quote:

ORIGINAL: TallClevDom

I'm sorry, but the "he started it" excuse stops being acceptable when you reach the age of 14.

quote:

The latest revelations about Hillary Clinton’s misuse of an unsecured private email system to communicate top secret information appear to lead possible criminal complicity in some intelligence agencies that had to know of her conduct.

This past week we found out that at least twenty-two of those emails are so highly classified that they cannot be released even in a heavily redacted form...

We also found out that President Obama, contrary to his false statement last March that he only found out about Hillary’s use of that system from recent news reports, actually emailed Hillary at her “clintonmail.com” address at least eighteen times.

Those emails, of course, won’t be released. But the non-release pales to insignificance because of one overwhelmingly important fact: if the president knew that Hillary was using a private, non-governmental email system, so must have the intelligence agencies that were communicating secret information with her and her top staff.

How could the CIA, NSA, DIA, and the other thirteen intelligence agencies we collectively call the “intelligence community” not know that Clinton was using a private, non-government email system? Obviously, they couldn’t have failed to know. They must have communicated with her directly on a frequent basis and would have to have used her “clintonmail” address. Even if they knew that she was using a private system only from email strings containing her “clintonmail.com” address, they had an immediate duty to investigate and object to her using it. Such objections would have had to be resolved by Obama. There’s nothing to indicate any of the sixteen agencies ever objected, nor did the president.

Those facts could spread Hillary’s obvious criminality with a broad brush. If none of the intelligence agencies objected, and none sought to terminate her use of the unsecured system for communicating top secret — even compartmented information such as Special Access Programs — these agencies and their leaders are as culpable as Clinton and the president...

For those who don’t know about these systems, they are maintained entirely separate from the regular “.gov” email systems. You have to use different computers to log on to them and those computers are supposed to be kept in secured facilities. For the SIPRNET, for example, you have to not only log on with name and password, you have to insert a hard identification card like a credit card into the computer to gain access. More security is required for JWICS.

Cell phones, for example, aren’t allowed into any room containing SIPRNET or JWICS. The computers set up to use these networks don’t have CD drives or USB ports in order to prevent anyone copying the information they get access to. But all those protections fail when people have government-issued BlackBerries cleared onto SIPRNET and JWICS — which Clinton’s staff evidently had — and use them intentionally to copy information from a classified email and send it to an address on her “clintonmail” server. That can’t be done by accident. It has to be done laboriously and with intent to evade the restrictions on handling secrets. It’s a felony to do so, but that was Clinton’s practice and that of her staff.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin

quote:

ORIGINAL: voluntaryservant

Does Hillary Rodham Clinton endorse or participate in Beastiality or Paedophilia?

It's a well known fact that she both endorses and participates [8D]

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterBrentC

There are so many legitimate reasons to hate Hillary Clinton and the dumbocrats, we don't need to make up stuff.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterBrentC

I know this for a fact, liberals resort to insults and name-calling when faced with facts that can't be disputed. I'm just trying to fit in.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

And I can think of many reasons to reject the GOP too.

1) They haven't fielded anyone even half-sensible to be a president.
Same could be said for the left
2) They have a nasty habit of blocking sensible social values - just because they can.
Same could be said for the left
3) All their right-wing press and propaganda is usually outright lies - and been proven as such.
Same could be said for the left
4) The US would be better off having a stark raving loony than anyone in the GOP at present.
Does this mean you are ok with Trump?
5) The GOP and everyone in it is more for profiteering than helping the general populace.
Same could be said for the left

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

Yanno what??
Trump is enough of a loud-mouthed slimy sleaze-ball to pull it off!

I don't like much of what he said.
In fact, I don't like much of what any of the runners are saying - left, right, or centre.

I'd like a "None of the above" on the voting papers.

I wonder, if they did that and it was a winner, would they scrap all the runners and restart with a clean slate??

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterBrentC

There are so many legitimate reasons to hate Hillary Clinton and the dumbocrats, we don't need to make up stuff.

Dumbocrat? How the fuck am I supposed to convince people that right wingers have intelligence when you go around spewing crap like that? Don't you realize that makes you look like an asshat and not them?

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterBrentC

I know this for a fact, liberals resort to insults and name-calling when faced with facts that can't be disputed. I'm just trying to fit in.

If you walked by a kid playing in the sewer, would you tell him it's wrong or would you jump right in with him and start playing with the feces?

You are just another partisan troll scoring points for the left.

and no I wouldn't be a bit surprised to find a liberal hand in the sock.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin

quote:

ORIGINAL: voluntaryservant

Does Hillary Rodham Clinton endorse or participate in Beastiality or Paedophilia?

