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.
Here is what the right wing Headings to their articles say:Um, actually she DOES say in the e-mail to strip the classification and sent the info via UNclassified method. It spells it out - there is NO way to twist her words to mean otherwise.
I understand why libs are still trying to do so, though....this is 'damning' - her ticket to 'cell block D'!
Here is what the right wing Headings to their articles say:Um, actually she DOES say in the e-mail to strip the classification and sent the info via UNclassified method. It spells it out - there is NO way to twist her words to mean otherwise.
I understand why libs are still trying to do so, though....this is 'damning' - her ticket to 'cell block D'!
Bombshell: In Newly-Released Email, Hillary Orders Aide to Strip Classified Marking
But when you read her comment, no where does she say the words "Strip Classified Marking"
In response to Aide saying "They've said they've had issues sending secure fax. They're working on it."
She said to her Aide about the talking points memo that she needed, "If they can't, turn in to non paper, with no identifying heading, and send non secure"
She did NOT SAY
STRIP IT OF ITS CLASSIFIED MARKINGS
as the media is plastering everywhere and in their Headings of all of their articles as I have shown above with just one link.
They, the media, has MADE THIS UP.....
Also,
HEADING means TITLE
It could be, the rules are, when you send a fax, no matter what it is about, it runs on a secure fax system, that was simply DOWN.
No TOP SECRET information goes over Fax, no TOP SECRET info goes on the dot GOV system either....there is a separate government server for TOP SECRET info that is only available to use for people with TOP SECRET clearance and it is in a government Office and NEVER goes through the internet or secure fax, it stays within the govt building....
So, the media has taken her words of ''remove the Heading'', which is Title and CHANGED THIS to "Strip the Classification Marking"
She NEVER SAID THAT.... the media is making this in to something, it is sensationalizing this, using words she never said....and that is simply wrong, and unethical reporting.
In addition to this, what Hillary needed from her Aide that she had waited hours for....was a TALKING POINTS memo, and talking points memos are memos with talking points on a subject that has been UNCLASSIFIED, and able to release to the Public.... so how could anyone in the media know that this talking points memo was even classified top secret or secret or even sensitive but unclassified, SBU? They DON'T know.
And on another note:
The dot gov email system is the government's unclassified email system, so even if Hillary had used the .gov email system, it was an UNCLASSIFIED system and TOP SECRET is not put on it.....
emails on the .gov system are classified, after the fact, just like with Hillary's emails....there would be no difference in the "classified email count" on the release of her emails from her server than there would be if she was using the Unclassified .gov system server...there would still be over a thousand emails classified in some way, AFTER THE FACT, and before an FOIA release.
AFTER the election, I hope.Apparently not if your name was Clinton.
Massive pardons are just around the corner...
It's obvious just what kind of fantasy land you want to imagine for Hillary.Here is what the right wing Headings to their articles say:Um, actually she DOES say in the e-mail to strip the classification and sent the info via UNclassified method. It spells it out - there is NO way to twist her words to mean otherwise.
I understand why libs are still trying to do so, though....this is 'damning' - her ticket to 'cell block D'!
Bombshell: In Newly-Released Email, Hillary Orders Aide to Strip Classified Marking
But when you read her comment, no where does she say the words "Strip Classified Marking"
In response to Aide saying "They've said they've had issues sending secure fax. They're working on it."
She said to her Aide about the talking points memo that she needed, "If they can't, turn in to non paper, with no identifying heading, and send non secure"
She did NOT SAY
STRIP IT OF ITS CLASSIFIED MARKINGS
as the media is plastering everywhere and in their Headings of all of their articles as I have shown above with just one link.
They, the media, has MADE THIS UP.....
Also,
HEADING means TITLE
It could be, the rules are, when you send a fax, no matter what it is about, it runs on a secure fax system, that was simply DOWN.
No TOP SECRET information goes over Fax, no TOP SECRET info goes on the dot GOV system either....there is a separate government server for TOP SECRET info that is only available to use for people with TOP SECRET clearance and it is in a government Office and NEVER goes through the internet or secure fax, it stays within the govt building....
So, the media has taken her words of ''remove the Heading'', which is Title and CHANGED THIS to "Strip the Classification Marking"
She NEVER SAID THAT.... the media is making this in to something, it is sensationalizing this, using words she never said....and that is simply wrong, and unethical reporting.
In addition to this, what Hillary needed from her Aide that she had waited hours for....was a TALKING POINTS memo, and talking points memos are memos with talking points on a subject that have been UNCLASSIFIED, and able to release to the Public.... so how could anyone in the media know that this talking points memo was even classified top secret or secret or even sensitive but unclassified, SBU? They DON'T know. This is why I call bull crap!
And on another note:
The dot gov email system is the government's unclassified email system, so even if Hillary had used the .gov email system, it was an UNCLASSIFIED system and TOP SECRET is not put on it.....
emails on the .gov system are classified, after the fact, just like with Hillary's emails....there would be no difference in the "classified email count" on the release of her emails from her server than there would be if she was using the Unclassified .gov system server...there would still be over a thousand emails classified in some way, AFTER THE FACT, and before an FOIA release.
"Turn into non paper with NO IDENTIFYING HEADING and SEND NON SECURE"She said to her Aide about the talking points memo that she needed, "If they can't, turn in to non paper, with no identifying heading, and send non secure"
What a good sheeple.Here is what the right wing Headings to their articles say:Um, actually she DOES say in the e-mail to strip the classification and sent the info via UNclassified method. It spells it out - there is NO way to twist her words to mean otherwise.
I understand why libs are still trying to do so, though....this is 'damning' - her ticket to 'cell block D'!
Bombshell: In Newly-Released Email, Hillary Orders Aide to Strip Classified Marking
But when you read her comment, no where does she say the words "Strip Classified Marking"
In response to Aide saying "They've said they've had issues sending secure fax. They're working on it."
She said to her Aide about the talking points memo that she needed, "If they can't, turn in to non paper, with no identifying heading, and send non secure"
She did NOT SAY
STRIP IT OF ITS CLASSIFIED MARKINGS
as the media is plastering everywhere and in their Headings of all of their articles as I have shown above with just one link.
They, the media, has MADE THIS UP.....
Also,
HEADING means TITLE
It could be, the rules are, when you send a fax, no matter what it is about, it runs on a secure fax system, that was simply DOWN.
No TOP SECRET information goes over Fax, no TOP SECRET info goes on the dot GOV system either....there is a separate government server for TOP SECRET info that is only available to use for people with TOP SECRET clearance and it is in a government Office and NEVER goes through the internet or secure fax, it stays within the govt building....
So, the media has taken her words of ''remove the Heading'', which is Title and CHANGED THIS to "Strip the Classification Marking"
She NEVER SAID THAT.... the media is making this in to something, it is sensationalizing this, using words she never said....and that is simply wrong, and unethical reporting.
In addition to this, what Hillary needed from her Aide that she had waited hours for....was a TALKING POINTS memo, and talking points memos are memos with talking points on a subject that have been UNCLASSIFIED, and able to release to the Public.... so how could anyone in the media know that this talking points memo was even classified top secret or secret or even sensitive but unclassified, SBU? They DON'T know. This is why I call bull crap!
And on another note:
The dot gov email system is the government's unclassified email system, so even if Hillary had used the .gov email system, it was an UNCLASSIFIED system and TOP SECRET is not put on it.....
emails on the .gov system are classified, after the fact, just like with Hillary's emails....there would be no difference in the "classified email count" on the release of her emails from her server than there would be if she was using the Unclassified .gov system server...there would still be over a thousand emails classified in some way, AFTER THE FACT, and before an FOIA release.
1,340 emails SO FAR have contained classified information on her personal server. That's 1,340 more than she said existed. That's 1,340 felonies.It does not say what the sensationalized headers are touting and without some true journalism, with research of what the talking points were, and whether the "talking points" were some how not really "talking points" at all....because talking points ARE UNCLASSIFIED Points on a subject to be given to the public.
I'm just sick and tired of the faux media not doing their jobs and reporting the facts and truth that they gathered through actually investigating instead of simply pushing the propaganda, sensationalized garbage.....and you all following this kind of thoughtless crap without thinking for yourselves.
Again you are twisting facts and truth. She said she did not send or receive classified documents that were marked Classified at the time the emails were sent or received, and so far, it shows that she didn't.1,340 emails SO FAR have contained classified information on her personal server. That's 1,340 more than she said existed. That's 1,340 felonies.It does not say what the sensationalized headers are touting and without some true journalism, with research of what the talking points were, and whether the "talking points" were some how not really "talking points" at all....because talking points ARE UNCLASSIFIED Points on a subject to be given to the public.
I'm just sick and tired of the faux media not doing their jobs and reporting the facts and truth that they gathered through actually investigating instead of simply pushing the propaganda, sensationalized garbage.....and you all following this kind of thoughtless crap without thinking for yourselves.
Her clearly ordering a subordinate to remove classification markings is just icing on the cake and another 10 years in prison.
You're delusional. She's going to prison if justice still exists in America.Again you are twisting facts and truth. She said she did not send or receive classified documents that were marked Classified at the time the emails were sent or received, and so far, it shows that she didn't.1,340 emails SO FAR have contained classified information on her personal server. That's 1,340 more than she said existed. That's 1,340 felonies.It does not say what the sensationalized headers are touting and without some true journalism, with research of what the talking points were, and whether the "talking points" were some how not really "talking points" at all....because talking points ARE UNCLASSIFIED Points on a subject to be given to the public.
I'm just sick and tired of the faux media not doing their jobs and reporting the facts and truth that they gathered through actually investigating instead of simply pushing the propaganda, sensationalized garbage.....and you all following this kind of thoughtless crap without thinking for yourselves.
Her clearly ordering a subordinate to remove classification markings is just icing on the cake and another 10 years in prison.
And even if she used the .gov system, (which was the Unclassified email system gvt workers used) the whole time as Secretary of state, all of those thousand plus emails NOW classified and redacted in some manner for the FOIA requests, would now be redacted and classified AFTER the fact as well.
You're delusional. She's going to prison if justice still exists in America.Again you are twisting facts and truth. She said she did not send or receive classified documents that were marked Classified at the time the emails were sent or received, and so far, it shows that she didn't.1,340 emails SO FAR have contained classified information on her personal server. That's 1,340 more than she said existed. That's 1,340 felonies.It does not say what the sensationalized headers are touting and without some true journalism, with research of what the talking points were, and whether the "talking points" were some how not really "talking points" at all....because talking points ARE UNCLASSIFIED Points on a subject to be given to the public.
I'm just sick and tired of the faux media not doing their jobs and reporting the facts and truth that they gathered through actually investigating instead of simply pushing the propaganda, sensationalized garbage.....and you all following this kind of thoughtless crap without thinking for yourselves.
Her clearly ordering a subordinate to remove classification markings is just icing on the cake and another 10 years in prison.
And even if she used the .gov system, (which was the Unclassified email system gvt workers used) the whole time as Secretary of state, all of those thousand plus emails NOW classified and redacted in some manner for the FOIA requests, would now be redacted and classified AFTER the fact as well.
And BTW - she only changed her story about marked documents AFTER classified data was found on her personal server.
Now we are up to 1,340. And it is HER responsibility to know what's classified information.
Nixon was innocent, by that standard.You're delusional. She's going to prison if justice still exists in America.Again you are twisting facts and truth. She said she did not send or receive classified documents that were marked Classified at the time the emails were sent or received, and so far, it shows that she didn't.1,340 emails SO FAR have contained classified information on her personal server. That's 1,340 more than she said existed. That's 1,340 felonies.It does not say what the sensationalized headers are touting and without some true journalism, with research of what the talking points were, and whether the "talking points" were some how not really "talking points" at all....because talking points ARE UNCLASSIFIED Points on a subject to be given to the public.
I'm just sick and tired of the faux media not doing their jobs and reporting the facts and truth that they gathered through actually investigating instead of simply pushing the propaganda, sensationalized garbage.....and you all following this kind of thoughtless crap without thinking for yourselves.
Her clearly ordering a subordinate to remove classification markings is just icing on the cake and another 10 years in prison.
And even if she used the .gov system, (which was the Unclassified email system gvt workers used) the whole time as Secretary of state, all of those thousand plus emails NOW classified and redacted in some manner for the FOIA requests, would now be redacted and classified AFTER the fact as well.
And BTW - she only changed her story about marked documents AFTER classified data was found on her personal server.
Now we are up to 1,340. And it is HER responsibility to know what's classified information.
She is not in prison. She has not been charged with a crime. These are facts. Is it your contention that justice does not still exist in America?
What, my friend, do you think her criminal motive was? Please....be specific and support your claim with some rational thought. Thanks.
You're delusional. She's going to prison if justice still exists in America.Again you are twisting facts and truth. She said she did not send or receive classified documents that were marked Classified at the time the emails were sent or received, and so far, it shows that she didn't.1,340 emails SO FAR have contained classified information on her personal server. That's 1,340 more than she said existed. That's 1,340 felonies.It does not say what the sensationalized headers are touting and without some true journalism, with research of what the talking points were, and whether the "talking points" were some how not really "talking points" at all....because talking points ARE UNCLASSIFIED Points on a subject to be given to the public.
I'm just sick and tired of the faux media not doing their jobs and reporting the facts and truth that they gathered through actually investigating instead of simply pushing the propaganda, sensationalized garbage.....and you all following this kind of thoughtless crap without thinking for yourselves.
Her clearly ordering a subordinate to remove classification markings is just icing on the cake and another 10 years in prison.
And even if she used the .gov system, (which was the Unclassified email system gvt workers used) the whole time as Secretary of state, all of those thousand plus emails NOW classified and redacted in some manner for the FOIA requests, would now be redacted and classified AFTER the fact as well.
And BTW - she only changed her story about marked documents AFTER classified data was found on her personal server.
Now we are up to 1,340. And it is HER responsibility to know what's classified information.
She is not in prison. She has not been charged with a crime. These are facts. Is it your contention that justice does not still exist in America?
What, my friend, do you think her criminal motive was? Please....be specific and support your claim with some rational thought. Thanks.
. We'll let the FBI decide.........
OK....ask me how hard Im laughing??
New poll = 20% of Dums set to vote for Trump
Trump Could Win It All
Nixon was innocent, by that standard.You're delusional. She's going to prison if justice still exists in America.Again you are twisting facts and truth. She said she did not send or receive classified documents that were marked Classified at the time the emails were sent or received, and so far, it shows that she didn't.1,340 emails SO FAR have contained classified information on her personal server. That's 1,340 more than she said existed. That's 1,340 felonies.It does not say what the sensationalized headers are touting and without some true journalism, with research of what the talking points were, and whether the "talking points" were some how not really "talking points" at all....because talking points ARE UNCLASSIFIED Points on a subject to be given to the public.
I'm just sick and tired of the faux media not doing their jobs and reporting the facts and truth that they gathered through actually investigating instead of simply pushing the propaganda, sensationalized garbage.....and you all following this kind of thoughtless crap without thinking for yourselves.
Her clearly ordering a subordinate to remove classification markings is just icing on the cake and another 10 years in prison.
And even if she used the .gov system, (which was the Unclassified email system gvt workers used) the whole time as Secretary of state, all of those thousand plus emails NOW classified and redacted in some manner for the FOIA requests, would now be redacted and classified AFTER the fact as well.
And BTW - she only changed her story about marked documents AFTER classified data was found on her personal server.
Now we are up to 1,340. And it is HER responsibility to know what's classified information.
She is not in prison. She has not been charged with a crime. These are facts. Is it your contention that justice does not still exist in America?
What, my friend, do you think her criminal motive was? Please....be specific and support your claim with some rational thought. Thanks.
Motive is irrelevant. What is relevant is that she clearly broke the law. Why is this a hard concept for you?Nixon was innocent, by that standard.You're delusional. She's going to prison if justice still exists in America.Again you are twisting facts and truth. She said she did not send or receive classified documents that were marked Classified at the time the emails were sent or received, and so far, it shows that she didn't.1,340 emails SO FAR have contained classified information on her personal server. That's 1,340 more than she said existed. That's 1,340 felonies.
Her clearly ordering a subordinate to remove classification markings is just icing on the cake and another 10 years in prison.
And even if she used the .gov system, (which was the Unclassified email system gvt workers used) the whole time as Secretary of state, all of those thousand plus emails NOW classified and redacted in some manner for the FOIA requests, would now be redacted and classified AFTER the fact as well.
And BTW - she only changed her story about marked documents AFTER classified data was found on her personal server.
Now we are up to 1,340. And it is HER responsibility to know what's classified information.
She is not in prison. She has not been charged with a crime. These are facts. Is it your contention that justice does not still exist in America?
What, my friend, do you think her criminal motive was? Please....be specific and support your claim with some rational thought. Thanks.
I believe Nixon had motive. You ignored that question for some reason.
Motive is irrelevant. What is relevant is that she clearly broke the law. Why is this a hard concept for you?Nixon was innocent, by that standard.You're delusional. She's going to prison if justice still exists in America.Again you are twisting facts and truth. She said she did not send or receive classified documents that were marked Classified at the time the emails were sent or received, and so far, it shows that she didn't.
And even if she used the .gov system, (which was the Unclassified email system gvt workers used) the whole time as Secretary of state, all of those thousand plus emails NOW classified and redacted in some manner for the FOIA requests, would now be redacted and classified AFTER the fact as well.
And BTW - she only changed her story about marked documents AFTER classified data was found on her personal server.
Now we are up to 1,340. And it is HER responsibility to know what's classified information.
She is not in prison. She has not been charged with a crime. These are facts. Is it your contention that justice does not still exist in America?
What, my friend, do you think her criminal motive was? Please....be specific and support your claim with some rational thought. Thanks.
I believe Nixon had motive. You ignored that question for some reason.
Mens rea is not a factor in federal crimes. Either she did or she didnt. And she did.Motive is irrelevant. What is relevant is that she clearly broke the law. Why is this a hard concept for you?Nixon was innocent, by that standard.You're delusional. She's going to prison if justice still exists in America.
And BTW - she only changed her story about marked documents AFTER classified data was found on her personal server.
Now we are up to 1,340. And it is HER responsibility to know what's classified information.
She is not in prison. She has not been charged with a crime. These are facts. Is it your contention that justice does not still exist in America?
What, my friend, do you think her criminal motive was? Please....be specific and support your claim with some rational thought. Thanks.
I believe Nixon had motive. You ignored that question for some reason.
Clearly? According to who? Where is the indictment?
Mens rea is not a factor in federal crimes. Either she did or she didnt. And she did.Motive is irrelevant. What is relevant is that she clearly broke the law. Why is this a hard concept for you?Nixon was innocent, by that standard.She is not in prison. She has not been charged with a crime. These are facts. Is it your contention that justice does not still exist in America?
What, my friend, do you think her criminal motive was? Please....be specific and support your claim with some rational thought. Thanks.
I believe Nixon had motive. You ignored that question for some reason.
Clearly? According to who? Where is the indictment?
Where is the indictment? Coming down shortly. Are you honestly this stupid to think just because someone isnt indicted it means they didnt commit a crime? Dont answer that.
