192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
blatham
 
  1  
Mon 23 Dec, 2019 08:44 pm
"We have a world. The world is tiny compared to the universe."

Just two short sentences and we now must totally rethink our notions of cosmology.

0 Replies
 
Builder
 
  -1  
Mon 23 Dec, 2019 10:05 pm
Quote:
That brain is tiny compared to anybody else's


Let's see now............. Supermodel wife? Check. Private luxury resort? Check. Golf courses to play on for free all over the world? Check.
coldjoint
 
  -2  
Mon 23 Dec, 2019 10:12 pm
@Builder,
Quote:
Let's see now.............

The brain that keeps him ahead of the MSM and corrupt politicians and intelligence agencies? Tiny, but all of theirs combined are tinier.
0 Replies
 
RABEL222
 
  3  
Mon 23 Dec, 2019 10:14 pm
@Builder,
Crooked mafia gambling halls that cleaned Russian mafia money owned and ran by Trump and his family .
Builder
 
  -1  
Mon 23 Dec, 2019 11:36 pm
@RABEL222,
Read that back to yourself. If any of it were true, he would not still be your president.

Now ask yourself why Clinton deleted thousands of emails from her private server, during a court hearing about her using a private server for government business.

Destruction of evidence means a jail term. We'll be getting to that shortly.
hightor
 
  4  
Tue 24 Dec, 2019 04:17 am
@Builder,
Quote:
Now ask yourself why Clinton deleted thousands of emails from her private server, during a court hearing about her using a private server for government business.


State Department probe of Clinton emails finds no deliberate mishandling of classified information
Builder
 
  -2  
Tue 24 Dec, 2019 04:32 am
@hightor,
Quote:
....finds no deliberate mishandling of classified information


Still looking to WaPo for excuses?

Try the article below, where old mate Comey does his best to backpedal under pressure. I think the weblink says it all, though.

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/comey-admits-mistakes-describing-clintons-sloppy-handling-classified/story?id=54487996

Quote:
In the statement he delivered on July 5, 2016, he described her email practices as “extremely careless.” He initially considered using “gross negligence,” but told Stephanopoulos that was a “lawyer term.”

“My staff convinced me that that's just gonna confuse all kinds of people, if you start talking about statutes and what the words mean,” he said. “What's a colloquial way to explain it? And elsewhere in my statement I had said ‘extremely careless.’ And so they said, ‘Just use that.’ And so that's what I went with.”

He said that he would not use the words “extreme carelessness” if he were to do it again.

“I don't know what it would be, sitting here. [I'd] find some other way to convey, 'cause I wanted to be honest and transparent. This wasn't your ordinary bureaucrat who just mishandles one document. This was something more than that. But not something that anybody would prosecute,” Comey said.


Gotta wonder why these folks keep changing their tune. The Clinton Curse?

hightor
 
  5  
Tue 24 Dec, 2019 04:46 am
@Builder,
Quote:
I think the weblink says it all, though.

It really says very little:
Quote:
“I should've worked harder to find a way to convey that it's more than just the ordinary mistake, but it's not criminal behavior, and find different words to describe that,” Comey said.

Why is that a big deal?

Quote:
Still looking to WaPo for excuses?

No. The State Department actually cleared HRC. The WP merely published the story. It was widely reported and I could have chosen from a number of other sources.
Builder
 
  -2  
Tue 24 Dec, 2019 05:40 am
@hightor,
Quote:
It really says very little:


Comprehension levels vary widely.

Quote:
Why is that a big deal?


A so-called professional investigator suggesting he tones down his own "honest appraisal".

I didn't think the concept would come easy to you.

Don't sweat it.

Quote:
The State Department actually cleared HRC.


With her "disposal record" for such incidents, I'm not surprised she got given a get out of jail free card.
0 Replies
 
revelette3
 
  4  
Tue 24 Dec, 2019 09:35 am
It's funny Trump would have talked about "bird graveyards" when one of first things he did was "clarified" a migration law protecting birds.

A Trump Policy ‘Clarification’ All but Ends Punishment for Bird Deaths

Trump, the bird killer.

Also:

95 Environmental Rules Being
Rolled Back Under Trump
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Tue 24 Dec, 2019 09:39 am
@blatham,
Quote:
The firm behind NRATV sued one of its former hosts on Friday in federal court in Texas, accusing him of lying about how few people watched the far right-wing TV channel.

Progressives think that if they demonize the people who protect our civil liberties, that we are gullible enough to stop supporting our protectors and thereby leave ourselves defenseless against progressives.

Progressives don't fool anyone but themselves.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Tue 24 Dec, 2019 09:42 am
@blatham,
Quote:
White evangelicals fear atheists and Democrats would strip away their rights. Why?

Because that's what progressives do for fun. They try to violate people's civil liberties.

Free people must always be on guard against progressivism in order to maintain their freedom.

And, unfortunately, the Democratic Party is currently infested with progressives.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Tue 24 Dec, 2019 09:43 am
@blatham,
blatham wrote:
63 million suckers, just waiting to be conned
President Trump’s reelection campaign is raising ungodly amounts of money for next year’s election.

Let me guess. You don't think that people who contribute to extreme leftist candidates are being conned??

Whosever thoughts you are copying here, their bias is pretty transparent.
0 Replies
 
Glennn
 
  1  
Tue 24 Dec, 2019 09:45 am
@hightor,
Quote:
The State Department actually cleared HRC.

Funny.

Clinton violated the law. She should have been charged with gross negligence.

Comey said: "although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgement is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case," and then added, "prosecutors necessarily weigh a number of factors before bringing charges. There are obvious considerations, like the strength of the evidence, especially regarding intent. Responsible decisions also consider the context of a person’s actions, and how similar situations have been handled in the past."

He said no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case. Actually that statement is not valid. Either he lied, or he is unaware of a case from a year ago in which the FBI charged Bryan Nishimura, a Regional Engineer for the U.S. military in Afghanistan with unauthorized removal and retention of classified materials. And he did so without malicious intent. That's what Hillary did.

This is from Section 793 of the U.S. Code:

(f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—

And here is what Comey said about Hillary Clinton's actions:

"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."

"There is evidence to support a conclusion that any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton's position, or in the position of those with whom she was corresponding about those matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation."

"None of these emails should have been on any kind of unclassified system, but their presence is especially concerning because all of these emails were housed on unclassified personal servers not even supported by full-time security staff, like those found at agencies and departments of the United States government -- or even with a commercial email service like Gmail."

"Only a very small number of the emails containing classified information bore markings indicating the presence of classified information. But even if information is not marked 'classified' in an email, participants who know or should know that the subject matter is classified are still obligated to protect it."

"We do assess that hostile actors gained access to the private commercial email accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account. We also assess that Secretary Clinton's use of a personal email domain was both known by a large number of people and readily apparent."

"She also used her personal email extensively while outside the United States, including sending and receiving work-related emails in the territory of sophisticated adversaries. Given that combination of factors, we assess it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton's personal email account."
__________________________________________________________________________________
hightor
 
  2  
Tue 24 Dec, 2019 10:27 am
@Glennn,
Quote:
She should have been charged with gross negligence.

Well, the prosecutor declined to press that charge. What the **** are you going to do about it? Whine in perpetuity about how unfair it all is?

By the way, the naval reservist pled guilty.
Glennn
 
  0  
Tue 24 Dec, 2019 10:32 am
@hightor,
Quote:
Whine in perpetuity about how unfair it all is?

Do you always interpret someone correcting your perceptions as whining?
Quote:
By the way, the naval reservist pled guilty.

I see. So if only he had not pled guilty. Sure . . .
snood
 
  3  
Tue 24 Dec, 2019 10:42 am
Quote:

It is not wildly unusual for someone in an administration to refuse to answer a subpoena, usually on the grounds that to do so would intrude on executive privilege, the president’s need to be able to get information and make decisions in private without overbearing congressional intrusion that would hamper the ability to get free and full information. But Trump has simply declared that Congress cannot have any information at all, making a blanket declaration that Congress has no right to compel testimony from key White House advisors or to see documents.


- Heather Cox Richardson
Professor of History Boston College
0 Replies
 
hightor
 
  2  
Tue 24 Dec, 2019 10:53 am
@Glennn,
Quote:
Do you always interpret someone correcting your perceptions as whining?

Do you always describe your tiresome and predictable commentary as "correcting someone else's perceptions"? Do you really think your silly opinion will get back to James Comey? It was his decision, not mine.
coldjoint
 
  -1  
Tue 24 Dec, 2019 11:27 am
@hightor,
Quote:
Well, the prosecutor declined to press that charge.

Comey was not the prosecutor. Lynch's corrupt DOJ was. Can you say tarmac meeting? The case can be re-opened.
snood
 
  7  
Tue 24 Dec, 2019 11:39 am
Y’know, it may be pretty widely agreed that we don’t consider Joe Biden our best candidate. But I think it’s noteworthy how nervous he seems to make Trump. Nervous enough that he made that call to Zelensky right after finding out Biden was leading him by 10 points in several polls. Nervous enough that even after having been impeached for it, he’s got Giuliani rooting around in Ukraine trying to find dirt on Biden.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.44 seconds on 01/10/2025 at 06:05:29