Author Topic: Hillary LOL (f/k/a Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch f/k/a Hillary 2016?)  (Read 335488 times)

0 Members and 5 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Yard Dog

  • Baller on a Budget
  • Katpak'r
  • ***
  • Posts: 2468
  • I am DC Cat
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1050 on: January 25, 2016, 09:03:12 AM »
run, bloomie, run.

I heard he will only run as an independent if it is Sanders vs. Trump or Cruz. If Hillary wins he will not run. Probably because he is well known to be an establishment liberal.

Offline CNS

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 36687
  • I'm Athletes
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1051 on: January 25, 2016, 09:43:16 AM »
He isn't winning either way, but should run either way.  I think he stands a better chance than either Bernie or Hill.

I really hope he and trump go as independents.  An individual's vote would be pretty important in that election and we could have a president elected with an all time low percentage of the vote.  The "Not my president" sentiment would skyrocket higher than it is during discussion about Obama at a family reunion in central Mississippi.

Offline Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 18431
  • Kiss my ass and suck my dick
    • View Profile
    • I am the one and only Sugar Dick
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1052 on: January 25, 2016, 10:57:48 AM »
Hillary is such a loser :ROFL:
goEMAW Karmic BBS Shepherd

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 44895
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1053 on: January 25, 2016, 01:34:14 PM »
Hillary spending dough on ads during the nfl playoffs, while bern buys a bunch of sidewalk chalk and deploys his army of grotesque adult children to draw campaign signs. :ROFL:

Bernie has spent more money in Iowa than Hillary has. Huge shocker that FSD has no idea what he's talking about.

Offline Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 18431
  • Kiss my ass and suck my dick
    • View Profile
    • I am the one and only Sugar Dick
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1054 on: January 25, 2016, 08:49:20 PM »
Hillary spending dough on ads during the nfl playoffs, while bern buys a bunch of sidewalk chalk and deploys his army of grotesque adult children to draw campaign signs. :ROFL:

Bernie has spent more money in Iowa than Hillary has. Huge shocker that FSD has no idea what he's talking about.

Probably ought to go back and check for "context" before spouting off like an r-tard.
goEMAW Karmic BBS Shepherd

Offline ednksu

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9862
    • View Profile
Quote from: OregonHawk
KU is right on par with Notre Dame ... when it comes to adding additional conference revenue

Quote from: Kim Carnes
Beer pro tip: never drink anything other than BL, coors, pbr, maybe a few others that I'm forgetting

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 53340
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1056 on: January 29, 2016, 03:24:09 PM »
KSUW and Dax get ready to change your shorts
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/government-declares-22-clinton-emails-top-secret/ar-BBoSo4n?ocid=spartanntp

The emails are just the proverbial cheery on top . . . the operation of a separate IT platform outside of the operational purview of Federal IT administrators, the hosting of domain names on foreign soil, operating an improper IT platform that's not properly secured both virtually and physically and on and on and on.    She was assuredly hacked, and foreign intel services and other bad guys likely monitored anything and everything going in and out.   But ProgLibs don't care.


Offline ednksu

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9862
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1057 on: January 29, 2016, 03:32:22 PM »
The problem is that there wasn't a good clear policy on operating your private email server.  There is a clear, concise, federal policy on classified data.  The issue has always been whether or not someone could prove she stripped the classification and sent or stored it.
Quote from: OregonHawk
KU is right on par with Notre Dame ... when it comes to adding additional conference revenue

Quote from: Kim Carnes
Beer pro tip: never drink anything other than BL, coors, pbr, maybe a few others that I'm forgetting

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1058 on: January 29, 2016, 03:41:20 PM »
The problem is that there wasn't a good clear policy on operating your private email server.

:lol: Never change, Edna.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, K-State fans could have beheaded the entire KU team at midcourt, and K-State fans would be celebrating it this morning.  They are the ISIS of Big 12 fanbases.

