Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

nhgeek2004 t1_je7ylp2 wrote

Accountability is a real bother for today's busy leader.

127

pumpkinpatch1982 t1_je8dtxf wrote

I mean just take a look at all the bullshit to get the Laurie list released. There should always be accountability and those in power need to be held accountable if they screw up. I just wonder about all the stuff that we don't hear about.

29

valleyman02 t1_je8842r wrote

It's not easy creating outrage. Give the poor billionaires a break?

9

mindi4nh OP t1_je7swbo wrote

“They really belong to the public. They don’t belong to the governor or to the staff….The people of the state have a right to a complete history… and they have a right to have records preserved.” Thank you Paul. #RighttoKnow

105

smartest_kobold t1_je7wf3n wrote

I wonder what he's doing that he needs to destroy the evidence so urgently.

68

DigTreasure t1_jeaw4bm wrote

You haven't heard about SVB, and it's ties to NH, and Mexican cartels? All with the approval from Gov SnoopSnoop

7

MistakenLabotomy t1_je961z6 wrote

Sununu: " I'm for small, transparent government, but that government is a dictatorship and not transparent at all. Oh yea and no weed you stinky hippies."

53

sgtragequit t1_jeabba8 wrote

if nh doesnt wanna legalize, im more than happy paying maines taxes for it ¯\(ツ)/¯

6

MistakenLabotomy t1_jeaeju5 wrote

Absolutely! I'll support all the surrounding states that have legal trees. Maine is kind of a hike and I only get to MA once in a while. It would be nice to be able to stop on my way home from work. Black market for now I guess.

2

Jotch777 t1_jebjbsc wrote

There will never be a NH Governor who votes for legalization before it’s federally legal, as they want to control it like liquor and only have it at the state stores.

4

KrissaKray t1_jeeiupw wrote

You can tell these potheads this over and over but it will never sink in.

0

AstroPen4 t1_je80gap wrote

what’s he hiding? 🤨

44

dark_frog t1_je9uixr wrote

He's not sure, that's why everything has to go

7

InevitableMeh t1_je9bib3 wrote

It should be 7 years across the government to allow for legal statute of limitations for potential investigations.

22

beyond_hatred t1_je9undq wrote

It should be indefinite. There's no technical reason why the state can't retain all records permanently. Storage and archiving are cheap.

Also, some crimes don't have a time limitation for how long they can be prosecuted. If the records are there 50 years back, it might make all the difference.

Also, the statute of limitations for any given crime is enforced by the courts. It should not be short-circuited by a state employee pre-emptively destroying potential evidence.

18

alkatori t1_jea7hnr wrote

It's because they don't want the liability and potential costs of investigation. You're right, it could be stored indefinitely. It's likely not worth keeping all records after 10 or 20 years vs the continual cost of storing it. But certainly longer than 30 days.

I used to work in public safety, 911 systems primarily.

Chicago holds 911 and radio recordings for 90 days.

They could hold them longer with the equipment they have. They don't want to. They want to be able to respond to all information requests with the fact that they only retain data for 90 days.

5

jeagerkinght t1_jeb2n2y wrote

Currently building a storage server for a municipal government in central NH, storage is not "cheap". I certainly agree that records should be kept for longer than 30 days, but indefinite is also way too long. The 7 years comment seems appropriate

3

Happy_Confection90 t1_jef5wuy wrote

But it's 2023. You don't have to keep physical copies to store files indefinitely. All you need is a scanner and a server that fits in a closet sized room.

2

jeagerkinght t1_jef8m3z wrote

Oh I agree completely, digital is the way to go, but by no means is digital storage "cheap". Cheaper than it used to be? Certainly. But not "cheap", especially on a government budget.

To throw this into perspective, the city that I work for is spending $82k on 50ish TB of storage and backing that up. And that doesn't include the operating system to run on the server, nor the power to actually run it. Thats just the physical system. Not to mention that that hardware is only good for so long, then it need to be replaced and all that data needs to be migrated. And you need to pay someone to manage that server to make sure nothing gets corrupted or lost due to unforeseen hardware failure.

I still think that this data should be kept for 7 years, maybe longer, but no matter how you store it, it's not "cheap".

1

Fraggle-of-the-rock t1_jea7if0 wrote

You’d be surprised to know how many divisions in the State actually still use physical files. The division I work for has to keep physical files and record’s because our computer system is 20+ years old, not internet based and can’t support saving documents. Basically, it’s a simple database. If our records go up in smoke, we’ve got very little info to run on. That’s the least of the worries though.

2

impvlerlord t1_je9bbp0 wrote

Scumnunu is transparent — in the sense that anybody with half a brain can see through his bullshit and see that he’s a typical nepo-baby, for the business & not the people politician like virtually every other politician in this country.

