Bengaaaazzziiiiiiiii. !!!!!!!!

[PaulS]

That is exactly it - expenses. They just said they would not even ask for any $ to cover their expenses now.

Now if only Carly would admit that her accusations where out and out lies.

[spence]

Originally Posted by PaulS

That is exactly it - expenses. They just said they would not even ask for any $ to cover their expenses now.

Now if only Carly would admit that her accusations where out and out lies.

I'm just surprised Jim could have been complaining so long about this and not taken the time to understand the key accusation.

As for Carly, it's scary to think someone who wants to be POTUS would bone up on the issues by buying into the equivalent of Facebook memes.

[JohnR]

One of the big issues is that entire gaps in her emails around Benghazi were missing. Before people were on to her having her own server (that she is not supposed to). Seeing that she may have conducted her own extragovernmental intelligence in Libya, hidden on her email server, outside of proper and official channels, where people died - yeh it is important.

Even if she is completely clean wrt Benghazi (in the realm of possibility) she may have been covering for her server that she should not have had.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I'm just surprised Jim could have been complaining so long about this and not taken the time to understand the key accusation.

As for Carly, it's scary to think someone who wants to be POTUS would bone up on the issues by buying into the equivalent of Facebook memes.

I understood that there was little if any evidence that they profited by it, but rather, just covered their expenses. My concern was how ghoulish they acted, and whether or not they altered abortion procedures to maximize the harvest.

Furthermore, I didn't like the way they claimed the tapes were "edited", yet never denied the accuracy of what was on the tapes.

Again, how do you take an organization seriously that says "those tapes were edited. Besides, what was shown on there, we promise not to do again".

It seems that what was on those tapes (as opposed to claims of profiteering) was exactly accurate. Yet you claimed the videos were "discredited". Since PP promises not to do it again, that seems to imply that they were engaged in that practice up until now, which seems to imply that the tapes were perfectly accurate.

[spence]

Originally Posted by JohnR

One of the big issues is that entire gaps in her emails around Benghazi were missing. Before people were on to her having her own server (that she is not supposed to). Seeing that she may have conducted her own extragovernmental intelligence in Libya, hidden on her email server, outside of proper and official channels, where people died - yeh it is important.

Curious as to why 7 previous investigations didn't find any gaps. Perhaps it's because the initial Daily Caller piece that made the accusation more recently ended up walking it back.

Actually the number of stories, let by many in the NYT have been corrected because they contained bad information.

The DOJ has made a statement her use of private email and choosing which emails to file was within the law.

The Blumenthal thing doesn't appear to implicate her. The one incident of him passing along a CIA source could get him in trouble but I don't see how she is tarnished.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

I don't see how she is tarnished.

blind devotion

[JohnR]

Originally Posted by spence

Curious as to why 7 previous investigations didn't find any gaps. Perhaps it's because the initial Daily Caller piece that made the accusation more recently ended up walking it back.

The top House Republican Benghazi investigator says the emails Hillary Clinton has handed over for review have “huge gaps” that challenge her credibility over what happened in the 2012 attacks in Libya.
“There are gaps of months and months and months,” Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) said on Sunday on CBS’s “Face the Nation.”

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/0...#ixzz3opmwSLSg

Originally Posted by spence

The DOJ has made a statement her use of private email and choosing which emails to file was within the law.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/17/us...uiry.html?_r=0

“I don’t think it posed a national security problem,” Mr. Obama said Sunday on CBS’s “60 Minutes.” He said it had been a mistake for Mrs. Clinton to use a private email account when she was secretary of state, but his conclusion was unmistakable: “This is not a situation in which America’s national security was endangered.”


Those statements angered F.B.I. agents who have been working for months to determine whether Mrs. Clinton’s email setup did in fact put any of the nation’s secrets at risk, according to current and former law enforcement officials.


.......

“Injecting politics into what is supposed to be a fact-finding inquiry leaves a foul taste in the F.B.I.’s mouth and makes them fear that no matter what they find, the Justice Department will take the president’s signal and not bring a case,” said Mr. Hosko, who maintains close contact with current agents.

