American Presidential candidates GoP/Dems
Discussion
whoami said:
She's been waiting months for them to interview her. You'll notice the article says " multiple law enforcement officials said investigators hadn't found sufficient evidence to bring charges and that they are not expecting to be bought against Clinton". Widely reported here for sometime, no indictment is coming, talk of one is just republicans jerking off.unrepentant said:
whoami said:
She's been waiting months for them to interview her. You'll notice the article says " multiple law enforcement officials said investigators hadn't found sufficient evidence to bring charges and that they are not expecting to be bought against Clinton". Widely reported here for sometime, no indictment is coming, talk of one is just republicans jerking off.We'll see.
unrepentant said:
whoami said:
She's been waiting months for them to interview her. You'll notice the article says " multiple law enforcement officials said investigators hadn't found sufficient evidence to bring charges and that they are not expecting to be bought against Clinton". Widely reported here for sometime, no indictment is coming, talk of one is just republicans jerking off.CNN's proof that there will be no indictment is.... that CNN said on May 6th that "so far investigators haven't found evidence to prove that Clinton willfully violated the law".
That was nearly 2 months ago. The latest public leaks were ~1 week ago.
Have a read of the NDA that HRC signed:
https://www.archives.gov/isoo/security-forms/sf312...
She tries to dictate the narrative by saying that the records were classified after the fact. No dice.
NDA said:
1. Intending to be legally bound, I hereby accept the obligations contained in this Agreement in consideration of my being granted
access to classified information. As used in this Agreement, classified information is marked or unmarked classified information ,
including oral communications, that is classified under the standards of Executive Order 13526, or under any other Executive order or
statute that prohibits the unauthorized disclosure of information in the interest of national security
access to classified information. As used in this Agreement, classified information is marked or unmarked classified information ,
including oral communications, that is classified under the standards of Executive Order 13526, or under any other Executive order or
statute that prohibits the unauthorized disclosure of information in the interest of national security
NDA said:
I have been advised that the unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of classified information by me
could cause damage or irreparable injury to the United States or could be used to advantage by a foreign nation. I hereby agree that I
will never divulge classified information to anyone unless: (a) I have officially verified that the recipient has been properly authorized by
the United States Government to receive it; or (b) I have been given prior written notice of authorization from the United States
Government Department or Agency (hereinafter Department or Agency) responsible for the classification of information or last granting
me a security clearance that such disclosure is permitted. (...)
I further understand that I am obligated to comply with laws and regulations that prohibit the unauthorized disclosure of classified information.
could cause damage or irreparable injury to the United States or could be used to advantage by a foreign nation. I hereby agree that I
will never divulge classified information to anyone unless: (a) I have officially verified that the recipient has been properly authorized by
the United States Government to receive it; or (b) I have been given prior written notice of authorization from the United States
Government Department or Agency (hereinafter Department or Agency) responsible for the classification of information or last granting
me a security clearance that such disclosure is permitted. (...)
I further understand that I am obligated to comply with laws and regulations that prohibit the unauthorized disclosure of classified information.
NDA said:
4. I have been advised that any breach of this Agreement may result in the termination of any security clearances I hold; removal from
any position of special confidence and trust requiring such clearances; or termination of my employment or other relationships with the
Departments or Agencies that granted my security clearance or clearances. In addition, I have been advised that any unauthorized disclosure of classified information by me may constitute a violation, or violations, of United States criminal laws
any position of special confidence and trust requiring such clearances; or termination of my employment or other relationships with the
Departments or Agencies that granted my security clearance or clearances. In addition, I have been advised that any unauthorized disclosure of classified information by me may constitute a violation, or violations, of United States criminal laws
NDA said:
7.
