2016 Election

Status
Not open for further replies.
#4,778
#4,778
carlos86 said:
like???
Click to expand...

You are a "baby". (Don't take offense)

You will find as you get older, your views on politics will change. Opinions on various things that you might find important now, will change.

When I started a family and started my own business, I found my "values" changed. It happens to everyone that has a brain.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#4,780
#4,780
IBlvNTmWrk said:
wow... Bernie just played the "Jesse Jackson is a friend of mine" quote on Meet The Press when asked about his relationships with minorities. He even campaigned for Jackson in '98 and helped him win the state of NH.
Click to expand...

Jesse is a great shakedown thug.. Donate to my cause or I will unleash hell you city and business.. Maybe an nice fire or looting..
 
#4,781
#4,781
Grand Vol said:
The relevant question is...

Why don't you like him?

Which you avoided.
Click to expand...

For the same reasons that I do not like Obama. Both men think they are smarter than everyone else in the room. Both men are narcissistic liars. Both men 90% of the time have no idea what in the hell they are talking about and 90% have no idea what is going on in the world. Both men have no clear picture of the bigger larger worldview, lack ability, and understanding of domestic policy and America's role in foreign policy. In other words I don't like stupid people and I really don't like stupid people who believe that they are smarter than the people who have more experience, intelligence and wherewithal to help a leader make effective decisions.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4,785
#4,785
Looks like we got an Sunday NFL football news dump. LG will love this.

Hillary’s team copied intel off top-secret server to email | New York Post

Let's go thru the process to cut n' paste classified material. From: Kurt Schlichter @KurtSchlichter

You have to bring up classified material on SPIR or another secure system. Then you have to download that file into some medium, like a thumb drive, which is a huge violation. And then you have to take the thumb drive with classified material and stick it into the nonsecure system. So now you not only violated the law but you contaminated the nonsecure system with classified material. Then you have to bring up the classified document and consciously cut-and-paste out a text without headers. And then you put that text into an unsecure email and send it to out, another violation. Then you have to bring up the classified document and consciously cut-and-paste out a text without headers. And then you put that text into an unsecure email and send it to out, another violation. Then Hillary receives it and downloads classified material onto her own unsecure server and somebody's bathroom. So, besides reading it in an unsecure environment, she stores it on an unsecure system permanently. This is not a simple screw up. This is a conscious effort to violate the laws she was absolutely aware of.
Click to expand...
 

Attachments

  • CZgnmYPVAAAh9e4.jpg
    CZgnmYPVAAAh9e4.jpg
    30.1 KB · Views: 0
#4,789
#4,789
The pattern here seems to be 1) quote unnamed source, 2)quote partisan hack as though the information allegedly obtained from the unnamed source is of a certain character, 3) call it breaking news. I have seen this movie now, on this subject, for the better part of a half year. Until you have some actual facts, you really are just speculating.

And while I would agree that negligent handling of such information is a concern, & a basis for valid criticism of her, I think that the comparisons to the general are, on their face, absurd. He gave over information, knowingly, to a woman with whom he was sleeping, so she could write a book. If Clinton did what she did out of convenience, or arrogance, it deserves to be criticized. By what he did is much, much worse.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4,790
#4,790
lawgator1 said:
The pattern here seems to be 1) quote unnamed source, 2)quote partisan hack as though the information allegedly obtained from the unnamed source is of a certain character, 3) call it breaking news. I have seen this movie now, on this subject, for the better part of a half year. Until you have some actual facts, you really are just speculating.

And while I would agree that negligent handling of such information is a concern, & a basis for valid criticism of her, I think that the comparisons to the general are, on their face, absurd. He gave over information, knowingly, to a woman with whom he was sleeping, so she could write a book. If Clinton did what she did out of convenience, or arrogance, it deserves to be criticized. By what he did is much, much worse.
Click to expand...
Criticized?!?!?!?!?!?! You really are a ****ing partisan idiot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4,792
#4,792
1972 Grad said:
He is slipping though. It took him 31 minutes to show up and defend Hillary after I said he would be along to explain why it was no big deal.
Click to expand...
It is just absolutely beyond me how anybody can defend that woman. What little respect I now have for the office of the President (after 7 years of Dumbo) will completely evaporate if that slut is elected.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4,793
#4,793
lawgator1 said:
The pattern here seems to be 1) quote unnamed source, 2)quote partisan hack as though the information allegedly obtained from the unnamed source is of a certain character, 3) call it breaking news. I have seen this movie now, on this subject, for the better part of a half year. Until you have some actual facts, you really are just speculating.

And while I would agree that negligent handling of such information is a concern, & a basis for valid criticism of her, I think that the comparisons to the general are, on their face, absurd. He gave over information, knowingly, to a woman with whom he was sleeping, so she could write a book. If Clinton did what she did out of convenience, or arrogance, it deserves to be criticized. By what he did is much, much worse.
Click to expand...

1) Do you know that Hillary is being investigated by FBI Counterintelligence??? Do you know what that means??? 2) The level of classification of the documents that General Petraeus gave over was "Confidential" Confidential material would cause damage or be prejudicial to national security if publicly available. The level of classification of the document that Hillary had emailed and on her server were "Secret" meaning Secret material would cause "serious damage" to national security if it were publicly available and Top secret meaning Such material would cause "exceptionally grave damage" to national security if made publicly available. Also stripping classified information of their classification and emailing them over an unsecure source is also a felony along with the others.
 
#4,796
#4,796
carlos86 said:
1) Do you know that Hillary is being investigated by FBI Counterintelligence??? Do you know what that means??? 2) The level of classification of the documents that General Petraeus gave over was "Confidential" Confidential material would cause damage or be prejudicial to national security if publicly available. The level of classification of the document that Hillary had emailed and on her server were "Secret" meaning Secret material would cause "serious damage" to national security if it were publicly available and Top secret meaning Such material would cause "exceptionally grave damage" to national security if made publicly available. Also stripping classified information of their classification and emailing them over an unsecure source is also a felony along with the others.
Click to expand...
Yeah, but she didn't know....
 
#4,797
#4,797
IBlvNTmWrk said:
Somebody needs to explain why she's not in jail.
Click to expand...

Because the FBI is launching 3 types of investigation into Hillary. 1 From the Counterintelligence division, 2) Cyber Crimes Division 3) a corruption investigation into her dealings with the Clinton Foundation and her giving favors to countries who donated to the foundation while she was still SECSTATE.
 
#4,798
#4,798
SpaceCoastVol said:
Yeah, but she didn't know....
Click to expand...

stripping classified information of their classification and emailing them over an unsecure source

I know you being sarcastic but lawgator truly believes she didn't know that this was illegal when they give you a long ass briefing telling you how illegal it is before you sign your name on the line.
 
#4,799
#4,799
carlos86 said:
stripping classified information of their classification and emailing them over an unsecure source

I know you being sarcastic but lawgator truly believes she didn't know that this was illegal when they give you a long ass briefing telling you how illegal it is before you sign your name on the line.
Click to expand...
LG is a lawyer. He will defend whichever side of the argument suits him or wherever his paycheck comes from. In this case, he is a socialist hack, so he will defend her to the end. What is mind boggling to me is that he can accept that someone - and a lawyer I might add - that held a position as high as she did could possibly be "unaware" of those laws. Every Ensign in the Navy knows these things. It is more proof that lawyers are not interested in the truth, just the win. It is also proof that she has no business whatsoever holding that office.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#4,800
#4,800
lawgator1 said:
The pattern here seems to be 1) quote unnamed source, 2)quote partisan hack as though the information allegedly obtained from the unnamed source is of a certain character, 3) call it breaking news. I have seen this movie now, on this subject, for the better part of a half year. Until you have some actual facts, you really are just speculating.

And while I would agree that negligent handling of such information is a concern, & a basis for valid criticism of her, I think that the comparisons to the general are, on their face, absurd. He gave over information, knowingly, to a woman with whom he was sleeping, so she could write a book. If Clinton did what she did out of convenience, or arrogance, it deserves to be criticized. By what he did is much, much worse.
Click to expand...

I don't know if you're just playing the devil's advocate or honestly believe this garbage.
 
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Advertisement





Back
Top