|
Post by immrblue on Oct 23, 2015 14:52:33 GMT -5
Dothan........... BAD memories of that place. Contractors at Napier Field killed 3 friends due to their faulty maintenance in Nov 85. www.flickr.com/photos/23032926@N05/5100212518 Shame a VIP bird at one time, shame some of the enemies of this country from within weren't aboard.
|
|
|
Post by breakingbad on Dec 15, 2015 15:13:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Dec 15, 2015 20:40:55 GMT -5
And aboutwell is right... again... what else has Fox News got?... this boat just don't float...
|
|
|
Post by aponderer on Dec 16, 2015 8:37:50 GMT -5
And aboutwell is right... again... what else has Fox News got?... this boat just don't float... Forget Fox News. The real issue is whether or not she'll be prosecuted for what she's done wrong. The fact that classified emails were found on her unclassified (and unauthorized) server and that she did not report it when those emails were received is prima facie evidence of wrongdoing. With the likes of this Administration's Justice Dept. it seems unlikely anything will come of it, though. Unless, of course, James Comey is somehow not muzzled. If you had allowed classified emails to be on your computer without reporting it, you would likely be posting from jail...
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Dec 16, 2015 9:46:57 GMT -5
And aboutwell is right... again... what else has Fox News got?... this boat just don't float... Forget Fox News. The real issue is whether or not she'll be prosecuted for what she's done wrong. The fact that classified emails were found on her unclassified (and unauthorized) server and that she did not report it when those emails were received is prima facie evidence of wrongdoing. With the likes of this Administration's Justice Dept. it seems unlikely anything will come of it, though. Unless, of course, James Comey is somehow not muzzled. If you had allowed classified emails to be on your computer without reporting it, you would likely be posting from jail... All depends on whether she knew for a fact that they were classified or not at the time... she says she didn't... maybe she should have known... but who am I... or you... to say?... there is no proof that she did anything intentionally wrong... no matter how hard you try... There are times when we get ticketed or in trouble for not knowing what the law, the rules, the protocol, or something else was at the time... I've been there myself... (never paid a fine)... and sometime we don't... (some people are reasonable)... you want her prosecuted... because you don't like her... which is fine... I don't... because I do... Fox News would like nothing more than to see her prosecuted... you know that... I think... Prepare yourself... she's likely to be your President for the next 4 or 8 years...
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Dec 16, 2015 9:50:13 GMT -5
Forget Fox News. The real issue is whether or not she'll be prosecuted for what she's done wrong. The fact that classified emails were found on her unclassified (and unauthorized) server and that she did not report it when those emails were received is prima facie evidence of wrongdoing. With the likes of this Administration's Justice Dept. it seems unlikely anything will come of it, though. Unless, of course, James Comey is somehow not muzzled. If you had allowed classified emails to be on your computer without reporting it, you would likely be posting from jail... All depends on whether she knew for a fact that they were classified or not at the time... she says she didn't... maybe she should have known... but who am I... or you... to say?... there is no proof that she did anything intentionally wrong... no matter how hard you try... There are times when we get ticketed or in trouble for not knowing what the law, the rules, the protocol, or something else was at the time... I've been there myself... (never paid a fine)... and sometime we don't... (some people are reasonable)... you want her prosecuted... because you don't like her... which is fine... I don't... because I do... Fox News would like nothing more than to see her prosecuted... you know that... I think... Prepare yourself... she's likely to be your President for the next 4 or 8 years... She WAS THE BOSS. If she didn't know, it simply shows how incompetent and irrelevant she was. And she was using an unauthorized, unprotected server. That, in and of itself is illegal.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Dec 16, 2015 10:26:03 GMT -5
All depends on whether she knew for a fact that they were classified or not at the time... she says she didn't... maybe she should have known... but who am I... or you... to say?... there is no proof that she did anything intentionally wrong... no matter how hard you try... There are times when we get ticketed or in trouble for not knowing what the law, the rules, the protocol, or something else was at the time... I've been there myself... (never paid a fine)... and sometime we don't... (some people are reasonable)... you want her prosecuted... because you don't like her... which is fine... I don't... because I do... Fox News would like nothing more than to see her prosecuted... you know that... I think... Prepare yourself... she's likely to be your President for the next 4 or 8 years... She WAS THE BOSS. If she didn't know, it simply shows how incompetent and irrelevant she was. And she was using an unauthorized, unprotected server. That, in and of itself is illegal.