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1059 on: January 29, 2016, 03:48:18 PM »
The GOP's woes pale in comparison to the Dems, who staked everything on a congenital liar who is going to be indicted for mishandling top secret information because she set up a private server to hide her communications from FOIA requests. And their Plan B is... an avowed socialist who is pushing 80. :lol: That is really amazing. The Dems' obsession with identity politics has come home to roost.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/01/29/official-some-clinton-emails-too-damaging-to-release.html

Quote
EXCLUSIVE: The intelligence community has deemed some of Hillary Clinton’s emails “too damaging" to national security to release under any circumstances, according to a U.S. government official close to the ongoing review. A second source, who was not authorized to speak on the record, backed up the finding. 

The determination was first reported by Fox News, hours before the State Department formally announced Friday that seven email chains, found in 22 documents, will be withheld “in full” because they, in fact, contain “Top Secret” information.

The State Department, when first contacted by Fox News about withholding such emails Friday morning, did not dispute the reporting – but did not comment in detail. After a version of this report was first published, the Obama administration confirmed to the Associated Press that the seven email chains would be withheld. The department has since confirmed those details publicly.

The decision to withhold the documents in full, and not provide even a partial release with redactions, further undercuts claims by the State Department and the Clinton campaign that none of the intelligence in the emails was classified when it hit Clinton's personal server.

Fox News is told the emails include intelligence from "special access programs," or SAP, which is considered beyond “Top Secret.” A Jan. 14 letter, first reported by Fox News, from intelligence community Inspector General Charles McCullough III notified senior intelligence and foreign relations committee leaders that "several dozen emails containing classified information” were determined to be “at the CONFIDENTIAL, SECRET, AND TOP SECRET/SAP levels."
I've said it before and I'll say it again, K-State fans could have beheaded the entire KU team at midcourt, and K-State fans would be celebrating it this morning.  They are the ISIS of Big 12 fanbases.

Offline ednksu

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9862
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1060 on: January 29, 2016, 03:53:32 PM »
The problem is that there wasn't a good clear policy on operating your private email server.

:lol: Never change, Edna.

The child wonders into the thread.  Glad to see you weren't LaVoy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controversy#Question_of_use_of_private_server_for_government_business
Quote from: OregonHawk
KU is right on par with Notre Dame ... when it comes to adding additional conference revenue

Quote from: Kim Carnes
Beer pro tip: never drink anything other than BL, coors, pbr, maybe a few others that I'm forgetting

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1061 on: January 29, 2016, 04:05:31 PM »
The problem is that there wasn't a good clear policy on operating your private email server.

:lol: Never change, Edna.

The child wonders into the thread.  Glad to see you weren't LaVoy.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controversy#Question_of_use_of_private_server_for_government_business

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/state-department-email-rule-hillary-clinton-115804

Quote
The State Department has had a policy in place since 2005 to warn officials against routine use of personal email accounts for government work, a regulation in force during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as secretary of state that appears to be at odds with her reliance on a private email for agency business, POLITICO has learned.

...

Spokespeople for the State Department and Clinton stressed earlier this week that the agency had “no prohibition” on the use of private email for work purposes.

...

The 2005 policy says approved “telework solutions” satisfy the rule, which appears in a section of State Department regulations discussing “sensitive but unclassified” information — an extremely broad category of data. Former officials said a large volume of State Department paperwork and email falls into the swath of information known internally as “SBU.”

State Department rules say almost any information that could be withheld from a Freedom of Information Act request can be considered sensitive.

After this story was first published, a State Department official acknowledged the 2005 policy but emphasized that it is limited to records containing such sensitive information.

“Under State Department policy in the FAM referenced in news reports tonight, sensitive but unclassified information should be handled on a system with certain security requirements except in certain circumstances. That FAM policy pertains solely to SBU information,” the official said. “Reports claiming that by using personal email she is automatically out of step of that FAM are inaccurate.”

The official suggested it is possible a review the department is doing of a trove of emails Clinton returned to the agency in December at its request will conclude that none contains SBU information.


