G oog le BadWeB | Login/out | Topics | Search | Custodians | Register | Edit Profile

Buell Forum » Quick Board » Archive through June 06, 2019 » Mrs. Hillary Clinton » Archive through July 09, 2016 « Previous Next »

Author Message
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Hughlysses
Posted on Thursday, July 07, 2016 - 11:58 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Update on today's hearing with Comey; excellent remarks by Trey Gowdy:

http://www.politico.com/blogs/james-comey-testimon y/2016/07/clinton-untrue-statements-fbi-comey-2252 16
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Hughlysses
Posted on Thursday, July 07, 2016 - 12:58 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

She didn't testify under oath, and Comey didn't question her:

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2016/07/07/comey-hi llarys-fbi-testimony-wasnt-under-oath-or-recorded- but-it-would-still-be-a-crime-to-lie/

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sifo
Posted on Thursday, July 07, 2016 - 01:26 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

So this is all a done deal. It really doesn't matter, other than for posterity, if the fix was in, or if Bill really did hang around an airport hanger waiting for Loreta Lynch's airplane to discuss his grand kids with her for half an hour. (Boy does that sound ridiculous when I reread that last bit, but that's their story.)

Moving forward... Comey did state that even though he wouldn't prosecute others in this situation either, there would be other disciplinary actions, including stripping the individual of any security clearances they may have. Moving forward, shouldn't this same standard be applied to Hillary? I'm not really sure who would be in charge of granting or suspending a security clearance for the President, but it sure seems like a difficult conundrum. My guess is that the security clearance is implied, and granted by the vote of the people. It terrifies me that there are people who would willfully vote for such a dishonest, and grossly negligent (either through shear ignorance, or design) person. It is this fact that really has me being very pessimistic about the future of this once great country. We can survive a corrupt leader when they present themselves. When the people are willing to vote for the corruption, there is little hope left.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sifo
Posted on Thursday, July 07, 2016 - 01:27 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

She didn't testify under oath, and Comey didn't question her:

No transcript either!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Hughlysses
Posted on Thursday, July 07, 2016 - 01:46 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

I did read one potentially positive thing that may come out of this fiasco: some people who have been prosecuted for mishandling classified info, such as a Marine they're trying to boot out of the service who used regular e-mail to send a classified report to his comrades in Afghanistan on an emergency basis to try to protect them, maybe able to insist on similar legal treatment.

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2016/07/07/ lawyer-on-the-birth-of-hillary-defense-many-people -have-been-punished-for-doing-much-less-n2189307
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Orman1649
Posted on Thursday, July 07, 2016 - 01:54 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

The Hillary defense....it's like...

http://www.hulu.com/watch/290329
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Aesquire
Posted on Thursday, July 07, 2016 - 04:09 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

http://www.thefederalistpapers.org/us/rush-limbaug h-responds-perfectly-to-the-clinton-email-decision

Don't despair. They want you to give up.

And did ANYONE actually think Hillary Rodham Clinton was going to be prosecuted by an Obama Social Justice Dept.?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sifo
Posted on Thursday, July 07, 2016 - 06:54 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Comey does appear to be largely a guy who is concerned about doing his job correctly. The one thing that I have a real problem with, and he reconfirmed this today, is that he has inserted the requirement for "intent" into a negligence law. Surely, anyone working in the field of law, must understand that negligence isn't about intent. It's such a basic concept that it's simply inconceivable that he doesn't understand this. Given how damning the rest of what he had to say, there just aren't many good explanations for this. The one that stands out, is that he was ordered to do this by his superiors. I've actually been in a similar situation where I told that I had to lie to an employee about the reason that they were not being promoted into a new position that they were applying for. I was gone from that job within two months from that point. It will be interesting to see what shakes out from all of this.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Hootowl
Posted on Thursday, July 07, 2016 - 07:01 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

I have also wondered this. The law is clear that intent has nothing to do with it.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

M1combat
Posted on Thursday, July 07, 2016 - 08:05 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

So if you don't intend to be speeding you're good?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Pwnzor
Posted on Thursday, July 07, 2016 - 08:27 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

I didn't intend to kill those people after I smoked three sherm sticks and ate all those libriums and snorted all that meth.

See, there was no intent. Therefore, no victim.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Aesquire
Posted on Thursday, July 07, 2016 - 08:43 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Don't sweat the weasel words.

It's obvious that Comey was under intense pressure. For him the only face saving gesture was to refuse to participate. Since Lynch has said she's going to leave it up to the Justice Dept. She didn't legally recuse herself, she passed the buck. Comey passes the buck. Both legal, maybe cowardly, dirty rotten sneaky, maybe legal moves.

Correct me if I'm wrong on that.

Also, I don't think Comey said a thing about the charges of destruction of govt. documents.

And there's the Hillary & Bill Foundation aspect.

So there's still IMHO a faint hope of prosecution, so we can cling bitterly to that until all hope is crushed forever. ; )
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Xdigitalx
Posted on Thursday, July 07, 2016 - 08:47 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

OR...I didn't intend to get the girl pregnant.... ? It slipped?
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sifo
Posted on Thursday, July 07, 2016 - 09:02 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

So there's still IMHO a faint hope of prosecution

Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Pwnzor
Posted on Thursday, July 07, 2016 - 09:06 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

all hope is crushed forever.