|
|
|
Post by aponderer on Dec 16, 2015 10:48:08 GMT -5
Forget Fox News. The real issue is whether or not she'll be prosecuted for what she's done wrong. The fact that classified emails were found on her unclassified (and unauthorized) server and that she did not report it when those emails were received is prima facie evidence of wrongdoing. With the likes of this Administration's Justice Dept. it seems unlikely anything will come of it, though. Unless, of course, James Comey is somehow not muzzled. If you had allowed classified emails to be on your computer without reporting it, you would likely be posting from jail... All depends on whether she knew for a fact that they were classified or not at the time... she says she didn't... maybe she should have known... but who am I... or you... to say?... there is no proof that she did anything intentionally wrong... no matter how hard you try... There are times when we get ticketed or in trouble for not knowing what the law, the rules, the protocol, or something else was at the time... I've been there myself... (never paid a fine)... and sometime we don't... (some people are reasonable)... you want her prosecuted... because you don't like her... which is fine... I don't... because I do... Fox News would like nothing more than to see her prosecuted... you know that... I think... Prepare yourself... she's likely to be your President for the next 4 or 8 years... I guess that old judicial adage "Ignorance of the law is no excuse" doesn't apply to her... Because of her position, she was expected to know all the rules regarding protection of classified information. Anyone in gov't service (including the military) who is authorized to access classified information is not only briefed on the rules (law), but must sign a document accepting responsibility for protecting that classified information, especially compartmented classified information (i.e., special access, even within the classification level). In addition to that, if one is authorized to access classified information, there must be a "need to know" to access that information before one is permitted to access that information. For example, if one holds a SECRET clearance, that is not enough to be able to access all information classified SECRET; there must exist a need to know before one can access that information. I would find it hard to believe that Ms. Clinton's position would not have authorization to access all classified levels of information and would not be charged with protection of all classified information within the State Department. Failure to comply with all the rules of handling and protecting classified information is much more serious than one getting caught with ones hand in the cookie jar. [unless ones name is Sandy Berger...]
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2015 11:10:18 GMT -5
Forget Fox News. The real issue is whether or not she'll be prosecuted for what she's done wrong. The fact that classified emails were found on her unclassified (and unauthorized) server and that she did not report it when those emails were received is prima facie evidence of wrongdoing. With the likes of this Administration's Justice Dept. it seems unlikely anything will come of it, though. Unless, of course, James Comey is somehow not muzzled. If you had allowed classified emails to be on your computer without reporting it, you would likely be posting from jail... All depends on whether she knew for a fact that they were classified or not at the time... she says she didn't... maybe she should have known... but who am I... or you... to say?... there is no proof that she did anything intentionally wrong... no matter how hard you try... There are times when we get ticketed or in trouble for not knowing what the law, the rules, the protocol, or something else was at the time... I've been there myself... (never paid a fine)... and sometime we don't... (some people are reasonable)... you want her prosecuted... because you don't like her... which is fine... I don't... because I do... Fox News would like nothing more than to see her prosecuted... you know that... I think... Prepare yourself... she's likely to be your President for the next 4 or 8 years... Hilliary is not becoming president unless she rigs the election. She was only borderline electable in 2008. And she didn't have Benghazi, mishandling of classified info, and Obama's poor policies then. Hillary is not a person most people would want to have a beer with; she is just not likable enough.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Dec 16, 2015 12:47:07 GMT -5
All depends on whether she knew for a fact that they were classified or not at the time... she says she didn't... maybe she should have known... but who am I... or you... to say?... there is no proof that she did anything intentionally wrong... no matter how hard you try... There are times when we get ticketed or in trouble for not knowing what the law, the rules, the protocol, or something else was at the time... I've been there myself... (never paid a fine)... and sometime we don't... (some people are reasonable)... you want her prosecuted... because you don't like her... which is fine... I don't... because I do... Fox News would like nothing more than to see her prosecuted... you know that... I think... Prepare yourself... she's likely to be your President for the next 4 or 8 years... Hilliary is not becoming president unless she rigs the election. She was only borderline electable in 2008. And she didn't have Benghazi, mishandling of classified info, and Obama's poor policies then. Hillary is not a person most people would want to have a beer with; she is just not likable enough. Many Democrats who supported Obama in 2008 wished later that Hillary had won the nomination... she'll get another chance in '16...
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Dec 16, 2015 12:51:16 GMT -5
All depends on whether she knew for a fact that they were classified or not at the time... she says she didn't... maybe she should have known... but who am I... or you... to say?... there is no proof that she did anything intentionally wrong... no matter how hard you try... There are times when we get ticketed or in trouble for not knowing what the law, the rules, the protocol, or something else was at the time... I've been there myself... (never paid a fine)... and sometime we don't... (some people are reasonable)... you want her prosecuted... because you don't like her... which is fine... I don't... because I do... Fox News would like nothing more than to see her prosecuted... you know that... I think... Prepare yourself... she's likely to be your President for the next 4 or 8 years... I guess that old judicial adage "Ignorance of the law is no excuse" doesn't apply to her... I've been lucky a few time on that one myself... when I didn't familiarize myself with all the laws in a state I was traveling to or through... which ALL drivers are supposed to be held accountable... the law or state officials took my word (ignorance of it) for it... you can't take Hillary's...
|
|
|
Post by aponderer on Dec 16, 2015 16:39:12 GMT -5
I guess that old judicial adage "Ignorance of the law is no excuse" doesn't apply to her... I've been lucky a few time on that one myself... when I didn't familiarize myself with all the laws in a state I was traveling to or through... which ALL drivers are supposed to be held accountable... the law or state officials took my word (ignorance of it) for it... you can't take Hillary's... Now that traffic laws, in general (I'm not talking speed limits, here) are pretty much standardized across all states (those that don't comply face the loss of federal transportation funding), if you were, say, the head of your state's MVA (or DMV), I doubt that the law or state officials in another state would give you the benefit of the doubt on ignorance of the law on matters of traffic law... You would expected to know the law...
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Dec 16, 2015 18:50:55 GMT -5
I've been lucky a few time on that one myself... when I didn't familiarize myself with all the laws in a state I was traveling to or through... which ALL drivers are supposed to be held accountable... the law or state officials took my word (ignorance of it) for it... you can't take Hillary's... Now that traffic laws, in general (I'm not talking speed limits, here) are pretty much standardized across all states (those that don't comply face the loss of federal transportation funding), if you were, say, the head of your state's MVA (or DMV), I doubt that the law or state officials in another state would give you the benefit of the doubt on ignorance of the law on matters of traffic law... You would expected to know the law... I could give you a good example of one I got near Raton, New Mexico... and another one near Missouli, Montana... but you might not believe it them... (and I might have already told one of them here before)... Most travel information I've seen tells travelers to familiarize themselves with laws of the states in which they will be traveling before they go... I'm not sure that most do...
|
|
|
Post by aponderer on Dec 17, 2015 7:29:56 GMT -5
Getting back to "ignorance of the law" and classified emails on her server...
Do you really think that Ms. Clinton (a lawyer) did not know the law regarding handling and protecting classified information? Could it be that she did know the law, but considered herself above the law? Or maybe she was an adherent of her husband's opinions on the meaning of is?