I understand that all classified information to which I have access or may obtain access by signing this Agreement is now and will
remain the property of, or under the control of the United States Government unless and until otherwise determined by an authorized[/b]
official or final ruling of a court of law. I agree that I shall return all classified materials which have, or may come into my possession or
for which I am responsible because of such access: (a) upon demand by an authorized representative of the United States
Government; (b) upon the conclusion of my employment or other relationship with the Department or Agency that last granted me a
security clearance or that provided me access to classified information; or (c) upon the conclusion of my employment or other
relationship that requires access to classified information. If I do not return such materials upon request, I understand that this may be a violation of sections 793 and/or 1924, title 18, United States Code, a United States criminal law.
Just kidding. The Federal Bureau of Interviews just wanted a quick chat, a 'security review'. That's all I understand that all classified information to which I have access or may obtain access by signing this Agreement is now and will
remain the property of, or under the control of the United States Government unless and until otherwise determined by an authorized[/b]
official or final ruling of a court of law. I agree that I shall return all classified materials which have, or may come into my possession or
for which I am responsible because of such access: (a) upon demand by an authorized representative of the United States
Government; (b) upon the conclusion of my employment or other relationship with the Department or Agency that last granted me a
security clearance or that provided me access to classified information; or (c) upon the conclusion of my employment or other
relationship that requires access to classified information. If I do not return such materials upon request, I understand that this may be a violation of sections 793 and/or 1924, title 18, United States Code, a United States criminal law.
whoami said:
unrepentant said:
whoami said:
She's been waiting months for them to interview her. You'll notice the article says " multiple law enforcement officials said investigators hadn't found sufficient evidence to bring charges and that they are not expecting to be bought against Clinton". Widely reported here for sometime, no indictment is coming, talk of one is just republicans jerking off.We'll see.
What HRC has already been known to have done in this case (not disputed) has sent others to jail. Those ruined or jailed have done even less in some instances. My opinion is that the Clintons are too powerful and their corruption is rooted too deep to be charged. Bill Clinton meeting with with the head of the DOJ on an airport Tarmac for 30 minutes was just the icing on the corrupt cake.
Jimbeaux said:
What HRC has already been known to have done in this case (not disputed) has sent others to jail. Those ruined or jailed have done even less in some instances. My opinion is that the Clintons are too powerful and their corruption is rooted too deep to be charged. Bill Clinton meeting with with the head of the DOJ on an airport Tarmac for 30 minutes was just the icing on the corrupt cake.
You don't halve write some crapJimbeaux said:
What HRC has already been known to have done in this case (not disputed) has sent others to jail. Those ruined or jailed have done even less in some instances. My opinion is that the Clintons are too powerful and their corruption is rooted too deep to be charged. Bill Clinton meeting with with the head of the DOJ on an airport Tarmac for 30 minutes was just the icing on the corrupt cake.
Hogwash. Absolute bilge. Why hasn't Colin Powell been questioned? He did the self same thing. It's all a joke, red meat for stupid republican voters too dumb to use common sense. So Bill sees that an old friend is parked next to him and goes to say hello. It may in hindsight not have been the smartest move given the desperation of republicans to jump on anything but Ms Lynch is a person of the highest integrity (unlike most of the frothing idiots on the other side) and if she says it was innocent I believe her.You can add anti Semitism to rump's other racist traits now.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/02/politics/donald-trum...
And Whoami - looks like your boy Donald is finally catching up with my sources.
He's right though, no indictment coming.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/07/02/politics/donald-trum...
And Whoami - looks like your boy Donald is finally catching up with my sources.
He's right though, no indictment coming.
mikal83 said:
You don't halve write some crap
I legitimately cannot tell whether you're an expert troll, or a knuckle dragging moron the likes of which PH has never seen before.Lets recap your replies on this page.
mikal83 said:
(Insert sound of stuka dive bomber please)
mikal83 said:
Trump better than Clinton. Yes he is.....at lots of things. A crook, a racist, a woman hater, a rapist, a tax dodger, a liar, a cheat, a fraud............lots of things "better" than Clinton.
mikal83 said:
Your consistent....ly boring. Give exact examples of this that and the other..........your just a knob really. (Best to lay of the booze b4 you post as it's a bit obvious on your spolling)
Edited by mikal83 on Friday 1st July 21:03
mikal83 said:
Oops
mikal83 said:
HC is evil, trumpf is good repeat, HC is evil, trumpf is good repeat...........
One slighly worthwhile reply, and 5 parts human feces.You have nothing to add to this discussion. You can barely string together a coherent sentence (which makes it all the more amusing that you suggest others should lay "of" the booze).
unrepentant said:
Hogwash. Absolute bilge. Why hasn't Colin Powell been questioned? He did the self same thing. It's all a joke, red meat for stupid republican voters too dumb to use common sense. So Bill sees that an old friend is parked next to him and goes to say hello. It may in hindsight not have been the smartest move given the desperation of republicans to jump on anything but Ms Lynch is a person of the highest integrity (unlike most of the frothing idiots on the other side) and if she says it was innocent I believe her.
The two major differences being:Colin Powell did not host his own private email server
An investigation showed that CP had two classified emails, HRC has over 2000. CP disputes that they ever should have been classified “I wish they would release them, so that a normal, air-breathing mammal would look at them and say, ‘What’s the issue?’”
The two scenarios are worlds apart.
amusingduck said:
mikal83 said:
You don't halve write some crap
I legitimately cannot tell whether you're an expert troll, or a knuckle dragging moron the likes of which PH has never seen before.Lets recap your replies on this page.
mikal83 said:
(Insert sound of stuka dive bomber please)
mikal83 said:
Trump better than Clinton. Yes he is.....at lots of things. A crook, a racist, a woman hater, a rapist, a tax dodger, a liar, a cheat, a fraud............lots of things "better" than Clinton.
mikal83 said:
Your consistent....ly boring. Give exact examples of this that and the other..........your just a knob really. (Best to lay of the booze b4 you post as it's a bit obvious on your spolling)
Edited by mikal83 on Friday 1st July 21:03
mikal83 said:
Oops
mikal83 said:
HC is evil, trumpf is good repeat, HC is evil, trumpf is good repeat...........
One slighly worthwhile reply, and 5 parts human feces.You have nothing to add to this discussion. You can barely string together a coherent sentence (which makes it all the more amusing that you suggest others should lay "of" the booze).
mikal83 said:
amusingduck said:
Weem Grimleys!
I find it quite amusing that you've taken the time to "troll" through my replies to some rather boring posts. Thankyou for your time. Now just run along back to your "man cave". You little armchair warrior you.If you ask me, Hillary has acted illegally, but it's been whitewashed by the elite and a complicit media - the BBC makes it sound like she is a poor victim.
She's wiggled out of it by saying nothing (potentially) leaked was actually marked classified, but that doesn't mean it wasn't subject to classification.
http://realclimatescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2...
I'm signed to the official secrets act, but it's not OK for me to divulge sensitive material just because it isn't marked secret etc.
It was also probably a blatant attempt to foil FOI seekers, which is just as bad.
She's wiggled out of it by saying nothing (potentially) leaked was actually marked classified, but that doesn't mean it wasn't subject to classification.
http://realclimatescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2...
I'm signed to the official secrets act, but it's not OK for me to divulge sensitive material just because it isn't marked secret etc.
It was also probably a blatant attempt to foil FOI seekers, which is just as bad.
Mr GrimNasty said:
If you ask me, Hillary has acted illegally, but it's been whitewashed by the elite and a complicit media - the BBC makes it sound like she is a poor victim.
Agreed. Personally, I am much more interested in her speeches to GS, etc., though. But she will never release the texts. Perhaps some interepid reporter (if any are left) can unplug the white noise generator at the next one. scherzkeks said:
Mr GrimNasty said:
If you ask me, Hillary has acted illegally, but it's been whitewashed by the elite and a complicit media - the BBC makes it sound like she is a poor victim.
Agreed. Personally, I am much more interested in her speeches to GS, etc., though. But she will never release the texts. Perhaps some interepid reporter (if any are left) can unplug the white noise generator at the next one. Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff