Hillary Clinton is Done

Status
Not open for further replies.
16.5 said:
You were, huh....:rolleyes:

The rest of the list wasn't "private" either. We have some emails that show that Bill was asking for permission to give speeches in North Korea and the Congo, among other places.... which were vetoed by the State Department.<snip>
Click to expand...

But since those weren't Hillary Clintons emails, they are irrelevant, as was the rest of your comment.
 
If she deleted any emails that could be embarrassing -- whether involving State Department business, Clinton foundation business, foreign donations to the foundation, hubby's foreign speaking engagements, private opinions of President Obama, etc., etc. -- she will look bad.
Click to expand...
TheL8Elvis said:
Those sound like personal emails. How exactly would details of those emails come to public attention ?
Click to expand...

16.5 said:
Emails regarding "state department business" sound like "personal emails." rolls eyes
Click to expand...

TheL8Elvis said:
I was, of course, referring to the remainder of the list. I thought it would be obvious, but apparently ...
Click to expand...

:rolleyes: Ok.... 16.5 explains why Billy's speaking arrangements and the CFF are not "private."

TheL8Elvis said:
But since those weren't Hillary Clintons emails, they are irrelevant, as was the rest of your comment.
Click to expand...

Lolz!!! In other news, goal posts were seen hurtling past the Voyager spacecraft today...
 
Last edited:
Skeptic Ginger said:
There's no doubt the story continues in the right wing blogosphere and in forum and FB discussions. But it takes the news harping on it to affect the voters that might make a difference.
Click to expand...

you 90% sure of that?

wareyin was utterly wrong when he claimed that the story wasn't in the news.

Chicago Tribune today, do some research.
 
16.5 said:
you 90% sure of that?

wareyin was utterly wrong when he claimed that the story wasn't in the news.

Chicago Tribune today, do some research.
Click to expand...

The death throes of The Great Email Smuggling Conspiracy of 2015. You find articles on right wing blogs and pseudo news sites, and they cite the three articles they can find in any publication in the country.

A far cry from top-of-the-news on every network, eh? They've got the Trump circus to cover, evil Iran, evil IS, evil Roosha. "FBI confident it will recover some emails" is down about 19th on the usually reliable Fox News site.

Trying to elevate this to "criminal" by changing "can" or "may" or "might" to "MUST!!!" is desperation. What we have here, ultimately, is exposure of huge gaps in government procedures. Now that we know where the stupid loopholes are, close them. Make all documents with various Secret classifications "read only". Make a firm policy that NO ONE is to use anything other than secure government-run servers. All departments. Also make it a firm policy of No Personal Mail on those servers. You want to email your campaign manager, hair dresser, personal trainer? Do so on your own time and your own dime.

But "criminal prosecution"??!! Absurd and desperate.
 
Foolmewunz said:
The death throes of The Great Email Smuggling Conspiracy of 2015. You find articles on right wing blogs and pseudo news sites, and they cite the three articles they can find in any publication in the country.

A far cry from top-of-the-news on every network, eh? They've got the Trump circus to cover, evil Iran, evil IS, evil Roosha. "FBI confident it will recover some emails" is down about 19th on the usually reliable Fox News site.
.
Click to expand...

Did you mean to respond to my post? Because your post makes no *********** sense whatsoever...

You think the chicago tribune is a right wing blog or pseudo news site? Words fail me.... Seriously.... Wow, just wow...

Man the quality of Hillary propaganda on this forum has gone in the *******.
 
16.5 said:
Did you mean to respond to my post? Because your post makes no *********** sense whatsoever...

You think the chicago tribune is a right wing blog or pseudo news site? Words fail me.... Seriously.... Wow, just wow...

Man the quality of Hillary propaganda on this forum has gone in the *******.
Click to expand...

Grown ups don't have to asterisk to make their point. Well, maybe it's that your point is so wrong you need to cover up.

You're trawling the web to find stories about this and having more and more difficulty. You're what I was comparing to a right wing blog, not the Chicago Tribune. It's not in the top of the news any longer. It's filler.
 
Foolmewunz said:
Grown ups don't have to asterisk to make their point. Well, maybe it's that your point is so wrong you need to cover up.

You're trawling the web to find stories about this and having more and more difficulty. You're what I was comparing to a right wing blog, not the Chicago Tribune. It's not in the top of the news any longer. It's filler.
Click to expand...

