FBI releases Clinton investigation documents

[Mycroft]

I don't think this is going to go anywhere if you feel compelled to create strawmen.

There are no strawmen.

I made the case why Trump is the lesser of evils and you seem to contradict that...except you won't provide any evidence to support your contradiction other that you unsupported opinion that he is worse than Hillary.

Sorry, but when it comes to a discussion, that's just not good enough.

 

[Mycroft]

Honestly, I'm not convinced that it was a mistake to work together with our NATO allies against Gaddafi. As I recall, all of the Republican politicians were very vocal in their support as well.



Last I checked, Clinton/Obama did not create a civil war in Libya by getting involved there. If anything, they helped speed the conclusion to the war by becoming involved.

The invasion of Iraq CREATED a civil war, which has resulted in the creation of IS and cost hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilian lives (along with over 3,000 of our own soldiers).

You should be ashamed of yourself for treating the two as comparable, but I'm sure you aren't, because you are clearly among the right wing apologists.

Clinton/Obama didn't start the civil war in Libya, but they got involved and it allowed them to attempt to get involved in the Syrian civil war by funneling arms through Libya to, eventually, ISIS.

Now...please try to justify all that as a smart thing.

Oh...and while you are at it, show how the Republicans signed off on that arms transfer.

 

[eohrnberger]

Honestly, I'm not convinced that it was a mistake to work together with our NATO allies against Gaddafi. As I recall, all of the Republican politicians were very vocal in their support as well.



Last I checked, Clinton/Obama did not create a civil war in Libya by getting involved there. If anything, they helped speed the conclusion to the war by becoming involved.

There is still a civil war going on in Libya, 1/2 the country are trying to be a secular state, while the other 1/2 is trying to be a Caliphate, and they are shooting at each other.

The invasion of Iraq CREATED a civil war, which has resulted in the creation of IS and cost hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilian lives (along with over 3,000 of our own soldiers).

:lamo What's this?

Bottom line is that both engagements resulted in further secular fighting.
In Iraq it's now more so Iraq security forces against Islamists the same as in Libya.

If you condemn or condone the Iraqi action you should also condemn or condone the Libya action.

You should be ashamed of yourself for treating the two as comparable, but I'm sure you aren't, because you are clearly among the right wing apologists.

No, not really. But it's pretty clear that you believe that any of your guys can't do anything wrong, and we both know that this isn't the case.

 

[Moot]

the question is why are you not reading it or why are you ignoring it?
why are you being so dishonest? I know you can't refute what the FBI said.
so you have to restort to open dishonesty?

Then again Clinton is about as dishonest as she gets and her lies have been exposed.

Why are you ignoring the FBI report? How can you claim to be honest if you ignore the evidence and can't prove she broke the law?

 

[Gaea]

There is still a civil war going on in Libya, 1/2 the country are trying to be a secular state, while the other 1/2 is trying to be a Caliphate, and they are shooting at each other.

Either you aren't very good at making distinctions, or you're intentionally ignoring them.

Obama's administration did not create the civil war in Libya.

Bush's administration did create the civil war in Iraq.

This isn't controversial.

Bottom line is that both engagements resulted in further secular fighting.

Why do you think the US involvement in Libya is responsible for further secular fighting? Why can't you acknowledge that other nations bear far more responsibility for this?

Iraq was America's war. Libya was not.

No, not really. But it's pretty clear that you believe that any of your guys can't do anything wrong, and we both know that this isn't the case.

I had a feeling you'd spout some absurd crap like this, purely due to projection.

I can name dozens of things Obama has done badly, and voted against him in 2012. For instance, it was incredibly irresponsible of him to condemn Assad for using chemical weapons, draw a red line, threaten significant military intervention, and then not follow through.

 

[Absentglare]

Only if you ignore what the FBI says.

The FBI also discovered several thousand work-related e-mails that were not in the group of 30,000 that were returned by Secretary Clinton to State in 2014. We found those additional e-mails in a variety of ways. Some had been deleted over the years and we found traces of them on devices that supported or were connected to the private e-mail domain. Others we found by reviewing the archived government e-mail accounts of people who had been government employees at the same time as Secretary Clinton, including high-ranking officials at other agencies, people with whom a Secretary of State might naturally correspond.

With respect to the thousands of e-mails we found that were not among those produced to State, agencies have concluded that three of those were classified at the time they were sent or received, one at the Secret level and two at the Confidential level.

you seriously didn't read anything the FBi said did you?

The state department claimed that two of those three were marked classified erroneously.

Nothing the FBI said makes claims about emails that they have no access to- they're not in the business of speculating to attack political opponents, unlike republicans.

 

[Gaea]

There are no strawmen.

Really, now?

You mean, besides the fact he (reluctantly) supported the war in Iraq?

And supported the Libyan intervention?

Do you have evidence that Trump has ever cast a vote for war? That he has ever initiated American action toward war?

You completely changed the subject. From: "Donald Trump supported the war in Iraq and supported the war in Libya" to "Did he cast a vote?"

We know exactly how he would have voted.... because he went on the record in support of both interventions.

I already stated that Trump couldn't have possibly voted because he has never held public office. So we must determine how he would behave based on what he has said.

 

[Gaea]

Clinton/Obama didn't start the civil war in Libya, but they got involved and it allowed them to attempt to get involved in the Syrian civil war by funneling arms through Libya to, eventually, ISIS.

Now...please try to justify all that as a smart thing.

Oh...and while you are at it, show how the Republicans signed off on that arms transfer.

You aren't very good at this debating thing. Your entire debate strategy revolves around changing the subject.

When did I express my approval for their arms sales to Syrian rebels?

If you can't find a quote, it's because there isn't one.

Stop deflecting.

 

[Grim17]

There are no strawmen.

I made the case why Trump is the lesser of evils and you seem to contradict that...except you won't provide any evidence to support your contradiction other that you unsupported opinion that he is worse than Hillary.

Sorry, but when it comes to a discussion, that's just not good enough.

Why bother?

You are assuming that Clinton supporters have morals and that my friend, was a very bad assumption on your part.

You see, anyone with morals would never support someone PROVEN to be a corrupt, secretive, lying politician like Hillary Clinton. She lied to the public dozens and dozens of times, has the thick stench of bribery surrounding her and knowingly destroyed 17,000 emails in order to prevent the public from knowing how inept and totally corrupt a public official she was... Even the State Department's own Inspector General concluded she risked national security when she knowingly broke State Department policy by setting up her own private email server in order to conceal her activity as SOS from both the government and the public.

Knowing what we know about Clinton, It is humanly impossible for anyone with a shred of decency to support, much less vote for, Hillary Rodham Clinton for President of the United States.


.

 

[AFM]

You have been rabbiting on about Clinton's emails forever, nothing is going to be done about this as the authorities are in Obama's and her pocket so what is the point

 

[Mycroft]

Really, now?




You completely changed the subject. From: "Donald Trump supported the war in Iraq and supported the war in Libya" to "Did he cast a vote?"

We know exactly how he would have voted.... because he went on the record in support of both interventions.

He also went on record opposing the Iraq war, so no...you don't know exactly how he would have voted. However, we have a much better idea how Hillary would vote on such things because she has an actual record of votes and action.

I already stated that Trump couldn't have possibly voted because he has never held public office. So we must determine how he would behave based on what he has said.

By your logic, both Hillary and Obama would never have taken action to legalize gay marriage since both have long-time held the position that marriage was a union between a man and a woman.


Face it...you are tilting at windmills here. Trump is the lesser of evils and there is no disputing that.

 

[Mycroft]

You aren't very good at this debating thing. Your entire debate strategy revolves around changing the subject.

I'm not changing the subject. I'm providing reasoning. You are having a hard time disputing my reasoning.

When did I express my approval for their arms sales to Syrian rebels?

When did I say you expressed approval of their arms sales?

If you can't find a quote, it's because there isn't one.

Stop deflecting.

A quote to what? Republican's supposed approval of Clinton's arms transfer?

You are the one who says the Republicans approved of Cinton's/Obama's actions in Libya. YOU should be providing some justification for your statement.


You talk about my debating skills, when you are the one who cannot support your positions and, when called upon to do so, complain that I'm deflecting. :roll:

 

[jmotivator]

I think Comey did about all he could do. He's not the one that supposed to bring charges and his boss in the President. What he did do was go on national TV and go line-by-line and debunked every single one of Hillary's lies regarding the emails.

That's free fodder for people to use against her.

I don't think he did. His job is to complete the investigation and advise the DOJ appropriately.

In the end what happened was he knew that the DOJ would not follow his advice (they didn't with the Clinton Foundation request for investigation) and Comey cowardly decided to protect his job in the Clinton administration rather than do the right thing.

 

[rhinefire]

On 09/04/16 "60 Minutes" ran a piece on the vulnerability of cell phones meaning how easy it is to hack them. I kept thinking as this segment aired the old bag Hillary was and is ignorant of what she is doing with these cell phones endangering our national security if not destroying it all together while claiming she can't remember what she did to the FBI.

 

[ludin]

Why are you ignoring the FBI report? How can you claim to be honest if you ignore the evidence and can't prove she broke the law?

Ol she did break the law.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793

Paetrous plead guilty to the same crime for using a gmail account instead of a .gov account.
in fact several military members are on trial for the same crime of using a private email account
instead of a secure email. so what makes Clinton so special? nothing so she in fact broke the law.

2009 Federal Records keeping act.

Agencies that allow employees to send and receive official electronic mail messages using a system not operated by the agency must ensure that Federal records sent or received on such systems are preserved in the appropriate agency recordkeeping system.
Since she failed to turn over all of her emails she is in violation of this law as well.

In violation of the FOIA act. which also includes private servers and any emails contained on those servers.

The fact that you do not know this tells me that you are pretty much uninformed and cannot handle the facts of this discussion.

 

[ludin]

I think Comey did about all he could do. He's not the one that supposed to bring charges and his boss in the President. What he did do was go on national TV and go line-by-line and debunked every single one of Hillary's lies regarding the emails.

That's free fodder for people to use against her.

He didn't do his friggen job or he would have had her arrested and placed in custody and recommended charges for her and anyone associated with her.
no he punted like a wimp. he should be charged with collusion and corruption charges just like that hack at the DOJ.

and if it is found that Obama influenced the outcome of this he should be charged with the high crime of obstruction and locked up himself.

this whole things wreaks of political cover up and stinks to high heaven. The DOJ should be forced to turn over any email or communication regarding
this. a special prosecutor should have been appointed.

 

[eohrnberger]

Thanks! I'm old and not computer savvy. How do I get to Bing?

Bing

 

[j-mac]

She didn't use them all at the same time. lol When a blackberry would malfunction Clinton had one of her aides go a buy a new one. After migrating the emails to the new device and removing the simm card the old devices were either discarded or smashed. The FBI said this was not unusual for people who use mobile devices.

Her excuse, or at least one of them was that she wanted to simplify, using 1 device, we now find out that this was just another in the long string of lies from her. she had 13 devices, and 5 iPad's.....Not to mention, that I personally think your excuse for her here is laughable....

 

[Moot]

Her excuse, or at least one of them was that she wanted to simplify, using 1 device, we now find out that this was just another in the long string of lies from her. she had 13 devices, and 5 iPad's.....Not to mention, that I personally think your excuse for her here is laughable....

The FBI disagrees with you. So don't pretend you know Clinton's motive more than the FBI or she does...because that would be a lie.

She only used 8 mobile devices during her four years as Sec. of State....and she didn't use them all at the same time.

From FBI report...

FBI investigation determined Clinton used in succession 11 email capable Blackberry mobile devices...eight of which
were used during her tenure as Secretary of State. Investigation identified two email capable devices used after her tenure. The FBI identified four additional devices associated with (212) telephone number used during Clinton's tenure. However, these devices lacked email capability. (p.8)

Monica Hanley, a former Clinton aide, often purchased replacement Blackberry devices for Clinton during her tenure at State from AT&T stores located in Washington D.C area. When Clinton acquired a new device, Cooper was usually responsible for setting the new devices and syncing them to the server. Hanley, Abedin and undisclosed person also assisted Clinton with setting up new devices and disposed of old SIM cards. Abedin and Hanley indicated the whereabouts of Clintons devices would frequently become unknown once she transitioned to a new device. Cooper did recall two instances where he destroyed Clintons old mobile devices by breaking them in half or hitting them with a hammer.​

 

[Moot]

Ol she did break the law.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793

The FBI investigation says she didn't break any laws....so stop lying.

Paetrous plead guilty to the same crime for using a gmail account instead of a .gov account.
in fact several military members are on trial for the same crime of using a private email account
instead of a secure email. so what makes Clinton so special? nothing so she in fact broke the law.

Wrong again. Clinton didn't download or remove volumes of highly classified information from a secure government computer and keep it on her personal computer or her basement and then lie to the FBI to try and cover it up like Patraeus did. Comey explained this during his testimony to congress....I suggest you read the transcripts.

2009 Federal Records keeping act.

Agencies that allow employees to send and receive official electronic mail messages using a system not operated by the agency must ensure that Federal records sent or received on such systems are preserved in the appropriate agency recordkeeping system.
Since she failed to turn over all of her emails she is in violation of this law as well.

In violation of the FOIA act. which also includes private servers and any emails contained on those servers.

The fact that you do not know this tells me that you are pretty much uninformed and cannot handle the facts of this discussion.

Private email accounts were permitted and 90% of Clinton's work related emails were preserved on the State IT system.

 

[Moot]

He didn't do his friggen job or he would have had her arrested and placed in custody and recommended charges for her and anyone associated with her.
no he punted like a wimp. he should be charged with collusion and corruption charges just like that hack at the DOJ.

and if it is found that Obama influenced the outcome of this he should be charged with the high crime of obstruction and locked up himself.

this whole things wreaks of political cover up and stinks to high heaven. The DOJ should be forced to turn over any email or communication regarding
this. a special prosecutor should have been appointed.

Wow...are you calling Comey a liar?

 

[Moot]

Her excuse, or at least one of them was that she wanted to simplify, using 1 device, we now find out that this was just another in the long string of lies from her. she had 13 devices, and 5 iPad's.....Not to mention, that I personally think your excuse for her here is laughable....

Clinton's explanation for using one device for convenience has been consistent. Just because you don't believe her doesn't mean she's lying....it means you are.

The FBI report says she only used eight email capable mobile devices for emailing during her tenure. So if you continue to distort the FBI report and the truth, it just means you're lying....not Clinton.

 

[Gaea]

He also went on record opposing the Iraq war, so no...you don't know exactly how he would have voted. However, we have a much better idea how Hillary would vote on such things because she has an actual record of votes and action.

He "went on record opposing the Iraq war" in 2004, after we'd already invaded. :roll:

By your logic, both Hillary and Obama would never have taken action to legalize gay marriage since both have long-time held the position that marriage was a union between a man and a woman.

By my logic, Donald Trump would have voted in favor of the Iraq war in 2003, because he expressed support for it.
By my logic, Donald Trump would have voted against the Iraq war if he was psychic and able to see what happened a year after the invasion.

And by my logic, neither Obama nor Clinton would have taken action to legalize gay marriage on the day they said they opposed it.

You're drawing unfounded conclusions because your argument is based on faulty rationale.

If you want to conclude that Trump is better than Clinton, foreign policy is one of the worst ways to make the argument.

 

[Gaea]

I'm not changing the subject. I'm providing reasoning. You are having a hard time disputing my reasoning.

Subject: Obama intervention in Libya. Bush intervention in Iraq.

Syria isn't either of those. So arguing against the Syrian intervention is irrelevant to the discussion.

When did I say you expressed approval of their arms sales?

Clinton/Obama didn't start the civil war in Libya, but they got involved and it allowed them to attempt to get involved in the Syrian civil war by funneling arms through Libya to, eventually, ISIS.

Now...please try to justify all that as a smart thing.

^^^^^^^^^^ right there

A quote to what? Republican's supposed approval of Clinton's arms transfer?

A quote to me supposedly approving of arms sales to Syrian rebels. If I don't support it, why are you asking me to defend it?

You are the one who says the Republicans approved of Cinton's/Obama's actions in Libya. YOU should be providing some justification for your statement.

GOP: U.S. Should Offer Support to Libyan Rebels - WSJ

You talk about my debating skills, when you are the one who cannot support your positions and, when called upon to do so, complain that I'm deflecting.

The subject is Libya vs. Iraq, not Syria. If I can't defend my positions, why are you changing the subject to avoid dealing with the subject?

 

[Mycroft]

He "went on record opposing the Iraq war" in 2004, after we'd already invaded. :roll:



By my logic, Donald Trump would have voted in favor of the Iraq war in 2003, because he expressed support for it.
By my logic, Donald Trump would have voted against the Iraq war if he was psychic and able to see what happened a year after the invasion.

And by my logic, neither Obama nor Clinton would have taken action to legalize gay marriage on the day they said they opposed it.

You're drawing unfounded conclusions because your argument is based on faulty rationale.

If you want to conclude that Trump is better than Clinton, foreign policy is one of the worst ways to make the argument.

So...at this point, you are going to pick and choose which Trump statement you want to go by depending whether it supports your argument or not.

Okay.

In any case, with Clinton we KNOW what her history is. There's no picking and choosing involved. And her history is pathetic in terms of doing the right thing.

Again...Trump is the lesser of evils.