner's computer contained classified information. Apart from that the content of the emails didn't matter (recipes, plotting against Bernie Sanders, etc.).

Plus, given Abedin's position within the Clinton campaign, there was a natural reason why Clinton campaign emails would be found on her ex-husband's computer (hint: nothing nefarious went on here), and the chance that evidence would be uncovered that would have reversed the FBI's conclusion on the Clinton investigation was exceedingly remote. (Looking into it was the right thing to do on the FBI's part, but given the circumstances, should have been handled differently.)

Of course some people in the media reacted as if they had found the proverbial tapes, proof of Pizzagate and reveled in the Democrat's embarrassment that Anthony Weiner had become.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2018, 04:00 AM
 
Thank you!

Still chewing, but didn’t want to let my appreciation for the response wait.
     
Chongo
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Phoenix, Arizona
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2018, 11:57 AM
 
Quick summary:
HRC said:
No classified emails on server, there were.
Not marked classified at the time sent or received, they were, including special access.
Did not know what “C” meant, she did and there is a signed form acknowledging her receiving training on handling of classified information.
I had only once device, she had numerous and many were destroyed with a hammer.

Comey, under oath, stated he made the decision after HRC was interviewed. We now know he was drafting the 07/16 statement BEFORE HRC or any of her staff was interviewed.
He admitted under oath to giving classified memos to a friend to leak to the press.
"The blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church" Saint Tertullian, 197 AD
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2018, 01:11 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
The only question about the content is whether or not amongst the emails on Weiner's computer contained classified information. Apart from that the content of the emails didn't matter
Unless Comey lied in the interview on Sunday, this is incorrect.

The emails they found on Weiner’s laptop were emails they hadn’t seen from before Hillary set up her server. What they were looking for was discussion about the server which indicated they knew they were acting improperly by setting it up.


JAMES COMEY: ...She used a Blackberry for the first three months or so of her tenure as secretary of State before setting up the personal server in the basement. And the reason that matters so much is, if there was gonna be a smoking gun, where Hillary Clinton was told, "Don't do this," or, "This is improper," it's highly likely to be at the beginning.
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2018, 01:26 PM
 
I wonder how much classified info is on Jared Kushner's server.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2018, 01:37 PM
 
If there is, I’m not going to get in anyone’s way if they want to pursue it. I’ve got plenty of popcorn.
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 19, 2018, 02:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by Chongo View Post
Comey, under oath, stated he made the decision after HRC was interviewed. We now know he was drafting the 07/16 statement BEFORE HRC or any of her staff was interviewed.
He admitted under oath to giving classified memos to a friend to leak to the press.
Which of these two statements fits you best:

"I am outraged at mishandling of classified information."
"I don't like Democrats."
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2018, 11:43 AM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
What makes it worse is that it is a repeated mistake, ignoring the consequences (by confirming the existence just before the actual election). The election coverage was already dominated by the Clinton email scandal, and the main allegation — mishandling of classified information — had nothing to do with the actual content of the emails. There was no bombshell email amongst the ones discovered on Weiner's laptop, and even if new evidence relevant to the FBI investigation turned up, Comey should have followed protocol rather than do what was politically expedient.
While this commentary is useful to understanding your position, it doesn’t really answer my question, which was what was wrong with the original announcement of the emails being an “FBI matter”

Both the DoJ and the FBI thought this was the right thing to do under the circumstances. Protocol says this is allowed if the situation warrants. The example Comey gave is the FBI also announced an ongoing investigation with Ferguson.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2018, 01:20 PM
 
Originally Posted by Laminar View Post
Which of these two statements fits you best:

"I am outraged at mishandling of classified information."
"I don't like Democrats."
I know I wasn’t asked but I’ll answer anyway.

As a general principle, I'm outraged by the mishandling of classified information, buuuuuut she was the frigging Secretary of State. Even if she doesn’t have the legal authority, I’m not that angry about her declassifying stuff on the fly.

What I’m mad about is the reason she apparently used the server in the first place is she was worried about leaks. IOW, on the chance the wrong American might read it, she handed it over to every foreign intelligence service on the planet.

And then she lied about it for a year straight. I was much more vociferous about the classified part at the time than I am now because I was reacting to her insistence it never happened.
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2018, 02:12 PM
 
The obvious followup question that the leading question was pointing to is, "Do you express outrage similar in magnitude and longevity to the current administration's mishandling of classified data?"

And then it's obvious that Chongo couldn't give two shits about the handling of classified data, only what letter comes after a politician's name.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2018, 02:26 PM
 
The ultimate problem with this is the lack of consistency.

Serious question: why does consistency matter?

Serious second question: is Chongo truly being inconsistent? That setup wouldn’t have worked unless you were able to predict his response. That it can be predicted implies there must be some form of consistency on display, right?
     
Laminar
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Iowa, how long can this be? Does it really ruin the left column spacing?
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2018, 03:03 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
The ultimate problem with this is the lack of consistency.

Serious question: why does consistency matter?

Serious second question: is Chongo truly being inconsistent? That setup wouldn’t have worked unless you were able to predict his response. That it can be predicted implies there must be some form of consistency on display, right?
My main problem lies in the difference between stated values and actual values.

There's no way to have a productive discussion with someone that's lying to you, let alone someone that is lying to him or herself.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2018, 04:08 PM
 
I’d say the actual value in this case could be stated as “I’m a team player”.

However, I believe there is truly enormous pressure, both cultural and biological, to disallow this as a stated value. It’s just too damn flexible an idea to fit into how values are discussed, and how we’re programmed to think of them. If values are this flexible, there’s no justification for sticking to them.

That’s a bad adaptation, because having a value system confers a huge advantage upon a social organism.


The result? The actual value gets replaced with stated values that more readily fit the paradigm of how we think and discuss values.

More importantly, it’s so deeply ingrained I am fully convinced that more often than not people don’t even realize they’re doing it. We’re built to work this way.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2018, 09:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
While this commentary is useful to understanding your position, it doesn’t really answer my question, which was what was wrong with the original announcement of the emails being an “FBI matter”
That's because the FBI selectively applied different standards to different candidates on the basis of political considerations, that's why. Comey made this decision to protect the FBI (and himself) from criticism by the majority party in Congress, the GOP, under the assumption Hillary Clinton would win the election. That is not what you should base these decisions on.

Even if you believe voters deserved to know about the emails on Weiner's laptop before the election (which is a consideration divorced from the criminal investigation and a political one), I would argue that an official investigation into Russian connections of Trump affiliates also merits that. Again, Comey based his decision on what he thought the most likely outcome of the election was. And I don't think this is the right mental model for the head of the FBI.

If you want to have a model for what seems to be a well-run investigation, then it is Mueller's investigation: there are no leaks, no announcements by Mueller and his team about progress (apart from mandatory court filings, plea agreements and such which need to be made public anyway), etc. So far it seems that neither party politics nor the upcoming mid-term elections play a role in Mueller's considerations. That's as it should be.
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Both the DoJ and the FBI thought this was the right thing to do under the circumstances. Protocol says this is allowed if the situation warrants. The example Comey gave is the FBI also announced an ongoing investigation with Ferguson.
Just because DoJ and FBI thought that this was the right thing to do (Comey evidently thought so), doesn't mean I have to agree with their assessment. The situation in Ferguson is not comparable either.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2018, 09:58 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Unless Comey lied in the interview on Sunday, this is incorrect.
You are twisting my words here. The investigation was about mishandling of classified information, and certainly this includes the question whether there was intent.
Originally Posted by subego View Post
The emails they found on Weiner’s laptop were emails they hadn’t seen from before Hillary set up her server. What they were looking for was discussion about the server which indicated they knew they were acting improperly by setting it up.
You are getting completely side tracked by something that I don't consider relevant for our discussion: this is not about rehashing the Clinton email server story, but about whether Comey should have announced that they found the emails before they have had a chance to sift through them (which only took a week or so if memory serves).

If the investigation had been run Mueller style, the Weiner laptop emails would have been discovered, things would have been kept under wraps, the emails would have been analyzed whether they are relevant to the email server investigation, and whether they warrant the case to be re-opened. And because the FBI came to the conclusion that they were not, no announcement should have been made.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2018, 10:07 PM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
The ultimate problem with this is the lack of consistency.

Serious question: why does consistency matter?
Counter question: you don't see a problem in being hypocritical?
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Apr 20, 2018, 10:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
You are twisting my words here. The investigation was about mishandling of classified information, and certainly this includes the question whether there was intent.
I’m willing to drop this and focus on the more relevant statements, but it’s not twisting your words to interpret “the only question about the content is whether or not amongst the emails on Weiner's computer contained classified information” as meaning whether the laptop contained classified information is the only question about the content.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 21, 2018, 12:17 AM
 
I think you are focusing on hair splitting and take that bit out of context. In my post I was comparing information pertinent to work he investigation to gossip, infighting and campaign-related matters. Of cours you could add a number of ancillary crimes I did not explicitly mention. None of that is particularly relevant to our discussion, though.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Apr 21, 2018, 12:26 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
I think you are focusing on hair splitting and take that bit out of context. In my post I was comparing information pertinent to work he investigation to gossip, infighting and campaign-related matters. Of cours you could add a number of ancillary crimes I did not explicitly mention. None of that is particularly relevant to our discussion, though.
Again. I said I was willing to drop it and focus on more relevant discussion, the important part is Comey wasn’t looking to see whether Weiner’s laptop contained classified information.

Since the point was stated in a way which could be interpreted he was, I feel Comey deserves to have it made clear.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Apr 21, 2018, 01:23 PM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
Just because DoJ and FBI thought that this was the right thing to do (Comey evidently thought so), doesn't mean I have to agree with their assessment. The situation in Ferguson is not comparable either.
I’m not insisting on agreement.

I’m challenging the assertion Comey made the decision. It was Comey and Lynch. Lynch outranks Comey. Lynch not only okayed the announcement, she acted as editor.

Likewise, I am challenging the assertion they did not follow protocol. The protocol is not to discuss a case unless the situation warrants. Their decision cannot be dismissed by merely saying they did not follow protocol. It must be shown as unwarranted. I can see disagreement about the Weiner announcement. Not so much about the original. The investigation was, for all intents and purposes, public knowledge when it was announced.
     
The Final Dakar
Games Meister
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Eternity
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Apr 24, 2018, 08:52 PM
 
The guy who Comey appointed and prosecuted Scooter Libby, who was just pardoned, has just been hired as Comey's lawyer

This is the most hackneyed script I've ever read.
     
OreoCookie
Moderator
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Hilbert space
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 05:38 AM
 
Originally Posted by subego View Post
Likewise, I am challenging the assertion they did not follow protocol. The protocol is not to discuss a case unless the situation warrants.
I don't know why, but you get hung up on protocol: I am saying they made the wrong decision, because they let political considerations lead their decision making. So far you have not addressed this point at all. You also did not explain whether this narrow exception to the rule applies in the three cases we are talking about here.
Originally Posted by subego View Post
I can see disagreement about the Weiner announcement. Not so much about the original. The investigation was, for all intents and purposes, public knowledge when it was announced.
I think that is not an argument for several reasons: first of all, it is clear that some of the leaks came from the FBI, and as the head of the FBI it is Comey's responsibility to make sure that such sensitive investigations do not leak to the press. Mueller's investigation practically does not leak, at least not from the inside (as far as I can tell, the “leaks” come from witnesses Mueller's team has interviewed). Secondly, just because someone leaks (e. g. GOP Congressmen who were kept apprised) doesn't mean the FBI can just start confirming these things on the record. And lastly, to contrast and compare this to the FBI's investigation into the Trump campaign, before the election Comey and the FBI denied to openly say there was evidence that the Russian efforts were designed to help then-candidate Trump for fear of influencing the election. And that is despite their now well-documented efforts (that include obtaining FISA warrants for various Trump campaign officials, including his campaign manager). If you are less charitable, you'd call that lying.
I don't suffer from insanity, I enjoy every minute of it.
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 07:52 AM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
I don't know why, but you get hung up on protocol
It’s in response to the following assertions:

Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
...he should have followed procedure on this. That's what procedure is for...
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
Comey should have followed protocol rather than do what was politically expedient.

To get back on track, I’m trying to find out what your issue is with the original announcement the FBI was investigating Clinton. The one made before she was nominated.

Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
I think both were problematic.
Why is this first announcement an investigation was occurring problematic? If protocol wasn’t the issue, then what? Clinton knew she was being investigated, and her campaign was talking about it publicly. What was problematic about announcing what the principal had publicly admitted?
     
subego  (op)
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Bang! Bang!
Status: Online
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 08:37 AM
 
Originally Posted by OreoCookie View Post
Counter question: you don't see a problem in being hypocritical?
Sorry I missed this!

I’m going to assume what’s meant here is “double-standard”.

I can’t be a team player without having a double standard. That’s ultimately what being a team player is. My team is judged by a different standard for no reason other than it’s my team.

To put this into stark terms, I can see a problem with double-standards, or I can be on a winning team.

I lean towards the former, with expected results.
     
andi*pandi
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: inside 128, north of 90
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Yesterday, 10:46 AM
 
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:26 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,