Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Theres so much nonsense, that its hard keeping track of it all. was she at the time she said it? Was she ordered by a judge not to say anything? link? (curious)
Quote:
It was "allowed" to use a private server --- it wasn't
debatable. Past secretary of states had used offsite email services (google, etc). If anything a offsite server was probably far more secure. Its only after her tenure that the rules were changed.
Quote:
An internet video caused Benghazi attack. -- it didn't, and she knew it
Please. Benghazi benghazi benghazi.
Now I know a lot of folks here might think I am defending her, or some huge fan. I am not. BUT....I'm not a fan of things that are based on propaganda, and way too much of this has been.
That make sense? Its like the westboro folks....I dont like them....but they have the right to do what they do.......
How is she any different from any other current politician?
Is that really your defense? That politicians are corrupt by nature, therefore we should turn a blind eye to Hillary's bald faced lies and elect her President?
Theres a ton of holes in your arguments. You know that right?
For example, while Bill was well known for not using email personally while president, that doesnt mean he doesn't receive emails. He has a staff that can deal with that, and emails from her to him most likely occurred.
The argument that no classified emails were sent has been debated, many of the "classified" information was classified after it was sent. IE fine at the time.
And the state department is supposed to archive those emails. It only started to in Feb. Its not unreasonable to think that she believed that they were archived.
Basically this is a bunch of hoopla, that may or may not mean anything. But with the Conservatives penchant for creating fake controversies, its hard to say.
And thats a problem. conservative organizations have lied and misled so much its hard to know whats a real scandal anymore.
Is the Clinton emails a real scandal? Conservative organizations who are trying to win elections have been such bald faced liars its hard to know.
I dont even like the woman.....and find it hard to know.
These are not "holes" as you assert. These are EXCUSES being made at the behest of a pathological liar.
Theres so much nonsense, that its hard keeping track of it all. was she at the time she said it? Was she ordered by a judge not to say anything? link? (curious)
debatable. Past secretary of states had used offsite email services (google, etc). If anything a offsite server was probably far more secure. Its only after her tenure that the rules were changed.
Please. Benghazi benghazi benghazi.
Now I know a lot of folks here might think I am defending her, or some huge fan. I am not. BUT....I'm not a fan of things that are based on propaganda, and way too much of this has been.
That make sense? Its like the westboro folks....I dont like them....but they have the right to do what they do.......
Benghazi propoganda?
It was a video-lie
there isn't gun running-lie
there is gun running but we aren't involved -lie
Marc Turi is the gun runner Hillary hired to run guns to Libyan and Syrian rebels and some of the weapons ended up in the hands of terrorists. Nothing to see here, move along.
Suuurrreee. And heaven knows the Conservative organizations saying this sort of thing would never over exaggerate or make things up. Yup!
Here's the problem with your logic. If Hillary was merely mistaken and made a bad decision in good faith, then why did the State Department refuse to respond to a document request under FOIA, only to have the courts to resurrect a lawsuit that had been previously dismissed due to the fact that the State Department knew that Hillary had a private server and that there were in fact documents that would have been responsive to the FOIA request?
In other words, the State Department is either 1) woefully incompetent, or 2) knew that Hillary had FOIA-able documents and emails outside of the reach of FOIA (Hillary's intent all along) and therefore provided cover for her?
You folks can dilly-dally all day long with all these "holes" you assert, but the courts and the FBI have zeroed in on the State Department and Hillary Clinton. That has NOTHING to do with the GOP or conservatives.
Here's the problem with your logic. If Hillary was merely mistaken and made a bad decision in good faith, then why did the State Department refuse to respond to a document request under FOIA, only to have the courts to resurrect a lawsuit that had been previously dismissed due to the fact that the State Department knew that Hillary had a private server and that there were in fact documents that would have been responsive to the FOIA request?
In other words, the State Department is either 1) woefully incompetent, or 2) knew that Hillary had FOIA-able documents and emails outside of the reach of FOIA (Hillary's intent all along) and therefore provided cover for her?
You folks can dilly-dally all day long with all these "holes" you assert, but the courts and the FBI have zeroed in on the State Department and Hillary Clinton. That has NOTHING to do with the GOP or conservatives.
In all honesty I am going with option 1 if I have to pick one. But of course forced choices to complex questions isnt a real discussion is it?
But way too much of this REEKS of swiftboating. And this sort of nonsense has EVERYTHING to do with the GOP.
Hillary is all about the illusion. When in reality......... Corruption, unethical, immoral, while sitting on an ivory tower looking down her nose.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.