Originally Posted by spence

The Blumenthal thing doesn't appear to implicate her. The one incident of him passing along a CIA source could get him in trouble but I don't see how she is tarnished.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...y%20Blumenthal

What? A former journalist, Blumenthal was a top aide in the second term of the Bill Clinton administration and helped on messaging during the bad old days. He served as an adviser to Hillary Clinton’s 2008 presidential campaign, and when she took over the State Department, she sought to hire Blumenthal. Obama aides, apparently still smarting over his role in attacks on candidate Obama, refused the request, so Clinton just sought out his counsel informally. At the same time, Blumenthal was drawing a check from the Clinton Foundation. (Jr - emphasis mine)

How serious is it? Some of the damage is already done. Blumenthal was apparently the source of the idea that the Benghazi attacks were spontaneous, a notion that proved incorrect and provided a political bludgeon against Clinton and Obama. He also advised the secretary on a wide range of other issues, from Northern Ireland to China, and passed along analysis from his son Max, a staunch critic of the Israeli government (and conservative bête noire). But emails released so far show even Clinton’s top foreign-policy guru, Jake Sullivan, rejecting Blumenthal’s analysis, raising questions about her judgment in trusting him.

[spence]

Originally Posted by JohnR

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/17/us...uiry.html?_r=0

This is from March. How many more have been released? How many stories of missing emails have been pulled back? Reading online quite a few.

And given the revelations of the last week as to the true nature of the investigation I'm not sure I'd believe anything Trey Gowdy says. How much of the poor reporting do you think came from misleading leaks from his investigation?

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/17/us...uiry.html?_r=0

This is a completely different topic. I said the DOJ remarked it was legal. Your post is that Obama's remarks rankeled the FBI if there was a possible security breech.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...y%20Blumenthal

I'm shocked, shocked that Clinton would have any communication with a longtime friend and confidant.

About the only thing here that could have legs is the naming of a covert CIA agent, but the source of that leak at the CIA is now deceased. Otherwise all you've got is a lot of shoulda coulda woulda.

[JohnR]

And that, Spence, is why the FBI does its investigation - hopefully without external pressures.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by JohnR

And that, Spence, is why the FBI does its investigation - hopefully without external pressures.

Such as Obama saying the accusation is politically motivated, rather than valid. I'm sure the FBI loved that. The guy can't ever shut his yap - always wrong, yet never in doubt.

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Such as Obama saying the accusation is politically motivated, rather than valid. I'm sure the FBI loved that. The guy can't ever shut his yap - always wrong, yet never in doubt.

The fact that you and other republicans are so interested in this investigation proves at the very least that your interest is politically motivated.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by spence

About the only thing here that could have legs is the naming of a covert CIA agent, but the source of that leak at the CIA is now deceased. Otherwise all you've got is a lot of shoulda coulda woulda.

Or not. This weekend we learned the CIA said the name wasn't even classified. Why would Gowdy redact it from the email unless they were trying to give the impression ... ... ...

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Nebe

The fact that you and other republicans are so interested in this investigation proves at the very least that your interest is politically motivated.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Nebe, i don't beleieve she has testified under oath, yet, abiytthe attack. I am interested in hearing her side of the story. Is that political? I don't think so.

My side doesn't need manufactured evidence of why she's nowhere near fit to be POTUS, the facts speak for themselves.

She claimed that Bill didn't cheat on her, but rather, he was the victim of a vast right-wing conspiracy.

Consider that. If she genuinely believes that Bill was framed by the GOP, she's too stupid for the job. If she doesn't believe it, but said it for political purposes, then she's too dishonest for the job.

If there's a 3rd possibility, well, I am all ears.

Then there's that whole "on a trip to Bosnia, I had to DIVE into the trucks because I came under sniper fire."

[PaulS]

The unfortunate thing is that the committee has lost sight of what they were originally set up to do - look at the security for our overseas facilities.

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by PaulS

The unfortunate thing is that the committee has lost sight of what they were originally set up to do - look at the security for our overseas facilities.

No ,it's just the fact that the illegal server and e mails came up during the committee investigation. The FBI doesn't get involved in these things unless
they are sure there is really something to investigate.

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Nebe, i don't beleieve she has testified under oath, yet, abiytthe attack. I am interested in hearing her side of the story. Is that political? I don't think so.

My side doesn't need manufactured evidence of why she's nowhere near fit to be POTUS, the facts speak for themselves.

She claimed that Bill didn't cheat on her, but rather, he was the victim of a vast right-wing conspiracy.

Consider that. If she genuinely believes that Bill was framed by the GOP, she's too stupid for the job. If she doesn't believe it, but said it for political purposes, then she's too dishonest for the job.

If there's a 3rd possibility, well, I am all ears.

Then there's that whole "on a trip to Bosnia, I had to DIVE into the trucks because I came under sniper fire."

In regards to her saying that he didn't cheat on her and it was a conspiracy- maybe a better way of saying it would have been that he was seduced. I'm with you though..I don't think she would make a good president.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by justplugit

No ,it's just the fact that the illegal server and e mails came up during the committee investigation. The FBI doesn't get involved in these things unless
they are sure there is really something to investigate.

Illegal? I didn't know they were "illegal". Do you have a link to anything that says they were "illegal"?

So you don't care that nothing will be done to prevent the future death/destruction of our embassies and personnel?

[spence]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Illegal? I didn't know they were "illegal". Do you have a link to anything that says they were "illegal"?

I'm pretty sure Sean Hannity said it was illegal.

Oops...

http://democrats.benghazi.house.gov/...CIA_Source.pdf

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Illegal? I didn't know they were "illegal". Do you have a link to anything that says they were "illegal"?

So you don't care that nothing will be done to prevent the future death/destruction of our embassies and personnel?

The FBI, currently headed by Barack Obama (who last time I checked, was registered in the same party as Hilary), has decided that there's sufficient likelihood laws were broken, to launch an investigation.

The FBI doesn't launch an investigation just because one asks them to.

I cannot believe she's going to get indicted. But I really, really hope she does.

[Doover]

The KilderBeast stormed into Kissys office and demanded call off your dogs Biraq!
What other proof does one need to know this is a political WITCH hunt?

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I cannot believe she's going to get indicted. But I really, really hope she does.

I think our nation will be much better off if she's not...the partisan payback would be hell and just continue to rip this country apart.

Why is it that some seem to think bringing the Clinton's down will bring about the second coming of Jesus Christ?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

I think our nation will be much better off if she's not...the partisan payback would be hell and just continue to rip this country apart.

Why is it that some seem to think bringing the Clinton's down will bring about the second coming of Jesus Christ?

What if the FBI determines she broke the law? Why shouldn't she face the consequences?

I don't necessarily want to "bring her down", but does that mean we can't "tell the truth" about her actions and her values (or lack thereof)?

She may agree with you on every issue that matters to you, but she's a repugnant, morally bankrupt, pathological liar.

She claimed the GOP framed her husband to make it look like he cheated on her. You're OK with a POTUS who is either a world-class liar (if she knew that was crap), or a world-class moron (if she genuinely believed her accusation)?

She goes on and on about the evils of hedge fund managers, yet guess what her son-in-law does for a living?

[justplugit]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Illegal? I didn't know they were "illegal". Do you have a link to anything that says they were "illegal"?

Check out:
Slate March 3 2015
This will show all you need to know about the illegal vs should have known as it was Protocol.
IMHO she should have known the dangers of a private server vs a government server with all it's privacy, in her position. If she didn't I would have to question her decesion and
common sense.

[PaulS]

Servers aren't illegal. Agree using private email was stupid
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Doover]

Jeepers? It looks like the State Department JUST turned over 1300 email documents concerning OUR dead Ambassador Chris Stevens.

I wonder if these papers where found in the same wash room as the KilderBeast Whitewater documents?

[Fishpart]

I think the Whitehouse and Hildabeast are protesting just a little too much hoping that Tyranny of the Press will make this go away..

[PaulS]

Did Gowdy really release the name of a CIA agent?

[spence]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Did Gowdy really release the name of a CIA agent?

He did reveal the name of a CIA source, but it doesn't matter because it was an accident right

Here's what it looks like actually happened.

The investigation found an email from Sid Blumenthal that named a CIA source in Libya, a source mind you that was publicly known at the time. Hillary forwarded that email to someone at State. In an attempt to provide proof to the media Clinton had indeed passed along "classified" information -- as well as likely trying to distract from all the Republicans admitting the investigation is a partisan hit job --Gowdy actually made his own redactions to the email and made it public.

After that blew up he then made public several more emails one of which had the CIA source's name uncensored.

The CIA has reviewed all the emails from Blumenthal and found none contained classified information. The State Department did redact the name of the CIA contact on most emails just so they wouldn't be pulled into the mess.

So Gowdy screwed up twice. 1) He manipulated a Clinton email in an attempt to mislead people and 2) He then accidentally revealed the source he wrongly stated was classified.

What a joke.

[PaulS]

Glad to hear it was an accident. Repubs. do have a history of revealing CIA agent names for political purposes.

[Doover]

Now look what THEY have done!

Those fachachin Pubes have exposed the KilderBeast's State Department had a California Company running guns in Libya!

Darn them.