It's a well known fact that she both endorses and participates [8D]

Well I don't know about the last part, but I have always thought Bill was a jackass and she slept with him. Does that count as bestiality?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
....Actually this is a fine thread for showing the failure of your cause. In all its glorious willful ignorance.

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

Yanno what??
Trump is enough of a loud-mouthed slimy sleaze-ball to pull it off!

I don't like much of what he said.
In fact, I don't like much of what any of the runners are saying - left, right, or centre.

I'd like a "None of the above" on the voting papers.

I wonder, if they did that and it was a winner, would they scrap all the runners and restart with a clean slate??

Not a bad idea. From what i have seen so far it would have my vote.

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

Yanno what??
Trump is enough of a loud-mouthed slimy sleaze-ball to pull it off!

I don't like much of what he said.
In fact, I don't like much of what any of the runners are saying - left, right, or centre.

I'd like a "None of the above" on the voting papers.

I wonder, if they did that and it was a winner, would they scrap all the runners and restart with a clean slate??

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin

quote:

ORIGINAL: thishereboi

quote:

ORIGINAL: lovmuffin

quote:

ORIGINAL: voluntaryservant

Does Hillary Rodham Clinton endorse or participate in Beastiality or Paedophilia?

It's a well known fact that she both endorses and participates [8D]

Well I don't know about the last part, but I have always thought Bill was a jackass and she slept with him. Does that count as bestiality?

Yes, I'll go with that and as for the last part, I know there has to be something [8D]

quote:

Oh where?

quote:

The State Department is lying when it says it didn’t know until it was too late that Hillary Clinton was improperly using personal emails and a private server to conduct official business — because it never set up an agency email address for her in the first place, the department’s former top watchdog says.

“This was all planned in advance” to skirt rules governing federal records management, said Howard J. Krongard, who served as the agency’s inspector general from 2005 to 2008.

The Harvard-educated lawyer points out that, from Day One, Clinton was never assigned and never used a state.gov email address like previous secretaries.

“That’s a change in the standard. It tells me that this was premeditated. And this eliminates claims by the State Department that they were unaware of her private email server until later,” Krongard said in an exclusive interview. “How else was she supposed to do business without email?”

He also points to the unusual absence of a permanent inspector general during Clinton’s entire 2009-2013 term at the department. He said the 5½-year vacancy was unprecedented.

“This is a major gap. In fact, it’s without precedent,” he said. “It’s the longest period any department has gone without an IG.”

Inspectors general serve an essential and unique role in the federal government by independently investigating agency waste, fraud and abuse. Their oversight also covers violations of communications security procedures.

“It’s clear she did not want to be subject to internal investigations,” Krongard said. An email audit would have easily uncovered the secret information flowing from classified government networks to the private unprotected system she set up in her New York home.

He says “the key” to the FBI’s investigation of Emailgate is determining how highly sensitive state secrets in the classified network, known as SIPRNet, ended up in Clinton’s personal emails.

“The starting point of the investigation is the material going through SIPRNet. She couldn’t function without the information coming over SIPRNet,” Krongard said. “How did she get it on her home server? It can’t just jump from one system to the other. Someone had to move it, copy it. The question is who did that?”

As The Post first reported, the FBI is investigating whether Clinton’s deputies copied top-secret information from the department’s classified network to its unclassified network where it was sent to Hillary’s unsecured, unencrypted email account.

FBI agents are focusing on three of Clinton’s top department aides. Most of the 1,340 Clinton emails deemed classified by intelligence agency reviewers were sent to her by her chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, or her deputy chiefs, Huma Abedin and Jake Sullivan, who now hold high positions in Clinton’s presidential campaign.

“They are facing significant scrutiny now,” Krongard said, and are under “enormous pressure to cooperate” with investigators.

“This totally eliminates the false premise that she got nothing marked classified,” Krongard said. “She’s hiding behind this defense. But they [emails] had to be classified, because otherwise [the information in them] wouldn’t be on the SIPRNet.”

Added Krongard: “She’s trying to distance herself from the conversion from SIPRNet to [the nonsecure] NIPRNet and to her server, but she’s throwing her staffers under the bus.”

Still, “It will never get to an indictment,” Krongard said.

For one, he says, any criminal referral to the Justice Department from the FBI “will have to go through four loyal Democrat women” — Assistant Attorney General Leslie Caldwell, who heads the department’s criminal division; Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates; Attorney General Loretta Lynch; and top White House adviser Valerie Jarrett.

Even if they accept the referral, he says, the case quickly and quietly will be plea-bargained down to misdemeanors punishable by fines in a deal similar to the one Clinton’s lawyer, David Kendall, secured for Gen. David Petraeus. In other words, a big slap on the wrist.

“He knows the drill,” Krongard said of Kendall.