HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Jarqui » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 74 Next »

Jarqui

Profile Information

Member since: Sun Aug 23, 2015, 02:58 PM
Number of posts: 6,317

Journal Archives

NH Polls: CNN/WMUR Sanders +23, UMass Sanders +17, ARG Sanders +11

CNN/WMUR Sanders 58% Clinton 35% Sanders +23
http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/07/politics/new-hampshire-poll-donald-trump-bernie-sanders/index.html

UMass/7News (Tracking) Sanders 57, Clinton 40 Sanders +17
http://www.uml.edu/docs/2-7%20TOPLINE%20-%20UMassLowell-7NEWS%20NH%20PRIMARY_tcm18-230859.pdf

ARG (Tracking) Sanders 53, Clinton 42, Sanders +11
http://americanresearchgroup.com/pres2016/primary/dem/nhdem.html


RealClear Poll of Polls Sanders 55.0 Clinton 39.8 Sanders +15.2
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/

Bernie is in very good shape for Tuesday's vote

From the IG of the Intelligence Community

https://oig.state.gov/system/files/23_july_2015_cn_summary_of_ic_ig_support_to_state_department_ig.pdf
We note that none of the emails we reviewed had classification or dissemination markings, but some included IC-derived classified information and should have been handled as classified, appropriately marked, and transmitted via a secure network.


link to statement
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.


http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/23July2015_CN_SummaryofICIGsupport.PDF
"State personnel continue to deny the classified character of the released information despite a definitive determination from the IC Interagency FOIA process)"


The State Department tried "deny, deny, deny". That's part of the point of my post above for Feb 4th Press Conference. The State Department isn't denying it any more!!!

The FBI, the CIA, the IG of the State Department, the IG of the Intelligence Community and now, finally, the State Department itself all agree ... that Hillary transmitted material that was classified at the time of transmission.

The only one now left who doesn't agree with this ... is Hillary.

Game over.

You need to reread my post. It provides a transcript of

the State Department on Thursday agreeing with the findings of the CIA that were written up by the Inspector General of the Intelligence Community - that there were top secret emails that were classified at the time of transmission. It's there in black and white.

Who are we to believe: you or the Inspector General of the intelligence Community?

The Inspector General of the intelligence Community scolded the State Department for continuing being in denial the emails were classified even after it had effectively been proven. So some of this was the State Department misleading the public with misleading answers.

My post also lays out why what Clinton claimed is virtually impossible - like a DNA test giving a wrong result.

It also lays out how little Clinton's situation has in common with Powell and Rice private emails.

Clinton trying to cling to the other two Secretarys of State is a deception.

It's far from the same situation. Powell and Rice (or her staff) used private email for material that was not classified at the time.

For you to believe Hillary did the same, one thing you have to accept, since she only had one email address (no .gov email address),
https://www.hillaryclinton.com/briefing/factsheets/2015/07/13/email-facts/
is that she never sent or received any information in any email that was already classified in her four years as Secretary of State. Think about that. Think about what the Secretary of State does and how impossible that scenario would be to come about given that information from foreigners is born classified.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-clinton-emails-idUSKCN0QQ0BW20150821

Powell and Rice did not:
- have their own unsecured server at home storing state department emails - including over 1600 emails with classified information - some that were classified when she took possession of it
- exposed emails between the president and SoS through her unsecure server which are born confidential/classified
- have 29 (apparently the number has risen) top secret emails exposed over and above the other two that were beyond top secret
- expose emails from foreign countries that are born classified (classified the second they are created)
So there are quite of few things very different about what went on here with Hillary's emails compared with Powell & Rice. But Hillary didn't tell the American people that during the debate. She implied her situation was basically the same ... another lie. Clinging to Powell and Rice's situation was bogus and Hillary knew it.

Check out this little exchange in the press conference of Feb 4th
http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/dpb/2016/02/252161.htm
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.


John Kirby, Spokesperson at the state Department, acknowledged that there are sworn declarations from the CIA that said there were emails on Hillary's server that were top secret at the time of transmission and Kirby doesn't dispute those declarations (noted in Jan 14th letter link below).
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2693832/Letter-by-the-Intelligence-Agencies-Inspector.pdf

Hillary has denied doing this and the CIA has two sworn declarations she did that the State Department does not dispute.

Do Powell and Rice have "sworn declarations from the CIA that" their emails "were top secret at the time of transmission" ? Nope.

Would Hillary know what has been found? The IG says he's been updating her lawyer. And heck, it's in the news and on the State Department website.

I wouldn't put too much stock in Powell's or Rice's email situation. I realize that's what Hillary has tried to suck us into doing but that's another Clinton deception.

CNN: $153 million in Bill and Hillary Clinton speaking fees, documented

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/05/politics/hillary-clinton-bill-clinton-paid-speeches/index.html
Hillary Clinton and her husband, former President Bill Clinton, combined to earn more than $153 million in paid speeches from 2001 until Hillary Clinton launched her presidential campaign last spring, a CNN analysis shows.

In total, the two gave 729 speeches from February 2001 until May, receiving an average payday of $210,795 for each address. The two also reported at least $7.7 million for at least 39 speeches to big banks, including Goldman Sachs and UBS, with Hillary Clinton, the Democratic 2016 front-runner, collecting at least $1.8 million for at least eight speeches to big banks.
...
"What being part of the establishment is, is in the last quarter, having a super PAC that raised $15 million from Wall Street, that throughout one's life raised a whole lot of money from the drug companies and other special interests," Sanders said at Thursday's Democratic debate hosted by MSNBC.
...
"Time and time again, by innuendo, by insinuation, there is this attack that he is putting forth which really comes down to, you know, anybody who ever took donations or speaking fees from any interest group has to be bought. And I just absolutely reject that, senator, and I really don't think these kinds of attacks by insinuation are worthy of you. And enough is enough," Clinton said.


Breakdown of speeches
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/2704851/Total-Bill-and-Hillary-Clinton-Speech-Income.pdf

I'd say this supports much of what Bernie has been saying and it's a very prominent story on CNN.

Dewey beats Truman ... WSJ article calling Iowa for Clinton disappears

http://www.politico.com/blogs/iowa-caucus-2016-live-updates/2016/02/iowa-caucus-clinton-wall-street-journal-218602?lo=ap_b2





Poor Rupert Murdoch ...

New Hampshire 2016 UMass Lowell/7News Poll Sanders 61, Clinton 30 (Sanders +31)

http://www.uml.edu/docs/TOPLINE%20-%20UMassLowell-7NEWS%20NH%20PRIMARY%202-1-16_tcm18-230419.pdf

Bernie beats her in every demographic

On to Nevada ?

Here's Why Winning Iowa Could Break The Election Wide Open For Bernie Sanders

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/iowa-bernie-sanders_us_56aa3483e4b0d82286d51290?utm_hp_ref=politics
CHARLESTON, S.C. -- In the fall of 2007, Hillary Clinton held a 24-point lead over Barack Obama among black voters in a CNN national poll. By Jan. 18, 10 days after the New Hampshire primary, Obama was winning blacks by 28 points in the same poll, a 52-point swing.

This time around, Clinton again holds a commanding lead among black voters headed into Iowa. She boasts a roughly 45-point lead nationally, which her campaign refers to as a firewall.
...
What changed? His viability.
...
"The reality is, if Mrs. Clinton loses Iowa and New Hampshire, that could create new and real problems for her here(South Carolina)." S.C. Rep. Jim Clyburn


I don't think Bernie has to win. It would be nice and send Clinton's campaign into a tailspin but Bernie doesn't have to have it.

He'll become more viable in many people's eyes by how close he's come.

When blacks find out what Bernie is about, which these primaries will help to do, he's going to pull a bunch of them on board, tighten up SC and win some delegates.

Politico: Clinton will carry Iowa

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/02/insiders-trump-and-clinton-will-carry-iowa-218492
Democratic insiders believe overwhelmingly that Clinton will win.
Democratic insiders weren’t nearly as divided as their GOP counterparts: They said by a wide margin that Clinton will defeat Bernie Sanders on Monday night, crediting what they say is her vastly superior organization.

“Hands down, Clinton has the best operation,” one Iowa Democrat said. “It doesn't matter who I speak to — whether it's in a big county or small, on the western side of the state or eastern — they all say the same thing: They see no evidence of Sanders organizing. They have a lot of people, but none of them are trained or prepared for what will happen on Monday. The lesson they took from Obama’s 2008 win was that big crowds equate [to] support in a caucus room. They seem to [forget] that Obama also had the best caucus campaign Iowa had seen up to that point. Unfortunately for them, Clinton has a stronger operation than even Obama did then, and her supporters are more committed than theirs.”
...
But while Democrats overwhelmingly say Clinton will win, Republicans disagreed. A majority of GOP insiders insist Sanders’ energized supporters will carry him to victory.

“My friends on the [Democratic] side tell me that Hillary will win due to organization,” one Iowa Republican said, “but it will be close and damaging.”


Bernie's in tough. Go Bernie's team Go!

New Hampshire CNN/WMUR Sanders +23 Boston Herald/FPU Sanders +20

https://cola.unh.edu/sites/cola.unh.edu/files/research_publications/primary2016_demprimary013116.pdf

CNN/WMUR Sanders 57, Clinton 34, O'Malley 1 Sanders +23


http://www.bostonherald.com/sites/default/files/media/2016/01/31/FPU-BH-Jan26-30-Dem.pdf

Boston Herald/FPU Sanders 57, Clinton 37, O'Malley 2 Sanders +20


Something is happening folks

Debate is there next week I think so Hillary can check it out for herself on live TV

Go to Page: « Prev 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ... 74 Next »