Benghazi emails found from Clinton's DELETED cache

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: Annee

Few are naive about politics being dirty, but many of us are disgusted by the people that just accept it and say "meh, whatcha gonna do? That's politics."

It's that thinking which is why nothing will ever change. It makes you a part of the corruption.

I'm a realist. Idealism is a nice word - - not much else.

Exactly what do you consider dirty? And can prove?

"WE" as in general public haven't a clue how it all works in high level government.

But, there will always be "back room deals", "I scratch your back, you scratch mine", etc.

a reply to: Annee

People have provided plenty, but you won't accept it, because the people we all know are corrupt said it was ok. You want the very people protecting each other to throw one of their own under the bus before you'll accept that it happened.

So honestly forget it. Just keeping towing the line.

a reply to: Annee

Is national security a concern or is that a waste of your time?
APPARENTLY speaking out of turn means WAY more to YOU and yours than does current history.
OR you don't have the intellect to figure out what happens if OUR security fails.
YOU ARE 70 and ONLY support Globalism, so you MIGHT not WANT it ,since it is important to maintain our Republic.

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: Annee

Is national security a concern or is that a waste of your time?
APPARENTLY speaking out of turn means WAY more to YOU and yours than does current history.
OR you don't have the intellect to figure out what happens if OUR security fails.
YOU ARE 70 and ONLY support Globalism, so you MIGHT not WANT it ,since it is important to maintain our Republic.

Hillary could sneeze and you'd call it a national security issue.

I prefer to look at her entire political history and voting record.

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: Annee

People have provided plenty, but you won't accept it, because the people we all know are corrupt said it was ok. You want the very people protecting each other to throw one of their own under the bus before you'll accept that it happened.

So honestly forget it. Just keeping towing the line.

Provided what? Bunch of speculations, exaggerations, and hyperbole.

Define her corruption with confirmed facts.

a reply to: Annee

The entire email fiasco all by itself is enough for me.

You choose to ignore it and give her a pass and bend over backwards to accept that she who you consider politically worth while just some naive thing that made a little mistake with national security.

That's without going into anything else.

Honestly the book thing Trump did, another thing clear cut.

Both should be out, plain and simple.

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: Annee

The entire email fiasco all by itself is enough for me.

I don't see a conviction.

I see posters here believing what they want to.

a reply to: Annee

That requires people throwing their own under the bus, not going to happen. You can't use a corrupt system to disprove its own corruption.

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: Annee

That requires people throwing their own under the bus, not going to happen. You can't use a corrupt system to disprove its own corruption.

As I said, I'm a realist.

There is nothing yet to prove any kind of corruption by Hillary.

Get back to me when you have those confirmed facts.

a reply to: Annee

Not gonna happen, since you take the gospel of a system you admit is filled with corruption as fact over anything else.

You're not a realist. A realist would admit that people at the top protect each other. Pretending they don't isn't realistic, it's delusional.

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: Annee

Not gonna happen, since you take the gospel of a system you admit is filled with corruption as fact over anything else.

You're not a realist. A realist would admit that people at the top protect each other. Pretending they don't isn't realistic, it's delusional.

Of course people at the top protect each other.

You plan on changing human nature in your quest?

a reply to: Annee

VOTING RECORD after HER corruption in Watergate and on?
YOU are blind.

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: Annee

VOTING RECORD after HER corruption in Watergate and on?
YOU are blind.

And you see what you want to.

We're all blind it seems.

a reply to: Annee

Accept I'M TRAINED to observe, RECON.
Maybe you forgot so I 'll help you remember .

a reply to: Annee

Changing human nature isn't necessary. A new system is though.

And once again you recognize that the corrupt at the top protect their own, yet refuse to even acknowledge the possibility they are protecting Hillary and insist that until they who are protecting her convict her it's all bull#.

No one can prove anything, ever, if the only evidence you will ever accept is if it's first judged true by the very people who want to bury it.

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: Annee

Changing human nature isn't necessary. A new system is though.

And once again you recognize that the corrupt at the top protect their own, yet refuse to even acknowledge the possibility they are protecting Hillary and insist that until they who are protecting her convict her it's all bull#.

No one can prove anything, ever, if the only evidence you will ever accept is if it's first judged true by the very people who want to bury it.

New system?

I bet there's been times you've defended a friend, family member, co-worker, boss, etc -- who may not have necessarily been 100% in the right.

Change comes from the bottom up. You elect some politically innocent and idealistic local representative. How long do they stay that way?

a reply to: Annee

Obviously our current system doesn't work. And you're right I have. Which is why I should never be the one presiding over whether my friends or family is guilty of wrong doing or not.


Addendum: Oh and if I am the one presiding over them, you'd be an idiot to use my word as evidence, but I sure would be glad that you did. I'd of course insist I was being as honest and objective as possible, but in that scenario I want you to believe me.

Either way, we need some other way to deal with people in power that doesn't involve them in one giant circle jerk.

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: Annee

Obviously our current system doesn't work. And you're right I have. Which is why I should never be the one presiding over whether my friends or family is guilty of wrong doing or not.

Me too.

High level politics is now on a global scale.

I don't want to stereotype, but IMO some ethnic/cultural groups are more emotional then others. Also governing by religious belief. A great deal of sensitivity is involved in high level decisions. I think it's very, very, very complicated. And what may seem corrupt to us, may not be, but may be extreme difficulty in negotiations.

I lived on the Mexican border. One of the border towns had a non-Mexican mayor. He was a good mayor. A number cruncher and business man. The complaint: whole families couldn't just walk into his office whenever they felt like it. He required appointments. They voted out the non-Mexican business man (he didn't understand their culture). It's been complete chaos ever since. The people got what they wanted. Unfortunately, they got rid of what they needed.

Politics is complicated.

a reply to: Annee

It is complicated, more transparency might be a start.

You know what this place needs?

More Benghazi threads.

Seriously.

Never before has so much been made (up) about so little.

More please.