Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Jul 7, 2016 21:44:17 GMT -5
Well $200,000 was inaccurate. It was only $140,000 of stuff according to your sources.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,298
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 7, 2016 22:06:41 GMT -5
Well $200,000 was inaccurate. It was only $140,000 of stuff according to your sources. the word STOLE is inaccurate "according to your sources".
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jul 7, 2016 22:11:07 GMT -5
Well $200,000 was inaccurate. It was only $140,000 of stuff according to your sources. the word STOLE is inaccurate "according to your sources". "mistakenly believed they were entitled to take"
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,690
|
Post by Tennesseer on Jul 7, 2016 22:14:41 GMT -5
Well $200,000 was inaccurate. It was only $140,000 of stuff according to your sources. You didn't read the link, did you. Among other things, you would known $140,000 is no where mentioned in the article. This is how rumors start with false information. Good job.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,298
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 7, 2016 22:15:42 GMT -5
the word STOLE is inaccurate "according to your sources". "mistakenly believed they were entitled to take" i didn't see the word mistakenly at that site. did you know that Al Gore said he invented the internet? are we tired of the bullshit lies, yet?
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,298
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 7, 2016 22:16:35 GMT -5
Well $200,000 was inaccurate. It was only $140,000 of stuff according to your sources. You didn't read the link, did you. Among other things, you would known $140,000 is no where mentioned in the article. This is how rumors start with false information. Good job. he was adding 48 and 86. incorrectly, i might add.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,690
|
Post by Tennesseer on Jul 7, 2016 22:23:00 GMT -5
You didn't read the link, did you. Among other things, you would known $140,000 is no where mentioned in the article. This is how rumors start with false information. Good job. he was adding 48 and 86. incorrectly, i might add. And we should trust his analysis of polling information? Oy.
|
|
Virgil Showlion
Distinguished Associate
Moderator
[b]leones potest resistere[/b]
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:19:33 GMT -5
Posts: 27,448
|
Post by Virgil Showlion on Jul 7, 2016 22:26:44 GMT -5
"mistakenly believed they were entitled to take" i didn't see the word mistakenly at that site. did you know that Al Gore said he invented the internet? are we tired of the bullshit lies, yet?"mistakenly believed they were entitled to take" isn't an exaggeration or a lie. They believed they were entitled to the things. They took them. They were mistaken. They gave the bulk of it back to the government. I agree with the Politico author that "theft" is too strong a word. It's more a mixture of carelessness and self-entitlement. They couldn't be bothered to figure out what actually belonged to them and what didn't, and erred on the side that benefited them. Unfortunately, a remarkably common problem among politicians.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,298
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 7, 2016 22:28:17 GMT -5
LOL! he just does it to get under my skin. seems to be something of a hobby around here for some. might surprise them to know that i don't make any efforts to get under theirs. it just comes naturally. ok, brothers and sisters. have a splendid evening in whatever corner of this great universe you find yourselves!
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,690
|
Post by Tennesseer on Jul 7, 2016 22:28:52 GMT -5
Good article here. Republicans just can’t help themselves from overreaching on every Clinton scandalHillary Clinton had a bad day on Tuesday, thanks to FBI Director James Comey’s decision to pair his announcement that nothing illegal happened with her emails with a very public tongue lashing about how “careless” her setup had been, and how various public statements she’d made about it were false or misleading. In a sensible political climate that would have been a bad news cycle or two for Clinton, plus a talking point Trump surrogates could use on cable sporadically when they needed to change the subject in a hurry, plus a bunch of clips for use in ads down the road. But instead, Republicans have insisted on dragging out the matter, announcing an investigation of Comey’s investigation and calling on him to testify before Congress. House Speaker Paul Ryan has even called for Clinton to be denied national security briefings during the campaign. If you ever find yourself wondering how it is that Bill Clinton was caught having had a sexual affair with a White House intern and came out more popular than ever, here’s the answer — just as the Clintons and the media are locked in a pointless, toxic cycle of scandal and cover-up, the Republican Party is locked in its own cycle of pathological overreach. Complete article here: Republicans just can’t help themselves from overreaching on every Clinton scandal
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,298
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 7, 2016 22:32:08 GMT -5
i didn't see the word mistakenly at that site. did you know that Al Gore said he invented the internet? are we tired of the bullshit lies, yet?"mistakenly believed they were entitled to take" isn't an exaggeration or a lie. They believed they were entitled to the things. They took them. They were mistaken. They gave the bulk of it back to the government. I agree with the Politico author that "theft" is too strong a word. It's more a mixture of carelessness and self-entitlement. They couldn't be bothered to figure out what actually belonged to them and what didn't, and erred on the side that benefited them. Unfortunately, a remarkably common problem among politicians. i will let others take it from here, Virgil. i just get sick of the lying to score points when the plain truth is bad enough. can we agree on that? if not, i will have to live with that, because i am done debating this one.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,221
|
Post by tallguy on Jul 7, 2016 22:42:24 GMT -5
Good article here. Republicans just can’t help themselves from overreaching on every Clinton scandalHillary Clinton had a bad day on Tuesday, thanks to FBI Director James Comey’s decision to pair his announcement that nothing illegal happened with her emails with a very public tongue lashing about how “careless” her setup had been, and how various public statements she’d made about it were false or misleading. In a sensible political climate that would have been a bad news cycle or two for Clinton, plus a talking point Trump surrogates could use on cable sporadically when they needed to change the subject in a hurry, plus a bunch of clips for use in ads down the road. But instead, Republicans have insisted on dragging out the matter, announcing an investigation of Comey’s investigation and calling on him to testify before Congress. House Speaker Paul Ryan has even called for Clinton to be denied national security briefings during the campaign. If you ever find yourself wondering how it is that Bill Clinton was caught having had a sexual affair with a White House intern and came out more popular than ever, here’s the answer — just as the Clintons and the media are locked in a pointless, toxic cycle of scandal and cover-up, the Republican Party is locked in its own cycle of pathological overreach. Complete article here: Republicans just can’t help themselves from overreaching on every Clinton scandalOf course, and it makes perfect sense. When you have nothing of substance to contribute, you go with what you've got. (Or rather, with what you think you can convince people you've got.) For this incarnation of the Republican Party, that is pretty much zero. It would be SO nice if that were otherwise....
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,690
|
Post by Tennesseer on Jul 8, 2016 7:14:01 GMT -5
Did someone say Benghazi?
Investigate! We need to get to the bottom of this.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,298
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 8, 2016 10:51:36 GMT -5
The GOOD news for Hillary here is that this is all being aired out RIGHT NOW, in early July, in the haze of summer. It was all over the news wires (until the Clinton Murder Machine staged a distraction in Dallas last night) and it will be again for the next few days, or even weeks if the GOP have their way dragging it out in Congress, but for all intents and purposes it is about done.
By fall it will be history, and only committed anti-Hillary zealots will be concerned with it. Sure, it will be brought up frequently, and Trump will probably use it as a cornerstone of his "Crooked, Lyin', Fugly, Shrillary-Hillary" campaign stem winders, but he will be preaching to his choir.
For the rest of the country it will have about as much relevance as "Whitewater", "Tammy Wynette", and yes, "Benghazi!!!"
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz............................................ this exact same timing doomed John Kerry.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,562
|
Post by billisonboard on Jul 8, 2016 11:18:13 GMT -5
The GOOD news for Hillary here is that this is all being aired out RIGHT NOW, in early July, in the haze of summer. It was all over the news wires (until the Clinton Murder Machine staged a distraction in Dallas last night) and it will be again for the next few days, or even weeks if the GOP have their way dragging it out in Congress, but for all intents and purposes it is about done.
By fall it will be history, and only committed anti-Hillary zealots will be concerned with it. Sure, it will be brought up frequently, and Trump will probably use it as a cornerstone of his "Crooked, Lyin', Fugly, Shrillary-Hillary" campaign stem winders, but he will be preaching to his choir.
For the rest of the country it will have about as much relevance as "Whitewater", "Tammy Wynette", and yes, "Benghazi!!!"
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz............................................ this exact same timing doomed John Kerry. Please clarify.
|
|
NomoreDramaQ1015
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 14:26:32 GMT -5
Posts: 47,414
|
Post by NomoreDramaQ1015 on Jul 8, 2016 11:27:13 GMT -5
She has placed our national security at risk ......... while she was in the office of Sec of State. This was 'unintentional'. Doesn't sound very smart .. and that kind of stupidity doesn't belong as prez.
Well then we better fire A LOT of people in the defense department. They are using unsecured computers dating back to the late 70's for things like holding our nuclear arm codes and other things I am sure that ISIS would just love to play around with.
