Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Of course it doesnt bother you. Clinton is a Democrat. But I'll bet you went apeshit over Mark Sanford meeting his mistress in Argentina.Dr Grump doesnt care about the law. He doesnt care that a CEO having an affair with a 22yr old staffer would get him fired anywhere immediately. He only cares that Bill Clinton was a Democrat and therefore a good guy and Nixon was a Republican and therefore a bad guy.
I care about the bottom line. Clinton getting a blowjob doesn't bother me. Now if he had told Lewinsky the launch codes while getting his dick sucked, then that is a whole different matter. You might think him getting a blow job is infinitely worse than sending more than 4000 of your fellow Americans off to die (let alone the 100s of 1000s of Afghani and Iraqi civilians). I don't.
Still butthurt because you can't read a graph?
Dr Grump doesnt care about the law. He doesnt care that a CEO having an affair with a 22yr old staffer would get him fired anywhere immediately. He only cares that Bill Clinton was a Democrat and therefore a good guy and Nixon was a Republican and therefore a bad guy.Bubba Clinton lied under oath. The subject of the lie doesn't matter. The crime is lying under oath. The impeachment was proper
For the record, Nixon lied but never under oath.
Hillary used an illegal unsecure personal server to send over 1000 emails containing classified data. She violated national security laws. She should be prosecuted.
Lying is lying to me. An oath means nothing. If you think somebody putting their hand on a bible and lying is somehow different from somebody not putting their hand on the bible and lying, then you're an idiot. A lie, is a lie, is a lie. It is the content of the lie that matters, not a friggin bible.
In the eyes of the law it is different. Perjury and simply lying are not the same legally.
Nixon lied, Clinton committed perjury. Its very likely that Hillary also committed perjury in the Benghazi hearings.
Obama would love to bring her down, if the FBI finds enough evidence watch Obama and his AG jump on it. Remember the obamas and the Clintons hate each other.
Oh the irony. Rabbi, probably the biggest one sided political hack on USMB (many think he's a paid to post his crap) calling out another poster for being a partisan hack!
Un-fucking-believable!!!
Source: Key Clinton emails did not contain highly classified secretsSource: Key Clinton emails did not contain highly classified secrets
However, the source said State Department officials had already received instructions from intelligence officials that they need not use the strictest standards for handling the two emails in dispute – meaning that they aren’t highly classified.
Hale declined to comment on whether any changes had been made in recent days to the handling requirements for the disputed emails.
Intelligence officials claimed one email in Clinton’s account was classified because it contained information from a top-secret intelligence community “product” or report, but a further review determined that the report was not issued until several days after the email in question was written, the source said.
"The initial determination was based on a flawed process," the source said. "There was an intelligence product people thought [one of the emails] was based on, but that actually postdated the email in question."
A senior intelligence official told POLITICO last month that the disputes over the classification of Clinton's emails would take some time to adjudicate. "The process is ongoing and is likely to be a lengthy one due to the volume of material and the litigation aspects," said the official, who asked not be named.
Well documented, and yet you haven't been able to produce one single case where she has been found guilty of anything. Why is that?
Democrats in the White House and Justice Department.
The right wing. Home of NO CONSPIRACY THEORY LEFT BEHIND
Aren't you the lefty that claimed that Bush and Cheney orchestrated 9/11 as an excuse to go to war? speaking of conspiracy theories
That is a proven fact.
Proven? Ridiculous! I'll just go ahead and put you out of my misery. No one should have to suffer that level of stupidity.
Try to have a nice life anyway! People like you often find out that stupid can be painful.
Well documented, and yet you haven't been able to produce one single case where she has been found guilty of anything. Why is that?
Democrats in the White House and Justice Department.
The right wing. Home of NO CONSPIRACY THEORY LEFT BEHIND
Aren't you the lefty that claimed that Bush and Cheney orchestrated 9/11 as an excuse to go to war? speaking of conspiracy theories
That is a proven fact.
Proven? Ridiculous! I'll just go ahead and put you out of my misery. No one should have to suffer that level of stupidity.
Try to have a nice life anyway! People like you often find out that stupid can be painful.
The fact is, it doesn't matter since it was not illegal and since she did not do such or use it for nefarious reasons. The govt has her server and everything that was ever done on it, since it was NOT wiped clean as you all claimed, is on it and the FBI has it....as you continue to ignore the question of WHY she would undertake such an unusual action of setting up her own server and risking someone hacking it or someone sending her something classified and GAINING absolutely nothing as it pertains to her service to the American People.yes, to a moron case closed.What has the FBI found?
Here is your case against Hillary Clinton
FBI: Secretary Clinton, why did you use a private server for your email?
Sec Clinton: My agency told me it was allowable
Case closed
But a thinking person would recognize that "my agency told me it was allowable" does not answer the question of "WHY did you use a private server".
It simply answers the question of "why did you think it was OK to use a private server"
Which brings us back to the question of "why did you WANT to use a private server"
And that question was answered with several answers that were proven to be untrue
But, of course, that doesn't matter to you.
FBI: Sec Clinton, why did you use a private server?
Sec Clinton: I was given the option and thought having one server would be easier
Your case is against the policies of the State Department at that time. Seems they have changed since that time. Kind of a red herring on your part
sending classified government data over an unsecure server is a violation of federal law. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
Once again, any crime would be on the agency for policies which allow it.
You have no proof that Sec Clinton sent classified information. At best, you have proof that she received unmarked emails that were later considered classified
Weak case, don't you think?
A case that should have been closed years ago.......How long do you think Republicans will keep the investigation going?
Any guesses?
Totally ignoring it. Post after post, you ignore it.
The fact is, it doesn't matter since it was not illegal and since she did not do such or use it for nefarious reasons. The govt has her server and everything that was ever done on it, since it was NOT wiped clean as you all claimed, is on it and the FBI has it....as you continue to ignore the question of WHY she would undertake such an unusual action of setting up her own server and risking someone hacking it or someone sending her something classified and GAINING absolutely nothing as it pertains to her service to the American People.yes, to a moron case closed.
But a thinking person would recognize that "my agency told me it was allowable" does not answer the question of "WHY did you use a private server".
It simply answers the question of "why did you think it was OK to use a private server"
Which brings us back to the question of "why did you WANT to use a private server"
And that question was answered with several answers that were proven to be untrue
But, of course, that doesn't matter to you.
FBI: Sec Clinton, why did you use a private server?
Sec Clinton: I was given the option and thought having one server would be easier
Your case is against the policies of the State Department at that time. Seems they have changed since that time. Kind of a red herring on your part
sending classified government data over an unsecure server is a violation of federal law. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
Once again, any crime would be on the agency for policies which allow it.
You have no proof that Sec Clinton sent classified information. At best, you have proof that she received unmarked emails that were later considered classified
Weak case, don't you think?
A case that should have been closed years ago.......How long do you think Republicans will keep the investigation going?
Any guesses?
Totally ignoring it. Post after post, you ignore it.
you all were claiming she wiped it clean to hide criminal actions of hers.... turns out, that was just more right wing propaganda...
Look at her initial statement on the issue. We know for a fact every statement she made in that announcement was a lie. Every. Single. One.The fact is, it doesn't matter since it was not illegal and since she did not do such or use it for nefarious reasons. The govt has her server and everything that was ever done on it, since it was NOT wiped clean as you all claimed, is on it and the FBI has it....as you continue to ignore the question of WHY she would undertake such an unusual action of setting up her own server and risking someone hacking it or someone sending her something classified and GAINING absolutely nothing as it pertains to her service to the American People.FBI: Sec Clinton, why did you use a private server?
Sec Clinton: I was given the option and thought having one server would be easier
Your case is against the policies of the State Department at that time. Seems they have changed since that time. Kind of a red herring on your part
sending classified government data over an unsecure server is a violation of federal law. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
Once again, any crime would be on the agency for policies which allow it.
You have no proof that Sec Clinton sent classified information. At best, you have proof that she received unmarked emails that were later considered classified
Weak case, don't you think?
A case that should have been closed years ago.......How long do you think Republicans will keep the investigation going?
Any guesses?
Totally ignoring it. Post after post, you ignore it.
you all were claiming she wiped it clean to hide criminal actions of hers.... turns out, that was just more right wing propaganda...
She tried to wipe it clean and failed. She claimed to be deleting only personal e-mails. Now we know that that was also a lie.
1000 e-mails containing classified data, illegally sent on an unsecure personal server.
The Obama AG is not likely to prosecute her, but she should. If you or I had done that we would already be in jail. I held a top secret clearance, I know the rules and the penalties for violating them.
Look at her initial statement on the issue. We know for a fact every statement she made in that announcement was a lie. Every. Single. One.The fact is, it doesn't matter since it was not illegal and since she did not do such or use it for nefarious reasons. The govt has her server and everything that was ever done on it, since it was NOT wiped clean as you all claimed, is on it and the FBI has it....as you continue to ignore the question of WHY she would undertake such an unusual action of setting up her own server and risking someone hacking it or someone sending her something classified and GAINING absolutely nothing as it pertains to her service to the American People.sending classified government data over an unsecure server is a violation of federal law. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
Once again, any crime would be on the agency for policies which allow it.
You have no proof that Sec Clinton sent classified information. At best, you have proof that she received unmarked emails that were later considered classified
Weak case, don't you think?
A case that should have been closed years ago.......How long do you think Republicans will keep the investigation going?
Any guesses?
Totally ignoring it. Post after post, you ignore it.
you all were claiming she wiped it clean to hide criminal actions of hers.... turns out, that was just more right wing propaganda...
She tried to wipe it clean and failed. She claimed to be deleting only personal e-mails. Now we know that that was also a lie.
1000 e-mails containing classified data, illegally sent on an unsecure personal server.
The Obama AG is not likely to prosecute her, but she should. If you or I had done that we would already be in jail. I held a top secret clearance, I know the rules and the penalties for violating them.
what planet are you on?The fact is, it doesn't matter since it was not illegal and since she did not do such or use it for nefarious reasons. The govt has her server and everything that was ever done on it, since it was NOT wiped clean as you all claimed, is on it and the FBI has it....as you continue to ignore the question of WHY she would undertake such an unusual action of setting up her own server and risking someone hacking it or someone sending her something classified and GAINING absolutely nothing as it pertains to her service to the American People.yes, to a moron case closed.
But a thinking person would recognize that "my agency told me it was allowable" does not answer the question of "WHY did you use a private server".
It simply answers the question of "why did you think it was OK to use a private server"
Which brings us back to the question of "why did you WANT to use a private server"
And that question was answered with several answers that were proven to be untrue
But, of course, that doesn't matter to you.
FBI: Sec Clinton, why did you use a private server?
Sec Clinton: I was given the option and thought having one server would be easier
Your case is against the policies of the State Department at that time. Seems they have changed since that time. Kind of a red herring on your part
sending classified government data over an unsecure server is a violation of federal law. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
Once again, any crime would be on the agency for policies which allow it.
You have no proof that Sec Clinton sent classified information. At best, you have proof that she received unmarked emails that were later considered classified
Weak case, don't you think?
A case that should have been closed years ago.......How long do you think Republicans will keep the investigation going?
Any guesses?
Totally ignoring it. Post after post, you ignore it.
you all were claiming she wiped it clean to hide criminal actions of hers.... turns out, that was just more right wing propaganda...
Care4all has consistently proven to be among the most clueless posters here. She asserts things that are commonly known not to be the case. This exchange is a good example. Every statement Clinton made initially has proven to be false. This is simply the record. No spin at all.what planet are you on?The fact is, it doesn't matter since it was not illegal and since she did not do such or use it for nefarious reasons. The govt has her server and everything that was ever done on it, since it was NOT wiped clean as you all claimed, is on it and the FBI has it....as you continue to ignore the question of WHY she would undertake such an unusual action of setting up her own server and risking someone hacking it or someone sending her something classified and GAINING absolutely nothing as it pertains to her service to the American People.FBI: Sec Clinton, why did you use a private server?
Sec Clinton: I was given the option and thought having one server would be easier
Your case is against the policies of the State Department at that time. Seems they have changed since that time. Kind of a red herring on your part
sending classified government data over an unsecure server is a violation of federal law. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
Once again, any crime would be on the agency for policies which allow it.
You have no proof that Sec Clinton sent classified information. At best, you have proof that she received unmarked emails that were later considered classified
Weak case, don't you think?
A case that should have been closed years ago.......How long do you think Republicans will keep the investigation going?
Any guesses?
Totally ignoring it. Post after post, you ignore it.
you all were claiming she wiped it clean to hide criminal actions of hers.... turns out, that was just more right wing propaganda...
She never denied the server being wiped clean. She claimed to have given the email of choice to the state department and wiped the rest off the server.
What she did not know was that one can wipe a hard drive clean, but emails are still implanted within.
You really have absolutely no idea what has happened.
Or do you.
I am not sure.
I must believe you are not that naïve. I think you know exactly what is happening, but unable to respond so you simply deny what you know as the truth and claim it to be lies.
No. When she said it was "easier" what she meant was, it's easier to erase evidence and deny wrongdoing by having it set up this way.and the bottom line is this....she has yet to explain WHY she would take her existing .Gov email and have it put aside and have a server set up for a non .gov email address.
There is not one single reason why she or ANYONE on her tech team would find that to be "easier" as she claims.
More difficult? No. Not really...other than the fact that she would have to set something up that she already had (an email address)...not to mention having to consult her legal team to ensure it is legal....not to mention to have to HOPE that njo one accidentally sends her an email with classified information.....
So why would she do it? Why would anyone do it?
Still butthurt because you can't read a graph?Dr Grump doesnt care about the law. He doesnt care that a CEO having an affair with a 22yr old staffer would get him fired anywhere immediately. He only cares that Bill Clinton was a Democrat and therefore a good guy and Nixon was a Republican and therefore a bad guy.Bubba Clinton lied under oath. The subject of the lie doesn't matter. The crime is lying under oath. The impeachment was proper
For the record, Nixon lied but never under oath.
Hillary used an illegal unsecure personal server to send over 1000 emails containing classified data. She violated national security laws. She should be prosecuted.
Lying is lying to me. An oath means nothing. If you think somebody putting their hand on a bible and lying is somehow different from somebody not putting their hand on the bible and lying, then you're an idiot. A lie, is a lie, is a lie. It is the content of the lie that matters, not a friggin bible.
In the eyes of the law it is different. Perjury and simply lying are not the same legally.
Nixon lied, Clinton committed perjury. Its very likely that Hillary also committed perjury in the Benghazi hearings.
Obama would love to bring her down, if the FBI finds enough evidence watch Obama and his AG jump on it. Remember the obamas and the Clintons hate each other.
Oh the irony. Rabbi, probably the biggest one sided political hack on USMB (many think he's a paid to post his crap) calling out another poster for being a partisan hack!
Un-fucking-believable!!!
After I pointed that out to you, I didn't ever see a response, you were on USMB all day like normal, but you never came back to that specific thread. You didn't even come back and call me names, which you do to posters after they have totally destroyed you (which is a common occurrences).WOw the butt hurt is strong with this one.Still butthurt because you can't read a graph?Dr Grump doesnt care about the law. He doesnt care that a CEO having an affair with a 22yr old staffer would get him fired anywhere immediately. He only cares that Bill Clinton was a Democrat and therefore a good guy and Nixon was a Republican and therefore a bad guy.Lying is lying to me. An oath means nothing. If you think somebody putting their hand on a bible and lying is somehow different from somebody not putting their hand on the bible and lying, then you're an idiot. A lie, is a lie, is a lie. It is the content of the lie that matters, not a friggin bible.
In the eyes of the law it is different. Perjury and simply lying are not the same legally.
Nixon lied, Clinton committed perjury. Its very likely that Hillary also committed perjury in the Benghazi hearings.
Obama would love to bring her down, if the FBI finds enough evidence watch Obama and his AG jump on it. Remember the obamas and the Clintons hate each other.
Oh the irony. Rabbi, probably the biggest one sided political hack on USMB (many think he's a paid to post his crap) calling out another poster for being a partisan hack!
Un-fucking-believable!!!
Let me put it this way, I'd say most posters, left, center and right, know you are a dumb fuck by just reading your worthless, unimaginative, talking points driven posts. Of course, only you would ever claim to be the smartest conservative poster on USMB, that post was even more moronic than you accusing another poster of being a political hack.
Secondly, my annual salary I earn in strategic planning which includes devising graphs/charts to present to stockholders, potential investors and the Board of Directors is probably greater than what you make in 2-3 or more years. I've been successfully doing it for over 20 years.
Third, you have already embarrassed yourself by posting a graph that said absolutely nothing as evidence to back one of your wacky posts. It lacked vertical and horizontal data qualifiers. so in other words, it said nothing. It looked like the beginning of a graph that was never completed.
now its "subvert democracy". Did the Watergate breakin somehow take away one of your civil rights? if so, which one?
you see, all you seem to care about is others being unable to prove that she broke laws. What I find curious is how you either ignore the fact or choose to accept the fact that if Hillary has not broken any laws, then she most definitely utilized loopholes in the laws in an effort to gain political expediency. That, in itself, would eliminate her as a viable candidate to anyone that truly cared about electing the right person.
I recall in a thread about Benghazi and her "deleted hard drive" where you claimed that there was not a thread of evidence that she was in anyway at fault and in anyway hiding anything......ignoring the fact, of course, that she, by choice, opted to eliminate the ability to find such evidence by having her hard drive wiped clean.
You really don't care about her possible guilt....you would be happy if any evidence of her guilt was eliminated, be it illegally or otherwise.
That is why I have no issue referring to you as a fraud when you claim to be open minded.
yes, to a moron case closed.
But a thinking person would recognize that "my agency told me it was allowable" does not answer the question of "WHY did you use a private server".
It simply answers the question of "why did you think it was OK to use a private server"
Which brings us back to the question of "why did you WANT to use a private server"
And that question was answered with several answers that were proven to be untrue
But, of course, that doesn't matter to you.
No. When she said it was "easier" what she meant was, it's easier to erase evidence and deny wrongdoing by having it set up this way.
You have to pay close attention to what the Clintons say. Because they speak in lawyer language. Thus "it depends on the meaning of the word "is"". And "none of the emails were marked classified."
It doesn't matter if she was told it was OK, it was a violation of law, she was SecState, She is required to know and follow federal law.
