Hillary Clinton Keeps Racking Up The “I’m A Big Fat Liar” Points
[guest post by Dana]
What do you call it when a fundamentally dishonest individual tenaciously repeats a well known lie because she understands that sooner or later, Americans will become so exhausted from their efforts to refute it, they will just eventually give up, and perhaps even give in? Cynically determined to wear down Americans, or understanding that her loyalists, like Trump’s, believe truth is superfluous, malleable, and/or doesn’t really matter, Hillary Clinton is still peddling her particular brand of the “truth”. And now that she makes an appearance on the Washington Post’s Recidivism Watch – a unique place that “tracks politicians who repeat claims that we have previously found to be incorrect or false,” Americans are once again reminded that Hillary Clinton’s version of the truth is rarely ever that.
This is the lie she again repeated two days ago, even after receiving Four Pinocchios from the WAshington Post’s Fact Checker, “Pants on Fire” from PolitiFact, and “false” from FactCheck.org:
“As the FBI said, everything that I’ve said publicly has been consistent and truthful with what I’ve told them.”
As a reminder, this is what Comey said to Congress:
We have no basis to conclude she lied to the FBI.
From the Fact Checker:
Clinton continues to twist this statement by Comey into a line that suggests the FBI declared that her public remarks on the email issues were truthful. But Comey repeatedly refused to confirm that when pressed by lawmakers: “That’s a question I’m not qualified to answer. I can speak about what she said to the FBI.”
When asked specific questions about certain public statements made by Clinton, Comey did not endorse Clinton’s claims. Here’s an exchange between Comey and Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), chair of the House Select Committee on Benghazi:
GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said there was nothing marked classified on her emails either sent or received. Was that true?
COMEY: That’s not true.
GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said, “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.” Was that true?
COMEY: There was classified material emailed.
–Dana
This should matter so much to Americans, but sadly, more don’t care than do.
Dana (995455) — 8/5/2016 @ 7:03 amshe’s lied about the travel office, rose law firm billing records, ‘right wing conspiracy,
narciso (732bc0) — 8/5/2016 @ 7:07 amthat video, it’s a smaller list what she hasn’t lied about,
She’s a Clinton. Everything she says is a lie. — Sammy Finkelman
nk (dbc370) — 8/5/2016 @ 7:10 amKevin Drum at Mother Jones just wrote a piece that says, well she lied about Bosnia snipers, but is truthful about everything else.
Of course it takes the “dead broke when we left the White House” and passes that off as they owed money at that point in time. By that standard, I am dead broke too, since I haven’t paid off the mortgage.
Loren (66de82) — 8/5/2016 @ 7:36 amHillary’s been a lifelong Yankees fan — just like most lifelong Cubs fans who grew up in Chicago.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/5/2016 @ 7:52 amAnd most frickin’ idiot voters will believe this lying beotch…
champ (56cd04) — 8/5/2016 @ 7:58 amI don’t even bother reading posts like this anymore. It basically says “This just in, water is still wet.”
Dejectedhead (c21a67) — 8/5/2016 @ 7:59 amand general francisco franco is still dead,
narciso (732bc0) — 8/5/2016 @ 8:02 amThey’re focusing on relatively trivial discrepancies between what she said and the truth, and the issue of classfied information on her server is trivial. These lies are trivial, because everything theer was unintentional. If she had used a non-classified state.gov account instead the same thing would have happened.
And, what’s mroe, if she had hasd an account at satte.gov, it would have been hacked, as her account at clintonemail almost certainly was not, and we’ll soon see if Julian Assaunge can produce anything from it. I don’t think he has.
Her account at clintonemail.com had security features state.gov did not have:
Better passwords (probably)
No back door password reset using password hints or security questions.
Limited number of users.
Spear-phishing won’t work. (only a small percentage of tries, do, and much harder to impersonate a legitimate message)
No published information on what software the server is running.
Dictionary attack defeated by shutting down the server.
Intrusion detectable by increase in computer activity.
Sammy Finkelman (643dcd) — 8/5/2016 @ 8:26 amnot a damn thing prevents corrupt cowardly Comey from correcting the record at any time
fbi lol
happyfeet (a037ad) — 8/5/2016 @ 8:33 am* Everything that was classified on her server was unintentional (and things wouldn’t have been different in that r espect if she’d had a state.gov account instead, except that a state.gov account would have been hacked.)
She probably did reveal secrets – on purpose. In personal meetings at the State Department, and by telephone.
She was forwarding disinformation that came to her via Sidney Blumenthal, sending it to Jake Sullivan and and asking for responses to it to be written from all over the U.S. government.
I assume she was doing that for some purpose – the purpose of reporting back what was found plausible.
Sammy Finkelman (643dcd) — 8/5/2016 @ 8:33 amI think Comey is pretty much precluded from speaking about this. He spoke when he did because Hillary’s lawyers agreed to it,and again in testimony before Congress. Anyway we know what he said. He said she didn’t lie to the FBI (that he knows of) and taht’s because:
1) She only spkke to the FBI after everybody else did.
2) Bill Clinton determined, from the mere fact taht Attorney general loretta Lyunch agreed to be the same place with him, that theer were noit going to be any boig surprisesd
3) Her lawyers were probably there to confine the area of questioning.
4) Where it was known to the FBI that her public statements were wrong, “I responded right away” she told the truth.
Sammy Finkelman (643dcd) — 8/5/2016 @ 8:37 amAs Rome burns, Dana continues to fret about Hillary’s emails.
Tillman (a95660) — 8/5/2016 @ 8:38 am“Pants on Fire” from PolitiFact
Perhaps a special category for her
Pantsuit On Fire
kishnevi (3e3b90) — 8/5/2016 @ 8:39 amDejectedhead,
The reason I take the time to write posts like this is because I don’t want this level of significant dishonesty in a presidential candidate to go unreported as it typically does. You won’t find it on the front page of the New York Times or the typical mainstream media outlets ,, or even the Washington Post, whose back pages, ironically, house the Recidivism Watch.
There’s no reason that Trump’s bad behavior should dominate blog posts. There’s plenty to go around.
Dana (fd5891) — 8/5/2016 @ 8:43 amTillman, why does Hillary continue the brazen lies?
SPQR (670c50) — 8/5/2016 @ 8:52 amTillman,
Hillary doesn’t have an email scandal — she has a national security scandal.
The emails were about national security (and the corrupt Clinton Foundation).
If they had actually been about yoga and Chelsea’s wedding, she wouldn’t have hidden them.
The only reason you refuse a police officer permission to look inside your glovebox is because you’re hiding the drugs in there. If there really were only “maps” inside the glovebox, then you would grant him permission to see for himself that there’s only “maps” inside the glovebox.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/5/2016 @ 9:02 amNumber one for 28 years running:
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2016/08/04/if_trump_is_truly_imploding_and_i_don_t_think_he_is_then_why_is_the_washington_establishment_panicking
Churchill: “A lie travels half-way around the world before Truth gets its pants on.”
The only thing the Clintons have or will care about is gathering more power and wealth than they can possible make use of, an no one anywhere will stand in their way or be given a moments regard except as a dupe toward that overarching purpose.
DNF (ffe548) — 8/5/2016 @ 9:09 am#17 CS There is nothing proven about the emails to make so much of them. She shouldn’t have done it, but she didn’t leave classified documents in Russia or anything of that nature. If it’s that serious, then try to put Dubya and Cheney in jail too, since their White House used RNC email and lost some 22 million official emails. Otherwise, I won’t take the email security accusation seriously, it’s just a partisan hack attack.
Tillman (a95660) — 8/5/2016 @ 9:13 amTillman,
You’re lying. Again.
A Secretary of State can’t have those documents on a private server.
Your admission that “she shouldn’t have done it” is proof that you know she shouldn’t have done it because you know it’s against the law.
That’s why she hid her emails. Because she knew she was breaking the law.
Whenever a lefty invokes “Bush” or “Cheney” in the year 2016, it’s because they want to distract from their team’s screw up.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/5/2016 @ 9:22 amI can almost see you as OJ Simpson’s lawyer, pleading with the court; “But look at Bonnie & Clyde — they killed people, too!” (LOL)
the sleazy FBI pooftertrash who interviewed her didn’t even put the pig under oath
happyfeet (a037ad) — 8/5/2016 @ 9:23 amComey continues to prove that he is an Obama administration stooge and his reputation for integrity is entirely undeserved. Had he conducted an actual criminal investigation instead of a whitewash his response when “pressed by lawmakers” would have been “That’s a question I’m … qualified to answer.”
Because, recall, despite the fact that Comey falsely insisted he needed to prove intent to compromise national security information AND intent to harm the United States or aid a foreign power (a losing argument every time it’s been tried in court by individuals convicted of 18 USC 793(f) because they were grossly negligent) he studiously avoided paying attention to any of the evidence that would prove intent, establish mens rea or a guilty mind.
Such as her public lies. Had he conducted a thorough investigation he would have been qualified to address the gulf between what Hillary! told the FBI and what she told everyone else. In particular what Hillary!’s testimony under oath before Congress. But, recall, Comey acted as if he couldn’t act unless he had received a referral from Congress.
It was all BS. His mission from the start was to clear her through a pretense of an investigation.
Knowing this, Clinton just brazenly lies, and lies, and lies about her lies. And with her “media privilege,” as Instapundit puts it, by November the LIVs will believe the FBI exonerated her. The Dems know the value of repetition, bribery, and pageantry. The administration, including Comey, won’t contradict her. They want her to lie.
So it’s not amazing that she lies. It would be amazing if she didn’t.
Steve57 (2d3b12) — 8/5/2016 @ 9:24 amYou’ve stupidly absorbed one of the many DNC/Clinton misdirection arguments. You’re equating apples and oranges. There is no national security violation involved in any of what happened at the Bush White House. Nor was there a felony.
Further, Clinton didn’t “lose” anything. She deliberately deleted them.
Gerald A (945582) — 8/5/2016 @ 9:24 amCS, I’m afraid you’re incorrigible.
Tillman (a95660) — 8/5/2016 @ 9:25 amTillman continues to drive home a truth. The truth is you can’t defend Obama/Clinton without lying about other people.
Something to keep in mind when the LHMFM tries to convince you that Trump is having a melt down. And I don’t even like Trump.
Steve57 (2d3b12) — 8/5/2016 @ 9:27 amMost of us are incorrigible. We are incorrigibly immune to your transparent lies.
Steve57 (2d3b12) — 8/5/2016 @ 9:28 am#23 Gerald Not even a nice try:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/12/14/white.house.emails/
Tillman (a95660) — 8/5/2016 @ 9:31 amTillman is outraged that the Bush administration obeyed the law. Specifically the Hatch act, which says you can’t use government resources for political purposes. You know, like Gore did when he violated the Hatch act by fundraising from his office.
Steve57 (2d3b12) — 8/5/2016 @ 9:31 amSteve@26
The truth is you can’t defend Obama/Clinton without lying.
FTFY.
kishnevi (3e3b90) — 8/5/2016 @ 9:39 am#28 Stev57
http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1610414,00.html
Maybe we can agree that there needs to be more teeth put in the laws about emails. It looks like Hillary and Dubya and his minions have gotten away with using email servers that weren’t official email servers.
Tillman (a95660) — 8/5/2016 @ 9:46 am“The only reason you refuse a police officer permission to look inside your glovebox is because you’re hiding the drugs in there.”
False. That’s not at all the only reason. It doesn’t much happen in practice, because militarized paranoid police, but the reason you refuse an officer permission to look into your private property without duly explained right to do so, is principled and moral. It’s because they have not the right. And so they can f!ck off until they can produce either a warrant or probable cause.
In earlier times this wouldn’t be thought of as mens rea, it would be thought of as proper citizenship.
But we don’t have citizens any more (how quaint!), we have global migrants.
hunson abedeer (80144e) — 8/5/2016 @ 9:47 amDuring the Bush administration, the worry was more that a person might be using government e-mail for personal or political business. This was a principle carried over from telephone calls, and from a time when you got billed per call and per minute. The safe thing, therefore, was to use private e-mail, and then someone would go through it looking for anything that was government business.
Now there doesn’t seem to be much of a problem with using government e-mail for personal business. If there were a person might be spend a lot of time thinking what kind of email something was, and not be able to send at all a mixed message.
Sammy Finkelman (f0ed15) — 8/5/2016 @ 9:55 amTillman,
You’re doing a bang-up job as the mafia’s lawyer.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/5/2016 @ 9:56 amI love how you tell your client to say, “I’m just a small businessman trying to support my family!”
His response would have been: “Yes.” or “There were instances where what she told us contradicted what she had previously said in public.” or even “We did not evaluate this.”
Sammy Finkelman (f0ed15) — 8/5/2016 @ 9:59 amWhat absolutely infuriates me is that the MSM never calls either Clinton or Obama (or any other Democrat) out on their serial lying. It is an appalling dereliction of duty and is a good reason – in and of itself – to vote Democrats out of power.
Colonel Haiku (c0ad39) — 8/5/2016 @ 10:10 amColonel Haiku,
But didn’t you hear about Melania’s eighth grade book report?
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/5/2016 @ 10:15 amShe lifted some passages from Clif’s Notes.
We can’t have a First Lady who has done stuff like that.
So we have to enable Hillary to win; her spouse has never deceived anybody!
It’s “generalissimo”, narciso, get it right!
Colonel Haiku (c0ad39) — 8/5/2016 @ 10:26 amToday’s robotic excuse: “I short-circuited.”
Warning! Warning! Danger, Will Robinson!
DCSCA (797bc0) — 8/5/2016 @ 10:27 amYou’re acting like a typical troll, equating apples and oranges and ignoring points that have already been addressed.
1. There was not said to be any known national security problems in that situation. The law she violated was a much more serious one than what the Bush staffers violated.
2. Clinton’s violations were deliberate and premeditated. She deliberately deleted emails. Her server was deliberately set up to violate laws requiring emails to be permanently retained.
3. As far as I know, Bush himself did not engage in that – a rather important difference. Therefore Dubya didn’t get away with anything.
Also it’s worth noting, Bush has not, as far as I know, told any lies about the emails, let alone the continual lying of Clinton.
Gerald A (945582) — 8/5/2016 @ 10:27 amNo, Tillman, we can’t agree on anything until you stop pretending oranges are the same thing as watermelons to build your straw man, then your bogus “appeal to hypocrisy” also known as the Tu Quoque logical fallacy.
There are already plenty of teeth in the laws that Hillary! violated. Hillary! definitely violated the Espionage Act. Comey demonstrated that fact when he effectively went through the charge sheet. Then he changed hats and became Hillary!’s defense attorney and pretended he needed to prove intent. In an amazing display of moving the goalpost in real time he claimed that to charge her he needed to prove intent. First he claimed he needed to be able to prove she intentionally violated the Espionage Act by knowingly removing classified information and storing them on an unsecure, unauthorized system at an unsecure, unauthorized location. He even got around to claim that he needed to be able to prove she intended to do harm to the US or aid a foreign power in order to charge her with violating 18 USC 793 at all.
I’ve heard this argument before. It has been the losing argument in every appeal attempted by persons convicted of violating every section of 18 USC 793 excetp (a) and (b). And it gets laughed out of court because the courts recognize that 18 USC 793 criminalizes all sorts of compromise of national security information ranging from deliberate spying, paragraphs (a) and (b) through gross negligence. That’s why paragraphs (c) through (f) exist.
Comey used an argument that has failed every time it has been tried in court. That’s why he recommended Hillary! not be charged. Because had she been charged and this saw the inside of a court room she had no viable defense.
Then there’s the fact Comey exceeded his authority and made a recommendation at all. That fact drew former deputy directors of the FBI and associate deputy directors of the FBI out of the woodwork because whether Hillary! was to be charged or not is not the FBI’s call. That’s a decision up to the prosecutors. The FBI’s job is to hand them the results of their investigation without remark.
And no one even went here.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/44/3106
There is no doubt that Hillary! violated the Federal Records Act. She willfully removed and later destroyed federal records. Comey testified to that fact before Congress. She was advised to use a government account for government work and refused to do so. She fired an ambassador for failing to use a government account for government work. Thereby demonstrating beyond any reasonable doubt that her use of an unauthorized, unsecure, private server in the basement of her house was a willful violation of the Federal Records Act. And these violations are felonies.
Yet the Director of the FBI didn’t even mention her willful violations of the Federal Records Act. Because that would have been a slam dunk prosecution.
Since Hillary!’s actions are completely indefensible you, Tillman, try to muddy the waters by claiming the Bush administration did the same thing. Which is impossible for several reasons, most importantly because the President and his immediate staff are not subject to the same laws as executive branch agencies and departments. The office of the presidency is a creation of the Constitution and can not be regulated since it a separate, co-equal branch of government to the same extent as executive branch agencies and departments which are created by acts of Congress and therefore subject to congressional oversight.
So no, Tillman, I’m not going to pretend your straw man argument somehow establishes some grounds for you and I to come sort of agreement. It does not. All it establishes is that even you know that Hillary! belongs in prison. And you have to pretend she doesn’t by fabricating a case against Bush.
Steve57 (2d3b12) — 8/5/2016 @ 10:30 amSteve, Tillman doesn’t realize it, but he is acting as your straw man. He props up the latest fictions that serve as the foundation of Obama’s Rule of Law, and you knock them down with gusto. Gusto and a lot of facts that you place in context, which is of great benefit to us all. Well, all of us except Tillman.
Today’s blog is one of your best. Thank you.
BobStewartatHome (f2b3a5) — 8/5/2016 @ 10:48 am#39
A 4th difference: Nothing has surfaced to suggest the violations that may have occurred in the Bush WH were for the purpose of covering anything up.
Gerald A (945582) — 8/5/2016 @ 10:52 amSteve57,
I just overheard Perry Mason say, “Whaddya guys need me for when you already got Steve57?!”
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/5/2016 @ 10:55 am#40 Steve57
Couple of questions:
If the Bush admin. violated no laws, and no such laws pertain to the Executive Branch, why did they admit to possibly violating the “Presidential Records Act”?
Your going to tell me that the White House and its staff do not contend with any classified information? I seriously doubt that, top put it mildly.
Tillman (a95660) — 8/5/2016 @ 11:06 amTillman,
You’re the guy watching the football game who can’t bear to admit, “Yeah, our guy committed a penalty on that play.”
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/5/2016 @ 11:13 amInstead, you sit there and argue, “Hey, but do you guys remember the 1977 Orange Bowl, when so-and-so committed a penalty!?”
#45 CS Correct, it is a “you too” argument.
However, I can still challenge you to go after Dubya and his minions if you’re serious about this email deal. I’m basically just saying, “If you’re serious, go after them too. Put up or shut up!”
Tillman (a95660) — 8/5/2016 @ 11:17 amGiven the random, often incoherent sentences that come out of Mr. Trump’s mouth on a regular basis, it is *possible* that you might be able to convince me that HRC would do a better job in the Presidency than him, even given all of the issues that I know she will be disastrous in handling. However, if one insists on trying to convince me–as countless HRC minions are trying to do now–that HRC *isn’t* a pathological liar of truly epic proportions, I’m basically going to conclude that the person feeding me the line of BS in question is p***ing on my leg and telling me it’s lemonade, and I will ignore anything that person has to say afterwards.
M. Scott Eiland (1edade) — 8/5/2016 @ 11:24 amTillman,
Bush and Cheney aren’t running for President.
Besides, Hillary’s the most qualified, most competent, most everything candidate of all time! (LOL) So she has no excuse for doing what she did.
Your goofy focus on Bush/Cheney is precisely yet another example of you left wingers being fixated on the past.
By the way, your old gal Hillary said that the ransom payment to Iran was “old news” despite it only being publicly known for 12 hours.
And you embraced that excuse.
Certainly, then, you would admit these moonbat accusations you’re making against Bush/Cheney must qualify as “old, old, old news” — am I right?
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/5/2016 @ 11:26 amNever forget the four stage process to Clinton Scandal management:
“That’s a lie”;
“There’s no credible evidence of that”;
“We dispute that characterization of that;”
“This is old news–why are you still bringing it up?”
Looks like Her XXNess decided to skip to Stage 4 without those pesky prior steps.
M. Scott Eiland (1edade) — 8/5/2016 @ 11:31 amTillman,
Okay, okay, bud.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/5/2016 @ 11:44 amMaybe we should start impeachment proceedings against Bush & Cheney next week!
I don’t understand why nobody is remarking on this key distinction:
Those e-mails records never were in the custody of the State Department, and they weren’t removed.
Work-related e-mails should have been in the custody of the State Department, but they weren’t.
I don’t think that section of law applies. There might be something related to failure to retain or create records.
Sammy Finkelman (f0ed15) — 8/5/2016 @ 11:45 am…unless you consider that, so long as Hillary Clinton remained Secretary of State, records that she alone had access to, were, in a sense, in the custody of the Department, even though they were not physically present in any property belonging to the State Departtment, but, once she resigned, she had a duty to make them available to her successor.
Sammy Finkelman (f0ed15) — 8/5/2016 @ 11:50 amTrump’s such a blockhead.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/5/2016 @ 12:17 pmHe should be exploiting Hillary’s lies every day until November.
He should be pounding the fact there was only 1.2% GDP growth during the 2nd quarter.
You’re a fool if you think your logical fallacies obligate anyone to do anything. You know Hillary! is guilty as sin. like a monkey in a zoo you can fling your poo all you want and hope it sticks to someone else. But it doesn’t change the fact that Hillary! committed multiple felonies.
Steve57 (2d3b12) — 8/5/2016 @ 12:22 pm#15. Dana
I’m not stating that you shouldn’t post reports like this. I think you do great work at cataloging it. My statement was just about my own mood with regard to this topic.
Dejectedhead (0c7c2f) — 8/5/2016 @ 12:23 pmSteve57
I completely agree with you re Hillary.
Unfortunately, all team Hillary has to do is trot out an acolyte, say Lanny Davis, and he’d make mince meat of the logic and simple truth of the US Code you stated. He’d tie it up for “the American jury” with sound bites citing no less than Director Comey’s statement that Hillary was truthful with the FBI and that the highest authority in the land could find nothing to indict Mrs Clinton, who cooperated fully with the Justice Department.
Then you’d be caught chasing the rabbit holes he made in that mendacious melange and have you fighting straw men and sooner or later saying that Director Comey was mistaken or had not followed the US Code properly.
Now whatcha gonna do… you’re not only against Hillary but the FBI and Justice.
YOU’RE on trial and the jury is suspicious of your right wing conspiratorial tendencies.
Who the fuck are YOU to question the FBI or the Justice Department?
The American electorate doesn’t want facts… they want “feel good”… they’re too busy playing Pokemon GO and texting and worrying about paying the bills…. and Hillary is promising to fix all that.
Meanwhile, Rome Burns
PTS (ce7fc3) — 8/5/2016 @ 12:37 pmabout where roger simon thought it would go,
http://nypost.com/2016/08/04/how-iran-spent-its-ransom-windfall/
narciso (732bc0) — 8/5/2016 @ 12:39 pmOh, BTW
Tillman is a complete loon, but he sounds just like the Hillary bots I know.
They live in some kind of alternate reality, and logic, facts, critical thought, etc., have no place in that world.
PTS (ce7fc3) — 8/5/2016 @ 12:41 pmso apparently he was a little too quick to retract
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3725770/Could-Trump-right-Propaganda-film-suggests-Iran-DID-videotape-cash-drop-plane-photograph-shipment-cash-January-prisoner-swap.html
narciso (732bc0) — 8/5/2016 @ 12:41 pmjust perry, the octogenarian punk who haunts here,
narciso (732bc0) — 8/5/2016 @ 12:52 pmocto lives matter
happyfeet (a037ad) — 8/5/2016 @ 12:55 pmkinda
happyfeet (a037ad) — 8/5/2016 @ 12:56 pmthey left this detail, out of the op ed,
http://www.weeklystandard.com/lawmakers-cia-2-lied-to-us-about-benghazi/article/782724
narciso (732bc0) — 8/5/2016 @ 1:01 pmI’m shocked gambling was going on here,
http://www.thelocal.de/20160805/perpetrators-of-german-attacks-advised-by-isis-report
narciso (732bc0) — 8/5/2016 @ 1:27 pmcorrupt CIA poofterboy Michael Morell is a huge stinkypig fan
happyfeet (a037ad) — 8/5/2016 @ 1:38 pm“Vote Skynet Rodham Clinton in 2016–because everyone knows that malfunctioning robots that lie to you repeatedly are no threat to anyone.”
http://www.businessinsider.com/hillary-clinton-comey-truthful-2016-8
M. Scott Eiland (1edade) — 8/5/2016 @ 1:49 pmThis is something that could have happened at GMail, and probably at state.gov, but not at clintonemail.com:
http://bokbluster.com/2016/08/02/lying/
Sammy Finkelman (643dcd) — 8/5/2016 @ 2:02 pmnarciso@62.
This is the same Mike Morrell, who wrote today in an Op-ed in the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/05/opinion/campaign-stops/i-ran-the-cia-now-im-endorsing-hillary-clinton.html?_r=0
Sammy Finkelman (643dcd) — 8/5/2016 @ 2:05 pmNarciso @62 I see you made a cryptic reference to the Op-ed. It’s agood thing I linked it here for everybody else or very few people would solve the puzzle.
Sammy Finkelman (643dcd) — 8/5/2016 @ 2:08 pmIn a long article, that actually was fair, the New York Times reports that Donald trump was NOT wrong about something:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/05/science/donald-trump-nuclear-codes.html?_r=0
And I found a New York Post article that backs that up:
http://nypost.com/2016/05/25/the-government-of-the-free-world-still-uses-floppy-disks/
Sammy Finkelman (643dcd) — 8/5/2016 @ 2:23 pm38 and 65. But Donald Trump doesn’t know how to lie like that. He doesn’t even how to say that when it’s the truth.
Sammy Finkelman (643dcd) — 8/5/2016 @ 2:27 pmCS
I guess Tillman never heard of the old “Statute of Liberty” play.
Pinandpuller (a12946) — 8/5/2016 @ 2:46 pm#71 Pinandpuller,
Statute of liberty play … wow, that’s a Dennis Miller type of wordplay!
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/5/2016 @ 2:51 pmLove it!
65. The word “short-circuit” and the Business Insider headline make it sound like Hillary Clinton somehow thought Comey had called her truthful to the public, but when she elaborates, the short-circuit is supposed to be that she didn’t understand properly what Chris Wallace was asking. I think we better look at the transcript, becaus ethat may not be cnsistent with the complete sentences that she utterred.
Sammy Finkelman (f0ed15) — 8/5/2016 @ 3:27 pmContrary to your claim in #15 Dana, you didn’t have to write this post after all! That dastardly, liberal MSM did it for you:
http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/04/politics/hillary-clinton-email-claim/index.html
Tillman (a95660) — 8/5/2016 @ 3:32 pm#73 Sammy,
Let’s keep in mind that left wingers would never in a million years allow a GOP nominee to claim “I didn’t understand the question.”
Hillary is allegedly the smartest, most qualified, most competent, greatest nominee in the history of all time humanity.
Yet everytime she gets caught with her hand in the cookie jar, her response is “I didn’t know,” “It was a misunderstanding,” or “Chester Arthur did it, too!”
It’s the same with Barack.
Cruz Supporter (102c9a) — 8/5/2016 @ 3:43 pmHe’s allegedly Einstein, Shakespeare, and Oliver Cromwell all wrapped in one, but whenever there’s a scandal striking his administration, he claims to hear about it for the first time “in the morning newspaper, just like all the other folks.”
which is why I’ve dubbed him zaphod, from the hitchhiker’s guide,
https://regated.com/2016/08/nuclear-language-trump/
the little bird nesting inside morning joke knows next to nothing,
narciso (732bc0) — 8/5/2016 @ 3:49 pmI saw an excerpt of Hillary Clinton speaking about the “Short-circuit” on the CBS Evening News.
She said that she told the truth to the FBI, and in the FBI interview she said she told the truth the public (or something like that) and the “short-circuit” was that she said the FBI Director said she told the truth to the public.
I don’t anything about the FBI interview was released, and the FBI doesn’t record them and doesn’t make transcripts, only notes.
Sammy Finkelman (f0ed15) — 8/5/2016 @ 3:51 pmShe’s not even claiming (in this excerpt) that she didn’t understand the question, but that she made a short cut:
James Comey said she told the truth to the FBI, and, she said to the FBI that she told the truth to the public, therefore, it follows, that, according to James Comey, she told the truth to the public.
You can put this in the form of a syllogism:
So says Hillary Clinton, and the only problem was she cut out a few steps.
Like as if James Comey, or the FBI, was vouching for every little thing she told them, like anyone even knows for sur ethat she told them that. And you have to parse what she said, too, and how can you do that without the exact text?
Sammy Finkelman (f0ed15) — 8/5/2016 @ 3:58 pmParsing the utterances of a brain damaged drunk who lies as easily as she breathes seems a waste of time. She’s gotten a bit giddy over her polling and reverted to her regular Bag Lady on a bender routine.
Rick Ballard (08a530) — 8/5/2016 @ 4:03 pmremember we speculated why there was little security,
http://www.dallasnews.com/news/crime/headlines/20160805-tear-up-texas-undercover-fbi-agent-told-islamic-state-shooter-before-garland-attack.ece
it was worse than we thought possible,
narciso (732bc0) — 8/5/2016 @ 4:10 pminteresting tidbit no:
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2016/08/05/somali-in-london-knife-attack-whom-police-said-was-just-mentally-ill-recommended-jihad-terror-books.html
narciso (732bc0) — 8/5/2016 @ 4:13 pmyou would think they would thank him for making their job easier,
https://twitter.com/MichaelSSmithII/status/761573131014311940
narciso (732bc0) — 8/5/2016 @ 4:20 pm“You can put this in the form of a syllogism:
1. James Comey said she told the truth to the FBI.
2. She said to the FBI that she told the truth to the public.
Therefore:
3. According to James Comey, she told the truth to the public. Q.E.D.”
Though this is too long for the average Hillarybot to think about, it will no doubt end up in a bumper sticker and sound bite as:
“The FBI says Hillary Clinton is Honest”
That’s all they need… expect Dem ads with Comey saying something like the above in an edited and targeted bit.
PTS (ce7fc3) — 8/5/2016 @ 4:51 pmnarciso (732bc0) — 8/5/2016 @ 3:49 pm
No, narciso, not this time.
Your link shows Trump’s views about Iran getting nuclear and how Obama failed there. About which he is correct, as anyone who is not a leftie knows.
Zbiggy’s daughter was claiming Trump was asking about the policies and procedures involved in the US using or not using nuclear bombs. Which someone who might be President ought to know about, and he should be asking.
So Zbiggy’s daughter was trying to make a big deal out of that, and she was wrong. But what she was wrong about had nothing to do with the link you supplied.
kishnevi (18dae1) — 8/5/2016 @ 4:52 pmThe Clinton campaign is reportedly working with the Pokemon Go developers in order to have a stream of simple subliminal message appear on all players’ devices:
Hillary is Good
Trump is Bad
Vote for Hillary
Kill Trump
These are just a few of the ideas they’ve come up with.
These will be aimed at the very large part of distracted voters who will become increasingly excited about Hillary as they quest for the Pokemon.
PTS (ce7fc3) — 8/5/2016 @ 4:55 pmit does resemble the plot of kingsman, a very nihilistic spy thriller,
narciso (732bc0) — 8/5/2016 @ 4:59 pmhttps://www.bing.com/images/search?q=lesser+of+two+evil+jokes&view=detailv2&qpvt=lesser+of+two+evil+jokes&id=745D98833D8EC9866292FB74E44884E83055C350&selectedIndex=17&ccid=4XJNObr%2b&simid=608048077498483859&thid=OIP.Me1724d39bafefd14ee9e6935e5828d83o0&ajaxhist=0
mg (31009b) — 8/5/2016 @ 5:05 pmThere is no national security violation involved in any of what happened at the Bush White House. Nor was there a felony.
Further, Clinton didn’t “lose” anything. She deliberately deleted them.
Gerald A (945582) — 8/5/2016 @ 9:24 am
How much longer are you going to go on with this trollish garbage that everyone here sees through?
I said there was no felony. There’s nothing in that link about a possible felony. Clinton committed a felony. And she possibly endangered national security which was not a factor in the Bush emails.
Gerald A (76f251) — 8/5/2016 @ 5:08 pmtogether we have to unite with Mr. Trump
it’s the only way to stop the pig
we have to stop the pig
happyfeet (28a91b) — 8/5/2016 @ 6:02 pmClinton was involved in prosecuting Nixon, and I’m sure she and her colleagues spent many an evening laughing and cackling over the foolish “mistakes” Nixon made as he tried to find a compromise between criminality and respecting the Office of the President. Nothing of that for Hillary!, that’s for sure. She knows what her goal is! Criminality front and center, respect for the experiment in government that characterized the first 43 Presidents is nothing but a fool’s errand in her view. An expensive and dangerous luxury that true tyrants can’t abide. As demonstrated by the 44th person to hold that office, who has suborned the Department of Justice and the F. B. I., as well as the upper echelons of the Defense Department. But alas, that apparently wasn’t enough.
BobStewartatHome (f2b3a5) — 8/5/2016 @ 6:07 pmanother version of the tape,
http://basirat.ir/files/en/news/2016/4/20/1715_523.mp4
narciso (732bc0) — 8/5/2016 @ 7:24 pmPooter at least sounds sane, our military/industrial lobby not so much:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-05/vladimir-putin-just-issued-chilling-warning-united-states
One SS-18(latest model rev. 5, I think) targetting the tri-state area will vaporize 100 million people with 10-20 re-entry vehicles in airburst. Power grid cooked.
Who’s for the status quo?
\\\\\\\
DNF (ffe548) — 8/5/2016 @ 8:44 pmthat could put a crimp in one’s afternoon, gary, now he’s not a communist, but he fancies him a czar, particularly nicholas 1, who the brits and the french, stumbled into the crimean imbroglio,
narciso (732bc0) — 8/5/2016 @ 9:02 pmAs Rome burns, Dana continues to fret about Hillary’s emails.
Tillman (a95660) — 8/5/2016 @ 8:38 am
Tillman, you have the floor: persuade us that Hillary’s emails don’t matter. Persuade us that she didn’t have a hand, to one degree or another, in igniting the flame that has led to Rome burning.
Dejectedhead, thanks.
Dana (995455) — 8/6/2016 @ 4:47 pmyou have to give him points for mendacity,
http://libertyunyielding.com/2016/08/06/hillary-clinton-isnt-lying-fact-checkers/
narciso (732bc0) — 8/6/2016 @ 5:25 pm“The FBI says Hillary Clinton is Honest”
Sammy Finkelman (7b0afd) — 8/7/2016 @ 7:10 am* exculpatory details (from the charge of lying)
Sammy Finkelman (7b0afd) — 8/7/2016 @ 7:10 amEnough, Sammeh! Your excuse-making and Three Card Monte only serves your liberal overlords.
People will learn to love their oppression, to adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think.
Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 8/7/2016 @ 8:49 amThe key word there is “possibly”. These political operatives were required by law to use a private server for all political mail. It’s possible that they may once in a while have sent a message relating to their non-political government jobs on the same server, because they weren’t thining about it, because the regs applying the records preservation act to email hadn’t been written yet. Even when you’re trying to keep your private and work email on different servers, mistakes happen. But there was no deliberate scheme to do government business on the private server, and there’s certainly no grounds for speculating that they sent classified information on the private server. Anything classified would be government-related, and would go over the government server.
That’s very different from Clinton, who did everything on the private server, knowing full well that this was illegal, and after the regs covering this had been written. And who routinely transmitted classified information on this server.
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/7/2016 @ 7:16 pmAlso, the answer to “why did they admit” is usually “out of an excess of caution”.
Milhouse (5a188d) — 8/7/2016 @ 7:17 pmfollowing up from yesterday,
http://narcisoscorner.blogspot.com/?view=sidebar
narciso (732bc0) — 8/7/2016 @ 7:18 pmMilhouse @100, excellent response to an individual who doesn’t deserve the time of day.
I am sick and tired of that fool Tillman, who actually believes that if he engages in the tu quoque logical fallacy that somehow creates an obligation on my part to treat it as if it is a serious argument.
Either one can defend Hillary!’s behavior on its own merits or one can not. Since Tillman can not, and he knows it, he resorts to the fallacious “appeal to hypocrisy” argument. Which is the same thing as admitting he can’t defend it. Which means he just lost the debate, end of discussion.
Steve57 (2d3b12) — 8/10/2016 @ 8:48 amStevey #103, I see, it’s OK for Bush’s admin., comprised of some 50 people to “loose” 20 million emails. But if that mean ol’ Hillary deletes some of hers, you guys go nutz. ‘Makes perfect sense to me!
Tillman (a95660) — 8/10/2016 @ 3:24 pmTillman, your dishonesty is noted.
SPQR (a3a747) — 8/10/2016 @ 4:13 pm#104 Tillman
Millions of Bush administration e-mails recovered..
http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/12/14/white.house.emails/index.html
Guess they should of had Hillary wipe them clean like with a towel or something….
Big difference between this
And yoga stuff gone down the memory hole.
MSL (a8c328) — 8/10/2016 @ 4:49 pm