You are contradicting yourself. If the thread title is ironic, we obviously don't think it is the same.
Lock Her Up?
- Thread starter Gameface
- Start date
You are contradicting yourself. If the thread title is ironic, we obviously don't think it is the same.
Zombie
Well-Known Member
After all the investigations into Clinton I'm sure this time they'll finally nab that no good rotten criminal
And trump
And family dynasties
And Rs and Ds...
Gotta start somewhere. Hope they get trump on something. But Pence isn’t desirable either.
Bleh
Stars Fan
Well-Known Member
Having had a top secret clearance for 30 years and having worked in the state department as well as the military, I can tell you know nothing but what the media tells you. It's not what you think it is.i knew this was gonna come. at firs ti was like ooh geez gotta eat some crow. but looking into it her eis my respons
first of all anybody who did not want hillary to be locked up should shut the **** up and stop being hypocrties. because precedent has been set. and everyone is equal under the law
having said to the hypocrites to shut the **** up these 2 situations are so different it is not even funny. but if it is the same situaiotn Killary clinton. lock them up together. but the lying fake stream media did not give you all info!
first of all their position is different. killary rotten klinton who has ties to the KKK. was department of state. she set up her OWN email server. and she send and received CLASSIFIED information. that was the lock her up part. THE MISHANDLING (according to the right DELIBERATE and according to the left not deliberate)of CLASSIFIED information!
and according to law deliberate or not DOES NOT MATTER.
as far as we know yes trump used just a private email account and here. AND this is the DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LOCK HER UP OR NOT. is the mishandling of CLASSIFIED INFORMATION.
and the lying left wing media has not mentioned any classified information being send/received. if it did. yeah then lock her up. let them share a cell. trump can then pardon them both. do any of you know or have proof it was "classified" information. if i am not mistaken she has no clearance for clasified information. and if she does not have it and someone send it to her. it's not her FAULT.
geez guys stop being stupid and manipulated by lying fake stream media.
wow the mainstream media keeps showing their bias and stupidity!!!!!!!!!!!!
First of all Hillary Clinton never had classified information on her server. The classified system, the SIPRNET, does NOT communicate with the NIPRNET the unclassified system. That was the problem. She was using an unclassified system to do business. She repeatedly said that she never sent any emails marked secret on her server. But that was BS because she was the classifying authority, she had the responsibility to determine what was classified and what wasn't. So she was sending sensitive information over the unclassified system without proper classification. Not a crime, but very poor judgment.
Ivanka, being in the president's inner circle, could have had access to sensitive informationthat she sent on her unclassified email. We don't know. But with the attention paid to Hillary's emails it shows very poor judgment.
Hillary's IT tech deleted a bunch of her personal emails, not related to her Secretary of State job, at least according to the Clinton apologists.
The Trump apologists will say that Ivanka is not cabinet secretary and doesn't have a server and didn't delete anything.
There are as many similarities in the situations as there are differences. If you are going to lock Hillary up, you better be willing to lock Ivanka up beside her.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using JazzFanz mobile app
Red
Well-Known Member
When I look at the title, I don't see "Lock Her Up". I see "Lock Her Up?" Do you understand the difference a question mark makes???
D
Deleted member 365
Guest
Just to clarify, Hillary didn’t destroy her emails or server. She had stopped using the server and the company that owned the server using software to delete her personal emails, like any company would do when acquiring a new server. I know Hannity and Fox News makes it sound like after being served a subpoena, Clinton went downstairs and poured Clorox bleach into the server to destroy emails indicting her for planning Benghazi, giving people healthcare, wiping out Seth rich, and giving Russia radioactive materials so they could create an atomic bomb.
Unlike the Frump family cartel, Hillary was forthcoming and testified under oath without lying. Unlike the Frump family cartel, Hillary did not have conflicts of interesting doing business with scandalous countries like Russia or Saudi Arabia.
The email issues are dumb. However, I have an interest in finding out Ivanka’s emails because of all the criminal activity her family and associates have been convicted of and conflicts of interest they have.
I’m way more concerned with Ivanka and Jared and how they’re enriching themselves from Saudi Arabia at the expense of human rights (killing Khashoggi) than anything Clinton did. After years of investigation, law enforcement still haven’t found anything on the Clintons.
Yet in just two years we’ve seen a great empire of sleaze from the Frump family cartel. From paid off porn stars to sexual assault to Paul Manafort to now doing nothing against Saudi Arabia. Oh, and there’s still strong evidence about Russian collusion. Remember, Jr didn’t want to admit that he had a meeting with Russians in trump tower. “If it’s what you say it is, I love it!”
D
Deleted member 365
Guest
Fox News still attacks clinton and Obama daily. Clinton will be long dead and Fox will still be attacking her. She being in prison won’t change anything.
D
Deleted member 365
Guest
Good lord:
We’re not really going to buy into this false narrative that:
A. Oil prices are down because Saudi Arabia is doing us a solid, right?
B. Lower oil prices justify murdering a journalist, right?
C. Saudi Arabia is a friend and great ally, right?
Why doesn’t our very stable genius ever use leverage on these countries to get what we want? It’s always the opposite. If anything, Saudi Arabia should be caving to our demands and meeting our expectations to obtain weaponary, we shouldn’t surrender our stance on human rights to placate to some crappy country.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/20/politics/trump-saudi-arabia/index.html
We’re not really going to buy into this false narrative that:
A. Oil prices are down because Saudi Arabia is doing us a solid, right?
B. Lower oil prices justify murdering a journalist, right?
C. Saudi Arabia is a friend and great ally, right?
Why doesn’t our very stable genius ever use leverage on these countries to get what we want? It’s always the opposite. If anything, Saudi Arabia should be caving to our demands and meeting our expectations to obtain weaponary, we shouldn’t surrender our stance on human rights to placate to some crappy country.
https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/20/politics/trump-saudi-arabia/index.html
It is DutchJazzer, who probably sees babe as a moderate and RandyforRubio as center-left.
No, this is not accurate. Hillary, or rather her chief of staff Cheryl Mills, told the company to change the date on the server retention period, which made the emails out of date and ready for deletion. It's not that she had stopped using the server. And you're completely overlooking the fact that the company did NOT delete the emails at the time when it was requested. And the emails weren't actually deleted until months later, specifically after the subpoena was issued by the Senate committee. And maybe the technician (Combetta) at the server company did that on his own at that point, and maybe he received some prodding. It certainly stinks to me. According to the account here (yes, I know National Review is a conservative publication, yada yada) https://www.nationalreview.com/2017...emails-erased-technician-should-be-pressured/, Combetta lied repeatedly to the FBI about the situation and only told the truth (or at least some version) after he received immunity. I think their question about whether we can believe him now is legit, and again, the deletion of the emails after the subpoena stinks to me.
Yes, I agree. And I have very consistently said from DAY 1 of Trump that the corrupt financial stuff, including emoluments, is my gravest concern.
D
Deleted member 365
Guest
I hadn't even heard this claim before. It took me 15 minutes of Googling this and sifting through nothing but Breitbart, Blaze, and NR articles before I just gave up. Not going to lie Colton, that was a red flag for me.
So I used the FBI link to actually read through the transcripts. https://vault.fbi.gov/hillary-r.-clinton/Hillary R. Clinton Part 03 of 27/view
Apparently Combetta "remembered" that Mills asked to change the date on the server retention in late 2014 early 2015. It's not going to be until March 2015 when her email controversy begins.
What exactly do you think is nefarious here?
A mistake widely known and reported to be an innocent mistake by Combetta. Combetta admitted to the FBI that he had an "oh ****" moment because he forgot to delete the emails on the server. See p. 25 on the FBI vault.
And you think this was done... At the request of the Clintons? To cover up their tracks when they originally requested the emails to be deleted months before prior to any investigations? Hmmm... What evidence do we have that the Clintons were in communication with these people and ordered them to hurry up and delete these emails to eliminate incriminating evidence? The FBI vault doesn't seem to support this claim that the NR article seems to insinuate.
That's what I've read. He did it to cover his butt because he was supposed to have deleted the emails months prior. The FBI didn't find anything malicious between Combetta and Clinton with this act. Do you have sources that prove otherwise?
I'll be honest, it stinks of laziness and incompetence to me. The hallmarks of the Clintons. Not a nefarious ingenious criminal scheme. She's either a criminal genius or incompetent. I wish republicans would make up their minds. From what I read, she didn't want to carry two separate devices. Those employed to secure and maintain the server didn't do their jobs. When it was revealed that she had been using this private email server she was less than forthcoming, knowing that it would hurt her politically.
Nothing malicious or illegal was done. However, the poor job of maintaining the server fed conspiracy theorists. And most of all, the republicans knew they good make hay with this politically. And they did. If she hadn't been in the running for president I doubt we would have heard anything more about this than Ivanka's email controversy. But republicans knew she was the frontrunner and wanted to ruin her.
I tend to side with FBI director James Comey (who gains NOTHING by lying or covering for Clinton):
"Although we did not find clear evidence that Secretary Clinton or her colleagues intended to violate laws governing the handling of classified information, there is evidence that they were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information"
https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/07/politics/james-comey-hillary-clinton-grassley/index.html
Nothing illegal just careless and stupid.
You're right, it's difficult to take this piece seriously when you read these jabs:
- No, I’m not suggesting that DOJ direct the FBI to break into Mr. Combetta’s home with guns drawn in the dead of night, as Mueller did with former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.
- Back in November, we catalogued the stark contrasts between Mueller’s brand of hardball and the kid-gloves treatment given to subjects of the Clinton-emails investigation.
- It was unmitigated nonsense, but very useful nonsense. It enabled the Obama Justice Department to feign the appearance of a thoroughgoing inquiry: No, no, the fix wasn’t in; they tried really hard to make the case but, gee whiz, they ran into some legal restrictions that just couldn’t be overcome.
- The Trump Justice Department should appoint a solid United States attorney and some hard-nosed FBI agents from outside Washington, with no prior involvement in the Clinton probe, and instruct them to follow Mueller’s aggressive model in investigating Combetta. In return for the immunity he should never have been granted in the first place, the PRN tech should be compelled to reveal exactly what he was told in these conversations with Clinton lawyers. If he refuses, Combetta should be prosecuted, at a minimum, for lying to the FBI and obstructing Congress’s Benghazi investigation.
- As Robert Mueller might say of Paul Manafort: That should get his attention.
The bitterness is so thick you can taste it! You know it's bad when Benghazigate rears its ugly head! All we needed was a Seth Rich reference to complete the trifecta.
The title of this piece should be, "Paul Manaford and Michael Cohen are being railroaded! Can we please return the favor to Clinton? Oh and while at the same time ignore all of the crap the Trump crime cartel has committed? Thanks."
These conspiracies are why I tend to stick with more mainstream sources like NPR, Wash Post, NY Times, NY Post, CNN, and MSNBC while avoiding places like the NR and Breitbart.
Last edited by a moderator: