Should Hillary talk to the FBI??

a reply to: UnBreakable

Misogynists always think there should be separate language for men and women. Very archaic idea. Appropriate for truck drivers, I assume you mean men but... news flash ...women drive trucks these days.
Should I wear white gloves and pearls then and keep quiet unless spoken to? Would that be lol lady like?
I am a woman.

I really hope this thread isn't going to devolve to all these off topic distractions.

originally posted by: RickinVa

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: RickinVa

Retroactively classified you mean. God.. pick and choose what's real and what's not.
And retroactive means she's fine.
Remember where I showed you if there is doubt the information should not be classified?

Thank you for pointing out another of your obvious flaws.

You do realize that is a defensive strategy that has to be determined in a court of law right?

Yes it's a defensive strategy against the laws that would apply. You don't like that it shows how they won't apply to Hillary. The laws are going to be analyzed before an indictment to see what they can or cannot do. You really don't think they will indict then go back and see what laws she may have broken. No you can't. That would be stupid and I don't think you're stupid. So they will go point by point to apply the laws before they recommend indictment . That is the DOJ s roll in all of this. To see what laws apply to the material.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: RickinVa

Here's the official CIA press release page. It goes back years. Care to find the one where they announce in your words swear 22 emails were classified prior to being sent
www.cia.gov...

22 were deemed top secret. We do know that from the state dept (still after the fact) and the law still say it needed to be classified at the time.
Here's the code but it's a pdf file download
www.gpo.gov...
Here is an analysis of that law from Cornell university law

www.law.cornell.edu...

www.state.gov...

QUESTION: Right. So are you challenging sworn declarations from the CIA that they were top secret at the time of transmission?

MR KIRBY: As I said last week, it was at the request of the intelligence community that we specifically upgraded that traffic to top secret.

QUESTION: Okay, so you don’t dispute that.

MR KIRBY: If we had disputed it, we wouldn’t have upgraded it --

QUESTION: Okay.

MR KIRBY: -- to TS at the request of the intel community.

QUESTION: Okay.

oig.state.gov...

The IC IG found four emails containing classified IC-derived information in a limited sample of 40 emails of the 30,000 emails provided by former Secretary Clinton. The four emails, which have not been released through the State FOIA process , did not contain classification markings and/or dissemination controls . These emails were not retroactively classified by the State Department; rather these emails contained classified information when they were generated and , according to IC classification officials , that information remains classified today . This classified information should never have been transmitted via an unclassified personal system.

a reply to: RickinVa

Regarding you're comment about me pointing out my obvious flaws.. sure anything I can do to help your campaign to invalidate me.

a reply to: RickinVa

Ok find the laws you think apply. We can play court. You be the prosecutor ill be the defense.
I don't think that essay was biased I think it was about how laws will apply to Hillary. She had to be mentioned that was the point. You are having a hard time being objective.
What about Cornell university? Are they biased too? There's was strictly interpretation of law with no political overtones or even a mention of Hillary.

a reply to: RickinVa
FROM YOUR QUOTE:
Specifically upgraded that traffic to top secret. Says right there. The guys tongue tied at best but he does say that. It was upgraded.
And that means we're back to "it had to be classified at the time of violation." It was upgraded. It was after the fact. No violation.

Your link is to a discussion about Syria, Russia and NATO ??? Is that segment part of that discussion? It seemed not to be and although I didn't read it all I read a good bit and didn't see any mention of emails or Hillary.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UnBreakable

Misogynists always think there should be separate language for men and women. Very archaic idea. Appropriate for truck drivers, I assume you mean men but... news flash ...women drive trucks these days.
Should I wear white gloves and pearls then and keep quiet unless spoken to? Would that be lol lady like?
I am a woman.

I really hope this thread isn't going to devolve to all these off topic distractions.

When you start using the term 'circle jerk' and talking about another member being full of himself, that's just common courtesy, being a man or a woman. I notice you get personal when losing an argument. And I was being facetious when I made statements regarding women because I knew it would get a rise out of you. It worked. And you have confirmed my opinion of most of women Hillary supporters. "I am woman, here me roar".