And they do it on purpose with the justification that if the computer still works there is no reason to transfer this information to a secure modern computer.
Should that kind of stupidity and penny wise pound foolish attitude be in charge of our nuclear weapons and other important information?
But let's focus on Hillary!
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,562
|
Post by billisonboard on Jul 8, 2016 11:36:32 GMT -5
She has placed our national security at risk ......... while she was in the office of Sec of State. This was 'unintentional'. Doesn't sound very smart .. and that kind of stupidity doesn't belong as prez.
Based on the questionable assumption that the classified material in the email was serious enough to actually create risk.
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,221
|
Post by tallguy on Jul 8, 2016 11:43:25 GMT -5
Anybody who lived through 2000-2008 knows that not only do we elect stupidity as prez, we go out of our way to elect stupidity as prez.
|
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 37,562
|
Post by billisonboard on Jul 8, 2016 12:06:12 GMT -5
this exact same timing doomed John Kerry. I think you refer to the Swift Boat BS? ... That wasn't the "exact same timing". The Democrats held their convention in Boston in late July. ...
In early August, an important and perhaps unexpected campaign development occurred. Televised campaign ads sponsored by a group called the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth appeared. ... Overview of Campaign Events
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,298
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 8, 2016 13:00:10 GMT -5
this exact same timing doomed John Kerry. I think you refer to the Swift Boat BS?
True, but what really sunk John Kerry was his non-reaction to it. Not that Hillary is a better campaigner- sadly she isn't- but she has a much better organization behind her. Hillary will not be "Swift Boated" by this.
i'll grant you that one. you are absolutely right.
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,298
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 8, 2016 13:11:48 GMT -5
I think you refer to the Swift Boat BS? ... That wasn't the "exact same timing". The Democrats held their convention in Boston in late July. ...
In early August, an important and perhaps unexpected campaign development occurred. Televised campaign ads sponsored by a group called the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth appeared. ... Overview of Campaign Events i wasn't thinking of the commercial, but the runup to it: SBVT first went public with a May 4, 2004, press conference declaring opposition to Kerry. i first noticed them on the 4th of July that year.
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Jul 8, 2016 23:52:43 GMT -5
Just out of curiosity, and to inform those that might have forgotten, or didn't know,
Hillary is an attorney,,,,,,,,, Maybe you have forgotten that, in fact at one time one publication stated that
She was one of the top 100 attorneys in the nation, Remember any of that?? Which leads to this question,
If She is sooooooo, smart and educated in law, practiced with great law firms,,,,,,
How comes She can not tell the difference between classified email and a love letter from Bill??
Orrrrrr, ,are you trying to convince us, She is that stupid! So just which is it??
|
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 75,298
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
Member is Online
|
Post by djAdvocate on Jul 8, 2016 23:54:51 GMT -5
Just out of curiosity, and to inform those that might have forgotten, or didn't know, Hillary is an attorney,,,,,,,,, Maybe you have forgotten that, in fact at one time one publication stated that She was one of the top 100 attorneys in the nation, Remember any of that?? Which leads to this question, If She is sooooooo, smart and educated in law, practiced with great law firms,,,,,, How comes She can not tell the difference between classified email and a love letter from Bill?? Orrrrrr, ,are you trying to convince us, She is that stupid! So just which is it?? that's not the question i would be asking. the question i would be asking is THIS: "why did anyone think that she would not know the difference between violating the law and not?" just sayin'
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Jul 9, 2016 6:30:11 GMT -5
Well $200,000 was inaccurate. It was only $140,000 of stuff according to your sources. the word STOLE is inaccurate "according to your sources". I did not use the word stole in my response and pleas note it was not my source. Quite frankly, I see little difference between accidentally removing things and stealing when we hit the $140,000 level. Makes me think of an old Seinfeld scene with George when he was confronted over a "situation" and he asks, "Was I wrong about this? I had no idea". After about 25 situations with Hillary and Bill they are no longer accidents or misunderstandings.
|
|
Value Buy
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 17:57:07 GMT -5
Posts: 18,680
Today's Mood: Getting better by the day!
Location: In the middle of enjoying retirement!
