Whoops! Likely future speaker McCarthy slips up and states the truth.

[AURaptor 1,122]

There was zero politics in the Benghazi hearings. Stunning you can't see that, still.

Can your mind even process the truth ? Don't seem like it can.

"was zero politics" ?

"Don't seem like..."?

Are you trying to write down to your level of thought?

Incapable of answering my question, you resort to the most base level of trollitude... the grammar nazi.

Hillary has lied, and been caught doing it. Doesn't bother you one bit though, does it ?

[AURaptor 1,122]

This is the kind of post that makes the accusations of her "playing the victim" so ironic. She doesn't need to "play" the victim thanks to the Republicans. Her biggest crime is she want's to be president.

After you dismiss the lying , the unethical behavior, the corruption and did I mention the lying ? Yeah, she'd done a lot of that.

[homersapien 11,357]

There was zero politics in the Benghazi hearings. Stunning you can't see that, still.

Can your mind even process the truth ? Don't seem like it can.

"was zero politics" ?

"Don't seem like..."?

Are you trying to write down to your level of thought?

Incapable of answering my question, you resort to the most base level of trollitude... the grammar nazi.

Hillary has lied, and been caught doing it. Doesn't bother you one bit though, does it ?

Yeah, I done heered that myself. Not really.

[AURaptor 1,122]

Yeah, I done heered that myself. Not really.

Huh ? In your dorkish attempt to mock me and stay clear from having to discuss the issue, you've confused yourself, it seems.

So, you have or have not heard that Hillary has lied ? Which is it ? Or do you honestly think she's done nothing wrong per her e-mails, has done everything 100% above board and there is absolutely zero to the issue of her calling Benghazi " all about a Youtube video " , or that she NEVER ever , not a single time, had ANY SecState e-mails on her server, and absolutely never ever deleted anything which contained top secret material or reference to said material, in her e-mails.

Do try and answer this one, if you can.

[japantiger 4,051]

Yep, vast right-winged conspiracy. :rolleyes:/>

His slip certainly supports that thesis.

Yeah, it's breathtaking at all the coincidences of her own doing that paint her incorrectly as untrustworthy. Falls right into the right's evil strategery.

Yeah, are you going to believe her or your own lying eyes...

[homersapien 11,357]

Yeah, I done heered that myself. Not really.

Huh ? In your dorkish attempt to mock me and stay clear from having to discuss the issue, you've confused yourself, it seems.

So, you have or have not heard that Hillary has lied ? Which is it ? Or do you honestly think she's done nothing wrong per her e-mails, has done everything 100% above board and there is absolutely zero to the issue of her calling Benghazi " all about a Youtube video " , or that she NEVER ever , not a single time, had ANY SecState e-mails on her server, and absolutely never ever deleted anything which contained top secret material or reference to said material, in her e-mails.

Do try and answer this one, if you can.

She has undoubtedly lied. All politicians lie. Every POTUS has lied and every future POTUS will lie. Every predecessor to Clinton as the Sec. of State committed similar breaches of security.

I am not defending her. She is not my candidate. I think we need a fresh approach.

But nevertheless it is clear the only reason she is under such scrutiny by Republicans is because they are trying to undermine her political campaign for the presidency. If she wasn't a candidate, none of these investigation would be occurring. McCarthy's statements simply confirmed what everyone already knows.

Your vehemence about Clinton (and Obama) is amusing. If I throw a little gas on that fire from time to time, I can assure you it's not because I like Clinton. It's more about my own entertainment. Thanks for playing.

[AURaptor 1,122]

Then you're s troll. Thanks for admitting that much.

[Grumps 3,704]

Then you're s troll. Thanks for admitting that much.

homer has been open from the beginning that many of his posts are primarily for his entertainment. Personally, I think that is dishonest.

[autigeremt 6,593]

She deserves everything she's getting thrown at her. Politics is always creeping around the edges of investigations where the other party is in play, but Hillary should be in jail.

This is the kind of post that makes the accusations of her "playing the victim" so ironic. She doesn't need to "play" the victim thanks to the Republicans. Her biggest crime is she want's to be president.

Your answer speaks volumes..... "Her biggest crime is the wants to be President"......are you !$%&^* serious?????

[homersapien 11,357]

Then you're s troll. Thanks for admitting that much.

homer has been open from the beginning that many of his posts are primarily for his entertainment. Personally, I think that is dishonest.

Dishonest?

[homersapien 11,357]

She deserves everything she's getting thrown at her. Politics is always creeping around the edges of investigations where the other party is in play, but Hillary should be in jail.

This is the kind of post that makes the accusations of her "playing the victim" so ironic. She doesn't need to "play" the victim thanks to the Republicans. Her biggest crime is she want's to be president.

Your answer speaks volumes..... "Her biggest crime is the wants to be President"......are you !$%&^* serious?????

Well, what are are crimes exactly and why hasn't she been indicted?

[homersapien 11,357]

Then you're s troll. Thanks for admitting that much.

No, I sincerely believe in every point behind every post I make.

Pick one out and try me if you don't believe it.

[Grumps 3,704]

Then you're s troll. Thanks for admitting that much.

homer has been open from the beginning that many of his posts are primarily for his entertainment. Personally, I think that is dishonest.

Dishonest? :dunno:/>

I think it is dishonest to present an opinion as your actual belief when your are really not giving your true opinion, but just trying to irritate the person to whom you are replying, primarily for your own enertainment.

[homersapien 11,357]

Then you're s troll. Thanks for admitting that much.

homer has been open from the beginning that many of his posts are primarily for his entertainment. Personally, I think that is dishonest.

Dishonest? :dunno:/>

I think it is dishonest to present an opinion as your actual belief when your are really not giving your true opinion, but just trying to irritate the person to whom you are replying, primarily for your own enertainment.

Example? Other than obvious satire, I don't remember ever submitting an opinion I didn't agree with.

[AURaptor 1,122]

Then you're s troll. Thanks for admitting that much.

homer has been open from the beginning that many of his posts are primarily for his entertainment. Personally, I think that is dishonest.

Dishonest? :dunno:/>

I think it is dishonest to present an opinion as your actual belief when your are really not giving your true opinion, but just trying to irritate the person to whom you are replying, primarily for your own enertainment.

That's the basic definition of an internet troll. Saying " stuff " simply to piss others off , for the sake of one's own amusement. JUST as homer admitted to doing.

[cptau 169]

Hopefully this does McCarthy in too, aka Boehner II.

The fact that the administration felt it necessary to create a weak political cover story for the Benghazi deaths and then dragged out a coverup of that weak cover story past the election is one issue.

Many still believe Benghazi was also a illegal arms shipment operation for the Syrian Rebels supported by the senior leadership of both parties. Thus the delay of an investigation by both parties?

What came as a by product of this was the undercovering of the illegal use of the Clinton Foundation email server to conduct official US government communications containing classified information. Mrs. Bill Clinton allowing uncleared Clinton Foundation personnel to access those classified government emails made it worse.

Mrs. Bill Clinton's statements about the email that later proved to be untrue are both politically damaging and perhaps misleading to criminal investigators.

[AURaptor 1,122]

Mrs. Bill Clinton's statements about the email that later proved to be untrue are both politically damaging and perhaps misleading to criminal investigators.

" Misleading to criminal investigators " , with intent to hide and deny information , is a criminal act, is it not ?

It's become crystal clear that Hillary has lied, multiple times, on this matter. Saying first there was State Dept. e-mails, then no top secret e-mails, then no top secret e-mails which were titled as such, only shows she's invested in trying to skirt the issue by moving the goal post further and further along. Much like " that depends on what the definition of IS is " .

[homersapien 11,357]

Then you're s troll. Thanks for admitting that much.

homer has been open from the beginning that many of his posts are primarily for his entertainment. Personally, I think that is dishonest.

Dishonest? :dunno:/>

I think it is dishonest to present an opinion as your actual belief when your are really not giving your true opinion, but just trying to irritate the person to whom you are replying, primarily for your own enertainment.

That's the basic definition of an internet troll. Saying " stuff " simply to piss others off , for the sake of one's own amusement. JUST as homer admitted to doing.

If posting counterpoints to the insane, mindless, partisan, rude and insulting posts on this forum amounts to trolling, I'll plead guilty.

The question on the table is honesty (sincerity). I want to see a single example of my dishonesty. Heck, no doubt there is at least one out there, I am human.

[homersapien 11,357]

Mrs. Bill Clinton's statements about the email that later proved to be untrue are both politically damaging and perhaps misleading to criminal investigators.

" Misleading to criminal investigators " , with intent to hide and deny information , is a criminal act, is it not ?

It's become crystal clear that Hillary has lied, multiple times, on this matter. Saying first there was State Dept. e-mails, then no top secret e-mails, then no top secret e-mails which were titled as such, only shows she's invested in trying to skirt the issue by moving the goal post further and further along. Much like " that depends on what the definition of IS is " .

Bush and Cheney lied and should be tried for war crimes because of it.

You guys act like this is some sort of unique transgression. Like I said, all politicians lie to some degree when they need do.

This business about the e-mails is relatively minor, especially without any evidence harm was done. Yeah, it does make Clinton look secretive and conniving, but she is. In fact, that could just as well make her a decent president as well as being problematic.

[homersapien 11,357]

Hopefully this does McCarthy in too, aka Boehner II.

The fact that the administration felt it necessary to create a weak political cover story for the Benghazi deaths and then dragged out a coverup of that weak cover story past the election is one issue.

Many still believe Benghazi was also a illegal arms shipment operation for the Syrian Rebels supported by the senior leadership of both parties. Thus the delay of an investigation by both parties?

What came as a by product of this was the undercovering of the illegal use of the Clinton Foundation email server to conduct official US government communications containing classified information. Mrs. Bill Clinton allowing uncleared Clinton Foundation personnel to access those classified government emails made it worse.

Mrs. Bill Clinton's statements about the email that later proved to be untrue are both politically damaging and perhaps misleading to criminal investigators.

You may be right about the "political cover" story but that assumes they felt they could get away with it indefinitely. I personally think they jumped on the video story because it was plausible (considering the riots triggered by such things) and they wanted to believe it. IMO they dragged it out by not backing off to at least, a 'we don't really know and are investigating'. That mistake was due to political incompetence, ultimately on Obama's part.

[AURaptor 1,122]

If posting counterpoints to the insane, mindless, partisan, rude and insulting posts on this forum amounts to trolling, I'll plead guilty.

But you never make the case that what others think or post is ' insane, mindless, rude or insulting '. You just make a grand declaration of your view, as if it's a fact, and commence on the snarking and trolling.

The question on the table is honesty (sincerity). I want to see a single example of my dishonesty. Heck, no doubt there is at least one out there, I am human.

Here ->

homersapien, on 01 October 2015 - 04:14 PM, said:

AURaptor, on 01 October 2015 - 03:05 PM, said:

There was zero politics in the Benghazi hearings. Stunning you can't see that, still.

Can your mind even process the truth ? Don't seem like it can.

"was zero politics" ?

"Don't seem like..."?

Are you trying to write down to your level of thought?

1st thing I said was grammatically correct. The 2nd thing I said wasn't, but still falls with in the general common parlance of Southern speak, at least in the informal sense. This is an informal board, yet you chose to ignore the points I made, and instead attempted to ridicule my grammar , as a means of dismissing my education ( AU graduate ), my intellect, and there by invalidate any of my views.

THAT is being a troll.

[AURaptor 1,122]

Bush and Cheney lied and should be tried for war crimes because of it.

The fact of the matter is, they did not lie. There is no evidence, unlike with Hillary , that Cheney or Bush knew in advance that Saddam absolutely had zero WMD or any trace of a WMD program, as was ordered by the UN. To the contrary, many examples of Saddam's WMD cache have been uncovered during and after the war, making any claims that Bush / Cheney 'lied' as totally and completely moot.

You guys act like this is some sort of unique transgression. Like I said, all politicians lie to some degree when they need do.

The issue of " some degree " seems to be an out for you and your gal Hillary ( Yeah, I know, she's not YOUR gal ... what ever ). Telling a fib, a little white lie isn't held to the same level of accountability as it is when you lie to a Federal Grand Jury ( Bill Clinton ) or break all manner of national security issues ( Hillary )

This business about the e-mails is relatively minor, especially without any evidence harm was done. Yeah, it does make Clinton look secretive and conniving, but she is. In fact, that could just as well make her a decent president as well as being problematic.

It's not minor. Sensitive State Dept and national security info is never ' minor '. If her server has been hacked and it's generally accepted that it has been, then our enemies ( Russia, China ) and who ever they damn well please, likely has access to what ever Hillary had on her UNSECURED , PRIVATE server, and not a Govt established one.

And this points to the issue of you being a troll. Either you are so dim and can't comprehend the security risk, never mind Hillary's insubordination by doing what the Obama administration told her not to do, or you simply want to play the part of the rube, saying what ever it takes to be the contrarian, and simply act dumb, just out of spite and your ' amusement '.

Which is it ?

[homersapien 11,357]

If posting counterpoints to the insane, mindless, partisan, rude and insulting posts on this forum amounts to trolling, I'll plead guilty.

But you never make the case that what others think or post is ' insane, mindless, rude or insulting '. You just make a grand declaration of your view, as if it's a fact, and commence on the snarking and trolling.

The question on the table is honesty (sincerity). I want to see a single example of my dishonesty. Heck, no doubt there is at least one out there, I am human.

Here ->

homersapien, on 01 October 2015 - 04:14 PM, said:

AURaptor, on 01 October 2015 - 03:05 PM, said:

There was zero politics in the Benghazi hearings. Stunning you can't see that, still.

Can your mind even process the truth ? Don't seem like it can.

"was zero politics" ?

"Don't seem like..."?

Are you trying to write down to your level of thought?

1st thing I said was grammatically correct. The 2nd thing I said wasn't, but still falls with in the general common parlance of Southern speak, at least in the informal sense. This is an informal board, yet you chose to ignore the points I made, and instead attempted to ridicule my grammar , as a means of dismissing my education ( AU graduate ), my intellect, and there by invalidate any of my views.

THAT is being a troll.

Were's the dishonesty?

And yeah, the misuse of grammar on an Auburn forum bothers me. I occasionally do it myself, but typically catch it later and edit it.

If goading one for such a mistake is trolling, I'll plead guilty. But it's certainly not as bad as the frequent ad-hominem insults you sprinkle most of your posts with. What would you call that, other than simply being a jerk?

[homersapien 11,357]

And this points to the issue of you being a troll. Either you are so dim and can't comprehend the security risk, never mind Hillary's insubordination by doing what the Obama administration told her not to do, or you simply want to play the part of the rube, saying what ever it takes to be the contrarian, and simply act dumb, just out of spite and your ' amusement '.

Which is it ?

You have a lot of chutzpah to imply someone else is "dim" or a "rube" while insisting that Bush and Cheney didn't lie about the need to invade Iraq. :-\

[icanthearyou 4,462]

Bush and Cheney lied and should be tried for war crimes because of it.

The fact of the matter is, they did not lie. There is no evidence, unlike with Hillary , that Cheney or Bush knew in advance that Saddam absolutely had zero WMD or any trace of a WMD program, as was ordered by the UN. To the contrary, many examples of Saddam's WMD cache have been uncovered during and after the war, making any claims that Bush / Cheney 'lied' as totally and completely moot.

You guys act like this is some sort of unique transgression. Like I said, all politicians lie to some degree when they need do.

The issue of " some degree " seems to be an out for you and your gal Hillary ( Yeah, I know, she's not YOUR gal ... what ever ). Telling a fib, a little white lie isn't held to the same level of accountability as it is when you lie to a Federal Grand Jury ( Bill Clinton ) or break all manner of national security issues ( Hillary )

This business about the e-mails is relatively minor, especially without any evidence harm was done. Yeah, it does make Clinton look secretive and conniving, but she is. In fact, that could just as well make her a decent president as well as being problematic.

It's not minor. Sensitive State Dept and national security info is never ' minor '. If her server has been hacked and it's generally accepted that it has been, then our enemies ( Russia, China ) and who ever they damn well please, likely has access to what ever Hillary had on her UNSECURED , PRIVATE server, and not a Govt established one.

And this points to the issue of you being a troll. Either you are so dim and can't comprehend the security risk, never mind Hillary's insubordination by doing what the Obama administration told her not to do, or you simply want to play the part of the rube, saying what ever it takes to be the contrarian, and simply act dumb, just out of spite and your ' amusement '.

Which is it ?

This is a lie. What was found, was exactly what was already known about, not the infamous WMDs. And, it still does not address the "active nuclear program" or "ties to Al Qaeda".