• Please keep all posts on the Rittenhouse verdict here: Rittenhouse Verdict. Note the moderator warnings in the thread. The thread will be heavily moderated with a zero tolerance policy for any baiting, flaming, trolling or other rule breaks. Stick to the topic and not the other posters. Thank you.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Hillary lying once again

eohrnberger

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
48,372
Reaction score
31,353
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
“Director Comey said my answers were truthful, and what I’ve said is consistent with what I have told the American people, that there were decisions discussed and made to classify retroactively certain of the emails.”
—Hillary Clinton, interview on “Fox News Sunday,” July 31, 2016
Clinton made these remarks after “Fox News Sunday” host Chris Wallace played a video of her saying: “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified materials. I am confident that I never sent nor received any information that was classified at the time. I had not sent classified material nor received anything marked classified.”
As Wallace put it, “After a long investigation, FBI Director James Comey said none of those things that you told the American public were true.”
After Clinton denied that, Wallace played another video of an exchange between Comey and Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), chair of the House Select Committee on Benghazi:

GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said there was nothing marked classified on her emails either sent or received. Was that true?
COMEY: That’s not true.
GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said, “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.” Was that true?
COMEY: There was classified material emailed.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...irector-said-her-email-answers-were-truthful/


There you have it. A flat out lie about the facts, from what actually did occur to what she's rather have you believe.

Are we sure that we want this person elected to POTUS?
 

beefheart

You left out a Hoongadoonga
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2013
Messages
41,659
Reaction score
32,138
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate

There you have it. A flat out lie about the facts, from what actually did occur to what she's rather have you believe.

Are we sure that we want this person elected to POTUS?

Trey Gowdy...why he was gonna be the guy that indicted her...(during the 8th hearing)

And yet....bupkis. :lamo
 

Kobie

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 17, 2013
Messages
48,281
Reaction score
25,273
Location
Western NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
There you have it. A flat out lie about the facts, from what actually did occur to what she's rather have you believe.

Are we sure that we want this person elected to POTUS?

Not particularly, but I'd take her over the cheeto-hued ignoramus from the other major party.
 

Mycroft

Genius is where you find it.
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 27, 2011
Messages
76,878
Reaction score
31,072
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
That certainly isn't the first time she has lied and it won't be the last time she will lie. Heck, she even lied during her own nomination acceptance speech.

Hillary told the crowd about how she helped that girl get to school.

“My mother, Dorothy, was abandoned by her parents as a young girl. She ended up on her own at 14, working as a housemaid. She was saved by the kindness of others.

Her first-grade teacher saw she had nothing to eat at lunch and brought extra food to share the entire year. The lesson she passed on to me, years later, stuck with me: No one gets through life alone. We have to look out for each other and lift each other up.

And she made sure I learned the words from our Methodist faith: “Do all the good you can, for all the people you can, in all the ways you can, as long as ever you can.”

“So, I went to work for the Children’s Defense Fund, going door-to-door in New Bedford, Mass., on behalf of children with disabilities who were denied the chance to go to school.

I remember meeting a young girl in a wheelchair on the small back porch of her house. She told me how badly she wanted to go to school — it just didn’t seem possible in those days. And I couldn’t stop thinking of my mother and what she’d gone through as a child.

It became clear to me that simply caring is not enough. To drive real progress, you have to change both hearts and laws. You need both understanding and action.

So we gathered facts. We built a coalition. And our work helped convince Congress to ensure access to education for all students with disabilities.”

But it was ALL A LIE.

Ken Pittman at WBSM reported:

Here’s what I learned; The Mayor of New Bedford in 1973 was a guy I happen to know, Mayor John Markey (81 years old and a lifelong Democrat now living in Dartmouth, MA. Mayor Markey is also a retired judge and a man whose credibility and character are beyond reproach. “Jack” as he is known, is eligible for both court and municipal pension but only accepts one. He is not one to “double dip”. I called Jack and asked him a few questions about handicap services in 1973 at the New Bedford Public Schools, including wheelchair accessibility.

“I took over as Mayor in January of 1973. We had a budget for vans with drivers and provided services to students with disabilities. It was Tremblay Bus. They would pick them up and drop them off at their homes. Now, they may not have been able to go to the local school, depending on whether or not the schools were accessible for wheelchairs but there were many schools then which could and did accommodate our handicapped students in wheelchairs”.

“In fact, we had a local guy who was a paraplegic, injured in a diving accident who came to my office many times to advocate for the disabled and I actually spent an entire day in 1973 in a wheelchair to better understand the challenges they face everyday. Soon after that we were cutting out sidewalks for wheelchairs and doing things in New Bedford before the laws ever compelled us to.”

SHE LIED! Hillary's Tearjerker About Handicapped Girl in Wheelchair in DNC Speech WAS ALL A LIE!


Haven't we had enough with liars? We've put up with almost 8 years of one.
 

Moot

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 11, 2006
Messages
40,421
Reaction score
15,331
Location
Utah
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed

There you have it. None of the emails were marked classified...just like Clinton said. The three emails with the little 'c' for confidential were attributed to human error.


REP. MATT CARTWRIGHT: According to the manual, if you’re going to classify something, there has to be a header on the document, right?”

COMEY: Correct.

CARTWRIGHT: Was there a header that contained the “c” in the text?

COMEY: The “c” denoting classified material was in the body in the text, but there was no header on the email or in the text.

CARTWRIGHT: So if Secretary Clinton really were an expert at what's classified and what’s not classified and we're following the manual, the absence of a header would tell her immediately that those three documents were not classified. Am I correct in that?”

COMEY: That would be a reasonable inference.



CHAFFETZ: Did Hillary Clinton lie?

COMEY: We have no basis to conclude she lied to the FBI.

CHAFFETZ: Did Hillary Clinton break the law?"

COMEY: In connection with her use of the email server? My judgment is that she did not.

CHAFFETZ: Is it that you are just not able to prosecute it?

COMEY: Well, I don't want to give an overly lawyerly answer. The question I always look at is there evidence that would establish beyond a reasonable doubt that somebody engaged in conduct that violated a criminal statute, and my judgment here is there is not... I think she was extremely careless. I think she was negligent. That I could establish. What we can't establish that she acted with the necessary criminal intent.​
 

eohrnberger

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
48,372
Reaction score
31,353
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other

There you have it. None of the emails were marked classified...just like Clinton said. The three emails with the little 'c' for confidential were attributed to human error.
You have an interesting reading of this.
GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said there was nothing marked classified on her emails either sent or received. Was that true?
COMEY: That’s not true.
GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said, “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.” Was that true?
COMEY: There was classified material emailed.
One I can't agree with.
REP. MATT CARTWRIGHT: According to the manual, if you’re going to classify something, there has to be a header on the document, right?”

COMEY: Correct.

CARTWRIGHT: Was there a header that contained the “c” in the text?

COMEY: The “c” denoting classified material was in the body in the text, but there was no header on the email or in the text.

CARTWRIGHT: So if Secretary Clinton really were an expert at what's classified and what’s not classified and we're following the manual, the absence of a header would tell her immediately that those three documents were not classified. Am I correct in that?”

COMEY: That would be a reasonable inference.



CHAFFETZ: Did Hillary Clinton lie?

COMEY: We have no basis to conclude she lied to the FBI.

CHAFFETZ: Did Hillary Clinton break the law?"

COMEY: In connection with her use of the email server? My judgment is that she did not.

CHAFFETZ: Is it that you are just not able to prosecute it?

COMEY: Well, I don't want to give an overly lawyerly answer. The question I always look at is there evidence that would establish beyond a reasonable doubt that somebody engaged in conduct that violated a criminal statute, and my judgment here is there is not... I think she was extremely careless. I think she was negligent. That I could establish. What we can't establish that she acted with the necessary criminal intent.​
 

Moot

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 11, 2006
Messages
40,421
Reaction score
15,331
Location
Utah
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
You have an interesting reading of this.

GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said there was nothing marked classified on her emails either sent or received. Was that true?
COMEY: That’s not true.
GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said, “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.” Was that true?
COMEY: There was classified material emailed.

When Comey was allowed to explain what he meant (see the video)....he said he was referring to the three emails that had classified markings in the body of the email that were later deemed human error by the SD. As for the rest of the 64,000 emails...none were marked classified at the time they were sent or received.

One I can't agree with.
lol Of course not...because it doesn't fit your false narrative. That's why it's called "cherry picking."
 
Last edited:

Moot

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 11, 2006
Messages
40,421
Reaction score
15,331
Location
Utah
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
That certainly isn't the first time she has lied and it won't be the last time she will lie. Heck, she even lied during her own nomination acceptance speech.




Haven't we had enough with liars? We've put up with almost 8 years of one.
Better make that sixteen years since we're still dealing with the lies from the Bush administration that misled the country to war.
 

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
127,795
Reaction score
39,038
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
When Comey was allowed to explain what he meant....he said he was referring to the three emails that had classified markings in the body of the email that were later deemed human error by the SD. As for the rest of the 64,000 emails...none were marked classified at the time they were sent or received.

Clinton claims those 3 emails were classified after they were sent. No incoming emails ever had classified material. Listing to Comey's testimony in whole, it appears the subtext points to Clinton removing material so as to declassify material and then sending it; it was later determined the email was still classified (her modifications being insufficient).
 

eohrnberger

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
48,372
Reaction score
31,353
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
When Comey was allowed to explain what he meant (see the video)....he said he was referring to the three emails that had classified markings in the body of the email that were later deemed human error by the SD. As for the rest of the 64,000 emails...none were marked classified at the time they were sent or received.

"were later deemed human error by the SD" This is new to me. Citation?

lol Of course not...because it doesn't fit your false narrative. That's why it's called "cherry picking."

Not so much. The exchange between Gowdy and Comey was specific and succinct.

Now Hillary's lying and trying to play it in the media that Comey proved her as telling the truth all along. That's just not the truth.

“Director Comey said my answers were truthful, and what I’ve said is consistent with what I have told the American people, that there were decisions discussed and made to classify retroactively certain of the emails.”
—Hillary Clinton, interview on “Fox News Sunday,” July 31, 2016
VS
GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said there was nothing marked classified on her emails either sent or received. Was that true?
COMEY: That’s not true.
GOWDY: Secretary Clinton said, “I did not email any classified material to anyone on my email. There is no classified material.” Was that true?
COMEY: There was classified material emailed.

Yeah, she's never told the truth on this the entire time.
 

Moot

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 11, 2006
Messages
40,421
Reaction score
15,331
Location
Utah
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Clinton claims those 3 emails were classified after they were sent. No incoming emails ever had classified material. Listing to Comey's testimony in whole, it appears the subtext points to Clinton removing material so as to declassify material and then sending it; it was later determined the email was still classified (her modifications being insufficient).
Not sure, but I don't think Clinton specifically addressed the three emails. But plenty of other people have....including Comey and the SD.

I think you are confusing two separate issues. One, is the three emails marked c in the body of the email. The other is an email where she requested the removal of classified information and to send the unclassified portion.
 

ecofarm

global liberation
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 4, 2010
Messages
127,795
Reaction score
39,038
Location
Miami
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Not sure, but I don't think Clinton specifically addressed the three emails. But plenty of other people have....including Comey and the SD.

In her interview on Fox Sunday, she said the classification was established after the emails were sent. It was implied that she made changes, apparently unsuccessfully.

I think you are confusing two separate issues. One, is the three emails marked c in the body of the email. The other is an email where she requested the removal of classified information and to send the unclassified portion.

Her statement regarding "were [not was, iirc] classified after the fact" refers to which?

Citation for the "marked c"?
 

Moot

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 11, 2006
Messages
40,421
Reaction score
15,331
Location
Utah
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
"were later deemed human error by the SD" This is new to me. Citation?
I'm sure it is....


MR KIRBY: So I’m not going to comment on their findings and recommendations or all the documents that they reviewed. I am aware that there have been media – a media report pointing to call sheets within the Clinton email set that appear to bear classification markings. So let me just talk to that in a sense.

Generally speaking, there’s a standard process for developing call sheets for the secretary of state. Call sheets are often marked – it’s not untypical at all for them to be marked at the confidential level – prior to a decision by the secretary that he or she will make that call. Oftentimes, once it is clear that the secretary intends to make a call, the department will then consider the call sheet SBU, sensitive but unclassified, or unclassified altogether, and then mark it appropriately and prepare it for the secretary’s use in actually making the call. The classification of a call sheet therefore is not necessarily fixed in time, and staffers in the secretary’s office who are involved in preparing and finalizing these call sheets, they understand that. Given this context, it appears the markings in the documents raised in the media report were no longer necessary or appropriate at the time that they were sent as an actual email. So it appears that those --

QUESTION: That the calls were already made?

MR KIRBY: -- no – that those markings were a human error. They didn’t need to be there. Because once the secretary had decided to make the call, the process is then to move the call sheet, to change its markings to unclassified and deliver it to the secretary in a form that he or she can use. And best we can tell on these occasions, the markings – the confidential markings – was simply human error. Because the decision had already been made, they didn’t need to be made on the email..."

Daily Press Briefing - July 6, 2016

State: Some classified markings in Clinton emails were 'human error' - POLITICO



Not so much. The exchange between Gowdy and Comey was specific and succinct.

Now Hillary's lying and trying to play it in the media that Comey proved her as telling the truth all along. That's just not the truth.
VS

Yeah, she's never told the truth on this the entire time.
Gowdy wanted Comey to keep his answers short...and wouldn't let him explain. Apparently, he had a bus to catch. The exchange between Rep. Cartwright and Comey was much more specific and succinct because they discussed the manual for classifying emails which essentially proved what Clinton had been saying all along...that none of the emails were marked classified were sent or received.
 
Last edited:

Moot

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 11, 2006
Messages
40,421
Reaction score
15,331
Location
Utah
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
In her interview on Fox Sunday, she said the classification was established after the emails were sent. It was implied that she made changes, apparently unsuccessfully.

Her statement regarding "were [not was, iirc] classified after the fact" refers to which?

Citation for the "marked c"?

Issue #1: None of the emails were marked classified in the headers when they were sent or received. The SD retroactively classified some of the emails after she had them turned them over.

There were however, three emails that were marked 'c' in the body of text when they were sent. The SD has since come out and said those emails were "human error" and should have been demarked before they were sent. See post #13.


Issue #2: One email contained classified information and Clinton requested it be removed and to send the unclassified portion. That it was later deemed insufficient and still contained classified information when it was sent is news to me. Do you have a citation for that?
 
Last edited:

MrWonka

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
10,869
Reaction score
5,802
Location
Charleston, SC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
There you have it. A flat out lie about the facts, from what actually did occur to what she's rather have you believe.

Are we sure that we want this person elected to POTUS?

Yes we are because while most politicians say some less than accurate things from time to time the reality is that Hillary Clinton is overall about 10 times more honest than Donald Trump or any other republican candidate in the field.


2politifact032016grONLINE.jpg

It turns out that Trump has actually told more lies than every other candidate in the field combined. That includes all of the republican candidates who dropped out quite awhile ago. In fact John Kasich was the most honest Republican of the final three remaining and he still told five times more pants on fire lies than both Democratic candidates combined.
 

Mycroft

Genius is where you find it.
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 27, 2011
Messages
76,878
Reaction score
31,072
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Better make that sixteen years since we're still dealing with the lies from the Bush administration that misled the country to war.

shrug...

Have it your way.

Do you want to make it 24 by electing Hillary?
 

Mycroft

Genius is where you find it.
DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 27, 2011
Messages
76,878
Reaction score
31,072
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
...most politicians say some less than accurate things from time to time...

Your kidding me, right?

You dismiss her outright lying as "say some less than accurate things"?

That's like saying a murderer kind of let someone die because he happened to squeeze the trigger too hard.

LOL!!
 
Last edited:

eohrnberger

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
48,372
Reaction score
31,353
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Compared to the loose cannon...yes.

I'd rather have the loose cannon, whom I don't believe will be one once in office (but I may be wrong), rather than a corrupt, political elite which has demonstrated extremely poor judgement, and continues to do so, and has limited to no successes on her resume, especially as SoS.
 

Top Cat

He's the most tip top
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 4, 2011
Messages
30,598
Reaction score
12,333
Location
Near Seattle
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
I'd rather have the loose cannon, whom I don't believe will be one once in office (but I may be wrong),

Why on earth do you believe that an ego maniac will change his stripes? That is insane. He's 70 years old and people have been kissing his ass his whole life. He is what we think he is.

If he wins, it will only serve to bolster his ego.
 

eohrnberger

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
48,372
Reaction score
31,353
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Why on earth do you believe that an ego maniac will change his stripes? That is insane. He's 70 years old and people have been kissing his ass his whole life. He is what we think he is.

If he wins, it will only serve to bolster his ego.

To be as successful in business as Trump has been requires equal amounts of bluster as well as being reserved. All bluster will fail. All reserved will fail. It's the balance of both that will be successful.

On the campaign trail, he's showing just his bluster. It's what gets the media to talk about him. Playing the media is what he's learned to do for a long time now already, and being outrageous gets him all the coverage. When he's on the teleprompter, that's a glimpse of his other side.

Yes, he has an ego, but no, he's no ego maniac, though right now he may appear to be one to you.

I doubt that he's had people 'kissing his ass his whole life'. A business leader that surrounds himself with ass kissers will fail, he won't get the truth that he needs to make good business decisions.

"He is what we think he is." I rather doubt it. We are only seeing his campaign mode public persona, specific to win the primary. His acceptance address is probably the other side of him that he's showing only occasionally, when needed.

With Hillary we know what we are going to get. A corrupt pathological liar. Hell, right now, she's trying to liar about basic facts, such as Comey's statement in his presser as well as his testimony before congress, both of which disagree with her imaginings of what happened and what was said, and the more favorable narrative of herself she's trying to push.
 
Last edited:

kanabco

Banned
Joined
May 10, 2016
Messages
350
Reaction score
97
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Compared to the loose cannon...yes.

She learned this dance from Bill, "It depends upon what the meaning of the word 'is' is."... remember?

If Comey is going to say, "there is no reason to believe she lied [about the emails]" that opens up a Pandora's box of semantic syntax similar what Hillary uttered, "I was telling the truth [since I didn't lie]"

In my opinion the GOP should not have called Comey to testify. He had dammed her loudly with his announcement on TV. All they did was give her Bill-fodder to weasel out of it.
 

eohrnberger

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 20, 2013
Messages
48,372
Reaction score
31,353
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Yes we are because while most politicians say some less than accurate things from time to time the reality is that Hillary Clinton is overall about 10 times more honest than Donald Trump or any other republican candidate in the field.


View attachment 67205067

It turns out that Trump has actually told more lies than every other candidate in the field combined. That includes all of the republican candidates who dropped out quite awhile ago. In fact John Kasich was the most honest Republican of the final three remaining and he still told five times more pants on fire lies than both Democratic candidates combined.

Quite a long list of Hillary's lies listed here:

All False statements involving Hillary Clinton - PolitiFact

A long list here as well. Most memorable of the lies is this notion that she's qualified in any way.
she is identified today in friendly media solely by her “career” post-marriage to Bubba. This is the part that Barack Obama recently described as making her “probably the best qualified person ever to run for president.” This is both laughable and ironic, as she is better qualified than was Mr. Obama, arguably the most unqualified person ever elected president. And, as presidential aspirants go, they had one professional “qualification” in common: Neither had ever worked in a “real job.”

The lie that is Hillary - A list of her ‘accomplishments’ reveals a suspect pattern

The 7 Wildest Lies From Hillary Clinton

And the list of sites listing the lies goes on and on. If you aren't seeing Hillary as a liar, you are most likely willfully blinded by something or another.
 

MrWonka

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
10,869
Reaction score
5,802
Location
Charleston, SC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Your kidding me, right?

You dismiss her outright lying as "say some less than accurate things"?

When you start acknowledging the countless lies of the republican party I'll worry about her muddling the truth. I have provided data proving that Trump and every other republican has made 10 times more false statements than both Clinton and Sanders combined. You want to throw stones I suggest you move out of your glass house.
 

MrWonka

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 21, 2016
Messages
10,869
Reaction score
5,802
Location
Charleston, SC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Left
Quite a long list of Hillary's lies listed here:

All False statements involving Hillary Clinton - PolitiFact
And here is the list of Trump's...

All False statements involving Donald Trump | PolitiFact

You'll notice the list is more than twice as long despite the fact that he's really only been in politics for about a year.

If you aren't seeing Hillary as a liar, you are most likely willfully blinded by something or another.

Pick a politician... any politician. Then scrutinize every word that comes out of their mouth to the degree that Hillary Clinton's have been. I can assure you virtually every republican in existence will out pace any inaccuracies you might find in Clinton.
 
Top Bottom