Actually, the article to which I was referring was the lead editorial in today's chicago tribune, which I found not by trawling the web, but rather turning the page in today's paper which I read on the El on the way home this evening.

So literally everything you just posted was wrong.

By the way? Hillary email scandal is featured on the front page of tomorrow's New York Times. That is getting hard to find, I mean who bothers to read the front page of the New York Times?
 
Last edited:
16.5 said:
Actually, the article to which I was referring was the lead editorial in today's chicago tribune, which I found not by trawling the web, but rather turning the page in today's paper which I read on the El on the way home this evening.

So literally everything you just posted was wrong.
Click to expand...

Yes, literally. (For certain meanings of "literal", of course.)
 
Foolmewunz said:
Yes, literally. (For certain meanings of "literal", of course.)
Click to expand...

No, I chose that word very carefully.

You get the New York Times where you are? Might want to take a gander at Page A.1 tomorrow. That is where the filler is!
 
Last edited:
16.5 said:
No, I chose that word very carefully.

You get the New York Times where you are? Might want to take a gander at Page A.1 tomorrow
Click to expand...

An Article in a newspaper. I can't see page numbers here because I get it on line. There are actually two articles, but one appears to be an opinion piece.

It's still a waning story. The Amedin Patrol will play this up for a few days and by Monday, if Putin so much as farts downwind of the Pope or if Trump claims that he's a hog farmer, it'll be back on the bottom of the pile.
 
Foolmewunz said:
An Article in a newspaper. .
Click to expand...

yeah, "an" "article" in "a" "newspaper."

Front page of tomorrow's New York Times. Non-story. (by the way, online Times lists the place in the physical paper where the article will appear. this one is on A1, tomorrow. That must be for filler and stuff)

:rolleyes:

Or maybe Monday. Of course on September 30? Well that is when they release the next tranche of Hillary emails.

That usually renders less than 10,000 articles in major publications across the world.

Reuters tonight on NSA chief testifying that Hillary's emails created an "opportunity"? Right wing bloggy blog.

Hey whatever gets you through the night.
 
Last edited:
Foolmewunz said:
An Article in a newspaper. I can't see page numbers here because I get it on line. There are actually two articles, but one appears to be an opinion piece.
....
Click to expand...

Allow me to help:

.... That email, which included an update from the Africa Command of the Department of Defense detailing Libyan military movements, is part of the evidence that law enforcement officials say the F.B.I. is now examining as it tries to determine whether aides to Mrs. Clinton mishandled delicate national security information when they communicated with their boss.

The Libyan dispatch, written by an aide to Mrs. Clinton and then forwarded to her by Huma Abedin, one of her top advisers, should have been considered classified, according to intelligence officials. And, they say, other emails to Mrs. Clinton they have found, including one addressing North Korea’s nuclear weapons system and a third discussing United States drone strikes in Pakistan, should have been marked “Top Secret.”
Click to expand...

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/25/u...il-inquiry-weighs-if-aides-erred-at-send.html
 
wareyin said:
Except, it's not really in the news. Check CNN, for example. Not a peep on their politics page. Fox "News" may be flogging this faux scandal, but nobody else is.
Click to expand...

Skeptic Ginger said:
There's no doubt the story continues in the right wing blogosphere and in forum and FB discussions. But it takes the news harping on it to affect the voters that might make a difference.
Click to expand...

Foolmewunz said:
The death throes of The Great Email Smuggling Conspiracy of 2015. You find articles on right wing blogs and pseudo news sites, and they cite the three articles they can find in any publication in the country.

A far cry from top-of-the-news on every network

But "criminal prosecution"??!! Absurd and desperate.
Click to expand...

Bob001 said:
Allow me to help



http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/25/u...il-inquiry-weighs-if-aides-erred-at-send.html
Click to expand...

Thanks for the link.

I gotta admit, it is more than a little hilarious that three people are declaring the story dead, when the story turns up on the front page of the Times!

:D
 
16.5 said:
Thanks for the link.

I gotta admit, it is more than a little hilarious that three people are declaring the story dead, when the story turns up on the front page of the Times!

:D
Click to expand...
For the record, I didn't stay the story was dead, I said it will be because there is nothing there.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom