Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
BSCSMD

May I Respectfully Suggest...

130 posts in this topic

You saw the evidence?

I didn't see the evidence

Russia, China, Iran, and others saw the evidence though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I didn't see the evidence

Russia, China, Iran, and others saw the evidence though.

 Now thats funny! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

While I am not in any way a Clinton supporter, sympathizer, or apologist, may I respectfully suggest - as someone who knows that Hillary Clinton brought this all upon herself by attempting to have a secret email server to avoid being subject to the Freedom of Information Act and being held accountable to the People - that you listen to or watch the entire testimony before House Oversight Committee hearings today before you pass judgment based upon the accounts - the carefully picked and edited accounts based upon where the person doing the picking and editing lays on the ideological and political spectrum - you are sure to hear and see for months to come?

 

 

I don't appreciate or support when those who I ideologically and politically oppose cherry pick facts and comments made by people and use them to advance their cause or misrepresent in a most dishonest manner people they oppose. I don't appreciate or support when those whom I ideologically and politically agree also engage in the same unfair behavior.

 

 

I did listen to nearly the entire hearing. My takeaway is that while Hillary Clinton did absolutely violate her responsibility to safeguard classified information and that she and her staff absolutely should have known better than to engage in the whole litany and pattern of behavior in which they engaged, there was simply was not enough there IN TOTALITY to make a CLEAR case to a Grand Jury - more or less and jury in a criminal prosecution - that what she did was anything other than careless and frankly, stupid, but based on the evidence and case law precedent, a reasonable prosecutor would not be able to able to expect a reasonable enough chance of obtaining a conviction, and therefore would be foolish to proceed in such a manner. As such, the FBI has done the right thing in this case. Their reputation and integrity should not be called into question over this matter. Again, if you listen to or watch the entire hearing, you will hear or see Director Comey specifically state that he looked for any wat he could to find a way to prosecute Hillary Clinton for what she had done, but he simply could not find a way to justify doing so.

 

 

In no means does this indicate that in any possible way that Hillary Clinton has been cleared of any wrongdoing. To the contrary, she has behaved in a foolish, careless manner. It does not mean that she is getting a "free pass." In taking account the actions that she did, along with her staff - who are a direct reflection of her - her judgment has seriously called into question to the point that she is forever damaged. It also clearly illustrates the lengths she will go and the risks she will take to avoid transparency and accountability to the American People, with blatant disregard to the public trust and national security. This entire fiasco is nothing short of a reminder of her behavior which belies what must be her personal belief that she is above the law and better than the "average" American.

 

 

The question remains: "Will it matter to the American voter come November 8, 2016?"

 

 

For this American voter, "Yes, it will!" and a hope and pray that it matters to enough voters that she is not elected and forever leaves public "service" once and for all.

You were never going to vote for her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not know what is the "RWNJ" means, unless it is shorthand for "Right-Wing Nut Jobs", in which case I see no need to engage in slurs and insults. I have been respectful of you. Is it too much to ask that you return the favor?

 

As for any "meltdown", I don't see it. I do, however, see people who do not understand that ENTIRETY of the matter acting out on PARTIAL information, which is being used to agitate other for political purposes. That is the point of what I have written and shared.

Ken, you know I respect you but I think BSCSMD is right here. He presented his opinion in a respectful way. Why the need to paint with such a broad brush?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

While I am not in any way a Clinton supporter, sympathizer, or apologist, may I respectfully suggest - as someone who knows that Hillary Clinton brought this all upon herself by attempting to have a secret email server to avoid being subject to the Freedom of Information Act and being held accountable to the People - that you listen to or watch the entire testimony before House Oversight Committee hearings today before you pass judgment based upon the accounts - the carefully picked and edited accounts based upon where the person doing the picking and editing lays on the ideological and political spectrum - you are sure to hear and see for months to come?
 
I don't appreciate or support when those who I ideologically and politically oppose cherry pick facts and comments made by people and use them to advance their cause or misrepresent in a most dishonest manner people they oppose. I don't appreciate or support when those whom I ideologically and politically agree also engage in the same unfair behavior.
 
I did listen to nearly the entire hearing. My takeaway is that while Hillary Clinton did absolutely violate her responsibility to safeguard classified information and that she and her staff absolutely should have known better than to engage in the whole litany and pattern of behavior in which they engaged, there was simply was not enough there IN TOTALITY to make a CLEAR case to a Grand Jury - more or less and jury in a criminal prosecution - that what she did was anything other than careless and frankly, stupid, but based on the evidence and case law precedent, a reasonable prosecutor would not be able to able to expect a reasonable enough chance of obtaining a conviction, and therefore would be foolish to proceed in such a manner. As such, the FBI has done the right thing in this case. Their reputation and integrity should not be called into question over this matter. Again, if you listen to or watch the entire hearing, you will hear or see Director Comey specifically state that he looked for any wat he could to find a way to prosecute Hillary Clinton for what she had done, but he simply could not find a way to justify doing so.
 
In no means does this indicate that in any possible way that Hillary Clinton has been cleared of any wrongdoing. To the contrary, she has behaved in a foolish, careless manner. It does not mean that she is getting a "free pass." In taking account the actions that she did, along with her staff - who are a direct reflection of her - her judgment has seriously called into question to the point that she is forever damaged. It also clearly illustrates the lengths she will go and the risks she will take to avoid transparency and accountability to the American People, with blatant disregard to the public trust and national security. This entire fiasco is nothing short of a reminder of her behavior which belies what must be her personal belief that she is above the law and better than the "average" American.
 
The question remains: "Will it matter to the American voter come November 8, 2016?"
 
For this American voter, "Yes, it will!" and a hope and pray that it matters to enough voters that she is not elected and forever leaves public "service" once and for all.

 

 

And if the Director of the FBI testifies that Hillary did give access to classified information to several people who did not have security clearances would that change your mind? Everyone has been looking for hackers when all along it was Clinton's own people who were given access to her emails.

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/james-comey-hillary-clinton-email/

 

2:30 p.m. Comey tells Rep. Jason Chaffetz, the chairman of the House Oversight Committee, that there is "no doubt" that some of Clinton's lawyers who sifted through her emails did not have security clearance.

 

"Did Hillary Clinton give non-cleared people access to classified information?" Chaffetz asked.

 

 

"Yes," Comey said, though he noted that there was no evidence of criminal intent by Clinton in allowing her lawyers to sort through the emails.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the well thought out post by BSCSMD, I find the immature replies like "RWNJ" and "meltdown" counterproductive  Those who are trying express their opposing views would do better to avoid such insults and write a meaningful response that explains why you disagree with the OP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps if we listened to each other rather than insulting each other, we all could creep in towards the center a bit more rather than force each other into ever increasing polarity. Or do we all like the results of polarity?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your "sour grapes" BS is just that - BS. You're usually better than that ken. What BSCSMD posted is the simple plain truth of the matter. Whether it affects the way people choose to view Hillary is up to the individual voter.

 

I too watched a whole lot of that hearing today and Comey did an excelent job of dealing with stupid questions that came from both Republicans and Democrats, all of whom were going for the best political spin with their questions while Comey was refusing to bite with his answers. 

And there it is...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Perhaps if we listened to each other rather than insulting each other, we all could creep in towards the center a bit more rather than force each other into ever increasing polarity. Or do we all like the results of polarity?

Seems that is what I have tried to do. Perhaps other will follow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With the well thought out post by BSCSMD, I find the immature replies like "RWNJ" and "meltdown" counterproductive  Those who are trying express their opposing views would do better to avoid such insults and write a meaningful response that explains why you disagree with the OP.

One can dream...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if the Director of the FBI testifies that Hillary did give access to classified information to several people who did not have security clearances would that change your mind? Everyone has been looking for hackers when all along it was Clinton's own people who were given access to her emails.

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/james-comey-hillary-clinton-email/

 

2:30 p.m. Comey tells Rep. Jason Chaffetz, the chairman of the House Oversight Committee, that there is "no doubt" that some of Clinton's lawyers who sifted through her emails did not have security clearance.

 

"Did Hillary Clinton give non-cleared people access to classified information?" Chaffetz asked.

 

 

"Yes," Comey said, though he noted that there was no evidence of criminal intent by Clinton in allowing her lawyers to sort through the emails.

What is your point? It seems you knocked down your own straw man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What is your point? It seems you knocked down your own straw man.

 

Seriously? Do you not understand the question posed to Comey and the answer he gave? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You ever hear of the saying you can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich?

Their absolutely was enough there to prosecute her for compromising Nation Security and it was ridiculous and dirty political pool for the DOJ to cospire with the FBI, the FBI should not be the ones to determine if the case was not enough to prosecute.

Hillary is a dirty fat liar

 

You an attorney?  I know you are NOT the director of the FBI.  Republican Comey conspired with the DOJ to get Clinton off the hook you say!!!!  Then a far better and more important case than the e-mail matter would be investigating / indicting the director and his FBI staff genggie.  But who would be the investigating enetity in such a case, a special prosecutor you think?

 

Or would you rather just pull your head out of your @ss right now and simply move along?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You an attorney?  I know you are NOT the director of the FBI.  Republican Comey conspired with the DOJ to get Clinton off the hook you say!!!!  Then a far better and more important case than the e-mail matter would be investigating / indicting the director and his FBI staff genggie.  But who would be the investigating enetity in such a case, a special prosecutor you think?

 

Or would you rather just pull your head out of your @ss right now and simply move along?

 

And the FBI Director thinks anyone can view classified information so long as there is no criminal intent. Do you agree with this? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

While I am not in any way a Clinton supporter, sympathizer, or apologist, may I respectfully suggest - as someone who knows that Hillary Clinton brought this all upon herself by attempting to have a secret email server to avoid being subject to the Freedom of Information Act and being held accountable to the People - that you listen to or watch the entire testimony before House Oversight Committee hearings today before you pass judgment based upon the accounts - the carefully picked and edited accounts based upon where the person doing the picking and editing lays on the ideological and political spectrum - you are sure to hear and see for months to come?
 
I don't appreciate or support when those who I ideologically and politically oppose cherry pick facts and comments made by people and use them to advance their cause or misrepresent in a most dishonest manner people they oppose. I don't appreciate or support when those whom I ideologically and politically agree also engage in the same unfair behavior.
 
I did listen to nearly the entire hearing. My takeaway is that while Hillary Clinton did absolutely violate her responsibility to safeguard classified information and that she and her staff absolutely should have known better than to engage in the whole litany and pattern of behavior in which they engaged, there was simply was not enough there IN TOTALITY to make a CLEAR case to a Grand Jury - more or less and jury in a criminal prosecution - that what she did was anything other than careless and frankly, stupid, but based on the evidence and case law precedent, a reasonable prosecutor would not be able to able to expect a reasonable enough chance of obtaining a conviction, and therefore would be foolish to proceed in such a manner. As such, the FBI has done the right thing in this case. Their reputation and integrity should not be called into question over this matter. Again, if you listen to or watch the entire hearing, you will hear or see Director Comey specifically state that he looked for any wat he could to find a way to prosecute Hillary Clinton for what she had done, but he simply could not find a way to justify doing so.
 
In no means does this indicate that in any possible way that Hillary Clinton has been cleared of any wrongdoing. To the contrary, she has behaved in a foolish, careless manner. It does not mean that she is getting a "free pass." In taking account the actions that she did, along with her staff - who are a direct reflection of her - her judgment has seriously called into question to the point that she is forever damaged. It also clearly illustrates the lengths she will go and the risks she will take to avoid transparency and accountability to the American People, with blatant disregard to the public trust and national security. This entire fiasco is nothing short of a reminder of her behavior which belies what must be her personal belief that she is above the law and better than the "average" American.
 
The question remains: "Will it matter to the American voter come November 8, 2016?"
 
For this American voter, "Yes, it will!" and a hope and pray that it matters to enough voters that she is not elected and forever leaves public "service" once and for all.

 

Republicans who did what HRC did:

 

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/the-republicans-who-did-exactly-what-hillary-did

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The RWNJ meltdown continues. It's a lovely thing to see :D :D

The LWNJ celebration over corruption at the highest level continues. It's a terrible thing to see. Nothing says I'm ready to be your President like a year long FBI investigation. You must be so proud.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The LWNJ celebration over corruption at the highest level continues. It's a terrible thing to see. Nothing says I'm ready to be your President like a year long FBI investigation. You must be so proud.

Christ, so sick of republican gaslighting. Here. I'll repost for you. Maybe you'd like to go after them too since your high standard of honesty demands it. Republicans who did exactly what HRC did:

 

http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/the-republicans-who-did-exactly-what-hillary-did

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The LWNJ celebration over corruption at the highest level continues. It's a terrible thing to see. Nothing says I'm ready to be your President like a year long FBI investigation. You must be so proud.

 

Nothing says I'm ready to be your president after hearing the FBI Director say you are a liar, unreasonable and a poor administrator. And that you gave access to classified information to individuals who didn't have clearances. Isn't that what Petraeus was charged with? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing says I'm ready to be your president after hearing the FBI Director say you are a liar, unreasonable and a poor administrator. And that you gave access to classified information to individuals who didn't have clearances. Isn't that what Petraeus was charged with? 

Petraeus used the information to write and sell a book. Tell me where in todays testimony HRC did that.

Edited by zenwalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You an attorney?  I know you are NOT the director of the FBI.  Republican Comey conspired with the DOJ to get Clinton off the hook you say!!!!  Then a far better and more important case than the e-mail matter would be investigating / indicting the director and his FBI staff genggie.  But who would be the investigating enetity in such a case, a special prosecutor you think?

 

Or would you rather just pull your head out of your @ss right now and simply move along?

I do not suggest in any way for anyone to "move on." Perhaps that is what those blind to the careless and reckless behavior of Hillary Clinton would like to happen, but it is not what I am recommending.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Petraeus used the information to write and sell a book. Tell me where in todays testimony HRC did that.

No he didn't. He was charged with giving classified information to someone without a clearance. Comey stated today Clinton gave access to individuals without clearances. 

Edited by flyboy56

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Come on bro, give me a break. Did you read Genghis's post? Did you read the posts of most of the republicans here? How can you say it's not sour grapes? How many posts were there here prior to this announcement about "Hillary will be in handcuffs"? How many pubbies here claim that Comey didn't do his job or he gave into pressure? What do you call that if it's not sour grapes? Sarge's post is just a nicer. more intelligent sour grapes post.

I ignore Ghenghis. And sure some other right wingers are pissed. But there are Democrats pissed at Comey for not cannonizing Hillary as well. In my humble opinion the long winded but accurate post by the OP was dead on. So he's no fan of Hillary. So what? He essentially said what I have been saying. No criminal charges. Hillary did some less than careful things. Comey did his job and did it both well and honestly. It's done. Time to move on. Let the voters decide.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And?

So why did you say that this will matter to you? It clearly won't/doesn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0