Hillary is in trouble, because TMZ is on the case.
[quote]Aggv wrote:
Step one: Get rid of Hillary
Step two: Nominate liz warren [/quote]
Isn’t this is the lily-white chick who faked being Native American in order to get into college/law school and become a professor of Native American Studies?
No that we actual NAs represent a huge voting block (outside of, say, New Mexico and Oklahoma), but this fake bitch would manage to turn a reliable Democrat group 100% Republican.
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
the entirety of the Vietnam War was an intelligence disaster and Nixon won re-election in the middle of it.
[/quote]
Huh?
US involvement in Vietnam start in 1961 under John Kennedy (who defeated Nixon who opposed involvement)
The war escalated under LBJ until Nixon was elected circa 1969, who eventually withdrew all US troops, starting in 1972 until finally gone in 75.
I seriously think people are liberals because they lack basic facts.
Vietnam was a Democrat’s war.
Use Wiki before you post this kind of shit.
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
I seriously think people are liberals because they lack basic facts.
[/quote]
I think a lot of people are not giving the correct facts, or facts without any real context just to make a point.
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
[quote]DBCooper wrote:
the entirety of the Vietnam War was an intelligence disaster and Nixon won re-election in the middle of it.
[/quote]
Huh?
US involvement in Vietnam start in 1961 under John Kennedy (who defeated Nixon who opposed involvement)
The war escalated under LBJ until Nixon was elected circa 1969, who eventually withdrew all US troops, starting in 1972 until finally gone in 75.
I seriously think people are liberals because they lack basic facts.
Vietnam was a Democrat’s war.
Use Wiki before you post this kind of shit.[/quote]
Well, just a note what DB wrote isn’t inconsistent with what you posted. He didn’t say Nixon started the war, only that he won re-election while in the middle of the clusterfuck. I’m pretty sure DB knows when the war started.
[quote]thethirdruffian wrote:
Huh?
US involvement in Vietnam start in 1961 under John Kennedy (who defeated Nixon who opposed involvement)
[/quote]
Actually it was way back in 1950. Kennedy just escalated it, justifiably in response to Soviet aggression against our allies.
[quote]
The war escalated under LBJ until Nixon was elected circa 1969, who eventually withdrew all US troops, starting in 1972 until finally gone in 75.
I seriously think people are liberals because they lack basic facts.
Vietnam was a Democrat’s war.
Use Wiki before you post this kind of shit.[/quote]
Yes it was a Democrat’s war.
Here’s an interesting walk down Clinton memory lane
https://storify.com/drawandstrike/why-putting-the-clintons-back-in-the-white-house-i
[quote]Aragorn wrote:
Unbelievable. Talk about a serious lack of judgement!! Government accounts are there for a reason, not just for historical records keeping but also to generate a secure and encrypted connection for sensitive information. This is the most important function of government communication: to keep the information strictly to those intended to receive it.
The fact that she operated a private, hackable and completely unsecured connection for national diplomatic purposes is outrageous. It puts all our information at risk, because you can bet that even if she did somehow add a security function to the account all private email is lightyears away from the kind of encryption needed to be impregnable from China, Russia, or any other government’s information gathering apparatus.
[/quote]
It’s inexcusable and I’m also pissed off at her gall in doing that for four years. She’s old but she’s not stupid so there is no way she can plead ignorance. The only reason I can think of is that she just didn’t give a shit and that rules don’t apply to her, national security be damned. Your post summarizes the danger of her actions nicely.
The whole “make my emails public” is horse crap and doesn’t even begin to correct the problem and I find it insulting. Like she can prove that these are in fact ALL the emails and we’re too stupid to consider otherwise. Like someone saying, “I don’t look at porn, just look at my internet history!” She could have at least apologized. I would have more respect for that than this bogus offer.
And her offer doesn’t even begin to address the security concerns, which is even more important than the transparency aspect. This is a big deal, and was not a one-off thing. Unabashed arrogance is an ugly trait.
It keeps getting worse. It looks like she was using her private email to leak information.
?This week Tuesday, a former Department of Justice prosecuting attorney said that he believes then Secretary of State ? probably using her unofficial and illegal email system ? was complicit in the leaking of classified intelligence regarding military operation plans formulated by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) to destroy Iran?s nuclear weapons program.?
This one is very interesting considering Hillary is an Alinskyite and the fact that one of her husbands influence peddling scandals involved taking money from communist China. It also explains the obsession with pant suits.
This was too good not to share. At about 1:35 An Coulter recounts how a professor at Yale who taught Bill Clinton, Clarence Thomas and Hillary Clinton described them. He said one was smart, one was really smart and one was dumb! What I find scary is how can someone be so blatantly dumb yet this is the best candidate the democrats can find to run for president.
Eric Holder also used different email accounts with 3 different aliases.
OMG!
Government is corrupt!
Although this will be an issue, the Clinton machine will effectively combat and slow-walk this until after the election.
Who is still interested in the IRS or Benghazi? Only the partisans unfortunately.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
Hillary’s always been a lying sack of shit.
I’ve been in a few situations where there was irresponsible gunfire. If you’ve ever had a bullet go whizzing over your head, that is not something you forget, nor “mis-remember”.
The issue with Hillary is something that is deeper than just lying. That deeper issue is she is a fake assed, phony, ungenuine, poser. Her whole being is a facade.
That bitch is a ruthless, heartless, sociopath. That is why she did nothing to secure Benghazi prior to 9/11, then when the shit hit the fan she sat back and let brave men die.
^ yep
“What difference does it make?”
[quote]StevenF wrote:
“What difference does it make?”[/quote]
The answer is it makes a huge difference. That is why she immediately implemented damage control while the attack was under way. It directly reflects upon her competency to handle security.
The very worst aspect of this is the fact that her incompetence allowed the Jihadists to gain a victory over the US and that is a huge deal. When the leftists want to whine about Guantanamo the first thing they say is it’s a recruiting tool.
But their reasoning defies human nature. People do not want to join a losing team and end up in a hell hole like Gitmo. They want to join a winning team. That is why so many Jihadists are flocking to join ISIS.
So the difference it makes is they have encouraged the Jihadists by giving them an easy win that they should never have been able to pull off.
The NY Post is reporting that the Clinton email story was leaked by Valerie Jarrett, in an act of vengeance following the 2014 midterm election losses.