5. They never own up to anything.[/B][/COLOR] Originally Posted by WhirlawayExcept for dodging sniper fire on the tarmac.
- LexusLover
- 03-04-2015, 07:09 AM
- JD Barleycorn
- 03-05-2015, 02:02 AM
just like everyone else's email servers. This woman thinks she is above the law and has to respond to no one. Is this what the left wants to put in the Oval Office this time. She has been delusional for many years and she has 20+ years of retribution to pay back. Be afraid of Hillary liberals, be very afraid.
- LexusLover
- 03-05-2015, 03:15 AM
just like everyone else's email servers. This woman thinks she is above the law and has to respond to no one. Is this what the left wants to put in the Oval Office this time. She has been delusional for many years and she has 20+ years of retribution to pay back. Be afraid of Hillary liberals, be very afraid. Originally Posted by JD BarleycornShe has apparently violated the same Federal Statute that Patraeus did.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/04/us...over.html?_r=0
He's pleading to a Federal "misdemeanor," but the charges are multiple counts for each classified document and/or document containing classified information that she received through her private file server, which I understand was at home.
For those who are uninformed, a Federal Misdemeanor, like many State misdemeanors, carry penalties for incarceration in a Federal facility and in this particular instance a ban from holding public office in the future, which is warranted due to her status and security level.
Yet another "Great Right Wing Conspiracy"!
The Martha Stewart of the Obaminable Administration.
BTW: There has been some suggestion in the media, and perhaps in this forum, that the "laws" pertaining to the possession and handling of classified information post-dated the position of Hillarious in the DOS, but that assertion is patently false. Various provisions of the U.S. Code applicable to the former SOS have been around for 15 years and longer.
At a minimum she would loses her security clearance, which would effectively prohibit her from holding any public office requiring a security clearance, as well as in the private sector, even if she gets probation and a fine like Patraeus.
Apparently, Hillarious, who used to practice law, seems to think that she can "cull" the emails to determine which ones violated Federal law and which ones did not. And apparently she thinks she can simply inform Federal investigators that she doesn't have any "classified documents" on her computer, and never did. Again, Martha Stewart.
Like DNA on a blue dress, another Clinton is about to be exposed to the 21st century.
- Guest040616
- 03-05-2015, 04:38 AM
- LexusLover
- 03-05-2015, 05:04 AM
Are you saying that Jim Webb's chances for the Democratic nomination are greater today than they were yesterday.I didn't "say" anything. I posted:
NO
Are you ready to hop on the Jim Webb for POTUS in 2016 bandwagon?
NO
Originally Posted by bigtex
She has apparently violated the same Federal Statute that Patraeus did.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/04/us...over.html?_r=0
He's pleading to a Federal "misdemeanor," but the charges are multiple counts for each classified document and/or document containing classified information that she received through her private file server, which I understand was at home.
For those who are uninformed, a Federal Misdemeanor, like many State misdemeanors, carry penalties for incarceration in a Federal facility and in this particular instance a ban from holding public office in the future, which is warranted due to her status and security level.
Yet another "Great Right Wing Conspiracy"!
The Martha Stewart of the Obaminable Administration.
BTW: There has been some suggestion in the media, and perhaps in this forum, that the "laws" pertaining to the possession and handling of classified information post-dated the position of Hillarious in the DOS, but that assertion is patently false. Various provisions of the U.S. Code applicable to the former SOS have been around for 15 years and longer.
At a minimum she would loses her security clearance, which would effectively prohibit her from holding any public office requiring a security clearance, as well as in the private sector, even if she gets probation and a fine like Patraeus.
Apparently, Hillarious, who used to practice law, seems to think that she can "cull" the emails to determine which ones violated Federal law and which ones did not. And apparently she thinks she can simply inform Federal investigators that she doesn't have any "classified documents" on her computer, and never did. Again, Martha Stewart.
Like DNA on a blue dress, another Clinton is about to be exposed to the 21st century.
- Guest040616
- 03-05-2015, 05:08 AM
- Jackie S
- 03-05-2015, 06:07 AM
Are you saying that Jim Webb's chances for the Democratic nomination are greater today than they were yesterday.They sure aren't any worse.
Are you ready to hop on the Jim Webb for POTUS in 2016 bandwagon? Originally Posted by bigtex
From what I have been seeing on Cable News, especially CNN and MSNBC, the Liberal/Progressive Left is starting to take note that the Clintons are the money grubbing, lying sacks of shit that most have suspected, or have known, for years.