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UnBreakable

I am a woman.

What a coincidence. Hillary trots out this line when it's convenient for her to play the gender card.

Hillary Clinton is making a fundamental strategic change from her unsuccessful bid for the White House in 2008: She's running unabashedly as a woman candidate this time. Clinton summed up her new approach during the first Democratic debate in mid-October, when she gave an opening statement that called attention to her gender: "Yes, finally fathers will be able to say to their daughters, you too can grow up to be president." Asked why Democrats should nominate an insider such as herself, she replied, "Well, I can't think of anything more outsider than electing the first woman president." Clinton said she would add a unique mindset and fresh approach to the White House

www.usnews.com...

a reply to: Sillyolme

Why can't you understand that Mr Kirby is admitting that the state department upgraded the status of the emails because the CIA told them that the emails were already classified when sent to Hillary.

The State Departments retroactive upgrade to top secret DOES NOT over ride the fact that the emails were previously classified prior to the State Department receiving them from Hillary.

Why can't you understand that? Because it doesn't fit your agenda is the only reason why... you have no common sense or logic.

Why do you insist on saying the emails became classified when the state department classified them while ignoring the fact that other multiple agencies had determined that the information was classified before being sent?

Why can you not understand that to validate your claim that those emails were indeed classified after she received them and not prior will be determined in a court of law, not in a argument between me and you.

In a court of law after Hillary has been recommended for indictment and all of this will be done anyways, except for you crying it is a vast right wing conspiracy.

No more replying to you. Its pointless, you have been given multitudes of evidence showing that numerous federal agencies concluded that some emails were classified prior to being on Hillarys server... you just keep repeating retroactively classified because that is the only two words you know that you associate with classified information....

I really pray that Hillary is just like you and goes to her FBI interview with her lawyers and her "retroactively classified" playbook defense.... hopefully the FBI will be able to keep from laughing in her face.


see you on indictment recommendation day.......


TICK TOCK GOES THE FBI CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION CLOCK

TICK

TOCK

TICK

TOCK

I hear the fat ladyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy

Time to take a Hillary Sabbatical... not much will be heard for a while other than what ever anonymous source Fox puts out tomorrow,,, they are fairly consistent with their late Friday Hillary claims.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: RickinVa

Regarding you're comment about me pointing out my obvious flaws.. sure anything I can do to help your campaign to invalidate me.

No one needs any help to invalidate you... you are doing a perfectly good job all by yourself, no assistance is required.

a reply to: UnBreakable

You mentioned being lady like not me. Let's not slip off that like you've already done the the topic.
Otherwise we have nothing more to say on the subject and the whole gender issue doesn't need to be mentioned further right?

a reply to: RickinVa

I have great confidence in the facts I have. You have confidence in what you think.
I rely on experts. You rely on...You... I guess.
Anyway I'm done with your silliness and that other all he wants to do is act like a child and attack and I've been down that road on these boards before.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: RickinVa
Anyway I'm done

Promise?

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: UnBreakable

Otherwise we have nothing more to say on the subject and the whole gender issue doesn't need to be mentioned further right?

From your mouth to Hillary's ears.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: RickinVa

I have great confidence in the facts I have. You have confidence in what you think.
I rely on experts. You rely on...You... I guess.
Anyway I'm done with your silliness and that other all he wants to do is act like a child and attack and I've been down that road on these boards before.

"I rely on experts. You rely on...You... I guess"

I rely on the State Department website.
I rely on various government websites for information.
I rely on the advice of 2 Inspector Generals.
I rely on the CIA.
I rely on the FBI.

You call that relying on me, I call it being able acknowledge the facts that are readily available to anyone who cares to look for them.

You rely on which news sites do you call experts again for information?

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: RickinVa

She won't need to. Let's at least try to remember that this is an investigation into the security of the system. It is not a criminal investigation of Hillary.

LOL! An investigation into the security of her home based server? That is the funniest thing I have ever heard so far in this Hillary fiasco. ROFLstiltskin
Hillary bumper stickers and Christmas cards?

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

a reply to: RickinVa

a reply to: RickinVa