• 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
65,394
Reaction score
49,421
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other


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?
 

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
 
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.
 
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.
 

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.​
 

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.
One I can't agree with.
 

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:
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.
 

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).
 

"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.

VS

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



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:

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:
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.




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.
 
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?
 
...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:
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.
 
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.
 
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:
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.
 

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.

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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…