Trump's speech on Hillary Clinton's record
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-06-2016, 04:37 AM
RE: Trump's speech on Hillary Clinton's record
(22-06-2016 09:32 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Breaking Department rules is not breaking the law. Too bad for you. She's never going to be indicted.
Trump has no idea what "telling the truth" means.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/chasewithorn...9ef3b4787e

Breaking department rules is not breaking the law, but putting confidential government information on your home server sure is. There are strong indications she violated the Espianoge Act. I don't think she's getting indicted either, but I wouldn't say it's never going to happen. It probably should happen. General Patraeus was indicted for the same thing and on a much smaller scale. She just has better political cover, but that doesn't mean she's not guilty.

Trump is an asshole but that's independent of her problems.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like BnW's post
23-06-2016, 06:47 AM
RE: Trump's speech on Hillary Clinton's record
(22-06-2016 10:05 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(22-06-2016 09:57 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  The report demonstrates that other Secretaries of State, (as my references agree, which are FAR more knowledgeable than you), did similar acts.
Ah, so you decided to move the goal posts instead. Too bad for you that your words are archived for future reference on forums like this. You said, verbatim, that the report found that "she did nothing her predecessors had not also done." As stated by the IG report, she did, in fact, do something her predecessors had not also done (i.e. build a private server at home). So, which is it, Bucky Ball? Did you not read the report for yourself or did you read it and then decide to lie about it? Consider

Just as the reports I referenced, I meant she had used private email systems to communicate information. I NEVER said they also used servers in their home. You made that up. The fact is, with her particular history of being hacked and, her intentions may have reflected that she thought she was protecting the information BETTER than having it on government servers...as was PROVEN later, when the Office of Personnel Management was hacked, and MILLIONS of US citizens private information was compromised, (including MINE). So yeah. You hate women. You hate women politicians, so the ONLY conclusion you can jump to here, is that she was hiding something, when in fact she may have been trying to protect sensitive information. I never said they had private servers at home. The report doesn't say that. You never read it. You don't know what I meant. You jumped to a conclusion that supports you bullshit opinion of the subject.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2016, 07:03 AM
RE: Trump's speech on Hillary Clinton's record
(23-06-2016 12:15 AM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(23-06-2016 12:00 AM)Vosur Wrote:  The only reason I even brought it up was because Girly asserted that there are no signs of a coming indictment.

Am I wrong? You see signs of a coming indictment? I mean since you're a fascist living in Prague I am extremely interested in your opinion on US Politics. Nate Silver needs to start considering likely voter polls from the Czech Republic.

This is completely uncalled for. Shame on you.

. . . ................................ ......................................... . [Image: 2dsmnow.gif] Eat at Joe's
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Slowminded's post
23-06-2016, 07:45 AM
RE: Trump's speech on Hillary Clinton's record
(23-06-2016 06:47 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(22-06-2016 10:05 PM)Vosur Wrote:  Ah, so you decided to move the goal posts instead. Too bad for you that your words are archived for future reference on forums like this. You said, verbatim, that the report found that "she did nothing her predecessors had not also done." As stated by the IG report, she did, in fact, do something her predecessors had not also done (i.e. build a private server at home). So, which is it, Bucky Ball? Did you not read the report for yourself or did you read it and then decide to lie about it? Consider

Just as the reports I referenced, I meant she had used private email systems to communicate information. I NEVER said they also used servers in their home. You made that up. The fact is, with her particular history of being hacked and, her intentions may have reflected that she thought she was protecting the information BETTER than having it on government servers...as was PROVEN later, when the Office of Personnel Management was hacked, and MILLIONS of US citizens private information was compromised, (including MINE). So yeah. You hate women. You hate women politicians, so the ONLY conclusion you can jump to here, is that she was hiding something, when in fact she may have been trying to protect sensitive information. I never said they had private servers at home. The report doesn't say that. You never read it. You don't know what I meant. You jumped to a conclusion that supports you bullshit opinion of the subject.

Ermm.... How do you come to the conclusion that he hates women? Wat? He doesn't like Hilary, but I think it's a bit much to say that he hates women in general. If Hillary was a male candidate, no one would say that someone hates all men. O.o I dunno. I just don't think it's right to say that Vosur is jumping to conclusions and then jump to conclusions yourself. O.o

☆☆☆
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like CosmicRaven's post
23-06-2016, 07:55 AM
RE: Trump's speech on Hillary Clinton's record
People who've been here a while have their own posting history which also include behaviors and prejudices. Just because you don't know them doesn't mean they don't exist or get brought up in conflicts.

[Image: dnw9krH.jpg?4]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Heatheness's post
23-06-2016, 08:08 AM
RE: Trump's speech on Hillary Clinton's record
Something about this thread reminds me of Quintesson-style justice.




Don't let those gnomes and their illusions get you down. They're just gnomes and illusions.

--Jake the Dog, Adventure Time

Alouette, je te plumerai.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Old Man Marsh's post
23-06-2016, 08:16 AM
RE: Trump's speech on Hillary Clinton's record
(23-06-2016 07:55 AM)Heatheness Wrote:  People who've been here a while have their own posting history which also include behaviors and prejudices. Just because you don't know them doesn't mean they don't exist or get brought up in conflicts.

Vosur and I are good friends. He's really nice once you get to know him.

☆☆☆
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2016, 08:17 AM
RE: Trump's speech on Hillary Clinton's record
(23-06-2016 06:47 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  The fact is, with her particular history of being hacked and, her intentions may have reflected that she thought she was protecting the information BETTER than having it on government servers...as was PROVEN later, when the Office of Personnel Management was hacked, and MILLIONS of US citizens private information was compromised, (including MINE).

She doesn't get to make that choice, though. She doesn't get to violate the rules and possibly the law and then claim it was for the government's benefit, not hers. And, the fact is she's not making that claim.

Circumventing official servers means her emails are not subject to being officially archived and are outside FoIA requested. Even without classified information, that's a real concern.

This is a legitimate issue and questioning her on it is completely fair and reasonable. I get Vosur likes to pay the asshole when it comes to Clinton, but there are a lot of very legitimate questions about her.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like BnW's post
23-06-2016, 08:28 AM
RE: Trump's speech on Hillary Clinton's record
(23-06-2016 07:45 AM)CosmicRaven Wrote:  
(23-06-2016 06:47 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  Just as the reports I referenced, I meant she had used private email systems to communicate information. I NEVER said they also used servers in their home. You made that up. The fact is, with her particular history of being hacked and, her intentions may have reflected that she thought she was protecting the information BETTER than having it on government servers...as was PROVEN later, when the Office of Personnel Management was hacked, and MILLIONS of US citizens private information was compromised, (including MINE). So yeah. You hate women. You hate women politicians, so the ONLY conclusion you can jump to here, is that she was hiding something, when in fact she may have been trying to protect sensitive information. I never said they had private servers at home. The report doesn't say that. You never read it. You don't know what I meant. You jumped to a conclusion that supports you bullshit opinion of the subject.

Ermm.... How do you come to the conclusion that he hates women? Wat? He doesn't like Hilary, but I think it's a bit much to say that he hates women in general. If Hillary was a male candidate, no one would say that someone hates all men. O.o I dunno. I just don't think it's right to say that Vosur is jumping to conclusions and then jump to conclusions yourself. O.o

He also hates Angela Merkle, and made false claims about how she is ruining the German economy, which are totally false. He hates women politicians. It's a pattern.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-06-2016, 08:29 AM
RE: Trump's speech on Hillary Clinton's record
(23-06-2016 08:17 AM)BnW Wrote:  
(23-06-2016 06:47 AM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  The fact is, with her particular history of being hacked and, her intentions may have reflected that she thought she was protecting the information BETTER than having it on government servers...as was PROVEN later, when the Office of Personnel Management was hacked, and MILLIONS of US citizens private information was compromised, (including MINE).

She doesn't get to make that choice, though. She doesn't get to violate the rules and possibly the law and then claim it was for the government's benefit, not hers. And, the fact is she's not making that claim.

Circumventing official servers means her emails are not subject to being officially archived and are outside FoIA requested. Even without classified information, that's a real concern.

This is a legitimate issue and questioning her on it is completely fair and reasonable. I get Vosur likes to pay the asshole when it comes to Clinton, but there are a lot of very legitimate questions about her.

He said she was one of the most corrupt politicians in US history. I asked him to prove it. He told me to look it up myself.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: