RE: Hillary's E-Mails (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


slvemike4u -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/1/2015 7:51:52 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

i don't recall anyone here, nor anything ive read, being anywhere close to what could accurately be described as "conspiracy."

Hillary Clinton was required by law to make all her work communications accessible to the government. she didn't do that. further, as ive said before, documents that probably should exist are missing---that is, there are gaps in pertinent communication. she has repeatedly lied about things.

lastly, what possible reason could Hillary Clinton have for doing everything she's done except for to avoid government oversight and public scrutiny?

"laugh my ass off at conspiracy fools" doesn't address anything relevant.



the conspiracy would start at she didnt do that and would continue at repeatedly lied about things.


Well according to mikey it was referring to Larry Klayman but I can understand if you don't buy that one. After all he first referenced 16 pages which just happens to be the page this post is on and also states "the conspiracy fools" which implies more than the one he is now claiming. But he is on the same side of the fence so perhaps you should just ignore the inconsistencies and back his ass up.

Ahhhh,isn't that sweet of you,coming here and "explaining" my posts.
Such a sweet girl [:D]
Bless your heart but you are special [:D]



edited to add 17 pages ....not many more foolish,conspiracy themed posts and we shall reach the magic 20 page thread.
These threads are than held for a period of sixty days on special servers set up just for that task [:D]




thishereboi -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/1/2015 7:57:30 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Why would I do that? I am capable of independant thought, and not given to slobbering asswipe either gushingly or passive-agressively from rightwing Fascist shiteaters devoid of actual facts.


You might try giving that little felching habit a skip every so often.



still obsessed with all things anal I see. Maybe a trip to the local airport bathroom would help you with that.




bounty44 -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/1/2015 12:01:28 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

I was referring to Larry Klayman,who as far as I know was the only "conspiracy fool" mentioned previous to my post.
But I will say bounty you are coming real close,real fuckingcloise.
My opinion,I'm entitled to it [:D]


unfortunately, somewhere along the line, the "im entitled to my opinion" statement ended up as the equivalent of "and my opinion, however unfounded and thoughtless, has just as much merit as anyone else's."

that said---bill o'reilly recently floated the idea that (presuming she concealed/destroyed public records) the email scandal she knew would ensue would be potentially less harmful to her than any of the documents others might have (would have) seen.

and if you can come up with an alternative and better explanation as to why Hillary Clinton's done everything she's done (including all the lying), in contrast to the one of being able to conceal records from oversight and the public, by all means do.





mnottertail -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/1/2015 12:06:08 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Why would I do that? I am capable of independant thought, and not given to slobbering asswipe either gushingly or passive-agressively from rightwing Fascist shiteaters devoid of actual facts.


You might try giving that little felching habit a skip every so often.



still obsessed with all things anal I see. Maybe a trip to the local airport bathroom would help you with that.


You want me to watch you in action is that the thing?




mnottertail -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/1/2015 12:07:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44


quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

I was referring to Larry Klayman,who as far as I know was the only "conspiracy fool" mentioned previous to my post.
But I will say bounty you are coming real close,real fuckingcloise.
My opinion,I'm entitled to it [:D]


unfortunately, somewhere along the line, the "im entitled to my opinion" statement ended up as the equivalent of "and my opinion, however unfounded and thoughtless, has just as much merit as anyone else's."

that said---bill o'reilly recently floated the idea that (presuming she concealed/destroyed public records) the email scandal she knew would ensue would be potentially less harmful to her than any of the documents others might have (would have) seen.

and if you can come up with an alternative and better explanation as to why Hillary Clinton's done everything she's done, in contrast to the one of being able to conceal records from oversight and the public, by all means do.





Yeah, its all ideas floated by people incapable of any form of rational cogitation and thats why it is as meaningless to the majority of real people as it is.




thishereboi -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/1/2015 2:30:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail


quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Why would I do that? I am capable of independant thought, and not given to slobbering asswipe either gushingly or passive-agressively from rightwing Fascist shiteaters devoid of actual facts.


You might try giving that little felching habit a skip every so often.



still obsessed with all things anal I see. Maybe a trip to the local airport bathroom would help you with that.


You want me to watch you in action is that the thing?



not no, but hell no. you can keep your bathroom fantasies to yourself. I just hoped getting you to go would slow down your impulsive need to share them with us.




mnottertail -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/1/2015 2:39:03 PM)

You're the one at the glory holes, I wish you would hold up until them scabs on your knees heal.




Moderator3 -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/1/2015 4:10:31 PM)

FR

This thread is getting to a place where it's pushing the Feisty limit. Let's have a bit more topic rather than the slam dunking just to slam dunk.

Remember where you are too. This is Feisty, stuff happens and its allowed, but there is a point of no return.

Thank you

Edit to add the FR.




KenDckey -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/1/2015 4:50:03 PM)

Thank you moderator 3




DesideriScuri -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/1/2015 5:16:19 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44
"Looking back, it would have been probably, you know, smarter to have used two devices," Clinton said. Her office that day released a statement saying she "wanted the simplicity of using one device."
yet (never mind that devices can have multiple accounts on them):


Actually, it's been stated that to have the level of security you'd want on a high level government official's phone/email, you can only have one account on the phone.

But, since she's used more than one device, that makes things look a bit less aboveboard for her.




bounty44 -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/1/2015 6:26:17 PM)

a good point...one wonders then why she didn't try to run with that explanation---although since she did end up using multiple devices, I guess it does render that argument null.




KenDckey -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/1/2015 7:14:25 PM)

I do believe that Hillary is digging a political grave of her own making. I think this has her so tainted, not only by reps, but by Dems that she may not survive.




thishereboi -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/1/2015 8:22:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

You're the one at the glory holes, I wish you would hold up until them scabs on your knees heal.



Like I told mikey, if you have a problem with gays, just come out and say so. Don't hide behind juvenile cocksucking jokes.




thishereboi -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/1/2015 8:24:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Moderator3

FR

This thread is getting to a place where it's pushing the Feisty limit. Let's have a bit more topic rather than the slam dunking just to slam dunk.

Remember where you are too. This is Feisty, stuff happens and its allowed, but there is a point of no return.

Thank you

Edit to add the FR.



I'm truly sorry, but if he is allowed to spew that crap, I should be allowed to call him on it.




thishereboi -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/1/2015 8:25:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

I do believe that Hillary is digging a political grave of her own making. I think this has her so tainted, not only by reps, but by Dems that she may not survive.



As long as she waits until after the primary to crash and burn....




KenDckey -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/2/2015 1:01:07 AM)

I think she already has the money needed to make it to the primary. But after that is where her problem lay.




joether -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/2/2015 2:38:37 AM)

I enjoy how the conservatives and libertarians are trying to push this issue. Because they all know.....NONE.....of the possible Republican or Tea Party 2016 candidates have a prayer in a race against Hillary Clinton. Rather than a straight up, honest, and open race; these people want everything underhand and evil. Then bitch later why the race was so dirty and ugly. When its pointed out they they played a major role in things, they flatly deny it. Even if you show the writtings and video of their words and actions.

Hillary is a tough gal. As a US President she will not take shit from anyone. She'll be the one that shows the world that Putin has a secret sissy fetish.

Benghazi didn't work for them, so now they are even more desperate to find....something.....ANYTHING....to pin on here. If your selection of people for the GOP or TP tickets is so utterly, fucking bad; why not look for other people? That would be the logical course of action. Oh forgot, logic is not a virtue of the GOP/TP....




epiphiny43 -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/2/2015 2:52:07 AM)

quote:



ORIGINAL: bounty44
"Looking back, it would have been probably, you know, smarter to have used two devices," Clinton said. Her office that day released a statement saying she "wanted the simplicity of using one device."
yet (never mind that devices can have multiple accounts on them):

Only a small correction, but any reading in the media reveals the frequent statement that the Govt. issued Blackberrys of the time (The device she used) could only handle one account. Thus multiple devices required to do multiple accounts. Keep up?



NOT in reply other than to bounty44




thishereboi -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/2/2015 5:34:47 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: joether

I enjoy how the conservatives and libertarians are trying to push this issue. Because they all know.....NONE.....of the possible Republican or Tea Party 2016 candidates have a prayer in a race against Hillary Clinton. Rather than a straight up, honest, and open race; these people want everything underhand and evil. Then bitch later why the race was so dirty and ugly. When its pointed out they they played a major role in things, they flatly deny it. Even if you show the writtings and video of their words and actions.

Hillary is a tough gal. As a US President she will not take shit from anyone. She'll be the one that shows the world that Putin has a secret sissy fetish.

Benghazi didn't work for them, so now they are even more desperate to find....something.....ANYTHING....to pin on here. If your selection of people for the GOP or TP tickets is so utterly, fucking bad; why not look for other people? That would be the logical course of action. Oh forgot, logic is not a virtue of the GOP/TP....



Wrong again, what a surprise. I hope she makes it to the primary because I think she would be the easiest to beat. But you are right about the election being ugly. Between the right reusing all the old sarah jokes on hillary and the left crying because they are being mean to her it's going to be a free for all.





bounty44 -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/2/2015 5:57:28 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: epiphiny43

quote:



ORIGINAL: bounty44
"Looking back, it would have been probably, you know, smarter to have used two devices," Clinton said. Her office that day released a statement saying she "wanted the simplicity of using one device."
yet (never mind that devices can have multiple accounts on them):

Only a small correction, but any reading in the media reveals the frequent statement that the Govt. issued Blackberrys of the time (The device she used) could only handle one account. Thus multiple devices required to do multiple accounts. Keep up?



NOT in reply other than to bounty44


“keep up?” you know---it’d be nice to find a liberal on here who was able to converse without the sort of smug condescension that makes talking with them unpleasant.

I have been reading/viewing plenty and ive not seen/heard anything saying the devices issued by the state department at that time could physically only handle one account. so your "any reading" pretty much goes out the window. that doesn't mean you personally won't be able to find something, it just means im not.

I found one little blurb from the Washington times that said this:

“Hillary Clinton was barred from operating multiple email accounts on a singular hand-held device such as a Blackberry or iPhone by State Department rules, two former officials told Business Insider.

“The officials, who spoke to the news outlet on the condition of anonymity, said State Department regulations during her tenure as secretary of state permitted only one email account per Blackberry.”

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/10/hillary-limited-1-email-account-phone-state-depart/

You’ll note that it doesn’t say the blackberry’s were “incapable” of holding two accounts, but rather that (apparently) state department rules forbade it. (gee you think they'd know, if it was the case, that the devices at the time could only physically handle one account.)

Except for that I don’t buy that for a couple of reasons. First, the “anonymous” source. The information contained in “this was the rule at the time” doesn’t require secrecy. There’s no reason I can see that a state department spokesman didn’t come right out, straight away and declare to the public in bold letters: “Hillary Clinton was only allowed by our rules to have one account on her device.”

Second and more importantly, Hillary Clinton didn’t say during her press conference “rules demanded I have only one account on my blackberry.” That’s a definitive statement that would put some qualms to rest---instead she said she “opted for convenience,” which doesn’t.

Lastly, there are blackberry forums discussing the very issue having and how to set up multiple accounts on blackberry devices that predate hillary’s time in office.

so unless you've got an actual rule in writing from the state department at the time, or blackberry model specs of her device from 2010 that somehow show hers to be incapable, and an explanation as to why Clinton herself and other state department people aren't putting that argument forth, I'm pretty comfortable with what im thinking.









Page: <<   < prev  15 16 [17] 18 19   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.109375