Favorite Drink: Zombie Dust from Three Floyd's brewery
Mini-Profile Name Color: e61975
Mini-Profile Text Color: 196ce6
|
Post by Value Buy on Jul 9, 2016 6:43:49 GMT -5
Well $200,000 was inaccurate. It was only $140,000 of stuff according to your sources. You didn't read the link, did you. Among other things, you would known $140,000 is no where mentioned in the article. This is how rumors start with false information. Good job. ?? I did not read the link? Bullshit. From your source: This is where the questions of provenance get muddy. Some gifts are intended for the government, and must stay in the government’s hands, while some are intended for the person living in the White House. But it’s not always as simple as "this is mine" and "that is Uncle Sam’s." Within about two weeks of the publication of the Post article, public criticism escalated, and the Clintons announced that they would pay the government nearly $86,000 for items that were actually government property. A few days after that, they also returned about $48,000 worth of furniture (including the sofas, chair and ottoman from Mittman). Add that up and the government got back $134,000 out of the $190,000 the Clinton’s had declared as gifts. But as an indication of how hard it is to determine ownership, the National Park Service, which oversees the White House property, later returned a chair and an ottoman to the Clintons. Okay, it was only $134,000You got me.my BAD for not quoting your sourceIf I used a link showing they accidently removed that much merchandiseI added it my head and made an addition error, or consider it a rounding error.Quite frankly you blew your argument with a link that has them returning anything close to that amount.
|
|
Tennesseer
Member Emeritus
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:58:42 GMT -5
Posts: 63,690
|
Post by Tennesseer on Jul 9, 2016 7:41:43 GMT -5
You didn't read the link, did you. Among other things, you would known $140,000 is no where mentioned in the article. This is how rumors start with false information. Good job. ?? I did not read the link?Bullshit. From your source: This is where the questions of provenance get muddy. Some gifts are intended for the government, and must stay in the government’s hands, while some are intended for the person living in the White House. But it’s not always as simple as "this is mine" and "that is Uncle Sam’s." Within about two weeks of the publication of the Post article, public criticism escalated, and the Clintons announced that they would pay the government nearly $86,000 for items that were actually government property. A few days after that, they also returned about $48,000 worth of furniture (including the sofas, chair and ottoman from Mittman). Add that up and the government got back $134,000 out of the $190,000 the Clinton’s had declared as gifts. But as an indication of how hard it is to determine ownership, the National Park Service, which oversees the White House property, later returned a chair and an ottoman to the Clintons. Okay, it was only $134,000You got me.my BAD for not quoting your sourceIf I used a link showing they accidently removed that much merchandiseI added it my head and made an addition error, or consider it a rounding error.Quite frankly you blew your argument with a link that has them returning anything close to that amount. Ummm, no, I didn't blow my argument. I clarified misinformation. And do you really want to now quote from the link which you could have done when you allegedly opened it the first time? Anyone can now open the link, quote a portion, and then say they read it several days ago. And your math skills suck.
|
|
ken a.k.a OMK
Senior Associate
They killed Kenny, the bastards.
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 14:39:20 GMT -5
Posts: 14,120
Location: Maryland
|
Post by ken a.k.a OMK on Jul 9, 2016 7:51:18 GMT -5
Back in the dark ages classified documents had a red border for secret. You had to carry them in a red striped folder. Maybe they should use colored text in emails. The example I saw in the news had a C at the beginning of the classified text. If I were reading many emails I know I'd miss that C.
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Jul 9, 2016 8:11:51 GMT -5
|
|
OldCoyote
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 10:34:48 GMT -5
Posts: 13,449
|
Post by OldCoyote on Jul 9, 2016 8:17:06 GMT -5
Back in the dark ages classified documents had a red border for secret. You had to carry them in a red striped folder. Maybe they should use colored text in emails. The example I saw in the news had a C at the beginning of the classified text. If I were reading many emails I know I'd miss that C. Ken, Are you telling us that if You were reviewing a highly classified document, that supposedly was not marked, You would have not know it was a highly classified document??
|
|
ken a.k.a OMK
Senior Associate
They killed Kenny, the bastards.
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 14:39:20 GMT -5
Posts: 14,120
Location: Maryland
|
Post by ken a.k.a OMK on Jul 9, 2016 8:25:50 GMT -5
Yes I am telling you that. Information isn't always classified when first written. It costs money to mark something classified. Sometimes it took someone on the project to question how the info was obtained or if it was a scientific discovery (I was in research not politics) was it common knowledge or did we just figure it out. Usually though preliminary work was handled as classified until we finished the report to determine what level it should be. Also info is declassified all the time.
|
|