A picture worth 1000 word's

originally posted by: MystikMushroom

originally posted by: bknapple32
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Nor do I expect people to think that rationally when they use an internet meme to try and get a serious political point across.

Yup.

I mean, on a very, very shallow and superficial there's some merit -- but it's like comparing apples and oranges. Sure, they're both fruit -- but they aren't even the same color. They don't have anywhere near the same flavor or texture. You don't have to peel an apple to eat it either. They're very, very different.

Being a moron and trusting your email server to someone wholly unqualified and being negligent isn't the same as willfully stealing government secrets and giving them to known adversaries.

It's a nice false equivalence/logical fallacy though -- And I'm sure emotionally reactive people will respond very strongly....because: PICTURES!

There were government standards, statutes, rules and laws in place and she was a classified information authority. Stop making f'ing excuses, she did it this way so she would have an excuse while she probably passed hundreds of classified docs to enemy Nations so she could make money. Make money by organizing grants and loans from the state department to those foreign governments and corporations for kickbacks to her piggyback, the Clinton foundation. The truth will comments out eventually.

As far as her kind of fruit and how she tastes, I expect a flavour and aroma of four day old dead fish with a texture of powdered chalk. Mix some of that with your fava beans and let me know how it works out.

Cheers - Dave

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
See, Snowden willingly and knowingly exposed classified information with willful intent.

Politics aside.
The information Snowden exposed showed criminal activity with in our own government.
Hillary Clintons actions were criminal activity in itself.
Notice the difference?
Probably not. You seem to be in the crowd that thinks Snowden is a traitor. Yet willing to give Hillary a pass for endangering the lives of Americans abroad with her mishandling of sensitive classified material.

The FBI director called it "mishandling" and went on to say people have been stripped of their security clearance for the same infraction. By all means continue to ignore the real ramifications of all this.

a reply to: JAY1980

I need to break out my "jumping to conclusions mat".

Have I ever said Snowden was a traitor? Yes? No?

Right.

Did I say Hillary is innocent and didn't break any laws? Yes? No?

Right.

See, that's what happens when you jump to conclusions about someone and put words in their mouths. It erodes your own argument and position.

Comparing Hillary to Snowden is not equitable. They aren't the same thing.

It's like comparing a red Toyota Camry to a red Jeep Cherokee. They're both vehicles, but vastly different and utilized by totally different types of people. They aren't even made by the same company. There is more not in common between Snowden and Clinton than there is in common.

But hey, memes are powerful in America because: YAY! PICTURES!

a reply to: MystikMushroom

The gritchy pants suit SELLING such for personal gain

imho

is FARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR WORSE.

a reply to: neo96

So we're going to switch from her being incompetent to being some spymaster involved in a grand conspiracy to sell state secrets?

Way to flip flop the narrative people.

Sheesh.

And I love how everyone assumes I'm some kind of Hillary supporter simply because I'm not on some misogynist anti-Hillary rant like everyone else. Just because I'm not spitting insults and hyperbole about Clinton doesn't automatically make me some kind of apologist.

originally posted by: BO XIAN
a reply to: MystikMushroom

The gritchy pants suit SELLING such for personal gain

imho

is FARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR WORSE.

And do you or anyone else have proof she was paid for specific secrets or that secrets were transmitted for cash?

No?

I'd like to see some evidence to that before we start down that road.

It seems for the longest time everyone was blaming her for being incompetent, and now they want to switch the narrative to make her appear far worse.

All because there's not going to be an indictment.

So, if you can't get her indicted -- make up whatever new fantastical story you can...psychologically it makes sense I guess from an angry and desperate mental perspective.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

So we're going to switch from her being incompetent to being some spymaster involved in a grand conspiracy to sell state secrets?

Not the one who blame staffers.

Hackers already tried to break into Clinton’s private network, as stated in a POLITICO piece last year titled Clinton server faced hacking from China, South Korea and Germany:

n addition, Russia-linked hackers tried to access Clinton’s emails five times. Also, Computer World states Hillary Clinton’s email system was insecure for two months.

www.huffingtonpost.com...

And I love how everyone assumes I'm some kind of Hillary supporter simply because I'm not on some misogynist anti-Hillary rant like everyone else. Just because I'm not spitting insults and hyperbole about Clinton doesn't automatically make me some kind of apologist.

Why yes!

Everyone that has a problem with Clinton is because they 'hate' women!

a reply to: MystikMushroom

In such a corrupt context . . . such proof could be tricky to emphatically uncover with sufficient witnesses willing to risk their lives.

However,

Slick Willy's GIVING China nuclear missile tech secrets was a an early red flag.

And, going by the CHARACTER the gritchy one has presented to the world lo these many years . . . I'd guess that the 'rumors' that have surfaced are merely the tiny treasonous tip of a huge treasonous iceberg.

I believe that either one of them and certainly the gritchy one are more guilty of deliberate treason than all the rest of our traitors of history combined.

The best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. On that score, the gritchy one has left a trail of death, chaos, traitorousness that's unparalleled in modern times and probably in history.

Time WILL tell.

A tweet is worth a thousand words.

twitter.com...

For those that don't like memes.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

Can we prove Hillary was running around handing people classified information on purpose, aka: "Hey *pst* check this out! I know you don't have the clearance, but I'll go ahead and forward it to you!"

Hillary sent/received classified information to/from Sydney Blumenthal. The emails prove this to be true.

Blumenthal has NO security clearance.

Hillary was obligated to report this to the proper authorities when it happened.
She did not do that.

So, yes, we can prove it.

originally posted by: butcherguy

Hillary sent/received classified information to/from Sydney Blumenthal. The emails prove this to be true.

Blumenthal has NO security clearance.

Hillary was obligated to report this to the proper authorities when it happened.
She did not do that.

So, yes, we can prove it.

ABSOLUTELY INDEED.

I'd forgotten that.

And THAT is just the tiny TIP OF A HUGE ICEBERG . . . and THAT is obvious to anyone with sufficient brain cells left to tie their shoes and a shred of fair-minded, objective analysis and assessment skills.

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Clinton: Hired incompetent people to setup an email server and wasn't careful about what was sent using it...

That's debatable, and if true presses the fact that Clinton clearly isn't trustworthy of picking her own cabinet.

More likely the answer was to skate around FOIA.

I'll bite, then: how is the average person supposed to know whether the tech setting up the email server is uber 1337 or just a total whiffle? Checking their credentials doesn't do it -- I've seen people pass the tests who couldn't figure out how to tell the IP address of their own computer.

originally posted by: BO XIAN
a reply to: MystikMushroom
And, going by the CHARACTER the gritchy one has presented to the world lo these many years . . . I'd guess that the 'rumors' that have surfaced are merely the tiny treasonous tip of a huge treasonous iceberg.

So true. Trump would sell out anyone for a chance to make himself look wonderful. Just ask the ex-employees who are suing him and the people who are trying to get their money back from goodole Trump-U.

originally posted by: bknapple32
a reply to: MystikMushroom

Nor do I expect people to think that rationally when they use an internet meme to try and get a serious political point across.

You do realize that in todays society a meme is just about the only way to get a point across to people so that they take notice and understand.

Yeah it's sad but, it seems the vast majority of people don't bother to read like you and I do.

That comes with it's own set of problems that we won't get into here though, I just wanted to point out that a meme is far more likely to get noticed by the masses then an article with lots of words and no pictures.