17

agent_tits t1_je9pkno wrote

I appreciate the sentiment but surely we can do better than Scumnunu.

Poonunu? Sunono?

2

impvlerlord t1_je9pyad wrote

Lmao, a guy at work always calls him that and while not the smoothest of wordplay, it gets the point across 😂

I’ve heard Sunono before though, that’s a good one as well considering his veto record

3

agent_tits t1_jeak1ze wrote

Lmao I can’t argue with that.

Admittedly as soon as I started trying to improve upon it I had nothing good lol

Maybe just “that guy who’s John Sununu’s brother and son”

2

impvlerlord t1_jeb8ikb wrote

Honestly the last one would probably piss him off the most 😂😂

1

KrissaKray t1_jeeizod wrote

Changing politicians' names to mock them is max level cringe for adults.

1

agent_tits t1_jeeluyx wrote

So is saying “max level cringe” as a singular adjective but here we both are, racing to the bottom

2

KrissaKray t1_jeeml89 wrote

I don’t take criticism from people who change people’s names like children.

−2

agent_tits t1_jeen8o9 wrote

Lol I tried to make this odd confrontation sort of fun, but yikes

1

nixstyx t1_je84a29 wrote

Could someone with a subscription tell me what kind of records we're talking about?

16

Galvitron420 t1_je85h7j wrote

Emails, memos, text, documents, drafts

When you click the link, click the AA at the top of the screen it will give you the option to “show reader” click that and you can read without a subscription, works for most paywalled things in my experience.

20

Auntienursey t1_je8hn2l wrote

Yep, a replusican through and through, doing shady shit and doesn't want a paper trail

10

bigmikekbd t1_je9cylf wrote

The records are not theirs to destroy.

9

philm162 t1_je90w6t wrote

This will come back to haunt his presidential ambitions.

6

kitchinsink t1_je9lv7k wrote

Yeah, no. This is not defensible. Transparency is really important, and this isn't it.

4

Wasteland_Mystic t1_jea0d5e wrote

I work in an industry where all records must be saved. Not just for weeks, months or years. Forever. Why? Because the Federal Government told us we need to. We had everything on paper records for the longest time and are moved over to almost 100% digital record keeping. It is doable. There is no good reason why we don’t have this for all government offices.

3

TreeHuggingHippyMan t1_jeb9wr3 wrote

What’s he afraid of in his prenup for the Presidency. Chump is too transparent . Sort of reminds me of how Trump broadcast his signals wY early 😆

3

ImportantImplement9 t1_jeagncw wrote

I can only see the headline, but this is completely unacceptable!!

Wish I could read the whole thing :-\

2

casewood123 t1_jeatb58 wrote

Those fuckers have no problem keeping records on us plebes for perpetuity.

2

cringequeenxd t1_jebzdgc wrote

and here i thought this man couldn’t get any stupider

2

gvuio t1_jecibu2 wrote

It is NH policy to purge records. To get a casino dealer license you have to get fingerprinted every year. Why? The state police purges the records yearly. Can’t trust that pesky cloud!

1

CLS4L t1_je9eug7 wrote

We a criminal is president his people had their hand in the cookie jar. Oh you in trouble now

0

DOGO8991 t1_je9o8dc wrote

I have a hard time understanding why anyone lives in NH when every surrounding state is superior

−11

distressefakeleather t1_je9qmd2 wrote

This is a pretty egregious misuse of power, but the state itself is a fantastic place to live in general. Many people can find a lifestyle they desire in so many different parts of the state.

A politician or political engines misuse of power in a state can have a slow but impactful effect on everyday life of the citizens. But with the cycle being what it is and the NH house being so large any meaningful change for better or worse is hard to come by.

9

slumberlust t1_je9t56e wrote

> Many people can find a lifestyle they desire in so many different parts of the state.

This is true of every surrounding state as well. What about NH do you specifically think is attractive? The whites are great.

1

alkatori t1_jea7tht wrote

For the most part. My family is here. :)

I wouldn't want to move to MA due to their gun laws.

ME and VT are just as nice as NH. I personally think VT is a more beautiful state up north.

2

distressefakeleather t1_jea9r1d wrote

In central NH, proximity to the mountains, ocean, and cities large (Boston) and small. One thing I wish was better: the food. But this is getting better in recent years.

2

NathanVfromPlus t1_je9vgjf wrote

The rhetoric of "[Region X] is bad, so people should just leave there" isn't really helpful at all. It overlooks the many challenges that might keep people from leaving their homes. You could just as easily say the same thing about the people living in Yemen, or Detroit, or Palestine, or West Virginia, or Ukraine, or Florida. "If it's such a horrible place to live, then why don't the people there just leave?" Because it's really not that easy.

4