All hail King Hillary!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Court
Posted on Thursday, July 07, 2016 - 09:49 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

>>>And there's the Hillary & Bill Foundation aspect.

He refused to address that citing a still open investigation.

It has been announced today that the State Department has reopened the e-mail case.


quote:

WASHINGTON (AP) ó The State Department is reopening an internal investigation of possible mishandling of classified information by Hillary Clinton and top aides, officials told The Associated Press on Thursday. . .




SOURCE: https://www.yahoo.com/news/apnewsbreak-state-depar tment-reopens-clinton-emails-probe-225859610--poli tics.html
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Aesquire
Posted on Thursday, July 07, 2016 - 10:11 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Personally, I'm sticking with the "Obama screws her after the Convention" pipe dream.

It probably will actually be worse for America, so it's perfect hope & paranoia fuel.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Aesquire
Posted on Thursday, July 07, 2016 - 10:51 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Just heard Obama tell us we need to make people feel they are equal under the law.

I have a suggestion.

Not sure which speech is on the radio. Sounds like deliberate misinterpretation of racism. Or a great speech. I'm biased.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Aesquire
Posted on Friday, July 08, 2016 - 03:49 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

http://mobile.wnd.com/2016/07/comey-has-long-histo ry-of-clinton-related-cases/
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Blake
Posted on Friday, July 08, 2016 - 03:59 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Airbo noted the really strange point in all this. It is not the FBI that prosecutes or decides whether or not to prosecute the case. That is up to the federal prosecutor working for the Atty. Gen.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Aesquire
Posted on Friday, July 08, 2016 - 06:01 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

The AG who did not recuse herself but stated she has no intention of getting involved?

So no one drops the ball. They just pretend it doesn't exist.

Sweet.

Of course now this can all be forgotten. Not new news.
Far more important to push for civil rights suspension in the wake of more murdered police. The Prez gives another speech on racist cops and cops get murdered. Again.

I'd rate the above statement as paranoid delusion if it was the first time this incredible coincidence happened. Or only the hundredth time the Party of the Klan used victims to push to steal liberty. Or caused race riots with a century of plantation policies. Or civil unrest used to suspend freedom of speech and political gathering.

I note with zero irony that the manuals used for anti-terrorism law enforcement agencies have all mention of jihad removed and specifically list veterans, tea party, those who love the Constitution too much, as primary terrorist threats. I think ISIS & AQ are near the bottom of the threat list. Just under the Campfire Girls but admittedly higher than Twilight fans.

Which is criminally insane. Twilight fans are clearly more dangerous than the Boy Scouts. ( who rank well above AQ I bet ya )
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Aesquire
Posted on Friday, July 08, 2016 - 06:05 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

http://headtrip.keenspot.com/d/20080915.html

This may seem off topic but there's a lot of cross over with twilight & Hillary fans. The same delusional love for monsters.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Aesquire
Posted on Friday, July 08, 2016 - 08:04 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Here's another take on the subject.

For me, itís pretty simple. Clinton maintained an illegal, unsecured server in violation of law, policy, and common sense to protect her political privacy. As Iíve been shouting for over a year, the server itself is the smoking gun. If itís illegal to ship classified information in a secret pneumatic tube from your office to your home, the mere fact that you had a pneumatic tube installed for such purposes is all the proof of intent you need.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/437596/hilla ry-clinton-email-scandal-server-smoking-gun-provin g-intent?target=author&tid=897
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ferris_von_bueller
Posted on Friday, July 08, 2016 - 09:10 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Common f***ing sense, Aesquire, but common sense is in short supply.

Why would a government employee spend thousands of dollars setting up their own server when the gov provides email for free? What a joke this country has become.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Aesquire
Posted on Friday, July 08, 2016 - 12:11 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

Why?

To keep her actions secret. To defeat the law. She is on record not wanting her criminal actions subject to FOI.

She did not want Congress to subpoena her e-mail.

She couldn't destroy govt. Documents as easily with a State Dept account.

Criminal conspiracy.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Aesquire
Posted on Friday, July 08, 2016 - 01:39 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/07/chaffe tzs_fbi_referral_on_hillary_perjury_a_time_bomb.ht ml
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ferris_von_bueller
Posted on Friday, July 08, 2016 - 02:30 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

It was a rhetorical question of course any sane person with an IQ above an ameba knows no one does such a thing unless they are looking to hide something. Hence, intent !!
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Ducbsa
Posted on Saturday, July 09, 2016 - 11:22 am:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)



Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Sifo
Posted on Saturday, July 09, 2016 - 12:36 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

This is what white privilege looks like
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of page Link to this message

Torquehd
Posted on Saturday, July 09, 2016 - 02:07 pm:   Edit Post Delete Post View Post/Check IP Print Post    Move Post (Custodian/Admin Only) Ban Poster IP (Custodian/Admin only)

If you believe in white privilege.

Does it exist?

Somewhere I'm sure it does. In most places, if you're white, your race makes you take a back seat when being considered for hiring, promotions, college grants, etc. If you're a white man, you're even lower on the food chain.

"white privilege" is a leftist buzzword. That should be your first indication that it's opposite of the truth.

HilLIARy's privilege has nothing to do with her skin color. Hers is built upon cronyism.
« Previous Next »

Topics | Last Day | Tree View | Search | User List | Help/Instructions | Rules | Program Credits Administration