But wait! There's more

[Guest]

The hole gets deeper by the day:

Official: Some Clinton emails 'too damaging' to release | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01/29/official-some-clinton-emails-too-damaging-to-release.html)

For the source police yes we know it is a fox publication!

[Guest]

And even more:

Former House Oversight chairman: 'FBI director would like to indict Clinton and Abedin' | Washington Examiner (http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/issa-fbi-director-would-like-to-indict-clinton-and-abedin/article/2581811)

[Guest]

Interestingly, Hillary's ability to stay out of prison may very well depend on how well she does in the primaries. If she does very well, she may be considered too big to jail, if not...well there's no love lost between the Clintons and the Obamas.

[Guest]

Hang her! Throw her to the dogs, like she threw our people in Libya to the animals.

[Guest]

Every minute that goes by I become more convinced the reason for her unwarranted survival is the wall of defense being put around the possibility of an Obama involvement.

Today 22 emails that were between Clinton and Obama were removed from the list. The come under the protection of the president's something or other. They may not be released until "...years after he leaves the WH...".

There are an awful lot of complicit people in Washington keeping their heads down and their mouths shut.

The only reason Clinton is not prosecuted to the fullest.

The wagons are circled for a reason.

All that remains is for the American people to wake up...especially those who blindly support the tainted Clinton candidacy.

[Guest]

The hole gets deeper by the day:

Official: Some Clinton emails 'too damaging' to release | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01/29/official-some-clinton-emails-too-damaging-to-release.html)

For the source police yes we know it is a fox publication!

And so therefore we can ignore this source!!

[Guest]

And so therefore we can ignore this source!!

That is the choice of liberals. They ignore anything that is right. It's almost like they believe that morals and ethics do not exist. Yes, by all means ignore the source, regardless of the truth.

Liberals admit the fact that they walk about blindly, allowing the supreme government to direct their zombie bodies.

[Guest]

Take a look at the posts on this thread. Liberal this, liberal that. Fox News, and Washington Examiner articles are referenced. Add to the number of Benghazi that have gone nowhere. Republican head of the House (I am not sure what his position was, but you know who I mean) saying that Benghazi was designed to bring Hillary down, and look at her poll numbers. How can anyone outside of the Republican world look at this and think Republicans have an open mind on Hillary? That everything Republicans have put forward is political in nature, and has nothing to do with the rule of law.

Even if she is brought to trial, Republicans are already saying that the verdict is fixed in her favor. If she is convicted, she will receive a presidential pardon, because Obama wants to hide something. It is always something.

Paranoia is a two way street. Democrats are probably thinking that the FBI is waiting until Hillary wins the Democratic nomination before they bring charges against her. If the FBI doesn't bring charges against her, the Benghazi hearing will make their finding known in October of this year. This hearing was supposed to be over by the end of 2014 according to Trey Goudy.

I hate defending Hillary. She is the last person that I want to see as president. There isn't a more polarizing person in the US than Hillary, and for good reason. She is a bitch that has been running for president forever. However, what I hate worse is Republicans complaining about everything, and not being held responsible for anything. The other guy is always the problem. The Republican establishment unleashed the people that are mad at their current state, and they can't control them now. So, you get a Trump, and a Cruz. Who the hell thinks if either of these two get elected, things will not get worse? If Cruz is elected, both parties will make sure he is a one term president. In this election, reasonable people need not run for president.

[Guest]

Take a look at the posts on this thread. Liberal this, liberal that. Fox News, and Washington Examiner articles are referenced. Add to the number of Benghazi that have gone nowhere. Republican head of the House (I am not sure what his position was, but you know who I mean) saying that Benghazi was designed to bring Hillary down, and look at her poll numbers. How can anyone outside of the Republican world look at this and think Republicans have an open mind on Hillary? That everything Republicans have put forward is political in nature, and has nothing to do with the rule of law.

Even if she is brought to trial, Republicans are already saying that the verdict is fixed in her favor. If she is convicted, she will receive a presidential pardon, because Obama wants to hide something. It is always something.

Paranoia is a two way street. Democrats are probably thinking that the FBI is waiting until Hillary wins the Democratic nomination before they bring charges against her. If the FBI doesn't bring charges against her, the Benghazi hearing will make their finding known in October of this year. This hearing was supposed to be over by the end of 2014 according to Trey Goudy.

I hate defending Hillary. She is the last person that I want to see as president. There isn't a more polarizing person in the US than Hillary, and for good reason. She is a bitch that has been running for president forever. However, what I hate worse is Republicans complaining about everything, and not being held responsible for anything. The other guy is always the problem. The Republican establishment unleashed the people that are mad at their current state, and they can't control them now. So, you get a Trump, and a Cruz. Who the hell thinks if either of these two get elected, things will not get worse? If Cruz is elected, both parties will make sure he is a one term president. In this election, reasonable people need not run for president.

Yep, liberals make excuses and attempt to justify or rationalize bad behavior. If it is not proved, it must not be true. Well, there is plenty of proof now. If this is not enough for you to scream "Uncle" then you are just in denial. Hillary told her staff to remove classification markings from the email. Her email is so highly classified, that they can't even release it to the public with redaction of the classified portions. That's is so grievous that she won't be able to find a defense. Now, even her staff will be prosecuted with her. Regardless of how she might get off scott free, she is so guilty that everyone will distance themselves from her in the future.

Your post is desperate and hysterical. You are still attempting to defend a felonious criminal that has jeopardized national security and a couple decades ago would have been executed. If that is not pathetic and unwarranted loyalty, what would it be? You would be better off, not posting your accusations of political attacks. Hillary is on her own and even the White House is scrambling to avoid the fallout.

You know why we use the term "liberal" as a slur? It's because today's liberals are so UN-American that we are disgusted. If you liberals do not agree with or do not like something, you constantly attempt to ban it from existence. And liberals are leaches, not builders or contributors.
So go cry your blues to someone that might feel some empathy for you. But, you had best avoid Hillary, because not only does she poison everyone around her, but she cares nothing for anyone but herself.

[Guest]

The hole gets deeper by the day:

Official: Some Clinton emails 'too damaging' to release | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01/29/official-some-clinton-emails-too-damaging-to-release.html)

For the source police yes we know it is a fox publication!

You forgot the most important thing they said, or don't you research or do you want to put your head in the sand?


"The department says the documents were not marked classified at the time they were sent or received by Clinton. But it says is looking into whether they should have been."

[Guest]

You forgot the most important thing they said, or don't you research or do you want to put your head in the sand?


"The department says the documents were not marked classified at the time they were sent or received by Clinton. But it says is looking into whether they should have been."

Hmmmnnn....maybe some were not marked knowing all servers were secured and it would or could not be an issue. Until we all of a sudden have the infamous, I'll do my own thing, illegal or not server is discovered.

Assuming the information is true that they were not marked, then to the letter of the law Clinton did not do anything wrong....right? Wrong.

So we will give you blind supporters and Clinton they may not have been marked. Now how about when her aids told her some of the emails could not be sent because of the security formatting and then her direction to just go ahead and type them in a way that they can be sent via her email......what dodge and weave BS story or guideline has been issued for that?

[Guest]

Hmmmnnn....maybe some were not marked knowing all servers were secured and it would or could not be an issue. Until we all of a sudden have the infamous, I'll do my own thing, illegal or not server is discovered.

Assuming the information is true that they were not marked, then to the letter of the law Clinton did not do anything wrong....right? Wrong.

So we will give you blind supporters and Clinton they may not have been marked. Now how about when her aids told her some of the emails could not be sent because of the security formatting and then her direction to just go ahead and type them in a way that they can be sent via her email......what dodge and weave BS story or guideline has been issued for that?

No, you are wrong. If you take classification markings off of classified information, it IS STILL CLASSIFIED. Classified information has markings on it that tells when it may be declassified, if at all. You may NEVER/NEVER transmit classified information through the Internet, period. That is a clear violation, regardless of whether or not she says she didn't know. SHe has NO excuse. She has been working in the gov environment for how long? She knows the rules and she signed non-disclosure agreements. She even has to go through special instruction/training for the handling of Top Secret material. I have worked in the Dept of State, as well as DOD and the military, with NSA and CIA and they ALL have to abide by FEDERAL LAW regarding the protection and handling of classified information. I have looked at it, trying to see if she has any defense whatsoever, but I see only a cut and dry case of intentional abuse of the system, resulting in a felony violation. Even if her staff sent those emails, there is nothing in her emails to suggest that she did anything to correct their criminal activity. There is no way that classified information could be mistakenly transmitted over the Internet. Classified information is in a totally separate and closed electronic system and there is no way for it to mistakenly cross over to the Internet. It has to be done manually, only manually.
Hillary's lawyer(s) insist that it was done by accident or that it really isn't classified because there is no markings on it. That doesn't cut it. She can not expect the American voter to believe that she is that stupid. But, she does seem to think that Americans are naive or stupid enough to believe her lies. There is even an email that SHE sent, instructing her staff to take the classification markings off of the material and send it to her via the Internet.

Now, regarding the possible threat of exposure. She is already guilty of mishandling classified information. That is a given. However, has her email been exposed to "uncleared" personnel? YES. She allowed an outside contractor, that is not cleared for Top Secret, and most likely had no gov clearance at all, to maintain her server. Anyone knows that the system administrator has total control of the information on the servers. So YES, the Top Secret information was exposed to non-cleared personnel, another felony violation.

There is enough information, just on the Internet regarding this issue to warrant felony charges against Hillary and her staff. I can only guess that the Justice Dept, appointed by Obama is attempting to protect Obama from possibly being implicated in the felony.

[Guest]

Hmmmnnn....maybe some were not marked knowing all servers were secured and it would or could not be an issue. Until we all of a sudden have the infamous, I'll do my own thing, illegal or not server is discovered.

Assuming the information is true that they were not marked, then to the letter of the law Clinton did not do anything wrong....right? Wrong.

So we will give you blind supporters and Clinton they may not have been marked. Now how about when her aids told her some of the emails could not be sent because of the security formatting and then her direction to just go ahead and type them in a way that they can be sent via her email......what dodge and weave BS story or guideline has been issued for that?

"Hmmmnnn....maybe some were not marked knowing"

Maybe elephants fly!

[Guest]

"Hmmmnnn....maybe some were not marked knowing"

Maybe elephants fly!

Have a hard time recognizing a cynical or facetious hypothesis to emphasize a point to be made.

Well that is what it was. How about considering it an appeasement offering to the radical loyalists thus allowing most of us to focus on the reality of what was done.....and what is being done to KEEP Clinton and now Obama looking good (they think).

[Guest]

Virtual tie raises doubts: Can Hillary Clinton close the deal? - Yahoo News (http://news.yahoo.com/virtual-tie-raises-doubts-hillary-clinton-close-deal-085603229.html)

[Guest]

Every minute that goes by I become more convinced the reason for her unwarranted survival is the wall of defense being put around the possibility of an Obama involvement.

Today 22 emails that were between Clinton and Obama were removed from the list. The come under the protection of the president's something or other. They may not be released until "...years after he leaves the WH...".

There are an awful lot of complicit people in Washington keeping their heads down and their mouths shut.

The only reason Clinton is not prosecuted to the fullest.

The wagons are circled for a reason.

All that remains is for the American people to wake up...especially those who blindly support the tainted Clinton candidacy.

You mean Executive Privilege. Every President has had that not just the Clintons, Obama, etc.

There may be other factors involved.

[Guest]

You mean Executive Privilege. Every President has had that not just the Clintons, Obama, etc.

There may be other factors involved.

When Presidents Invoke Executive Privilege | FRONTLINE (http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/when-presidents-invoke-executive-privilege/)

Do some Googling.

[Guest]

You mean Executive Privilege. Every President has had that not just the Clintons, Obama, etc.

There may be other factors involved.

It has become increasingly obvious the ONLY rational assumption is either the knowledge or direct or indirect involvement in Clinton's violation of federal laws. Hence persecution and prosecution is being shielded, hidden, allowed for SELF preservation.

Political lawyers playing the game against political lawyers playing the blame, shame, shell game.

[Guest]

Obama will direct his Attorney General (he appointed) to shield him from Hillary's grievous felonious actions. The only way to do that, will be for the AG to ignore the case presented to her by the non-partisan FBI. Hillary is guilty of multiple felony violations, but will not be charged because Obama will protect himself by protecting her. She will run amok with her loud claim that she did nothing wrong because she was not charged. She will blame anything resulting from this as an attack from the right. A favorite tact of hers. She is scum and anyone with the least intelligence would realize that and not support her. But, since her husband is also scum and got away with many/many crimes, she will also.

[Guest]

Obama will direct his Attorney General (he appointed) to shield him from Hillary's grievous felonious actions. The only way to do that, will be for the AG to ignore the case presented to her by the non-partisan FBI. Hillary is guilty of multiple felony violations, but will not be charged because Obama will protect himself by protecting her. She will run amok with her loud claim that she did nothing wrong because she was not charged. She will blame anything resulting from this as an attack from the right. A favorite tact of hers. She is scum and anyone with the least intelligence would realize that and not support her. But, since her husband is also scum and got away with many/many crimes, she will also.

Could not have said it better myself. It just makes one wonder how far does party loyalty go to ignore, accept, support, promote such an incompetent felon.

[Guest]

That is the choice of liberals. They ignore anything that is right. It's almost like they believe that morals and ethics do not exist. Yes, by all means ignore the source, regardless of the truth.

Liberals admit the fact that they walk about blindly, allowing the supreme government to direct their zombie bodies.








The source has no truth.

This is the same source that claimed Etchy was going to win 325 electoral votes. This is the source that verified Iraq had WMD's.

See a pattern here?

The only people more ignorant and out of touch with reality than Fox News are those that watch it and rely on it as a source of information

[Guest]

The source has no truth.

This is the same source that claimed Etchy was going to win 325 electoral votes. This is the source that verified Iraq had WMD's.

See a pattern here?

The only people more ignorant and out of touch with reality than Fox News are those that watch it and rely on it as a source of information

They did have WMD's. I saw proof of them. So, I guess the joke is on you and anyone else that has been told otherwise. You do know that the gov keeps secrets from the people, don't you? Well, someone has to provide the information/intelligence for them to keep secret. But, this is not about WMD's. Suffice it to say, you don't know everything that goes on. Just because a liberal media outlet of some sort tells you something, doesn't mean diddly.

[Guest]

They did have WMD's. I saw proof of them. :loco:So, I guess the joke is on you and anyone else that has been told otherwise. You do know that the gov keeps secrets from the people, don't you?:loco: Well, someone has to provide the information/intelligence for them to keep secret. But, this is not about WMD's. Suffice it to say, you don't know everything that goes on. :loco:Just because a liberal media outlet of some sort tells you something, doesn't mean diddly.

Were you wearing your tin foil hat angled toward Mecca when you saw these WMDs?

Did the little green men probe you aboard their flying saucer, too?

We are glad that your meds are letting you type now but the words are still like the chimpanzees writing the works of Shakespeare.

[Guest]

The source has no truth.

This is the same source that claimed Etchy was going to win 325 electoral votes. This is the source that verified Iraq had WMD's.

See a pattern here?

The only people more ignorant and out of touch with reality than Fox News are those that watch it and rely on it as a source of information

And just how does it come to pass that you are (or claim you are) so :censored: well versed on FOX?

Never mind it is a rhetorical question (doesn't require an answer as it makes a point!).

Impossible to have a view that does not incorporate the need to call folks names. The only reason must be self gratification.

Pretty sad actually!

[Guest]

Were you wearing your tin foil hat angled toward Mecca when you saw these WMDs?

Did the little green men probe you aboard their flying saucer, too?

We are glad that your meds are letting you type now but the words are still like the chimpanzees writing the works of Shakespeare.

No! He was standing next to Trump, who saw thousands and thousands of Muslims in New Jersey cheering as the twin towers were coming down. It is amazing what you can see when you look for it.

[Guest]

Obama will direct his Attorney General (he appointed) to shield him from Hillary's grievous felonious actions. The only way to do that, will be for the AG to ignore the case presented to her by the non-partisan FBI. Hillary is guilty of multiple felony violations, but will not be charged because Obama will protect himself by protecting her. She will run amok with her loud claim that she did nothing wrong because she was not charged. She will blame anything resulting from this as an attack from the right. A favorite tact of hers. She is scum and anyone with the least intelligence would realize that and not support her. But, since her husband is also scum and got away with many/many crimes, she will also.
Minus the scum comments that's Washington. Somebody's protecting somebody, political favors being called in, appointees doing what they need to do, etc. Where have you been? Wake up.

[Guest]

Were you wearing your tin foil hat angled toward Mecca when you saw these WMDs?

Did the little green men probe you aboard their flying saucer, too?

We are glad that your meds are letting you type now but the words are still like the chimpanzees writing the works of Shakespeare.

Sure and those thousands of citizens killed by Sadaam in mass graves were just tickled to death. No big deal if you believe or not. Those in the know don't mind laughing at your naivete. You wouldn't know, being as you were back here being protected and all.

[Guest]

They did have WMD's. I saw proof of them. So, I guess the joke is on you and anyone else that has been told otherwise. You do know that the gov keeps secrets from the people, don't you? Well, someone has to provide the information/intelligence for them to keep secret. But, this is not about WMD's. Suffice it to say, you don't know everything that goes on. Just because a liberal media outlet of some sort tells you something, doesn't mean diddly.

Don't take this the wrong way. IF you were in Desert Storm and have these issues that clearly show unresolved anger and rage - you might have PTSD or some other form of problem - onset of Alzheimer or dementia. These can be helped by VA care or referrals.

I put this on here without being facetious or making fun. If you think it might apply to you, talk to a professional healthcare provider.

[Guest]

Sure and those thousands of citizens killed by Sadaam in mass graves were just tickled to death. No big deal if you believe or not. Those in the know don't mind laughing at your naivete. You wouldn't know, being as you were back here being protected and all.

Be careful when you throw stones at someone, because they can come right back at you. Who supplied the chemical weapons used in killing those five thousand Iraqi citizens? Reagan. Oops. Don't worry Oliver North wasn't involved. He only concentrated on Central America. So, Oliver can continue with his Fox series of war stories, which is quite good. How Reagan Armed Saddam with Chemical Weapons (http://www.counterpunch.org/2004/06/17/how-reagan-armed-saddam-with-chemical-weapons/)

How many citizens were and are being killed in that area, since Saddam was killed? Maliki did more harm than Saddam. Under Saddam, there was no ISIS. Saddam was a ******* that should have been replaced or killed. Maybe it was necessary to go to war to do it. However we did, end of story.

[Guest]

Don't take this the wrong way. IF you were in Desert Storm and have these issues that clearly show unresolved anger and rage - you might have PTSD or some other form of problem - onset of Alzheimer or dementia. These can be helped by VA care or referrals.

I put this on here without being facetious or making fun. If you think it might apply to you, talk to a professional healthcare provider.

There is only one way to take it when someone makes such an allegation not knowing one iota about the person being addressed.

Poor choice of such a response.

[Guest]

Don't take this the wrong way. IF you were in Desert Storm and have these issues that clearly show unresolved anger and rage - you might have PTSD or some other form of problem - onset of Alzheimer or dementia. These can be helped by VA care or referrals.

I put this on here without being facetious or making fun. If you think it might apply to you, talk to a professional healthcare provider.

Real nice. An idiot with an opinion that is condescending and insulting. Already dealt with that when I returned from Vietnam. You were probably one of those protesters that sat back and took advantage of all the benefits of being coddled in the states while other sacrificed for you. I bet you got your college education while everyone else served also. No big deal. I laughed at your type before and will continue to laugh at your ignorance now.

If you don't believe in something that is fact, that's OK because I accept that from libtards. They believe all kinds of fairy tales (no bigotry intended if you are gay) but can't understand the thought of Freedom, Liberty and sacrifice, UNLESS it is someone else doing it for them. Then their own cowardice makes them ridicule the ones that they consider stupid enough to serve.

Yes, I was in Iraq when they uncovered mass graves consisting of thousands of dead. You can laugh and make believe that Sadaam was not a monster, but even Google will enlighten you IF you are not too lazy to take the very little effort required to educate yourself.

You are likely a leach on society and will vote for one of the two socialist candidates that are running on the Democrat ticket. Anytime someone waves a freebie in your direction makes you like a leach to blood.

You might want to seek professional help for that inferiority complex you obviously have. They can prescribe pills for your ailment.....maybe start with a couple of Viagra in the beginning to give you a bit more confidence.

[Guest]

Be careful when you throw stones at someone, because they can come right back at you. Who supplied the chemical weapons used in killing those five thousand Iraqi citizens? Reagan. Oops. Don't worry Oliver North wasn't involved. He only concentrated on Central America. So, Oliver can continue with his Fox series of war stories, which is quite good. How Reagan Armed Saddam with Chemical Weapons (http://www.counterpunch.org/2004/06/17/how-reagan-armed-saddam-with-chemical-weapons/)

How many citizens were and are being killed in that area, since Saddam was killed? Maliki did more harm than Saddam. Under Saddam, there was no ISIS. Saddam was a ******* that should have been replaced or killed. Maybe it was necessary to go to war to do it. However we did, end of story.

Sadaam had labs that produced his own gas, whether or not we supplied any. But, I do understand how many of you would not know how bad of a monster Sadaam really was. But, this diversion from the subject of the thread to blame Bush or Nixon or just Republicans in general has nothing to do with it. And it is obvious that many on here were probably too old to have served in the Middle East. So, they would not have much understanding of what went on over there.

[Guest]

Sadaam had labs that produced his own gas, whether or not we supplied any. But, I do understand how many of you would not know how bad of a monster Sadaam really was. But, this diversion from the subject of the thread to blame Bush or Nixon or just Republicans in general has nothing to do with it. And it is obvious that many on here were probably too old to have served in the Middle East. So, they would not have much understanding of what went on over there.

They do know what they have been told to do and say about it.....has nothing to do with reality.

My experience? Far too many that are vocal about issues of significance and especially the military are purely intellectualizing and parroting what they have been told.

I think I read some where there are no republicans or democrats in foxholes.....only in the bleachers!!

[Guest]

They do know what they have been told to do and say about it.....has nothing to do with reality.

My experience? Far too many that are vocal about issues of significance and especially the military are purely intellectualizing and parroting what they have been told.

I think I read some where there are no republicans or democrats in foxholes.....only in the bleachers!!

Good point! Another point about foxholes is that there are a lot of Christian conversions in the foxhole. I think that foxholes are more of an expression than a reality now that we are are in the Middle East. Foxholes in the jungles are manageable, but foxholes in the desert are pretty much just an idea. Kind of like having an above ground basement. But, once again I digress.

[Guest]

Real nice. An idiot with an opinion that is condescending and insulting. Already dealt with that when I returned from Vietnam. You were probably one of those protesters that sat back and took advantage of all the benefits of being coddled in the states while other sacrificed for you. I bet you got your college education while everyone else served also. No big deal. I laughed at your type before and will continue to laugh at your ignorance now.

If you don't believe in something that is fact, that's OK because I accept that from libtards. They believe all kinds of fairy tales (no bigotry intended if you are gay) but can't understand the thought of Freedom, Liberty and sacrifice, UNLESS it is someone else doing it for them. Then their own cowardice makes them ridicule the ones that they consider stupid enough to serve.

Yes, I was in Iraq when they uncovered mass graves consisting of thousands of dead. You can laugh and make believe that Sadaam was not a monster, but even Google will enlighten you IF you are not too lazy to take the very little effort required to educate yourself.

You are likely a leach on society and will vote for one of the two socialist candidates that are running on the Democrat ticket. Anytime someone waves a freebie in your direction makes you like a leach to blood.

You might want to seek professional help for that inferiority complex you obviously have. They can prescribe pills for your ailment.....maybe start with a couple of Viagra in the beginning to give you a bit more confidence.

...and you are the South end of a horse heading North!