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 17, 2015 8:25:14 GMT -5
Getting back to "ignorance of the law" and classified emails on her server... Do you really think that Ms. Clinton (a lawyer) did not know the law regarding handling and protecting classified information? Could it be that she did know the law, but considered herself above the law? Or maybe she was an adherent of her husband's opinions on the meaning of is? Does it even matter? If she knew the law and violated it, she's corrupt. If she didn't know the law, she is dangerously incompetent. Either way, it's criminal, and she has no business in the White House.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Dec 17, 2015 10:14:37 GMT -5
Hilliary is not becoming president unless she rigs the election. She was only borderline electable in 2008. And she didn't have Benghazi, mishandling of classified info, and Obama's poor policies then. Hillary is not a person most people would want to have a beer with; she is just not likable enough. Many Democrats who supported Obama in 2008 wished later that Hillary had won the nomination... she'll get another chance in '16... Only those that also demand that their 'significant others' whip them, tie them up, and control every aspect of their lives.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Dec 17, 2015 10:29:20 GMT -5
Getting back to "ignorance of the law" and classified emails on her server... Do you really think that Ms. Clinton (a lawyer) did not know the law regarding handling and protecting classified information? Could it be that she did know the law, but considered herself above the law? Or maybe she was an adherent of her husband's opinions on the meaning of is?If she did, she was far ahead of you...
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Dec 17, 2015 10:30:33 GMT -5
Getting back to "ignorance of the law" and classified emails on her server... Do you really think that Ms. Clinton (a lawyer) did not know the law regarding handling and protecting classified information? Could it be that she did know the law, but considered herself above the law? Or maybe she was an adherent of her husband's opinions on the meaning of is? Does it even matter? If she knew the law and violated it, she's corrupt. If she didn't know the law, she is dangerously incompetent. Either way, it's criminal, and she has no business in the White House. Can we say President Ms Clinton in 2017?...
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Dec 17, 2015 10:36:00 GMT -5
Many Democrats who supported Obama in 2008 wished later that Hillary had won the nomination... she'll get another chance in '16... Only those that also demand that their 'significant others' whip them, tie them up, and control every aspect of their lives. I was one of those who supported Clinton all the way through the caucus and primary process until the very end in '08... voting against Obama 6 times that year... Clinton 5... McCain once... Many of my friends and associates did so as well... but went back to Obama when McCain selected Palin fir his VP running mate...
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 17, 2015 11:35:19 GMT -5
Does it even matter? If she knew the law and violated it, she's corrupt. If she didn't know the law, she is dangerously incompetent. Either way, it's criminal, and she has no business in the White House. Can we say President Ms Clinton in 2017?... Sure. If we choke back a bit of vomit.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Dec 17, 2015 12:04:29 GMT -5
Can we say President Ms Clinton in 2017?... Sure. If we choke back a bit of vomit. Get ready...
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Dec 17, 2015 12:09:16 GMT -5
Sure. If we choke back a bit of vomit. Get ready... If it's a choice between Hillary and Trump, I'm prepared to vote for Hillary. The continued destruction of the Democratic Party is necessary for the future of this country, and if Trump wins, the destruction of the Democrats stops. Only Hillary can continue doing to the Democratic Party what Obama has done.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Dec 17, 2015 13:33:44 GMT -5
I look forward to it...
My former union, the CWA, has just endorsed Bernie Sanders this morning... disappointing... that's where I cast one of my several votes against Barack Obama in Las Vegas...
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Dec 18, 2015 11:27:06 GMT -5
Only those that also demand that their 'significant others' whip them, tie them up, and control every aspect of their lives. I was one of those who supported Clinton all the way through the caucus and primary process until the very end in '08... voting against Obama 6 times that year... Clinton 5... McCain once... Many of my friends and associates did so as well... but went back to Obama when McCain selected Palin fir his VP running mate... That's because you favor having someone else make every decision in your life for you. That, and the complete genocide of blacks. There is no other reason to vote Democrat.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2015 12:30:55 GMT -5
If it's a choice between Hillary and Trump, I'm prepared to vote for Hillary. The continued destruction of the Democratic Party is necessary for the future of this country, and if Trump wins, the destruction of the Democrats stops. Only Hillary can continue doing to the Democratic Party what Obama has done. I think the potential damage Trump could do to the republican party pales in comparison to the damage Hillary could do to our country. At least with Trump there is an off chance of something good happening. If Hillary gets in, the concept of political parties may become irrelevant by the next election.
|
|