TheBlueVue 177 Posted December 28, 2015 Author Share Posted December 28, 2015 We've officially become 3rd world country if she skates unscathed. I'm confident that took place when the IRS's Lois Lerner targeted TEA party groups under 'down low ' orders from Obama, and virtually nothing happened . Correction.....NOTHING HAPPENED. Lerner retired with her $100 grand a year retirement package and the IRS continued doing what they've been doing. Hell, they're STILL doing it bro. So, your point is valid and I stand corrected; our 3rd world status was well established as it relates to EQUAL PROTECTION UNDER THE LAW before Hillary's corrupt shenanigans were considered a "simple mistake" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AU_Tiger_88 417 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/smoking-gun-email-suggests-hillary-committed-a-crime/ “I did not send nor receive anything that was classified at the time,” she has claimed. By instructing her aide to send her material marked classified, it is clear that she not only may have received classified information, but that it was indeed “classified at the time.” She needs some jail time but it probably won't happen with this administration.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,121 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 She's mentally incapable of being President. That much is clear. This woman is a habitual liar and a felon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBlueVue 177 Posted January 9, 2016 Author Share Posted January 9, 2016 Seriously, are there ANY democrats in our government who aren't pathological liars or common criminals? Just one? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,796 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 Seriously, are there ANY democrats in our government who aren't pathological liars or common criminals? Just one? Speaking of pathological... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,121 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 Seriously, are there ANY democrats in our government who aren't pathological liars or common criminals? Just one? Speaking of pathological... SOP Ignore the obvious issue of Hillary's crimes, and instead, insult fellow posters. Crassic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DKW 86 7,410 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 All my training handling classified documents leads me to one conclusion: The Elites in DC have just over ruled law. If she did this, she should be in a courtroom fighting to keep her elitist butt out of jail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,796 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 Ton of assumptions here, including the title of the thread. "I'm not going to speculate about whether the document being discussed was classified," this official added. "Generally speaking, I can say that just because a document is sent via a secure method doesn't mean that it's classified. Many documents that are created or stored on a secure system are not classified." A spokesperson for Grassley's office says it is working under the assumption the email was classified, since Clinton's aides would have had other ways to send the document to her if it wasn't, such as through email.... Kirby also said the fact that the talking points were initially set to be sent via a secure system did not necessarily mean they were classified. “Just because something, a document, is on a classified system doesn’t necessarily make the document, the content, necessarily classified,” he added. He would not say if the document was classified. An earlier exchange between Sullivan and Clinton also included discussion of State's secure email system. Sullivan told Clinton in February 2010 that he couldn’t send her a Mideast peace-related statement former British Prime Minister Tony Blair. Clinton seemed irritated: “It's a public statement! Just email it,” she wrote. Sullivan responded by explaining it was impossible to send her the information she wanted because it was stuck in State’s classified system: “Trust me, I share your exasperation. But until ops converts it to the unclassified email system, there is no physical way for me to email it. I can't even access it,” Sullivan wrote. Read more: http://www.politico....0#ixzz3wl5wEszo It was her talking points. To whom? If it was the press, would that have been classified? We don't know. It warrants scrutiny, but the scrutiny should precede the histrionics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBlueVue 177 Posted January 9, 2016 Author Share Posted January 9, 2016 Ton of assumptions here, including the title of the thread. "I'm not going to speculate about whether the document being discussed was classified," this official added. "Generally speaking, I can say that just because a document is sent via a secure method doesn't mean that it's classified. Many documents that are created or stored on a secure system are not classified." A spokesperson for Grassley's office says it is working under the assumption the email was classified, since Clinton's aides would have had other ways to send the document to her if it wasn't, such as through email.... Kirby also said the fact that the talking points were initially set to be sent via a secure system did not necessarily mean they were classified. “Just because something, a document, is on a classified system doesn’t necessarily make the document, the content, necessarily classified,” he added. He would not say if the document was classified. An earlier exchange between Sullivan and Clinton also included discussion of State's secure email system. Sullivan told Clinton in February 2010 that he couldn’t send her a Mideast peace-related statement former British Prime Minister Tony Blair. Clinton seemed irritated: “It's a public statement! Just email it,” she wrote. Sullivan responded by explaining it was impossible to send her the information she wanted because it was stuck in State’s classified system: “Trust me, I share your exasperation. But until ops converts it to the unclassified email system, there is no physical way for me to email it. I can't even access it,” Sullivan wrote. Read more: http://www.politico....0#ixzz3wl5wEszo It was her talking points. To whom? If it was the press, would that have been classified? We don't know. It warrants scrutiny, but the scrutiny should precede the histrionics. Dude, the talking points were about conversation she had with Lavrov about several geopolitical hot issues. Also, Jake Sullivan was no intern..he had been with Hillary for the duration and would know if something needed to be sent via secure connection. Seems you're making the assumptions. he had tried for hours and hours to get the documnet sent through secured connection. Do you honestly believe these are simply talking points that she was going to quote verbatim on TV? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,796 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 Ton of assumptions here, including the title of the thread. "I'm not going to speculate about whether the document being discussed was classified," this official added. "Generally speaking, I can say that just because a document is sent via a secure method doesn't mean that it's classified. Many documents that are created or stored on a secure system are not classified." A spokesperson for Grassley's office says it is working under the assumption the email was classified, since Clinton's aides would have had other ways to send the document to her if it wasn't, such as through email.... Kirby also said the fact that the talking points were initially set to be sent via a secure system did not necessarily mean they were classified. “Just because something, a document, is on a classified system doesn’t necessarily make the document, the content, necessarily classified,” he added. He would not say if the document was classified. An earlier exchange between Sullivan and Clinton also included discussion of State's secure email system. Sullivan told Clinton in February 2010 that he couldn’t send her a Mideast peace-related statement former British Prime Minister Tony Blair. Clinton seemed irritated: “It's a public statement! Just email it,” she wrote. Sullivan responded by explaining it was impossible to send her the information she wanted because it was stuck in State’s classified system: “Trust me, I share your exasperation. But until ops converts it to the unclassified email system, there is no physical way for me to email it. I can't even access it,” Sullivan wrote. Read more: http://www.politico....0#ixzz3wl5wEszo It was her talking points. To whom? If it was the press, would that have been classified? We don't know. It warrants scrutiny, but the scrutiny should precede the histrionics. Dude, the talking points were about conversation she had with Lavrov about several geopolitical hot issues. Also, Jake Sullivan was no intern..he had been with Hillary for the duration and would know if something needed to be sent via secure connection. Seems you're making the assumptions. he had tried for hours and hours to get the documnet sent through secured connection. Do you honestly believe these are simply talking points that she was going to quote verbatim on TV? Don't know, but you don't know they were classified, either. I provided a rational, adult response-- it bears scrutiny. You and others provide the histrionics. Dude. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,347 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 Seriously, are there ANY democrats in our government who aren't pathological liars or common criminals? Just one? Speaking of pathological... SOP Ignore the obvious issue of Hillary's crimes, and instead, insult fellow posters. :-\ Look at the post to which he was responding and stop lying. That post was a crazy (pathological) thing to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,121 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 :-\ Look at the post to which he was responding and stop lying. That post was a crazy (pathological) thing to say. Oh, I'm sure there are " some " democrats out there who aren't pathological liars and cheats, but over all, it's not remotely a crazy thing to say. Hillary - pathological liar Bill - pathological liar Obama - pathological liar Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,796 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 :-\/> Look at the post to which he was responding and stop lying. That post was a crazy (pathological) thing to say. Oh, I'm sure there are " some " democrats out there who aren't pathological liars and cheats, but over all, it's not remotely a crazy thing to say. Hillary - pathological liar Bill - pathological liar Obama - pathological liar That statement only demonstrates your own pathological hatred. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,121 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 :-\/> Look at the post to which he was responding and stop lying. That post was a crazy (pathological) thing to say. Oh, I'm sure there are " some " democrats out there who aren't pathological liars and cheats, but over all, it's not remotely a crazy thing to say. Hillary - pathological liar Bill - pathological liar Obama - pathological liar That statement only demonstrates your own pathological hatred. Hatred, no question. But how is it pathological to hate those who are evil ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,796 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 :-\/> Look at the post to which he was responding and stop lying. That post was a crazy (pathological) thing to say. Oh, I'm sure there are " some " democrats out there who aren't pathological liars and cheats, but over all, it's not remotely a crazy thing to say. Hillary - pathological liar Bill - pathological liar Obama - pathological liar That statement only demonstrates your own pathological hatred. Hatred, no question. But how is it pathological to hate those who are evil ? It's crazy to think everyone you oppose as evil. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,121 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 It's crazy to think everyone you oppose as evil. I oppose them because they are evil. They are evil because they knowingly lie. Really not that hard to figure out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,796 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 It's crazy to think everyone you oppose as evil. I oppose them because they are evil. They are evil because they knowingly lie. Really not that hard to figure out. You're also either ignorant of what a pathological liar is, or delusional. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,121 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 It's crazy to think everyone you oppose as evil. I oppose them because they are evil. They are evil because they knowingly lie. Really not that hard to figure out. You're also either ignorant of what a pathological liar is, or delusional. Or too honest for you to deal with, apparently. Hillary lied about being shot at by sniper fire on the tarmac while in Bosnia. She had no real reason to lie, but to make herself look more heroic. Obama knowingly lied about ObamaCare. He's also lied about a great many other things too, some very large. Benghazi, along w/ Hillary, comes to mind. Bill lost his law license and was heavily fined for lying. See, there's nothing can do or say which will back up your claims that I either don't know what I'm talking about, or show in any way that I'm " delusional ". The problem for you is that you refuse to accept reality as it is. You insist on seeing things through a prism Left wing spin and MSM propaganda. When I or anyone else pull back the veil and show you the man behind the curtain, you call US crazy, and refuse to deal w/ the facts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,796 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 It's crazy to think everyone you oppose as evil. I oppose them because they are evil. They are evil because they knowingly lie. Really not that hard to figure out. You're also either ignorant of what a pathological liar is, or delusional. Or too honest for you to deal with, apparently. Hillary lied about being shot at by sniper fire on the tarmac while in Bosnia. She had no real reason to lie, but to make herself look more heroic. Obama knowingly lied about ObamaCare. He's also lied about a great many other things too, some very large. Benghazi, along w/ Hillary, comes to mind. Bill lost his law license and was heavily fined for lying. See, there's nothing can do or say which will back up your claims that I either don't know what I'm talking about, or show in any way that I'm " delusional ". The problem for you is that you refuse to accept reality as it is. You insist on seeing things through a prism Left wing spin and MSM propaganda. When I or anyone else pull back the veil and show you the man behind the curtain, you call US crazy, and refuse to deal w/ the facts. Never claimed they had never lied, but I don't know anyone who hasn't. Especially politicians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,121 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 Never claimed they had never lied, but I don't know anyone who hasn't. Especially politicians. This goes well beyond merely " lying ", and you know it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,347 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 :-\/> Look at the post to which he was responding and stop lying. That post was a crazy (pathological) thing to say. Oh, I'm sure there are " some " democrats out there who aren't pathological liars and cheats, but over all, it's not remotely a crazy thing to say. Hillary - pathological liar Bill - pathological liar Obama - pathological liar That statement only demonstrates your own pathological hatred. Hatred, no question. But how is it pathological to hate those who are evil ? The King of Irony strikes again! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,347 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 It's crazy to think everyone you oppose as evil. I oppose them because they are evil. They are evil because they knowingly lie. Really not that hard to figure out. And then he doubles down! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AURaptor 1,121 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 It's crazy to think everyone you oppose as evil. I oppose them because they are evil. They are evil because they knowingly lie. Really not that hard to figure out. And then he doubles down! Why wouldn't I ? They're liars. It's not up for debate. And homie, the huge difference between me and said Democrats is that I can list their lies, one after another. You can't list ONE of mine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homersapien 11,347 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 It's crazy to think everyone you oppose as evil. I oppose them because they are evil. They are evil because they knowingly lie. Really not that hard to figure out. And then he doubles down! Why wouldn't I ? They're liars. It's not up for debate. And homie, the huge difference between me and said Democrats is that I can list their lies, one after another. You can't list ONE of mine. That there is one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AUUSN 823 Posted January 10, 2016 Share Posted January 10, 2016 I'm guessing most people freaking out about this have never used a classified system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.