The State Department has now admitted that a number of Clinton's emails were not only classified, they were Top Secret. Several were even classified a level of protection above Top Secret (I didn't even know such a classification existed).

You know Edna, I've been calling you a libtard, but you might actually be clinically Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!).
I've said it before and I'll say it again, K-State fans could have beheaded the entire KU team at midcourt, and K-State fans would be celebrating it this morning.  They are the ISIS of Big 12 fanbases.

Offline ednksu

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9862
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1062 on: January 29, 2016, 04:18:29 PM »
Are you rough ridin' simple KSUW?

The problem is that there wasn't a good clear policy on operating your private email server.  There is a clear, concise, federal policy on classified data.  The issue has always been whether or not someone could prove she stripped the classification and sent or stored it.
Dax was emphasizing the fact she was even running a server at all, which isn't the biggest issue.  It's the classified data. 
Go back to your playground equipment.
Quote from: OregonHawk
KU is right on par with Notre Dame ... when it comes to adding additional conference revenue

Quote from: Kim Carnes
Beer pro tip: never drink anything other than BL, coors, pbr, maybe a few others that I'm forgetting

Offline renocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5971
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1063 on: January 29, 2016, 06:46:05 PM »
MG has not driven a car since 1996.  So much for her common woman running to fight for the common Joe and Joette.

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1064 on: January 29, 2016, 10:20:24 PM »
Are you rough ridin' simple KSUW?

The problem is that there wasn't a good clear policy on operating your private email server.  There is a clear, concise, federal policy on classified data.  The issue has always been whether or not someone could prove she stripped the classification and sent or stored it.
Dax was emphasizing the fact she was even running a server at all, which isn't the biggest issue.  It's the classified data. 
Go back to your playground equipment.

I took no issue with the bolder part of what you said. I did take issue with your very stupid preceding comment that "The problem is that there wasn't a good clear policy on operating your private email server." That's wrong and just plain stupid. There was a very clear policy, which she violated. By using that sever to disseminate classified info. In order to hide her communications from open records laws.

You can quibble all you want, but Hillary Clinton is a liar and by all rights should soon be a felon. The Dem front runner. :lol:
I've said it before and I'll say it again, K-State fans could have beheaded the entire KU team at midcourt, and K-State fans would be celebrating it this morning.  They are the ISIS of Big 12 fanbases.

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 53340
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1065 on: January 30, 2016, 12:03:19 AM »
LOL at the DOS, talk about a set of regulations so far out of touch with reality.    Other government agencies have far more strident rules on using IT platforms for official government business that are not managed by Federal IT departments.   Shocking, but not surprising.   What a bunch of amateurs.

To have this simply fall back on record keeping is laughable.   Wow, edn Whack-a-Doodle, it must feel really good for you to know that the Democratic front run would so blatantly mishandle DOS IT operations and know that the most limp wrist-ed sections of Federal law apply. 

The probability that she was hacked are about as close to 100% as you can't, intel agencies and other bad guys feast on these type of IT environments, rank amateurs can hack what she had.



 

Offline Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 18431
  • Kiss my ass and suck my dick
    • View Profile
    • I am the one and only Sugar Dick
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1066 on: January 30, 2016, 07:47:11 AM »
She's going to prison isn't she?

For me, the fact that she set up a private server to evade/undermine the FOIA is sufficient to forever bar her from being president. All of the other stuff, which displays a reckless disregard for national security and impertinent protocols, are just aggravating facts.
goEMAW Karmic BBS Shepherd

Offline renocat

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 5971
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1067 on: January 30, 2016, 08:39:19 AM »
She's going to prison isn't she?

For me, the fact that she set up a private server to evade/undermine the FOIA is sufficient to forever bar her from being president. All of the other stuff, which displays a reckless disregard for national security and impertinent protocols, are just aggravating facts.
Have you noticed how MG is trying to steer the conversation from your base points.  It even goes deeper.  The decision to set up this server was made by Hilliarrhea without Obama's knowledge or approval.  This was a blatant act to violate State Deptartment policy so she could keep her conversations secret, Why?  She and Bill sure accumulated a lot of wealth while she was SOS and Bill's fees increased as well. 

Offline K-S-U-Wildcats!

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 10040
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1068 on: January 30, 2016, 09:30:17 AM »
She's going to prison isn't she?

For me, the fact that she set up a private server to evade/undermine the FOIA is sufficient to forever bar her from being president. All of the other stuff, which displays a reckless disregard for national security and impertinent protocols, are just aggravating facts.

The Clinton Privelege will keep her out of prison, but she's going to be indicted and she'll never be president.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, K-State fans could have beheaded the entire KU team at midcourt, and K-State fans would be celebrating it this morning.  They are the ISIS of Big 12 fanbases.

Online wetwillie

  • goEMAW Poster of the WEEK
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • *****
  • Posts: 30434
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1069 on: January 30, 2016, 09:33:51 AM »
You guys don't really believe she is going to be indicted right?
When the bullets are flying, that's when I'm at my best

Offline ednksu

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 9862
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1070 on: January 30, 2016, 11:23:04 AM »
Are you rough ridin' simple KSUW?

The problem is that there wasn't a good clear policy on operating your private email server.  There is a clear, concise, federal policy on classified data.  The issue has always been whether or not someone could prove she stripped the classification and sent or stored it.
Dax was emphasizing the fact she was even running a server at all, which isn't the biggest issue.  It's the classified data. 
Go back to your playground equipment.

I took no issue with the bolder part of what you said. I did take issue with your very stupid preceding comment that "The problem is that there wasn't a good clear policy on operating your private email server." That's wrong and just plain stupid. There was a very clear policy, which she violated. By using that sever to disseminate classified info. In order to hide her communications from open records laws.

You can quibble all you want, but Hillary Clinton is a liar and by all rights should soon be a felon. The Dem front runner. :lol:

You guys keep saying this after link after link shows that you are wrong. 

And no she isn't, that is why the party highers are in damage control mode like their on the Titanic.
Quote from: OregonHawk
KU is right on par with Notre Dame ... when it comes to adding additional conference revenue

Quote from: Kim Carnes
Beer pro tip: never drink anything other than BL, coors, pbr, maybe a few others that I'm forgetting

Offline MakeItRain

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 44895
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1071 on: January 30, 2016, 11:45:45 AM »
You guys don't really believe she is going to be indicted right?
I'd like to think that they aren't that dumb and blinded by R's and D's but :dunno:

Offline sonofdaxjones

  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 53340
    • View Profile
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1072 on: January 30, 2016, 11:54:37 AM »
There have been people forced to retire under scorn and ridicule for far less (possibly summarily demoted even after their dismissal).

Look at the ProgLib apologists on this board . . . . so far in the tank for their movement they'll literally make excuses for anything in a quest for power.  Sad

Only in ProgLib Whack-A-Doodle land would anyone attempt to hide behind "well, there wasn't really a clear cut policy".  I mean  :lol:



Offline Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 18431
  • Kiss my ass and suck my dick
    • View Profile
    • I am the one and only Sugar Dick
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1073 on: January 30, 2016, 01:59:09 PM »
You guys don't really believe she is going to be indicted right?

You think the FOIA is something public officials should be able to avoid whenever they feel like it?
goEMAW Karmic BBS Shepherd

Offline Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!)

  • Racist Piece of Shit
  • Pak'r Élitaire
  • ****
  • Posts: 18431
  • Kiss my ass and suck my dick
    • View Profile
    • I am the one and only Sugar Dick
Re: Hillary 2016? (Now Hillary Clinton Indictment Watch)
« Reply #1074 on: January 30, 2016, 02:00:39 PM »
You guys don't really believe she is going to be indicted right?
I'd like to think that they aren't that dumb and blinded by R's and D's but :dunno:

Handling national security like it's email spam is a partisan issue? :sdeek:
goEMAW Karmic BBS Shepherd