ADVERTISEMENT

Clinton Classified E-Mail Scandal Progressing to New Level...

Do you think HRC will drop her presidential bid over her classified email scandal?

  • Yes, before the end of the year even if she isn't indicted

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Yes, but only after Biden enters the race

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Yes, but only after she loses Iowa and NH

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Yes, but only after she is convicted

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Yes, but only after her appeals are heard

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Yes, but only after she is perp walked into federal prison

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    6
  • Poll closed .
Thanks for the link but I fail to see what facts there would disprove my assertion that at least half of the folks receiving welfare are manipulating the system. You keep harping on the length of time as if that's the only way one can take advantage. I know families that have made welfare a way of life. Sure, they me be off of it here and there, but eventually, they're back on. Some sell food stamps for clothes, drugs, etc. Many have jobs paying them under the table yet still collect welfare. How else can you explain when they roll up to my office in a Tahoe and talking on their iPhone? Don't be so naive.

Oh I have no doubt that's the case. I just don't think its more than half. And even if it were more than half where you work, that still wouldn't be an accurate representation of the entire country. I'm sure in certain areas it is more than half. In other areas it might be closer to one in ten. If you've got a solution for fixing it aside from completely shutting down the programs I'd be seriously interested in hearing it. I haven't heard any suggestions from either side that would have any real chance of working
 
Oh I have no doubt that's the case. I just don't think its more than half. And even if it were more than half where you work, that still wouldn't be an accurate representation of the entire country. I'm sure in certain areas it is more than half. In other areas it might be closer to one in ten. If you've got a solution for fixing it aside from completely shutting down the programs I'd be seriously interested in hearing it. I haven't heard any suggestions from either side that would have any real chance of working

Well if nothing's working, then why do I have to contribute to nothing working?
 
Oh I have no doubt that's the case. I just don't think its more than half. And even if it were more than half where you work, that still wouldn't be an accurate representation of the entire country. I'm sure in certain areas it is more than half. In other areas it might be closer to one in ten. If you've got a solution for fixing it aside from completely shutting down the programs I'd be seriously interested in hearing it. I haven't heard any suggestions from either side that would have any real chance of working

Well if nothing's working, then why do I have to contribute to nothing working?
 
Well if nothing's working, then why do I have to contribute to nothing working?

Welfare works for quite a lot of Americans who aren't gaming the system and genuinely need help. Why do I have to contribute to maintaining the most ridiculously over-sized military in human history? Sometimes we have to pay taxes for things we don't agree with. That's part of being a citizen in a democratic republic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: strummingram
Assistance provided to welfare recipients should be tied directly to work they provide in return for the assistance. The assistance should be limited to one year unless the recipient enters a training program leading to a job. That should motivate people to either find a job and get off welfare or enter a training program in order to get a job that gets welfare. The basic principle is that if you don't work or you're not studying in order to get a job, then you don't eat... No freebies. Pretty simple concept.
 
Assistance provided to welfare recipients should be tied directly to work they provide in return for the assistance. The assistance should be limited to one year unless the recipient enters a training program leading to a job. That should motivate people to either find a job and get off welfare or enter a training program in order to get a job that gets welfare. The basic principle is that if you don't work or you're not studying in order to get a job, then you don't eat... No freebies. Pretty simple concept.

You are actually aware of the fact that there are Americans who are simply not capable of working right? We should just let those people starve? Maybe you should read some more about that Jesus guy you claim to love so much. Wasn't he all about feeding the hungry, and helping the poor?... These posts about welfare are riddled with prejudice. I'm completely aware there are people gaming the system, but to assume that anyone receiving welfare is doing so is not only illogical, it is immoral.
 
You are actually aware of the fact that there are Americans who are simply not capable of working right? We should just let those people starve? Maybe you should read some more about that Jesus guy you claim to love so much. Wasn't he all about feeding the hungry, and helping the poor?... These posts about welfare are riddled with prejudice. I'm completely aware there are people gaming the system, but to assume that anyone receiving welfare is doing so is not only illogical, it is immoral.

There is a small percentage of people who fall into the disabled category, and they are taken care of within the Social Security system and the Veteran's Administration. I don't consider either of those programs welfare. Most of those people paid into those systems. So, they are not on welfare in my view. If there are other folks that are disabled that are not covered by those systems, I would provide for those people too.

But the vast majority of people on welfare are capable of working, but they won't because it is more profitable to stay on the dole than go out and get a job. Plain and simple. So, they should be required to work for the public assistance they receive, that assistance should be for a limited time (one year), and/or they should be required to enroll in a jobs training program (for instance, two-year programs that leads to a marketable job skill) that leads to a job and a livable wage.

OBTW, since you don't believe in Jesus, there is no way you have any right to use his teachings or his name against believers. And, I don't really care what you think or post on this site because you provide no value added... Soooooooo, I****.....
 
There is a small percentage of people who fall into the disabled category, and they are taken care of within the Social Security system and the Veteran's Administration. I don't consider either of those programs welfare. Most of those people paid into those systems. So, they are not on welfare in my view. If there are other folks that are disabled that are not covered by those systems, I would provide for those people too.

But the vast majority of people on welfare are capable of working, but they won't because it is more profitable to stay on the dole than go out and get a job. Plain and simple. So, they should be required to work for the public assistance they receive, that assistance should be for a limited time (one year), and/or they should be required to enroll in a jobs training program (for instance, two-year programs that leads to a marketable job skill) that leads to a job and a livable wage.

OBTW, since you don't believe in Jesus, there is no way you have any right to use his teachings or his name against believers. And, I don't really care what you think or post on this site because you provide no value added... Soooooooo, I****.....

I just did. Funny how quickly you abandon his principles when they're inconvenient to your political position...
 
I just did. Funny how quickly you abandon his principles when they're inconvenient to your political position...
You reveal your ignorance of His teachings every time you quote Scripture. Surprised you and your keyboard don't spontaneously combust every time you try to use Scripture against believers. Since you have ZERO standing before God based on your staunch atheism, your use of Scripture is meaningless. You are screaming into the face of a hurricane...
 
Back on the topic toy-'boy wants suppressed by hijacking the thread...

Hillary Clinton’s “there’s no evidence of that” line of defense over her email mess continues to crumble in the face of . . . new evidence.

For all her talk of how using a private email account for her work running the State Department was just fine, it’s now plain she left top-secret information vulnerable to hackers.

More evidence is likely to come out. The FBI’s probe has now expanded to include another private server she used, a backup service with Connecticut-based Datto Inc.

And now the Associated Press has confirmed that her main server was the target of repeated cyberattacks from China, South Korea and Germany. And those came after she left office, when her team belatedly agreed to use some threat-monitoring software.

In other news, a FOIA request from the watchdog group Citizens United has uncovered the fact that Hill’s chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, was forwarding classified info to the Clinton Foundation — so staff there could support Bill Clinton’s work in Africa.

Add to this new details about Hillary’s emails with longtime aide Sidney Blumenthal — emails that somehow didn’t make it into the data she finally handed over once word broke that she’d failed to share her work product with the government.

“It is curious Secretary Clinton took so much of her advice from someone who had never been to Libya, professed no independent knowledge of the country and who the White House blocked her from hiring,” said Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC), who heads the select committee trying to finally get to the full facts on the deadly Benghazi attack.

Curious? Hey, in Clintonworld, blending policy with pocket-lining is routine — national security be damned.
 
Back on the topic toy-'boy wants suppressed by hijacking the thread...

Hillary Clinton’s “there’s no evidence of that” line of defense over her email mess continues to crumble in the face of . . . new evidence.

For all her talk of how using a private email account for her work running the State Department was just fine, it’s now plain she left top-secret information vulnerable to hackers.

More evidence is likely to come out. The FBI’s probe has now expanded to include another private server she used, a backup service with Connecticut-based Datto Inc.

And now the Associated Press has confirmed that her main server was the target of repeated cyberattacks from China, South Korea and Germany. And those came after she left office, when her team belatedly agreed to use some threat-monitoring software.

In other news, a FOIA request from the watchdog group Citizens United has uncovered the fact that Hill’s chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, was forwarding classified info to the Clinton Foundation — so staff there could support Bill Clinton’s work in Africa.

Add to this new details about Hillary’s emails with longtime aide Sidney Blumenthal — emails that somehow didn’t make it into the data she finally handed over once word broke that she’d failed to share her work product with the government.

“It is curious Secretary Clinton took so much of her advice from someone who had never been to Libya, professed no independent knowledge of the country and who the White House blocked her from hiring,” said Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC), who heads the select committee trying to finally get to the full facts on the deadly Benghazi attack.

Curious? Hey, in Clintonworld, blending policy with pocket-lining is routine — national security be damned.

Why would I want this issue suppressed? Hillary dropping out of the race is in my best interest seeing as she is directly competing with the candidate I support. Yet again proving that you have completely bought into the polarizing partisan nonsense.
 
Why would I want this issue suppressed? Hillary dropping out of the race is in my best interest seeing as she is directly competing with the candidate I support. Yet again proving that you have completely bought into the polarizing partisan nonsense.
Hillary would be an ideal Neo-con, actually.
 
Why would I want this issue suppressed? Hillary dropping out of the race is in my best interest seeing as she is directly competing with the candidate I support. Yet again proving that you have completely bought into the polarizing partisan nonsense.
Your idiot socialist has ZERO chance of winning the nomination. It's more likely the DEMs will nominate bafoon bin Biden than they would nominate socio-Saunders... Both are losers in a national election.
 
Your idiot socialist has ZERO chance of winning the nomination. It's more likely the DEMs will nominate bafoon bin Biden than they would nominate socio-Saunders... Both are losers in a national election. And, Hill-Bill the cyber-shill has no chance either... Soooooooo, maybe some other loser will come to the for front soon for the DEMs... No way DEMs get smart and choose a winner...
 
Your idiot socialist has ZERO chance of winning the nomination. It's more likely the DEMs will nominate bafoon bin Biden than they would nominate socio-Saunders... Both are losers in a national election. And, Hill-Bill the cyber-shill has no chance either... Soooooooo, maybe some other loser will come to the for front soon for the DEMs... No way DEMs get smart and choose a winner...

Donald Trump is the leading republican and you think its the democrats that cant choose a winner? lolololololololol
 
The E-mail scandal is sucking the life out of Clinton and her POTUS candidacy like a cancer...
90
 
Hows your man doing? I have a bartender feeding me free drinks, so not watching

Looking pretty good so far. O' Malley is the biggest surprise so far though. Hillary has a pretty big target on her back
 
Hillary Clinton is such a sell-out. Sanders is making a much stronger showing than I ever expected and I think he's won this debate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: uncboy10
Damn Nuk- would have thought you would have posted the latest.

Boy might get his wish, but I rather more expect Uncle Joe to slide in.
 
Damn Nuk- would have thought you would have posted the latest.

Boy might get his wish, but I rather more expect Uncle Joe to slide in.
I thought I did on the other thread, but wait! There's more!:D

"Three months after Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email address and server while secretary of state was referred to the FBI, an intelligence source familiar with the investigation tells Fox News that the team is now focused on whether there were violations of an Espionage Act subsection pertaining to "gross negligence" in the safekeeping of national defense information."
"Under 18 USC 793 subsection F, the information does not have to be classified to count as a violation. The intelligence source, who spoke on the condition of anonymity citing the sensitivity of the ongoing probe, said the subsection requires the "lawful possession" of national defense information by a security clearance holder who "through gross negligence," such as the use of an unsecure computer network, permits the material to be removed or abstracted from its proper, secure location."
"Subsection F also requires the clearance holder "to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer. "A failure to do so "shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both."
"The source said investigators are also focused on possible obstruction of justice. "If someone knows there is an ongoing investigation and takes action to impede an investigation, for example destruction of documents or threatening of witnesses, that could be a separate charge but still remain under a single case," the source said. Currently, the ongoing investigation is led by the Washington Field Office of the FBI."
 
How delicious! Biden declines to runs while the HRC email scandal is about to explode again! Perfect!
 
***UPDATE***

An additional 268 emails have been added to the list of classified HRC emails, now totaling upwards of 700...

The new release of Clinton emails — the largest batch of messages made public since State began posting the messages online to comply with a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit — revealed more about Clinton's knowledge of embassy security issues and provided a window into lighter moments like Clinton being instructed in the use of emojis.

Friday's document release is the sixth of its kind and with it, more than half of the messages Clinton turned over to the agency from her private email account and server have now been made public. In the new batch, State deemed 268 emails classified at the lowest classification tier, according to spokesman John Kirby, who said that none of these emails "were marked classified at the time they were sent or received." There are now between 600 and 700 emails newly marked as classified since the releases began in May.

Clinton, who has been battling the controversy regarding her exclusive use of a private email account and homebrew server during her tenure at Foggy Bottom, has contended that no emails on her account were marked as classified at the time she received them.

The emails released on Friday were sent and received largely during 2011 and 2012, with additional messages from 2009 and 2010 that were not part of previous batches.

In one message in May 2011, Clinton vented to a longtime friend that not even "the allure of Mother Moon in all her glory" could impress Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
 
***UPDATE***
As the nation’s chief diplomat, Hillary Clinton was responsible for ascertaining whether information in her possession was classified and acknowledged that “negligent handling” of that information could jeopardize national security, according to a copy of an agreement she signed upon taking the job.
A day after assuming office as secretary of state, Clinton signed a Sensitive Compartmented Information Nondisclosure Agreement that laid out criminal penalties for “any unauthorized disclosure” of classified information.
Experts have guessed that Clinton signed such an agreement, but a copy of her specific contract, obtained by the Competitive Enterprise Institute through an open records request and shared with the Washington Free Beacon, reveals for the first time the exact language of the NDA.
“I have been advised that the unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of SCI by me could cause irreparable injury to the United States or be used to advantage by a foreign nation,” the agreement states.
Clinton received at least two emails while secretary of state on her personal email server since marked “TS/SCI”—top secret/sensitive compartmented information—according to the U.S. intelligence community’s inspector general.
The State Department said in September that Clinton’s private email system, set up at her Chappaqua, N.Y., home, was not authorized to handle SCI.
The Democratic presidential frontrunner defended her unauthorized possession of SCI and her sending of emails containing classified information by claiming that the information was not marked as classified when it was sent or received.
The language of her NDA suggests it was Clinton’s responsibility to ascertain whether information shared through her private email server was, in fact, classified.
“I understand that it is my responsibility to consult with appropriate management authorities in the Department … in order to ensure that I know whether information or material within my knowledge or control that I have reason to believe might be SCI,” the agreement says.
The Clinton campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the NDA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nctransplant
***UPDATE***
As the nation’s chief diplomat, Hillary Clinton was responsible for ascertaining whether information in her possession was classified and acknowledged that “negligent handling” of that information could jeopardize national security, according to a copy of an agreement she signed upon taking the job.
A day after assuming office as secretary of state, Clinton signed a Sensitive Compartmented Information Nondisclosure Agreement that laid out criminal penalties for “any unauthorized disclosure” of classified information.
Experts have guessed that Clinton signed such an agreement, but a copy of her specific contract, obtained by the Competitive Enterprise Institute through an open records request and shared with the Washington Free Beacon, reveals for the first time the exact language of the NDA.
“I have been advised that the unauthorized disclosure, unauthorized retention, or negligent handling of SCI by me could cause irreparable injury to the United States or be used to advantage by a foreign nation,” the agreement states.
Clinton received at least two emails while secretary of state on her personal email server since marked “TS/SCI”—top secret/sensitive compartmented information—according to the U.S. intelligence community’s inspector general.
The State Department said in September that Clinton’s private email system, set up at her Chappaqua, N.Y., home, was not authorized to handle SCI.
The Democratic presidential frontrunner defended her unauthorized possession of SCI and her sending of emails containing classified information by claiming that the information was not marked as classified when it was sent or received.
The language of her NDA suggests it was Clinton’s responsibility to ascertain whether information shared through her private email server was, in fact, classified.
“I understand that it is my responsibility to consult with appropriate management authorities in the Department … in order to ensure that I know whether information or material within my knowledge or control that I have reason to believe might be SCI,” the agreement says.
The Clinton campaign did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the NDA.
I'm willing to bet that no charges will ever be filed. Most corrupt DOJ ever and all the FBI can do is recommend charges.
 
