Clinton email explanation not credible

[ellapenella]

You really don't get it. We are mexico's gun and drug problem. we beat them up but in reality, mexico would be a lot safer if we had few addicts and did not allow so many guns to go south of the border. I guess you watch fox news, so I understand how fast and furious means so much to you. But it was a failed but noble attempt to get this flow of guns to mexico stopped. You can buy a gun here for a couple of hundred dollars and sell it in mexico for thousands. they not only have drug cartels, but they have states in insurrection. American really don't understand, and certainly trump doesn't, the USA is not an angel in the Mexican American relationship. Our citizens run guns across that border every day.

You're right I probably don't know all of what's going on . I'll watch whatever I want to watch , and what you , a stranger thinks of me , matters what ? nothing at all. but no I don't watch fox news . I did a few years ago but they've become something so fake . I can't relate to them . I don't really watch any news . I get most of my information here .lol

[ellapenella]

But I do research what people share ...

[Yamato]

I know that it was said to be a C.I.A operation. It was some sort of operation. But , is the president above the C.I.A ? could he not have helped his friend Stevens ? They were friends . Does the president not have authority to override the C.I.A ?

I think the first and main thing we need to understand about the CIA is that it's the action intelligence arm of the President. It's not an honest arbiter of intelligence-gathering but a gathering of selective intelligence or actionable intelligence to help drive policy and ideology. The CIA is on a quest for intelligence that can be used, not a quest for truth and justice.

Re: mbrn3000's war criminals claim, if Bush and Cheney were war criminals, the justice would have to spread to the CIA too. Surely not everyone from the CIA was squeaky clean, "slam dunk" or not. In 2009 the CIA was rife with Bush-era employees and still is today. Obama gave his full cooperation and shot down the notion there would be any prosecution of Bush administration officials in the earliest days of his office. Why? Is it because he's Bush's buddy? No. He is Bush's buddy, but that's not why. It's because he was about to commit the same crimes, and in some cases commit even worse ones. There is no partisan monopoly on war crimes, mbrn. If you're going to play that card, play it right.

you know America gets most of its oil domestically, and from the Americas than it does the middle east. a few more adjustments and the gulf of Arabia could be a Chinese problem.

You forgot Israel.

[ellapenella]

@mbrn30000

where do you get your information from ? do you have a favorite news station you watch ?

[ellapenella]

I think the first and main thing we need to understand about the CIA is that it's the action intelligence arm of the President. It's not an honest arbiter of intelligence-gathering but a gathering of selective intelligence or actionable intelligence to help drive policy and ideology. The CIA is on a quest for intelligence that can be used, not a quest for truth and justice.

Re: mbrn3000's war criminals claim, if Bush and Cheney were war criminals, the justice would have to spread to the CIA too. Surely not everyone from the CIA was squeaky clean, "slam dunk" or not. In 2009 the CIA was rife with Bush-era employees and still is today. Obama gave his full cooperation and shot down the notion there would be any prosecution of Bush administration officials in the earliest days of his office. Why? Is it because he's Bush's buddy? No. He is Bush's buddy, but that's not why. It's because he was about to commit the same crimes, and in some cases commit even worse ones. There is no partisan monopoly on war crimes, mbrn. If you're going to play that card, play it right.

You forgot Israel.

Thank you Yamato . I also get my information from you too . I learn a lot from you. thanks ...

* I still am a free thinker as you always tell everyone to be .

[Yamato]

.

oh really? So I guess labeling dems as criminals is a first amendment right, but labeling repugnuts criminals is reserved by you. go fox yourself.

Tell me what the crime is in one sentence or less.

Thank you Yamato . I also get my information from you too . I learn a lot from you. thanks ...

* I still am a free thinker as you always tell everyone to be .

Aww you're very sweet thank you

[ellapenella]

@mbrn30000

I think that you were once and maybe still are a huge obama supporter . And that you seem to want to mess with or meddle with people's minds regarding election .

* seems like you underestimate people though . You're not as smart as you like to think you are .

Edited August 15, 2015 by Ellapennella

[+DieChecker]

I have no idea who mbrn is, what age they are or even what gender, but he/her has a loyalty to the Clintons that is unbreakable and delusional in nature in that they don't care how bad an actor Hillary is, they just want her in the White House. It goes beyond a woman being president but I don't think I'll ever truly understand the failure of intellect and reason that leads someone in a free country, or what used to be a free country, to invest so much of themselves into people as despicable as the Obamas and the Clintons.

A very shrewd appraisal. He seems to fit that mold.

Bottom line, Shrillary will never be prosecuted because we live in a banana republic under Obama but she may be driven to leave the campaign for president.

We can only hope. Actually she might make a less then horrible President, as I think she'd get very little done, but not ruin anything either. But I think any one of the top ten Republicans would do twice as well at the job.

[mbrn30000]

@mbrn30000

I think that you were once and maybe still are a huge obama supporter . And that you seem to want to mess with or meddle with people's minds regarding election .

* seems like you underestimate people though . You're not as smart as you like to think you are .

I really don't care for the bangers in here over analyzing me. Obama will not go down in history as the worst president. Bush is clearly the worst president. Its people like you and merc and the right wing that live in the clouds. I would say I feel sorry for you, but I blame all of you for the blood of americans on your hands. to vote for bush ones was bad enough, voting for him twice inexcusable.

[Harte]

I totally disagree with you. the republican party led by the majority leader of the senate declared their goal would be to make certain there would be no re-election of OBama before he even was sworn in.

When obviously the entire Republican party should have turned Democrat in that moment. I mean, can you imagine? An opposing party vowing to win the White House?

How rude.

Harte

[mbrn30000]

Tell me what the crime is in one sentence or less.

Aww you're very sweet thank you

telling the congress there were weapons of mass destruction when he knew there were not. Sending powell to the UN to make the case, and Powell realizing he had been duped would have been the first witness. you must be too young to remember or something.

[mbrn30000]

I think the first and main thing we need to understand about the CIA is that it's the action intelligence arm of the President. It's not an honest arbiter of intelligence-gathering but a gathering of selective intelligence or actionable intelligence to help drive policy and ideology. The CIA is on a quest for intelligence that can be used, not a quest for truth and justice.

Re: mbrn3000's war criminals claim, if Bush and Cheney were war criminals, the justice would have to spread to the CIA too. Surely not everyone from the CIA was squeaky clean, "slam dunk" or not. In 2009 the CIA was rife with Bush-era employees and still is today. Obama gave his full cooperation and shot down the notion there would be any prosecution of Bush administration officials in the earliest days of his office. Why? Is it because he's Bush's buddy? No. He is Bush's buddy, but that's not why. It's because he was about to commit the same crimes, and in some cases commit even worse ones. There is no partisan monopoly on war crimes, mbrn. If you're going to play that card, play it right.

You forgot Israel.

we don't get oil from israel

[mbrn30000]

You're right I probably don't know all of what's going on . I'll watch whatever I want to watch , and what you , a stranger thinks of me , matters what ? nothing at all. but no I don't watch fox news . I did a few years ago but they've become something so fake . I can't relate to them . I don't really watch any news . I get most of my information here .lol

fox never became fake, they were always fake. it took you some time to figure that out? says a lot for you.

[2-B]

How come when Ted wacko bible thumping Cruz says he is a naturalized born American, because his mother was born in America and that is all that is required, we hear nothing from the right wing? we hear nothing from Donald, I want his birth certificate, trump? why? Cause Cruz is the right color? Under even the most ridiculous imagination of the right wing wacko crowd, Obama was born in Kenya to an American Mother and a Kenyan dad. so Cruz was absolutely, born to a Cuban dad, and an American mother in Canada...that is a fact. So how would he be an person eligible for the Presidency and Obama not? where are all the lawsuits? where are all the fake internet birth certificates, calls for an investigation? Where? I guess it's something else. What possibly could be the difference here? oh let's see? Why I just don't know. Any ideas from the peanut gallery? I know because Obama was a commie plot invented in 1961 starting with that birth announcement in the local paper. Amazing how sharp those commies can be. or could it be that the white house is not just a name, but a requirement?

For the record, Republican Dr. Ben Carson is polling at 14%, behind front runner Trump, the only two candidates in double digits in Iowa. Dr. Ben Carson (not "that black dude" as you called him) is African-American.

The animus against Obama stems from his ideology, his efforts to transform this country into a Euro-socialist model, his mendacity, his lack of transparency, his hypocrisy, and dozens of things that have nothing to do with race.

Republicans/Conservatives are perfectly willing to embrace candidates of color whose values and ideology are consistent with their own. That was true of Herman Cain in 2012 and is true of Ben Carson today. Finding Barack Obama lacking is a product of his record, a problem of his own making.

Personally, I was intrigued by his DNC speech in 2004 when his rhetoric soared, painting a pictured of one America, not a black America or a white America. But Hillary was right about one thing: the man came equipped with a speech and little else.

A turning point for me was seeing a video of him made circa 2004 in which he criticized the Constitution as too restrictive on the powers of the Federal government. Watching that, I could only think that for a law school graduate, he understood nothing of the intent of the Founding Fathers; he didn't understand that the point of the Constitution was to limit the powers of the central government and place most of the power in the hands of state and local government so that the government served the people rather than the people serving the government.

But that was only the start of my disappointments in Obama--none of which have anything to do with his skin color. For the record, I'd be pleased if Ben Carson became the Republican nominee. He's among my top choices right now.

[mbrn30000]

Keep smoking what you are smoking.

[Harte]

That's about the only answer to Obama's failure for Obama's admirers, some absurd ad hoc.

Harte

[mbrn30000]

That's about the only answer to Obama's failure for Obama's admirers, some absurd ad hoc.

Harte

bush apologist.

[Yamato]

telling the congress there were weapons of mass destruction when he knew there were not. Sending powell to the UN to make the case, and Powell realizing he had been duped would have been the first witness. you must be too young to remember or something.

You have to prove that he knew that, and how the hell did Dubya of all people know that? I don't even know what your evidence is, but if you think that's what the crime is and what the crime here is limited to, then President Obama failed miserably in his duty to prosecute Bush and Cheney exclusively for their crimes.

Everyone thought that the weapons were there. We ought to, we're the ones who armed him. See Ronald Reagan and Donald Rumsfeld. But you apparently don't want to prosecute Rumsfeld. Maybe you have evidence Rumsfeld didn't know? I see no reason why you'd let him off the hook otherwise. I wouldn't hire you to help the prosecution on this for a minute. You'd be a better fit for the defense.

[mbrn30000]

You have to prove that he knew that, and how the hell did Dubya of all people know that? I don't even know what your evidence is, but if you think that's what the crime is and what the crime here is limited to, then President Obama failed miserably in his duty to prosecute Bush and Cheney exclusively for their crimes.

Everyone thought that the weapons were there. We ought to, we're the ones who armed him. See Ronald Reagan and Donald Rumsfeld. But you apparently don't want to prosecute Rumsfeld. Maybe you have evidence Rumsfeld didn't know? I see no reason why you'd let him off the hook otherwise. I wouldn't hire you to help the prosecution on this for a minute. You'd be a better fit for the defense.

I don't have to prove anything. the dems ignored it. powell resigned in silence. I guess you are falling in line. the republicans appreciate your allegiance and ignorance. yeah they are working for you...lol

hey if you want to remain ignorant go ahead. you can deny this if you want, but I predicted the second Iraqi war when the supreme traitors appointed bush president. I knew he would invent a reason to steal Iraqi oil for cheney and company. and guess what he did! and here is another prediction. Jeb will attack iran if that traitor is elected. see they get their orders from the Saudi royal family. but I cannot prove my vision. but my republican friends sure heard me back in 2000, the bushes are owned by the saudi's

Edited August 16, 2015 by mbrn30000

[ellapenella]

fox never became fake, they were always fake. it took you some time to figure that out? says a lot for you.

all main stream media are fake and they all work together .

* took me like less than one minute to know you're trolling .

Edited August 16, 2015 by Ellapennella

[mbrn30000]

all main stream media are fake and they all work together .

* took me like less than one minute to know you're trolling .

yeah you keep smoking that joint.

[Harte]

Favorite comeback?

Harte

[Yamato]

I don't have to prove anything. the dems ignored it. powell resigned in silence. I guess you are falling in line. the republicans appreciate your allegiance and ignorance. yeah they are working for you...lol

hey if you want to remain ignorant go ahead. you can deny this if you want, but I predicted the second Iraqi war when the supreme traitors appointed bush president. I knew he would invent a reason to steal Iraqi oil for cheney and company. and guess what he did! and here is another prediction. Jeb will attack iran if that traitor is elected. see they get their orders from the Saudi royal family. but I cannot prove my vision. but my republican friends sure heard me back in 2000, the bushes are owned by the saudi's

"The Dems ignored it" which is exactly what I said, so how in the world are you calling me ignorant? We agree on the elephant in the room and that is complicity in the crime you claim.

The Bush's obviously are owned by the Saudis, the worst people in the Middle East from one of the worst regimes in the Middle East, that is not mutually exclusive with anything I said. The Bush administration had oil and blood all over them. It's a real shame therefore that Obama is a moral ethical and legal sellout and a copycat of said crimes.

[+DieChecker]

I'm not going to fight mbrn30000.... because that is what he wants. He's so deep in the cool aid, that he screams "OH YEAH!" whenever he goes through a doorway.

Here is what is important...

http://nypost.com/20...-5-e-mail-lies/

‘I remember landing under sniper fire.”

“I actually started criticizing the war in Iraq before [Obama] did.”

“We came out of the White House not only dead broke, but in debt.”

Hillary Clinton’s relationship with the truth has always been one of disdain, as shown by her accounts of landing in Bosnia (she was actually greeted by a child on the tarmac), her policies (she voted for the war in Iraq and only criticized it later, after the winds shifted, and after Obama) and her finances (if owning two multi-million-dollar homes is “dead broke,” then sure).

But the Democratic front-runner has really outdone herself with her varying explanations for her home e-mail server. Here are her five fabrications in the shifting story of why she hid her correspondence from public records and compromised national security.

This is the one that gets me...

4. “I did not e-mail any classified material to anyone on my e-mail. I’m certainly well aware of the classification requirements and did not send classified material.”

So, she said she KNEW what the requirements of something being Classified were AND she said she didn't send any Classified material. Yet later she backtracks and says that she didn't receive or send any information marked Classified. Yet, again, the FBI has found 60 emails now that SHOULD have been Classified.

So that leaves the questions of.... Did she really NOT know the requirements of something being Classified? Which means she did her job communicating as the Sec of State without knowing how to send Classified information, because she couldn't recognize Classified information...... Or, she did know she was sending and receiving Classified information, but chose for her underlings not to mark it so, and not to mark her replies as such either. Which again leads directly to her being a stupid person to be holding the SoS position.

OR.... She lied. She's either too stupid to recognize Classified information, or gave stupid orders, or she's a liar. Any way you look at it, she shouldn't be the Sec of State, much less the President. Imagine if she's just stupid??

She just met with President Obama and VP Biden over the weekend. Maybe their coming to some deal? Maybe she'll settle for VP?

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/08/15/clinton-obama-meet-face-to-face-on-martha-vineyard-amid-email-controversy-biden/

We have a saying about some specific Intel Engineers I work with... "That is the stupidest smart person I've ever meet.".... A person and hold a half dozen doctorate degrees and still be idiotic in multiple areas.

Hillary is smart in many areas, but not in the areas needed to be President. She should bow out now. Or, actually, since I usually vote Conservative, maybe she should stay in the race so the GOP win is a landslide?

Edited August 16, 2015 by DieChecker

[+DieChecker]

http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/25/politics/clinton-confident-never-sent-classified-emails/

"I am confident that I never sent nor received any information that was classified at the time it was sent and received," Clinton told reporters in Winterset, Iowa.

Shouldn't that be part of her job to recognize Classified information when she sees it? Is ignorance really an excuse for the very pinnacle of the State Department?