|
Post by redleg on Aug 17, 2015 8:20:31 GMT -5
It is puzzling how the top statesman of the worlds most powerful nation could operate in any capacity without ever sending or receiving classified material. In the state department even the menu for an insignificant meeting could be classified! Or the schedule for the tennis courts? I'm not a government guy but in my area those people are everywhere, and most claim to have handled classified material in order to perform their job. Even at very low pay grades. Maybe Ms. Clinton is being truthful. She could not be trusted with any information of importance? She was an actress performing a role, and not allowed to perform any real role in the state department? Seems to have done OK... 'cept she didn't have to tell anyone that security in Benghazi would be low... the Republicans did that when they decided to cut funding for it... "They" didn't. The Puppet did that, with his henchmen forcing the "sequester". And yet, State had the money to spend billions on "art" for various other consulates.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Aug 17, 2015 8:23:14 GMT -5
Hillary is not Nixon... although she worked on the procedure for the potential Nixon impeachment trial... Be sure to let us all know if anything new and important happens... You mean like the fact that they have found at least 60 of Hillary's emails that are classified, 2 of them Top Secret? That would be enough to have anyone else already in jail, awaiting the rest of their sentence.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Aug 17, 2015 8:41:23 GMT -5
Does that same thinking apply to Colin?... or just Hillary?... he said he did the same thing... First, did he use a private server exclusively, as Hillary did? Second, did he send and receive classified info on his private server? Third, did he lie about having a private server, then lie about what was on it? Fourth, did he wipe his server after being served with multiple subpoenas for it? Hillary has done all those things. Petreaus was convicted of having just a couple of classified docs on his private server, and giving them to his biographer. How many has Hillary given to the Chinese, Russians, and various Arab countries? There is NO evidence so far that Clinton had knowledge of ANY "Confidential," much less "Secret" or "Top Secret" information on her computer that was not released to the powers that be...
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Aug 17, 2015 8:46:05 GMT -5
No, she didn't... and no, she didn't... You obviously know very little about handling classified documents. She was required, by law, to use a government computer, if for no other reason than to preserve documents under the law. Second, she was required by law to turn over ALL classified information in her possession to authorize individuals. Because she used a private server, in defiance of the law, her entire server was classified. Therefore, she was required to turn it over. I have held a "Secret" clearance and have handled such documents... and she DID turn over all that she was asked to turn over to the best of her knowledge... And like I said, Colin Powell also used a private server... (it wasn't in defiance of the law for him)... but, being a Republican, he was not asked for the same things Clinton, who happens to be a Democrat, was asked to produce...
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Aug 17, 2015 8:52:08 GMT -5
Seems to have done OK... 'cept she didn't have to tell anyone that security in Benghazi would be low... the Republicans did that when they decided to cut funding for it... "They" didn't. The Puppet did that, with his henchmen forcing the "sequester". And yet, State had the money to spend billions on "art" for various other consulates. In 2011, Congress passed a law saying that if they couldn’t agree on a plan to reduce our deficit by $4 trillion — including the $2.5 trillion in deficit reduction lawmakers in both parties have already accomplished over the last few years — about $1 trillion in automatic, arbitrary and across the board budget cuts would start to take effect in 2013.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Aug 17, 2015 8:53:01 GMT -5
Hillary is not Nixon... although she worked on the procedure for the potential Nixon impeachment trial... Be sure to let us all know if anything new and important happens... You mean like the fact that they have found at least 60 of Hillary's emails that are classified, 2 of them Top Secret? That would be enough to have anyone else already in jail, awaiting the rest of their sentence. I don't think so... as of right now... tune in something other than Fox News...
|
|
|
Post by Ravenchamp on Aug 17, 2015 9:11:54 GMT -5
I only go to fox for truth. I call it the Trump network
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Aug 17, 2015 9:16:17 GMT -5
They sort of have to. If Herself's campaign really falters, they really have no one else. Bernie Sanders is so far left, he doesn't even normally run as a Democrat. Biden and Gore would be starting late. They need to find themselves another viable candidate FAST. It's going to be rather ironic, but they're very likely to be the party of old white men this time around. It'll be extra ironic if the GOP nominates Fiorina and turns out to be the only party running a woman. So far, the Democrats have been using the 'war on women' meme as a primary campaign plank to prep the way for Hillary. That crashes and burns if they end up with Sanders or Biden. It turns into a crater one of those guys will have to climb out of if Fiorina wins the GOP nomination. Not that it's been all that effective this year, what with Dr. Nucatola's video talking about selling livers over a nice Chianti and a bowl of fava beans. The Democrats are not looking for anyone else... and the primary voters, not the Party, will be the ones to select the nominee... And BTW, most of the Republican hopefuls are old White men or woman... several of them are well over the age of 60... Sure they are. Even the voters. Sanders currently leads Herself in New Hampshire. It's simply not true that most of the Republicans are old white men. Trump, Pataki, Gilmore, and Perry, fall into that category. Everyone else is under 65. Walker, Cruz, Rubio and Jindal are all under 50. For the Democrats, only O'Malley and Chafee are under 65. Hillary is 67, Webb 69 and Sanders is 74. If Biden gets in, he's 72, and Gore is 67. Except for O'Malley and Chafee, they're ALL old. Except for Hillary, they're all men, and every last one of them is white. The Republicans, by contrast, sport a pair of Latinos, a black, an Indian, and have just as many women running as the Democrats. We'll have more women running too, when Hillary finishes Herself off.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Aug 17, 2015 9:25:47 GMT -5
The Democrats are not looking for anyone else... and the primary voters, not the Party, will be the ones to select the nominee... And BTW, most of the Republican hopefuls are old White men or woman... several of them are well over the age of 60... Sure they are. Even the voters. Sanders currently leads Herself in New Hampshire. It's simply not true that most of the Republicans are old white men. Trump, Pataki, Gilmore, and Perry, fall into that category. Everyone else is under 65. Walker, Cruz, Rubio and Jindal are all under 50. For the Democrats, only O'Malley and Chafee are under 65. Hillary is 67, Webb 69 and Sanders is 74. If Biden gets in, he's 72, and Gore is 67. Except for O'Malley and Chafee, they're ALL old. Except for Hillary, they're all men, and every last one of them is white. The Republicans, by contrast, sport a pair of Latinos, a black, an Indian, and have just as many women running as the Democrats. We'll have more women running too, when Hillary finishes Herself off. Who wouldn't expect Sanders to lead the pack in his own territory... it would be foolish to think he wouldn't... nuff said here... And like I said, depending on what you consider "old"... many consider 60 to be old... but many others even say 55... at least that's what AARP says... And the Democrats aren't scrambling to get a Latino... a Black... or an Indian... none of that is required to serve as a good President... only looks like you are trying to be diverse... not necessary... only a brain counts...
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Aug 17, 2015 9:27:15 GMT -5
First, did he use a private server exclusively, as Hillary did? Second, did he send and receive classified info on his private server? Third, did he lie about having a private server, then lie about what was on it? Fourth, did he wipe his server after being served with multiple subpoenas for it? Hillary has done all those things. Petreaus was convicted of having just a couple of classified docs on his private server, and giving them to his biographer. How many has Hillary given to the Chinese, Russians, and various Arab countries? There is NO evidence so far that Clinton had knowledge of ANY "Confidential," much less "Secret" or "Top Secret" information on her computer that was not released to the powers that be... She doesn't have to have "knowledge". It was her private server. It doesn't matter if she knew or not. And as SecState, if she didn't know, she should be in prison for criminal stupidity, since one of the responsibilities of Cabinet Secretaries is to classify information. Or to have intel classify it. If she didn't know that OPSEC docs were classified, then she wasn't SecState. She was just the figurehead, put there to scare small children and sell our national security to the highest bidder for The Puppet.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Aug 17, 2015 9:29:43 GMT -5
You obviously know very little about handling classified documents. She was required, by law, to use a government computer, if for no other reason than to preserve documents under the law. Second, she was required by law to turn over ALL classified information in her possession to authorize individuals. Because she used a private server, in defiance of the law, her entire server was classified. Therefore, she was required to turn it over. I have held a "Secret" clearance and have handled such documents... and she DID turn over all that she was asked to turn over to the best of her knowledge... And like I said, Colin Powell also used a private server... (it wasn't in defiance of the law for him)... but, being a Republican, he was not asked for the same things Clinton, who happens to be a Democrat, was asked to produce... No, she didn't. She didn't turn over her server. If you did handle any classified material, then you know that any computer, or server, that has had classified info on it is also classified to the highest level of the information that was on it. Period. That means that when she gave her server to a company that had no security clearance, she 'passed classified information to a person or persons not authorized to have it".
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Aug 17, 2015 9:29:57 GMT -5
Looking back, I see the post where I mentioned "how old is old" was the one that I lost while posting... and couldn't remember all I had said... (I was busy and had company... darn Republican)... and left that part out of the second post...
My apologies...
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Aug 17, 2015 9:31:55 GMT -5
"They" didn't. The Puppet did that, with his henchmen forcing the "sequester". And yet, State had the money to spend billions on "art" for various other consulates. In 2011, Congress passed a law saying that if they couldn’t agree on a plan to reduce our deficit by $4 trillion — including the $2.5 trillion in deficit reduction lawmakers in both parties have already accomplished over the last few years — about $1 trillion in automatic, arbitrary and across the board budget cuts would start to take effect in 2013.And the Dems on that committee were told, in no uncertain terms, to vote against anything that came out of the committee, regardless of what it was. The Pubs actually gave the Dems everything they demanded, and then some, and the Dems still voted it down. It was a rigged game from the get go, because The Puppet was always going to use it to gut the military, and anything else that was a Constitutional requirement, and make sure that it all fell on Red states, or on programs that Pubs supported.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Aug 17, 2015 9:32:13 GMT -5
There is NO evidence so far that Clinton had knowledge of ANY "Confidential," much less "Secret" or "Top Secret" information on her computer that was not released to the powers that be... She doesn't have to have "knowledge". It was her private server. It doesn't matter if she knew or not. And as SecState, if she didn't know, she should be in prison for criminal stupidity, since one of the responsibilities of Cabinet Secretaries is to classify information. Or to have intel classify it. If she didn't know that OPSEC docs were classified, then she wasn't SecState. She was just the figurehead, put there to scare small children and sell our national security to the highest bidder for The Puppet. There's some more of that stuff in my neighbor's cow field, Redleg...
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Aug 17, 2015 9:32:57 GMT -5
You mean like the fact that they have found at least 60 of Hillary's emails that are classified, 2 of them Top Secret? That would be enough to have anyone else already in jail, awaiting the rest of their sentence. I don't think so... as of right now... tune in something other than Fox News... Maybe you should tune in something other than huffingtonpuffington post, or DU. There are quite a few articles on it, even some of the LR media is being forced to report on it.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Aug 17, 2015 9:33:32 GMT -5
I have held a "Secret" clearance and have handled such documents... and she DID turn over all that she was asked to turn over to the best of her knowledge... And like I said, Colin Powell also used a private server... (it wasn't in defiance of the law for him)... but, being a Republican, he was not asked for the same things Clinton, who happens to be a Democrat, was asked to produce... No, she didn't. She didn't turn over her server. If you did handle any classified material, then you know that any computer, or server, that has had classified info on it is also classified to the highest level of the information that was on it. Period. That means that when she gave her server to a company that had no security clearance, she 'passed classified information to a person or persons not authorized to have it". More of that "stuff"...
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Aug 17, 2015 9:34:43 GMT -5
Sure they are. Even the voters. Sanders currently leads Herself in New Hampshire. It's simply not true that most of the Republicans are old white men. Trump, Pataki, Gilmore, and Perry, fall into that category. Everyone else is under 65. Walker, Cruz, Rubio and Jindal are all under 50. For the Democrats, only O'Malley and Chafee are under 65. Hillary is 67, Webb 69 and Sanders is 74. If Biden gets in, he's 72, and Gore is 67. Except for O'Malley and Chafee, they're ALL old. Except for Hillary, they're all men, and every last one of them is white. The Republicans, by contrast, sport a pair of Latinos, a black, an Indian, and have just as many women running as the Democrats. We'll have more women running too, when Hillary finishes Herself off. Who wouldn't expect Sanders to lead the pack in his own territory... it would be foolish to think he wouldn't... nuff said here... And like I said, depending on what you consider "old"... many consider 60 to be old... but many others even say 55... at least that's what AARP says... And the Democrats aren't scrambling to get a Latino... a Black... or an Indian... none of that is required to serve as a good President... only looks like you are trying to be diverse... not necessary... only a brain counts... And there isn't one among all the Dem candidates. Isn't the Party of the KKK supposed to be the "inclusive" party? If so, why can they only find old, white Communists to run?
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Aug 17, 2015 9:36:29 GMT -5
She doesn't have to have "knowledge". It was her private server. It doesn't matter if she knew or not. And as SecState, if she didn't know, she should be in prison for criminal stupidity, since one of the responsibilities of Cabinet Secretaries is to classify information. Or to have intel classify it. If she didn't know that OPSEC docs were classified, then she wasn't SecState. She was just the figurehead, put there to scare small children and sell our national security to the highest bidder for The Puppet. There's some more of that stuff in my neighbor's cow field, Redleg... So, you are saying that the Party of the KKK appointed a person as SecState that was too stupid to know what was classified, and what wasn't? Or that she wasn't allowed to use a private server to do official business, because of the likelyhood of hacking? No wonder we are in the state we are in, with the Party of the KKK running things.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Aug 17, 2015 9:37:16 GMT -5
I don't think so... as of right now... tune in something other than Fox News... Maybe you should tune in something other than huffingtonpuffington post, or DU. There are quite a few articles on it, even some of the LR media is being forced to report on it. They can say anything... but just saying it doesn't change the facts...
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Aug 17, 2015 9:38:02 GMT -5
No, she didn't. She didn't turn over her server. If you did handle any classified material, then you know that any computer, or server, that has had classified info on it is also classified to the highest level of the information that was on it. Period. That means that when she gave her server to a company that had no security clearance, she 'passed classified information to a person or persons not authorized to have it". More of that "stuff"... So, you DIDN'T ever handle classified info. No wonder you have no idea what is going on with the criminal SecState.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Aug 17, 2015 9:39:52 GMT -5
Who wouldn't expect Sanders to lead the pack in his own territory... it would be foolish to think he wouldn't... nuff said here... And like I said, depending on what you consider "old"... many consider 60 to be old... but many others even say 55... at least that's what AARP says... And the Democrats aren't scrambling to get a Latino... a Black... or an Indian... none of that is required to serve as a good President... only looks like you are trying to be diverse... not necessary... only a brain counts... And there isn't one among all the Dem candidates. Isn't the Party of the KKK supposed to be the "inclusive" party? If so, why can they only find old, white Communists to run? Like I have said here... there are some 100 individuals running for the nomination on the Democrat side... several Blacks... several women... and even several Hispanics... only about 40 on the Republican side...
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Aug 17, 2015 9:41:57 GMT -5
Sure they are. Even the voters. Sanders currently leads Herself in New Hampshire. It's simply not true that most of the Republicans are old white men. Trump, Pataki, Gilmore, and Perry, fall into that category. Everyone else is under 65. Walker, Cruz, Rubio and Jindal are all under 50. For the Democrats, only O'Malley and Chafee are under 65. Hillary is 67, Webb 69 and Sanders is 74. If Biden gets in, he's 72, and Gore is 67. Except for O'Malley and Chafee, they're ALL old. Except for Hillary, they're all men, and every last one of them is white. The Republicans, by contrast, sport a pair of Latinos, a black, an Indian, and have just as many women running as the Democrats. We'll have more women running too, when Hillary finishes Herself off. Who wouldn't expect Sanders to lead the pack in his own territory... it would be foolish to think he wouldn't... nuff said here... Dude is a crackpot socialist, who doesn't consider himself a Democrat in his current post as U.S. Senator from Vermont. New Hampshire is known for its libertarian streak. How is a Democratic race for ANYTHING his home territory? Let alone outside of crazy-left Vermont? If 55 becomes the cutoff, then only O'Malley isn't old on the Democrat side. On the Republican side, Walker, Rubio, Jindal, Cruz, Paul and Christie are all under 55. Raise it to 60, and Huckabee and Santorum make the cut. Graham and Fiorina are on the cusp, as they're both 60. That's 10 out of the 17 candidates. LMAO! That's going to be a tough sell for all those voters who voted for Obama because it was 'historic'. If a brain counts, he never would have been elected.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Aug 17, 2015 9:41:51 GMT -5
So, you DIDN'T ever handle classified info. No wonder you have no idea what is going on with the criminal SecState. Yes, I did... but the details of that are none of your business... I will say that I was a communications expert...
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Aug 17, 2015 9:41:47 GMT -5
Maybe you should tune in something other than huffingtonpuffington post, or DU. There are quite a few articles on it, even some of the LR media is being forced to report on it. They can say anything... but just saying it doesn't change the facts... The facts are that Hillary violated national security, sold her office as SecState to the highest bidder, and may have committed espionage against the US.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Aug 17, 2015 9:45:33 GMT -5
Who wouldn't expect Sanders to lead the pack in his own territory... it would be foolish to think he wouldn't... nuff said here... Dude is a crackpot socialist, who doesn't consider himself a Democrat in his current post as U.S. Senator from Vermont. New Hampshire is known for its libertarian streak. How is a Democratic race for ANYTHING his home territory? Let alone outside of crazy-left Vermont? If 55 becomes the cutoff, then only O'Malley isn't old on the Democrat side. On the Republican side, Walker, Rubio, Jindal, Cruz, Paul and Christie are all under 55. Raise it to 60, and Huckabee and Santorum make the cut. Graham and Fiorina are on the cusp, as they're both 60. That's 10 out of the 17 candidates. LMAO! That's going to be a tough sell for all those voters who voted for Obama because it was 'historic'. If a brain counts, he never would have been elected. Keep laughing... but I'm bettin' I get the last one...
|
|