I'm willing to bet that no charges will ever be filed. Most corrupt DOJ ever and all the FBI can do is recommend charges.
I still hold out some hope that the FBI will do its job and recommend charges.... Force the hand of the most politicized DOJ since Nixon to make a decision that will define Obama's legacy...
 
  • Like
Reactions: randman1
I still hold out some hope that the FBI will do its job and recommend charges.... Force the hand of the most politicized DOJ since Nixon to make a decision that will define Obama's legacy...

Only in your mind.
 
And, in the minds of millions of Americans. I think openly having one standard for the powerful (HRC) and another standard for everyone else on the exact same legal issue defines poor leadership and complete corruption.
 
And, in the minds of millions of Americans. I think openly having one standard for the powerful (HRC) and another standard for everyone else on the exact same legal issue defines poor leadership and complete corruption.

Trust me, there aren't millions of Americans that are so obsessed with Hillary Clinton that they keep a running thread on every piece of news related to this issue.

Don't know why you think openly having one standard for the powerful, and another for everyone else is anything new... Pretty much every president in American history has done that.
 
Presidents and former Secretaries of State don't go to prison. Governments don't indict themselves and then find themselves guilty. I wish, but no such luck. People thinking the FBI is acting on behalf of the people is just bullsh*tting yourself, too. Institutions don't survive that way, folks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: uncboy10
Presidents and former Secretaries of State don't go to prison. Governments don't indict themselves and then find themselves guilty. I wish, but no such luck. People thinking the FBI is acting on behalf of the people is just bullsh*tting yourself, too. Institutions don't survive that way, folks.
Well, I actually agree with this. That still doesn't excuse the FBI from doing its job and it doesn't excuse the DOJ of corruption.
 
Last edited:
Trust me, there aren't millions of Americans that are so obsessed with Hillary Clinton that they keep a running thread on every piece of news related to this issue.

Don't know why you think openly having one standard for the powerful, and another for everyone else is anything new... Pretty much every president in American history has done that.
"There aren't millions of Americans that are so obsessed with Hillary Clinton that they keep a running thread on every piece of news related to this issue."
This is an election cycle, shippy... You obviously don't get around the internet much...
"Pretty much every president in American history has done that."
And, you accept that paradigm? Speaks volumes about you and people like you...
 
"There aren't millions of Americans that are so obsessed with Hillary Clinton that they keep a running thread on every piece of news related to this issue."
This is an election cycle, shippy... You obviously don't get around the internet much...
"Pretty much every president in American history has done that."
And, you accept that paradigm? Speaks volumes about you and people like you...

I don't accept that paradigm. I just accept the fact that it is made possible by convincing the entire population that one party is the answer, and the other is the villain. Meanwhile roughly half of the country thinks the exact opposite. Pretty effective means for maintaining the status quo if you have the money to buy off both parties. Speaks a lot about you and people like you that fall for such silliness.
 
I don't accept that paradigm. I just accept the fact that it is made possible by convincing the entire population that one party is the answer, and the other is the villain. Meanwhile roughly half of the country thinks the exact opposite. Pretty effective means for maintaining the status quo if you have the money to buy off both parties. Speaks a lot about you and people like you that fall for such silliness.
"...made possible by convincing the entire population that one party is the answer, and the other is the villain."
Isn't that what Obama did when he used the IRS to target his Tea Party conservative political enemies? I'm not falling for that and DOJ declining to bring charges against the people who perpetrated that crime. I'm not falling for HRC and I'm not falling for an FBI and DOJ that ignores signed NDAs and clear evidence of security breaches. But, evidently you are. Speaks volumes about you and people like you...
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT