Deleted
Joined: Nov 17, 2024 7:30:26 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2016 6:07:02 GMT -5
Yeah... I thought you'd come back with that same old crap. That's why I didn't bother with any of the other Googling.
Hillary says quietly with a wave of her hand "No... these aren't the lies you are looking for... she can go about her business..."
And the Hillary faithful all say "No, those weren't the lies we were looking for... she can go about her business..."
Jeeze. I wish I had the same command of The Force that she apparently has.
|
|
Wisconsin Beth
Distinguished Associate
No, we don't walk away. But when we're holding on to something precious, we run.
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:59:36 GMT -5
Posts: 30,626 
|
Post by Wisconsin Beth on Sept 30, 2016 7:36:37 GMT -5
I know. Amazing how above all laws and human control she is. She must be a Goddess.  does that make Trump some kind of demon or devil? To balance the Force of each other or something? |
|
swamp
Community Leader
THEY’RE EATING THE DOGS!!!!!!!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,673
|
Post by swamp on Sept 30, 2016 8:57:06 GMT -5
What illegal act has Hillary Clinton committed and then lied about? Even if nothing else (there's plenty of "else" but I don't feel like Googling things that the "Hillary is the bestest candidate evah!!!!!" crowd will just ignore anyway... what's the point?)... perjury in the congressional hearings. That's the crime OF lying. Look... you want to live in the world of Clinton Denial... That's fine and dandy. Live there. Enjoy yourself. Just don't get upset when it's pointed out that she's as guilty of the same exact things that Donald is guilty of. Please tell us who here is in the "bestest candidate evah" crowd?
I am voting for her. I'm not thrilled about it, but I think Trump is a narcissistic buffoon who is doing this solely as a marketing ploy.
|
|
happyhoix
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Oct 7, 2011 7:22:42 GMT -5
Posts: 21,753
|
Post by happyhoix on Sept 30, 2016 9:55:38 GMT -5
Yeah... I thought you'd come back with that same old crap. That's why I didn't bother with any of the other Googling. Hillary says quietly with a wave of her hand " No... these aren't the lies you are looking for... she can go about her business..." And the Hillary faithful all say "No, those weren't the lies we were looking for... she can go about her business..." Jeeze. I wish I had the same command of The Force that she apparently has. No, actually what happens is there are investigations and investigations and more investigations that end up coming up with squat. No prosecutable offense, despite all that endless digging. Remember the whole Whitewater thing? That was the original Bengazhi. Hard right conservatives convinced if they dug long enough, they would uncover a criminal act. They didn't, or she wouldn't be running for president today.
What I don't understand is why some people are convinced that she wasn't prosecuted because of some grand cover up or some nefarious power she has to frighten the whole judicial branch. Why isn't it possible she wasn't convicted because there was nothing to convict her of? Do you recall when one of the GOP members of one of the special committees formed to dig the dirt on her admitted, in public, that it was all done for political reasons - to prevent her from running for president?
On the other hand, Trump has supporters who will gladly ignore things he did that are demonstrable illegal. Raiding what turns out to be an illegal charity funded strictly by other people's money to pay for art work and pay off fines. Importing illegal workers so he can pay them below minimum wage to tear a building down - and then not paying them. Sticking his name on a sham university to bilk people with a get rich quick scheme. All of these things he has either been sued over and paid fines for or he is currently being investigated for. These aren't illusive charges drawn from conspiracy nuts on the internet, these are lawsuits and judgments documented in the court system. Why are Trump supporters so keen to stick Clinton with unsubstantiated charges when their own candidate has so many actual, real charges?
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 42,333
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Sept 30, 2016 10:38:03 GMT -5
But there was no indication that she attempted to lie intentionally. Discrepancies in testimony, particularly very small ones, are not inherently criminal. To be perjury you must WILLFULLY offer false testimony. If it had been criminal, they would have charged her. Good point. The put Hillary in prison crowd doesn't seem to understand intent must be proven to convict. I'm not sure of the exact numbers but an article I saw the other day had only 3 emails marked with the small c for a paragraph or so versus a big classified header that most people expect. If there are indeed 33,000 emails affected, 3 represents .009% of the 33K emails. Say roughly 33 emails contain classified info but are not marked in anyway. To know those are classified you would have to know that the information in them is classified. Those 33 emails would be .1% of the total. Decidedly uncommon.
From an absolute truth perspective she was incorrect, there were classified emails. However, if she really did not know they were classified, she is telling the truth as she perceived it to be and intent cannot be proven.
I remember one of the examples that was posted on this board as Hillary gets off and regular people don't. But it was entirely different, for the important reason that intent could easily be proven. He had been told parts of the sub were classified, and even knowing that, he took pictures on his phone. He was convicted on intent plus actions. I feel many people miss that both need to be present.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 17, 2024 7:30:26 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2016 11:10:39 GMT -5
But there was no indication that she attempted to lie intentionally. Discrepancies in testimony, particularly very small ones, are not inherently criminal. To be perjury you must WILLFULLY offer false testimony. If it had been criminal, they would have charged her. Good point. The put Hillary in prison crowd doesn't seem to understand intent must be proven to convict. I'm not sure of the exact numbers but an article I saw the other day had only 3 emails marked with the small c for a paragraph or so versus a big classified header that most people expect. If there are indeed 33,000 emails affected, 3 represents .009% of the 33K emails. Say roughly 33 emails contain classified info but are not marked in anyway. To know those are classified you would have to know that the information in them is classified. Those 33 emails would be .1% of the total. Decidedly uncommon.
From an absolute truth perspective she was incorrect, there were classified emails. However, if she really did not know they were classified, she is telling the truth as she perceived it to be and intent cannot be proven.
I remember one of the examples that was posted on this board as Hillary gets off and regular people don't. But it was entirely different, for the important reason that intent could easily be proven. He had been told parts of the sub were classified, and even knowing that, he took pictures on his phone. He was convicted on intent plus actions. I feel many people miss that both need to be present.
And that was just of that 33,000, wasn't the total number of emails a whole lot more than 33k... |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 17, 2024 7:30:26 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2016 20:57:43 GMT -5
Even if nothing else (there's plenty of "else" but I don't feel like Googling things that the "Hillary is the bestest candidate evah!!!!!" crowd will just ignore anyway... what's the point?)... perjury in the congressional hearings. That's the crime OF lying. Look... you want to live in the world of Clinton Denial... That's fine and dandy. Live there. Enjoy yourself. Just don't get upset when it's pointed out that she's as guilty of the same exact things that Donald is guilty of. Please tell us who here is in the "bestest candidate evah" crowd?
I am voting for her. I'm not thrilled about it, but I think Trump is a narcissistic buffoon who is doing this solely as a marketing ploy.
Anyone that will deny the simple truth... for whatever reason that they want to deny it. If people didn't think she was "the bestest candidate evah" they would admit the simple truths that are easily found. I'd be willing to bet the Hillary supporters would have said Capone was innocent of all the things he didn't get prosecuted for either. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 17, 2024 7:30:26 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2016 21:01:26 GMT -5
So because I believe that there is no way the republicans who spent millions of dollars to repeatedly hound Clinton wouldn't have prosecuted if they had found ANYthing... I'm somehow saying she's the best candidate ever?
|
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,662
|
Post by tallguy on Sept 30, 2016 21:14:14 GMT -5
So because I believe that there is no way the republicans who spent millions of dollars to repeatedly hound Clinton wouldn't have prosecuted if they had found ANYthing... I'm somehow saying she's the best candidate ever? Uh-huh. It's so simple I can't understand how you can possibly not see it. |
|
steff
Senior Associate
I'll sleep when I'm dead
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 17:34:24 GMT -5
Posts: 10,780
|
Post by steff on Sept 30, 2016 21:17:52 GMT -5
So because I believe that there is no way the republicans who spent millions of dollars to repeatedly hound Clinton wouldn't have prosecuted if they had found ANYthing... I'm somehow saying she's the best candidate ever? Uh-huh. It's so simple I can't understand how you can possibly not see it.  I mean, I see it, can't everyone? |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,705 
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 2, 2016 14:56:07 GMT -5
i got this from another board i post on. the language (bolded) made me laugh. this is in response to Trump's takedown of Machado on FOX. it was copied from TPM: Trump: She did not do well. She had a lot of difficulty. And, you know, they wanted to fire her. The company itself wanted to fire her. I saved her job ... I saved her job because I said that's going to -- I did that with a number of young ladies. The staff itself. Look what happened. Look what I get out of it. I get nothing. A lot of things are coming out about her ... I saved her job because they wanted to fire her for putting on so much weight it is a beauty contest ... I saved her job because they wanted to fire her for putting on so much weight. It is a beauty contest ... But, again, I helped somebody and this is what you get for helping somebody. Just so we're clear. These words aren't from a 20 year old video tape. These are from last night on Fox News, two days after the debate. The words amount to what we might term 'stand-up narcissism', a demonstration of a personality defect so profound and total that it becomes comedic in a way that makes a decent run at transcending its own awfulness.  |
|
dezailoooooo
Senior Associate
Joined: Aug 28, 2016 13:56:33 GMT -5
Posts: 13,630
|
Post by dezailoooooo on Oct 2, 2016 17:38:45 GMT -5
What illegal act has Hillary Clinton committed and then lied about? Even if nothing else (there's plenty of "else" but I don't feel like Googling things that the "Hillary is the bestest candidate evah!!!!!" crowd will just ignore anyway... what's the point?)... perjury in the congressional hearings. That's the crime OF lying. Look... you want to live in the world of Clinton Denial... That's fine and dandy. Live there. Enjoy yourself. Just don't get upset when it's pointed out that she's as guilty of the same exact things that Donald is guilty of. Sorry Richard...by coming up with excuses rather then facts on your accusation..what your saying is "I post these accusations because I have read them, got them from other sources..say in this case those sites that favor the Donald therefore the accusations must be true",..something along the lines of the Donald saying as he constantly does.." Trust Me.."..well for me and most normal thinking folks that really is not enough and my answer is.."Sorry Donald..not enough and no I don't trust you" |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 17, 2024 7:30:26 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2016 20:03:52 GMT -5
Even if nothing else (there's plenty of "else" but I don't feel like Googling things that the "Hillary is the bestest candidate evah!!!!!" crowd will just ignore anyway... what's the point?)... perjury in the congressional hearings. That's the crime OF lying. Look... you want to live in the world of Clinton Denial... That's fine and dandy. Live there. Enjoy yourself. Just don't get upset when it's pointed out that she's as guilty of the same exact things that Donald is guilty of. Sorry Richard...by coming up with excuses rather then facts on your accusation..what your saying is "I post these accusations because I have read them, got them from other sources..say in this case those sites that favor the Donald therefore the accusations must be true",..something along the lines of the Donald saying as he constantly does.." Trust Me.."..well for me and most normal thinking folks that really is not enough and my answer is.."Sorry Donald..not enough and no I don't trust you" Believe what you want at this point. Nothing you said is even remotely in line with reality... but you don't give a damn about that, so why should I? |
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Oct 2, 2016 21:39:38 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 17, 2024 7:30:26 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2016 23:04:26 GMT -5
Can't argue with that. (him being an ass and having said that, that is)
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 17, 2024 7:30:26 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2016 3:13:21 GMT -5
What illegal act has Hillary Clinton committed and then lied about? LMAO!! Somebody hasn't been watching the news... If the polls are accurate, it would be just under 50% that haven't been... at least not ALL of the news.   |
|
billisonboard
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 22:45:44 GMT -5
Posts: 38,410
|
Post by billisonboard on Oct 3, 2016 4:44:44 GMT -5
LMAO!! Somebody hasn't been watching the news... I know right! Somebody who is leading a department of our government...a whole department! And she doesn't know the difference between classified material and unclassified material. Oh wait no...that's a witch hunt! LoL! Somebody that actually gives a shit about it is on a witch hunt. Whatever dude...vote for whoever you want to vote for. You're the one looking back at yourself in the mirror every morning. Did you just reply to yourself? ... Looks that way.  |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 17, 2024 7:30:26 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2016 5:02:44 GMT -5
Did you just reply to yourself? So anyway, I get it, Hillary did not lie under oath about a supposed illegal act that she committed. Apparently you actually don't "get it"... since you said that she didn't lie under oath. and called it a "supposedly" illegal act. |
|
djAdvocate
Member Emeritus
only posting when the mood strikes me.
Joined: Jun 21, 2011 12:33:54 GMT -5
Posts: 76,705
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"000307"}
|
Post by djAdvocate on Oct 3, 2016 10:07:00 GMT -5
What illegal act has Hillary Clinton committed and then lied about? LMAO!! Somebody hasn't been watching the news... you forgot the quotation marks around "news". |
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 42,333
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Oct 3, 2016 10:35:45 GMT -5
Please tell us who here is in the "bestest candidate evah" crowd?
I am voting for her. I'm not thrilled about it, but I think Trump is a narcissistic buffoon who is doing this solely as a marketing ploy.
Anyone that will deny the simple truth... for whatever reason that they want to deny it. If people didn't think she was "the bestest candidate evah" they would admit the simple truths that are easily found.
I'd be willing to bet the Hillary supporters would have said Capone was innocent of all the things he didn't get prosecuted for either. The bolded is your reasoning and is really your opinion. You don't have to go far into Google to find that Trump is a much worse liar than Hillary Clinton by objective measure, yet you continually post how Hillary is more of a liar than Donald is. I am realistic enough to see that you don't think Trump is the best candidate ever, just who you prefer over Clinton in almost any match up.
If you refuse to see the overwhelming evidence about Trump's lies, why do you think people who prefer someone else, Hillary instead of Trump, might not see her flaws the same way as you do? I did check some of what your Google search brought up. I'd have to do some additional research to see how Hillary's polices compared to others at the time both Democrats and Republicans. One of the ones she is judged as being bad on was quite in vogue at the time, restricting welfare and putting limits on it. Most policies are juggling acts as that they are going to be good for some people, bad for others, and neutral for some.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 17, 2024 7:30:26 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2016 19:25:16 GMT -5
Apparently you actually don't "get it"... since you said that she didn't lie under oath. and called it a "supposedly" illegal act. How many times do we need to repeat the simple facts? 1) Hillary did NOT knowingly transmit any classified emails. 2 Out of tens of thousands of emails, she did receive a handful from others which were marked as partially classified. They were only marked as such with a (c) in the body of the text, rather than the large CLASSIFIED stamp at top of page that we all think of. Not only did she not send them, the people who did may not have realized they were marked (c). She did not lie under oath. Had she done so, she would have been prosecuted. Remember what they did to her husband for his dirty little lie? They certainly would have done the same to her if they could have! 1> Never said she knowingly TRANSMITTED anything. She maintained them on an unsecure server which allowed hackers access to them. Then she lied about them, after deleting a bunch of them. 2> And Yes... she did lie under oath. You can keep saying she didn't all you want. All that does is make you a liar the same as Hillary if you do. What you seem to forget is people are scared to prosecute her... for whatever reason (no, I don't know why they are so scared of her... I wish I did). So your "if they could have" is kind of irrelevant. It wasn't for lack of evidence that they "couldn't"... it was for lack of integrity and courage. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 17, 2024 7:30:26 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2016 19:28:12 GMT -5
Anyone that will deny the simple truth... for whatever reason that they want to deny it. If people didn't think she was "the bestest candidate evah" they would admit the simple truths that are easily found.
I'd be willing to bet the Hillary supporters would have said Capone was innocent of all the things he didn't get prosecuted for either. The bolded is your reasoning and is really your opinion. You don't have to go far into Google to find that Trump is a much worse liar than Hillary Clinton by objective measure, yet you continually post how Hillary is more of a liar than Donald is. I am realistic enough to see that you don't think Trump is the best candidate ever, just who you prefer over Clinton in almost any match up.
If you refuse to see the overwhelming evidence about Trump's lies, why do you think people who prefer someone else, Hillary instead of Trump, might not see her flaws the same way as you do? I did check some of what your Google search brought up. I'd have to do some additional research to see how Hillary's polices compared to others at the time both Democrats and Republicans. One of the ones she is judged as being bad on was quite in vogue at the time, restricting welfare and putting limits on it. Most policies are juggling acts as that they are going to be good for some people, bad for others, and neutral for some.
You need to get your reading glasses checked... I never said she was a worse liar. I said she's a worse choice for President. They are both liars. 1 lie or a billion lies... I don't care after the first one. After the first one you are no longer trustworthy. (it's one of the reasons that I NEVER lie.) |
|
ken a.k.a OMK
Senior Associate
They killed Kenny, the bastards.
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 14:39:20 GMT -5
Posts: 14,281
Location: Maryland
|
Post by ken a.k.a OMK on Oct 3, 2016 20:00:02 GMT -5
For all you who have never had a security clearance I want to say again and make myself very clear. If someone sends me a classified document it is up to them to use a secured line and make it clear that it's secret. Don't even call me and start discussing it. It isn't up to me to realize you broke the law.
If I check out a secret document then I'm responsible to safe guard it until I return it. If I leave it somewhere and you pick it up then I'm guilty, not you. Same is true on electronically transmitted material.
Marking documents as secret after she's out of office was just method of going after her.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 17, 2024 7:30:26 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2016 20:47:12 GMT -5
I would love to hear your credentials... Mine are the same as most people's here..... they are confined to what I have learned by reading about the process. However the truth is the truth.Yes it is. And the truth is that when it comes to classified information while it's the originating party's responsibility to keep it secret in the first place... the receiver of it ALSO bears the responsibility of KEEPING IT secret and taking whatever steps necessary for not allowing it to go further than them. Otherwise they become a new "originating party". (Unless things have changed since my Air Force: Instruction on Classified Materials class in '85 at Lackland AFB, TX) |
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,662
|
Post by tallguy on Oct 4, 2016 21:04:21 GMT -5
Mine are the same as most people's here..... they are confined to what I have learned by reading about the process. However the truth is the truth.Yes it is. And the truth is that when it comes to classified information while it's the originating party's responsibility to keep it secret in the first place... the receiver of it ALSO bears the responsibility of KEEPING IT secret and taking whatever steps necessary for not allowing it to go further than them. Otherwise they become a new "originating party". (Unless things have changed since my Air Force: Instruction on Classified Materials class in '85 at Lackland AFB, TX) Well there's your problem right there! You know that Texas education is crap with all of the textbooks filled with biased or flat-out wrong information pushed by ultraconservatives. |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 17, 2024 7:30:26 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2016 21:17:29 GMT -5
Yes it is. And the truth is that when it comes to classified information while it's the originating party's responsibility to keep it secret in the first place... the receiver of it ALSO bears the responsibility of KEEPING IT secret and taking whatever steps necessary for not allowing it to go further than them. Otherwise they become a new "originating party". (Unless things have changed since my Air Force: Instruction on Classified Materials class in '85 at Lackland AFB, TX) Well there's your problem right there! You know that Texas education is crap with all of the textbooks filled with biased or flat-out wrong information pushed by ultraconservatives. I wondered if anyone would mention Texas' terrible track record with educating. But no.. this wasn't "Texas Standard" education... this was "Military Grade" educating. |
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,662
|
Post by tallguy on Oct 4, 2016 21:25:58 GMT -5
Well there's your problem right there! You know that Texas education is crap with all of the textbooks filled with biased or flat-out wrong information pushed by ultraconservatives. I wondered if anyone would mention Texas' terrible track record with educating. But no.. this wasn't "Texas Standard" education... this was "Military Grade" educating. You mean a government program? |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 17, 2024 7:30:26 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2016 21:52:39 GMT -5
I wondered if anyone would mention Texas' terrible track record with educating. But no.. this wasn't "Texas Standard" education... this was "Military Grade" educating. You mean a government program? I never said ALL government programs were bad... |
|
tallguy
Senior Associate
Joined: Apr 2, 2011 19:21:59 GMT -5
Posts: 14,662
|
Post by tallguy on Oct 4, 2016 21:54:45 GMT -5
Uh-huh.  |
|
Deleted
Joined: Nov 17, 2024 7:30:26 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2016 22:01:37 GMT -5
True fact. I never did.
|
|
