2016 Postmortem

JackRiddler

(24,979 posts)

21. Hmm, 2 out of 3 of those are owned by Clinton.

Wed Jun 1, 2016, 02:08 AM

Jun 2016

She cited Kissinger as her "progressive" endorser in a debate, met him repeatedly, presented him with a prize, went to his tribute party, etc. etc. So Camboida.

As the senator from New York she cast an essential vote for going to war against the "wrong" country. As SoS she pushed hardest for the insane destruction of Libya without a plan for the day after, which Obama calls his biggest mistake.

Iran/Contra, we can leave her out of. She would have been a very minor player at most.

I agree, the e-mail story is small potatoes by comparison. What's a mere felony on exaggerated "national security" grounds compared to all that approval of mass murder you just pinned on her? But if it stops the Clintonista machine from taking over again, might as well go with it.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

73 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

WikiLeaks: Is This Email The FBI's Star Witness AGAINST Hillary Clinton? [View all] Segami Jun 2016 OP

Call a plumber, this drip just won't stop..... Segami Jun 2016 #1

I've got some penicillin StayFrosty Jun 2016 #2

Try getting yourself some help Segami Jun 2016 #3

Post removed Post removed Jun 2016 #5

Now that is a personal attack, frosty RobertEarl Jun 2016 #11

It wasn't just rude, it was disgusting. passiveporcupine Jun 2016 #17

Maybe I am paying too close attention to this story... intrepidity Jun 2016 #4

No one gives a shit StayFrosty Jun 2016 #6

Yeah, I don't think that is true intrepidity Jun 2016 #7

That's their job StayFrosty Jun 2016 #8

As agency head she had full authority to declassify any state document. n/t pnwmom Jun 2016 #39

So let us know when she claims she declassified the information at issue. eomer Jun 2016 #40

Most of the reports of this incident say that there is no evidence that any email pnwmom Jun 2016 #41

She would have had the authority. But that's irrelevant unless she actually did so. eomer Jun 2016 #42

There is no special procedure for doing so. So if she had wanted to declassify pnwmom Jun 2016 #44

No one gives a shit? catnhatnh Jun 2016 #13

I was reading the comments on an editorial in the NYT the other day and people definitely mindwalker_i Jun 2016 #15

And it *never* goes away Reiyuki Jun 2016 #31

F B I 840high Jun 2016 #30

That E-Mail is Worse Than Iran/Contra, the Bombing of Cambodia, Starting War Against Wrong Country Stallion Jun 2016 #9

could be worse than Watergate by the time we are through. nt grasswire Jun 2016 #12

Yeah exactly-Worse than Watergate!!!!!!!!! Stallion Jun 2016 #14

"you people" Matariki Jun 2016 #28

Hmm, 2 out of 3 of those are owned by Clinton. JackRiddler Jun 2016 #21

+1 840high Jun 2016 #32

Awwww ... NanceGreggs Jun 2016 #10

... NWCorona Jun 2016 #18

At this point you should be wishing for the non-indictment fairy...nt tex-wyo-dem Jun 2016 #19

I'm just sorry for the Transcript Fairy ... NanceGreggs Jun 2016 #20

There were no speeches given to the banksters? JackRiddler Jun 2016 #22

Who said there were no speeches? NanceGreggs Jun 2016 #23

You, in effect. JackRiddler Jun 2016 #24

I said the Transcript Fairy wasn't real ... NanceGreggs Jun 2016 #25

Madam, I never expected early leaking of the transcripts. JackRiddler Jun 2016 #26

I love the assumption ... NanceGreggs Jun 2016 #27

K & R AzDar Jun 2016 #16

I've always thought that email was s prime example... dchill Jun 2016 #29

yep 840high Jun 2016 #33

That senz Jun 2016 #34

Out of curiosity, why? Recursion Jun 2016 #36

Doesn't matter. As agency head she can declassify any State document pnwmom Jun 2016 #38

No, I don't. dchill Jun 2016 #45

Why do you think it was classified? (nt) Recursion Jun 2016 #54

The aide was attempting to send it over a secure channel... ljm2002 Jun 2016 #61

It could just as easily have been a document about an employee's promotion. randome Jun 2016 #63

Hmmm, let's see what is the "simplest explanation"... ljm2002 Jun 2016 #64

If we're not privy to all the facts, then we shouldn't be drawing conclusions. randome Jun 2016 #69

Bringing Slenderman nonsense into your argument... ljm2002 Jun 2016 #72

No it's not a pretty good indication of that. Recursion Jun 2016 #65

Burn the witch!! MFM008 Jun 2016 #35

LOL, sorry, no. Hillary has the authority to declassify any state dept. doc pnwmom Jun 2016 #37

Feel free to cite a reference for that claim. Lizzie Poppet Jun 2016 #48

Here: pnwmom Jun 2016 #49

Interesting contradiction with that Executive Order. Lizzie Poppet Jun 2016 #51

Did you read my second link? That is about declassification authority pnwmom Jun 2016 #52

Laughable. There is a procedure to declassify a document. DesMoinesDem Jun 2016 #50

Who says it was a classified document? randome Jun 2016 #53

The person I was replying to said Hillary could declassify documents on the spot. DesMoinesDem Jun 2016 #56

Well, you stated your opinion rather than linking to anything. randome Jun 2016 #57

No, not maybe she could, maybe she couldn't. She couldn't. DesMoinesDem Jun 2016 #58

Getting reeeeally desperate here. The secure fax went down, and you think Hillary is going YouDig Jun 2016 #43

I'm pretty sure the Guccifer Fairy is still coming, though! randome Jun 2016 #46

Come on FBI, let's get this show on the road. pdsimdars Jun 2016 #47

I think that is just the tip of the iceberg. BillZBubb Jun 2016 #55

This was what caught my attention from the start... ljm2002 Jun 2016 #59

She asked for what to be sent non-securely? There is nothing to indicate the doc was classified. randome Jun 2016 #60

Well if it wasn't classified... ljm2002 Jun 2016 #62

It could have been something about an employee's promotion. randome Jun 2016 #66

I get the futility of splitting hairs over the actual outcome of the e-mail libdem4life Jun 2016 #67

Except the Clinton Foundation is a PUBLIC charity. randome Jun 2016 #68

Yep...the Koolaid runs deep. There are these things called shell libdem4life Jun 2016 #70

So what if millions were donated to the CF? The money does not go to the Clintons. randome Jun 2016 #71

Um, they do have a few mansions libdem4life Jun 2016 #73