Bill Clinton made his bones on one issue......."it's the economy, stupid".
His own Party is beginning to realize that's not going to let them skate by any more.
The perfect storm would be that just about the time some enterprising hacker finds all of Hillary's EMails, they also find videos of Bill with a cigar stuck up some girls twat on Jeffrey Epstein's Island..
- gfejunkie
- 03-05-2015, 08:10 AM
Physician, heal thyself!
- LexusLover
- 03-05-2015, 08:44 AM
- UnderConstruction
- 03-05-2015, 08:47 AM
just like everyone else's email servers. This woman thinks she is above the law and has to respond to no one. Is this what the left wants to put in the Oval Office this time. She has been delusional for many years and she has 20+ years of retribution to pay back. Be afraid of Hillary liberals, be very afraid. Originally Posted by JD BarleycornIt was a private secure server. Nice try though dum dum
- LexusLover
- 03-05-2015, 08:54 AM
It was a private secure server. Nice try though dum dum Originally Posted by UnderConstructionI hate to break it to you,
...but after you explain what a "private secure server" is, I will give you ROS.
Here's the "tip of the iceberg"!
http://www.pcworld.com/article/20469...nd-secure.html
"NSA-dodging mail service explains why email can never truly be private and secure"
But that begs the question (or actually ignores it) ... the "question" is ...
.. has she violated any one or more of the Federal statutes that prohibit her from receiving and/or possessing classified information on a private computer system.... NOT whether it is secure or not.
Title 50 and the various criminal provisions under Title 18 that have begun to address the communications issues of the 21st century have been around for awhile and they are inviolate in order to maintain one's clearance status. You don't talk shit, share shit, or receive shit outside of the Federal system in which such information may pass.
You have to remember Hillarious "stored" evidence in a criminal investigation in her closet in shoe boxes for months before "finding" them ... after they were subpoenaed six months before she "found" them. They were not her checks.
- UnderConstruction
- 03-05-2015, 09:18 AM
I hate to break it to you,You ain't breaking shit but bricks, wet nips. To intimate that what she was using is like everyone else's email servers, is dishonest. And there are exceptions to the law you cite, in the case of classified or sensitive information.
...but after you explain what a "private secure server" is, I will give you ROS.
Here's the "tip of the iceberg"!
http://www.pcworld.com/article/20469...nd-secure.html
"NSA-dodging mail service explains why email can never truly be private and secure"
But that begs the question (or actually ignores it) ... the "question" is ...
.. has she violated any one or more of the Federal statutes that prohibit her from receiving and/or possessing classified information on a private computer system.... NOT whether it is secure or not.
Title 50 and the various criminal provisions under Title 18 that have begun to address the communications issues of the 21st century have been around for awhile and they are inviolate in order to maintain one's clearance status. You don't talk shit, share shit, or receive shit outside of the Federal system in which such information may pass.
You have to remember Hillarious "stored" evidence in a criminal investigation in her closet in shoe boxes for months before "finding" them ... after they were subpoenaed six months before she "found" them. They were not her checks. Originally Posted by LexusLover
- LexusLover
- 03-05-2015, 09:22 AM
...And there are exceptions to the law you cite, in the case of classified or sensitive information. Originally Posted by UnderConstructioncite them by statute number.
Go back to your Reader's Digest and CNN pundits.
Explain how you KNOW she had a "secure private server"?
Explain how they got to her "secure private server"?
Scotty beamed them?
- UnderConstruction
- 03-05-2015, 09:32 AM
cite them by statute number.Go find it yourself. I read it an article yesterday and I'm not bothering to go look for it just to please you. How who got to her server? You golem fucktard minion.###
Go back to your Reader's Digest and CNN pundits.
Explain how you KNOW she had a "secure private server"?
Explain how they got to her "secure private server"?
Scotty beamed them? Originally Posted by LexusLover
- Guest040616
- 03-05-2015, 09:35 AM
Go find it yourself. I read it an article yesterday and I'm not bothering to go look for it just to please you. How who got to her server? You golem fucktard minion.### Originally Posted by UnderConstructionUC, only give LLIdiot the attention he so justly deserves.
None! Zero! Nada! Zilch!
That should just about cover all the bases.
