Politics Enough with the Hillary cult: Her admirers ignore reality, dream of worshipping a queen

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
Denny Crane said:
Expert witness. High degree of confidence.

Phil Houston is CEO of QVerity, a training and consulting company specializing in detecting deception by employing a model he developed while at the Central Intelligence Agency. He has conducted thousands of interviews and interrogations for the CIA and other federal agencies. His colleague Don Tennant contributed to this report.
Click to expand...

Well, you let me know when 'I watched an interview on TV and I decided he's telling the truth' becomes the evidence standard for judicial decisions.

barfo
 
barfo said:
Well, you let me know when 'I watched an interview on TV and I decided he's telling the truth' becomes the evidence standard for judicial decisions.

barfo
Click to expand...
It already is.
 
Denny Crane said:
A lot of materials ordered by the court from the government were delivered two months late because the government sent the request for information to a coupleof old email accounts.

Slick!
Click to expand...

Crime of the century! Heads will roll!

I think we all know what's coming next: State Department workers were late coming back from lunch!

barfo
 
HuffPost vast right wing conspiracy nut jobs.

What would Obama's secy of defense know about security?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/h-a-goodman/romanian-hacker-guccifer-_b_9856196.html

Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates says he believes foreign countries like Russia, China and Iran may have hacked the private email server Hillary Clinton used while secretary of State.

“...I think the odds are pretty high,” he said

Gates said he agreed with former acting CIA Director Mike Morell’s claim that the server had probably been hacked by either Russia, China or Iran.

He added that the fact that classified intelligence has been found on the server was “a concern for me.”
 
barfo said:
Crime of the century! Heads will roll!

I think we all know what's coming next: State Department workers were late coming back from lunch!

barfo
Click to expand...

Obstruction of justice.
 
Two judges disagree.

WaPost vast right wing conspiracy nut jobs.

Evidence of government wrong doing and bad faith.

constantly shifting admissions by the government and former government officials

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...a38de8-f5c6-11e5-8b23-538270a1ca31_story.html

“Where there is evidence of government wrong-doing and bad faith, as here, limited discovery is appropriate, even though it is exceedingly rare in FOIA [Freedom of Information Act] cases,” Lamberth wrote.

...

However, Sullivan and Lamberth criticized what Lamberth called the “constantly shifting admissions by the government and former government officials” about the arrangement. Sullivan said the server arrangement allowed former federal employees to decide what government records to disclose, apparently without ensuring that State records were secured within the department’s own systems.

Calling Clinton’s personal server use “extraordinary,” Lamberth wrote, “An understanding of the facts and circumstances . . . is required before the Court can determine whether the search conducted here reasonably produced all responsive documents.”
 
Denny Crane said:
Two judges disagree.

WaPost vast right wing conspiracy nut jobs.

Evidence of government wrong doing and bad faith.

constantly shifting admissions by the government and former government officials

https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...a38de8-f5c6-11e5-8b23-538270a1ca31_story.html

“Where there is evidence of government wrong-doing and bad faith, as here, limited discovery is appropriate, even though it is exceedingly rare in FOIA [Freedom of Information Act] cases,” Lamberth wrote.

...

However, Sullivan and Lamberth criticized what Lamberth called the “constantly shifting admissions by the government and former government officials” about the arrangement. Sullivan said the server arrangement allowed former federal employees to decide what government records to disclose, apparently without ensuring that State records were secured within the department’s own systems.

Calling Clinton’s personal server use “extraordinary,” Lamberth wrote, “An understanding of the facts and circumstances . . . is required before the Court can determine whether the search conducted here reasonably produced all responsive documents.”
Click to expand...

So, if you post this stuff 10,000 times, does it make indictment 10,000 times more likely?

Do you think anyone but you and I is even bothering to read this?

barfo
 
I think it speaks to two different judges looking at the facts and making it a point to mention the obstruction of justice going on.
 
That's an official russian news site. There are other stories that published at least excerpts of those emails.

Granted, these are not directly from the server, but sent to or received from it.

It seems odd to discuss sensitive foreign policy matters to an insecure email address, with someone without clearance.

She can do no wrong!
 
Denny Crane said:
That's an official russian news site. There are other stories that published at least excerpts of those emails.

Granted, these are not directly from the server, but sent to or received from it.

It seems odd to discuss sensitive foreign policy matters to an insecure email address, with someone without clearance.

She can do no wrong!
Click to expand...

Of course she can (and has) done wrong.

The question is whether this is really the crime of the century as you are making it out to be.

It does point out, however, how scandal-free the last 8 years have been, that 'she used private email' is the worst thing you and your Republican friends can find.

Official russian news site? It's an official russian propaganda site aimed at the outside world.

"The United Kingdom media regulator, Ofcom, has repeatedly found RT to have breached rules on impartiality, and of broadcasting "materially misleading" content."

Are you a communist, Denny? Why do you hate America?

barfo
 
barfo said:
Of course she can (and has) done wrong.

The question is whether this is really the crime of the century as you are making it out to be.

It does point out, however, how scandal-free the last 8 years have been, that 'she used private email' is the worst thing you and your Republican friends can find.

Official russian news site? It's an official russian propaganda site aimed at the outside world.

"The United Kingdom media regulator, Ofcom, has repeatedly found RT to have breached rules on impartiality, and of broadcasting "materially misleading" content."

Are you a communist, Denny? Why do you hate America?

barfo
Click to expand...

Either the emails in the RT article are real or are not. There's nothing partial or impartial about the content.

The only thing the last 8 years have been is full of excuses by the cultists.

I ask the question again...

Why does most everyone consider the Clintons liars and crooks, but not most other politicians? The answer is: "because there's a there there."
 
Denny Crane said:
Either the emails in the RT article are real or are not. There's nothing partial or impartial about the content.

The only thing the last 8 years have been is full of excuses by the cultists.

I ask the question again...

Why does most everyone consider the Clintons liars and crooks, but not most other politicians? The answer is: "because there's a there there."
Click to expand...

Wait, when did people stop considering other politicians liars and crooks? I must have missed that change.

Yes, either the emails in the RT article are real or they are not. Either Guccifer hacked Clinton or he did not. Either Hillary committed a crime or she did not. Either the earth is flat or it is not.

There is something partial about you describing RT as an "official russian news site".

barfo
 
hillary-clinton-what-difference-does-it-make.jpg
 
Seriously. No trust issues with Bernie or Obama or Ted Kennedy or ...

There's a there there.
 
Denny Crane said:
Why does most everyone consider the Clintons liars and crooks, but not most other politicians? The answer is: "because there's a there there."
Click to expand...

So, is your argument here that public perception = reality?

If the public thinks Libertarians are lunatics, that means they are lunatics?

Interesting theory.

barfo
 
barfo said:
So, is your argument here that public perception = reality?

If the public thinks Libertarians are lunatics, that means they are lunatics?

Interesting theory.

barfo
Click to expand...

My argument is the facts known to the public yield this result.

As long as you're going to attack the "bias" of RT, how about the bias of the source of the "no scant evidence" source?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...c19242-097c-11e2-858a-5311df86ab04_story.html

Is it any wonder that if you’re a conservative looking for unbiased news — and they do; they don’t want only Sean Hannity’s interpretation of the news — that you might feel unwelcome, or dissed or slighted, by the printed Post or the online version? And might you distrust the news when it’s wrapped in so much liberal commentary?

(Patrick B. Pexton is the ombudsman of the WaPost).
 
Denny Crane said:
My argument is the facts known to the public yield this result.

As long as you're going to attack the "bias" of RT, how about the bias of the source of the "no scant evidence" source?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...c19242-097c-11e2-858a-5311df86ab04_story.html

Is it any wonder that if you’re a conservative looking for unbiased news — and they do; they don’t want only Sean Hannity’s interpretation of the news — that you might feel unwelcome, or dissed or slighted, by the printed Post or the online version? And might you distrust the news when it’s wrapped in so much liberal commentary?

(Patrick B. Pexton is the ombudsman of the WaPost).
Click to expand...

I like to check in on the scoop by Rachel Maddow now and then. If she even covers the issue, you know you will get the polar opposite view of the truth.

China New is good check.
 
Denny Crane said:
My argument is the facts known to the public yield this result.

As long as you're going to attack the "bias" of RT, how about the bias of the source of the "no scant evidence" source?
Click to expand...

I'm just responding to your ravings - I don't think I ever claimed that that article, or the Washington Post in particular, was unbiased.

However, now that you bring it up, I do think there is a fundamental difference between the Washington Post and the propaganda arm of a foreign government. Maybe you don't?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...c19242-097c-11e2-858a-5311df86ab04_story.html
Click to expand...

Sorry, can't read it without paying them 99 cents, which I simply can't afford. Maybe after Trump cuts my taxes (or raises them, depending on which day of the week it is).

Is it any wonder that if you’re a conservative looking for unbiased news — and they do; they don’t want only Sean Hannity’s interpretation of the news — that you might feel unwelcome, or dissed or slighted, by the printed Post or the online version?
Click to expand...

I'll take your word for it that conservatives look for unbiased news. They certainly appear to have very little ability to recognize it once they find it, so maybe that's the real problem.

barfo
 
Denny Crane said:
hillary-clinton-what-difference-does-it-make.jpg
Click to expand...

I fucking can't stand Clinton. I'm not voting for her in the primary or the General if she wins. But Denny you know goddamn well that's not what she said. You're a quality poster whether we disagree or not, but you really need to not post bullshit drivel like this. It's unbecoming of you as an honest broker.
 
I hope Trump gets elected and they spend the next 4 years uncovering all the lies that the Obama clan have covered up the last 8 years. His transparent presidency is a joke. Worst pres since Carter and maybe all time.
Only my opinion of course!
 
dviss1 said:
I fucking can't stand Clinton. I'm not voting for her in the primary or the General if she wins. But Denny you know goddamn well that's not what she said. You're a quality poster whether we disagree or not, but you really need to not post bullshit drivel like this. It's unbecoming of you as an honest broker.
Click to expand...

She absolutely said "what difference does it make."

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...t-hillary-clintons-what-difference-does-it-m/

"Was it because of a protest or was it because of guys out for a walk one night and decided they’d go kill some Americans," Clinton said. "What difference – at this point, what difference does it make?"




She lied about it being a protest. Her emails actually show she knew it was a terrorist attack.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

SlyPokerDog
OT The Mystery of the L.A. Mansion Filled With Surrogate Children
Replies
1
Views
196
BlazerWookee
BlazerWookee
truebluefan
Trump shares GIF of himself striking Hillary Clinton in the back with a golf ball
Replies
0
Views
332
truebluefan
truebluefan

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top