Why Hillary will obliterate Drumpf.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by austin_voy

One thing to consider/fear is that his supporters are coming out like flies to shit. ...what I do fear is that they may just say "fuck it" and stay home.

I expect that Hillarious-No-More will carry Travis County.

[Rey Lengua]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

I expect that Hillarious-No-More will carry Travis County.

Especially if she has assup piggy in her " get out the vote " campaign along with the drunken Travis County DA !

[flghtr65]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

So is Patreaus a "spy" or a "leak"?

Patreaus got in trouble because he knowingly gave (leaked) "Classified" information to someone who not Authorized to see it. That someone was his mistress. Perhaps she gave him a MSOG as a reward. For those who do not hobby, MSOG translates to multiple shot on goal.

Hillary and her staffers were authorized to see classified information. Big Difference. If you go back and look at rules in USC 1924 and USC 793, Patreaus was in violation of those rules.

The staffers should have put the correct classification label on the emails, but that is not Hillary's problem, since the BURDEN is on the sender not the recipient. At this point in time a Grand Jury has not been convened.

http://fortune.com/2016/05/23/clinto...une&yptr=yahoo

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by flghtr65

Hillary and her staffers were authorized to see classified information.

The staffers should have put the correct classification label on the emails, but that is not Hillary's problem, since the BURDEN is on the sender not the recipient.

Have you read any of the statutes, regs, and case law interpretation of them or do you rely on anecdotal reports from the news media who burned Patreaus to the stake while minimizing the coverage regarding Hillarious-No-More's "HANDLING" of "CLASSIFIED" information and documentation?

I already know the answer, so no need to waste bandwidth on bullshit.

Since you are seemingly "in love" with Obaminable and Hillarious-No-More:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press...ty-information

and you undoubtedly "love" Obaminable's "Executive Orders"!

BTW: Before you start more mindless jabbering .... and spewing ....

"Sec. 6.4. Publication. The Archivist of the United States shall publish this Executive Order in the Federal Register.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,
December 29, 2009"

Who was the Secretary of State of the United States on December 29, 2009?

[flghtr65]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Have you read any of the statutes, regs, and case law interpretation of them or do you rely on anecdotal reports from the news media who burned Patreaus to the stake?

LL, I read rules USC 1924 and USC 793. It does not take a law degree from Harvard Law School to figure out that Patreaus was in violation of the rules by leaking "Classified Information" to some one "WHO WAS NOT AUTHORIZED"

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by flghtr65

The staffers should have put the correct classification label on the emails, but that is not Hillary's problem, since the BURDEN is on the sender not the recipient.

So you're saying Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills and the rest of the staff are the ones who should be prosecuted for mishandling and failing to properly label classified information found in over 2,000 emails, flighty? Is that your argument?

There's just one wee little problem with your desperate attempt to shield hildebeest by throwing her staffers under the bus, flighty.

According to the WaPo link YOU provided and asked us to read, hildebeest was the SENDER for 104 emails that should have been designated as classified (according to the State Department's own review). So the BURDEN was on her (as you just told us) and SHE failed to exercise the proper diligence as SENDER of at least 104 emails. In other words, she is just as guilty of negligence as you say her staffers are, flighty.

Of course, I already pointed this out to you in post #312 of this thread. I can understand how you chose to ignore my previous post. It's painful and embarrassing to admit when you are tripped up by your own link and your argument falls apart based on WaPo's own accounting of the emails. What I don't understand is how you can be so colossally stupid as to regurgitate the same argument again in the same thread after I thoroughly discredited it.

I suppose it is just another sign of how desperate you are to protect hildebeest – the congenital liar and presumptive nominee of your party – from the consequences of her own criminally negligent behavior. The more desperate you become, the more ridiculous you look, and the more you hasten her impending downfall, flighty.

Read your own link and weep, you fool!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graph...clinton-email/

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by flghtr65

LL, I read rules USC 1924 and USC 793. It does not take a law degree from Harvard Law School to figure out that Patreaus was in violation of the rules by leaking "Classified Information" to some one "WHO WAS NOT AUTHORIZED"

Avoiding the obvious are you?

Do you have a law degree from ANY LAW SCHOOL?

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by lustylad

So you're saying Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills and the rest of the staff are the ones who should be prosecuted for mishandling and failing to properly label classified information found in over 2,000 emails, flighty? Is that your argument?

There's just one wee little problem with your desperate attempt to shield hildebeest by throwing her staffers under the bus, flighty.

There are a lot of problems with his mindless spewing of Gruberized bullshit...

.. the least of which is his inability to comprehend "the law" on the subject, since he is relying upon "proponents" of Hillarious's alleged "innocence" to justify his bullshit .... let's see ...

Huma and Cheryl .... those are women, right?

She is throwing the FEMALES under the bus, but not the MALE IT guy?

This SHIT can't get any better!!!!!

Once LITTLE FLIGHTY digs up all the paper work that memorializes the AUTHORITY of all the speed bumps he is placing in front of the BUS to DECLASSIFY documents that contain CLASSIFIED INFORMATION so that they can be sent to a PRIVATE SERVER and then digs up the INSPECTION AND AUTHENTICATION of the INTEGRITY and SAFETY of the PRIVATE SERVER of HILLARIOUS that was CERTIFIED according to the REQUIREMENTS of her BOSS on December 29, 2009, while SHE WAS SECRETARY OF STATE .... then perhaps we can start getting to the bottom of HER COMPETENCE to serve as POTUS.

[flghtr65]

Originally Posted by lustylad

So you're saying Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills and the rest of the staff are the ones who should be prosecuted for mishandling and failing to properly label classified information found in over 2,000 emails, flighty? Is that your argument?

There's just one wee little problem with your desperate attempt to shield hildebeest by throwing her staffers under the bus, flighty.

According to the WaPo link YOU provided and asked us to read, hildebeest was the SENDER for 104 emails that should have been designated as classified (according to the State Department's own review). So the BURDEN was on her (as you just told us) and SHE failed to exercise the proper diligence as SENDER of at least 104 emails. In other words, she is just as guilty of negligence as you say her staffers are, flighty.

Of course, I already pointed this out to you in post #312 of this thread. I can understand how you chose to ignore my previous post. It's painful and embarrassing to admit when you are tripped up by your own link and your argument falls apart based on WaPo's own accounting of the emails. What I don't understand is how you can be so colossally stupid as to regurgitate the same argument again in the same thread after I thoroughly discredited it.

I suppose it is just another sign of how desperate you are to protect hildebeest – the congenital liar and presumptive nominee of your party – from the consequences of her own criminally negligent behavior. The more desperate you become, the more ridiculous you look, and the more you hasten her impending downfall, flighty.

Read your own link and weep, you fool!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graph...clinton-email/

Where do you think the information that was on these 104 emails originated from? The information came from the server on the secure network. However, before it was sent to Hillary it was copied to a server on a non-secure network. This information was then sent to Hillary with a classification label of "NONCLASSIFIED". All of the emails from the staffers were sent to Hillary as "NONCLASSIFIED".

You would have something if one of the emails from the staffers came over with a label of CLASSIFIED. This is not the case.

They have been investigating the emails for 9 months and no Grand Jury has been convened.

[flghtr65]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Avoiding the obvious are you?

Do you have a law degree from ANY LAW SCHOOL?

No. Do you? The rules USC 1924 and USC 793 are not complicated. The rules were put in for spy's and leaks. The Prateus case is pretty simple. HE GAVE CLASSIFIED information to someone who WAS NOT AUTHORIZED.

http://fortune.com/2016/05/23/clinto...une&yptr=yahoo

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by flghtr65

No. Do you?

And if you can comprehend "the rules" ....

....even Hillarious should be able to do so! And she has a law degree!!!!

And if she has "brain damage" problems .... Bill has one also!!!!!

That's the point, isn't it? You without a law degree are "interpreting" laws .... and they with law degrees have consistently violated them, because they are "privileged."

They (Hillarious and her predator husband) have committed plenty of violations of "the law," including PERJURY on the PREDATOR's part!

The concealing and destruction of evidence is a "violation of the law."

As holders of law degrees and former attorneys they know that, as well as Obaminable and the current U.S. Attorney General. They all know that possessing CLASSIFIED documents on a PRIVATE SERVER is a "violation of the law"!

But if you want a criminal in the White House ... vote for her!

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by flghtr65

LL, I read rules USC 1924 and USC 793. It does not take a law degree from Harvard Law School to figure out that Patreaus was in violation of the rules by leaking "Classified Information" to some one "WHO WAS NOT AUTHORIZED"

That's right, flighty, Patreaus girlfriend had a Top Secret clearance as a Major in an Army Military Intelligence unit, but even at that level she wasn't "authorized" to see some of the classified intel Patreaus gave her access to. But you mendaciously continue to deflect from the fact that Hildebeest willfully and intentionally set up an insecure operation that gave at least one peon foreigner -- Guccifer -- access to classified material, and he didn't have a security clearance, flighty.

[LexusLover]

IBH .... He's Gruberized!

[DSK]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

There are a lot of problems with his mindless spewing of Gruberized bullshit...

.. the least of which is his inability to comprehend "the law" on the subject, since he is relying upon "proponents" of Hillarious's alleged "innocence" to justify his bullshit .... let's see ...

Huma and Cheryl .... those are women, right?

She is throwing the FEMALES under the bus, but not the MALE IT guy?

This SHIT can't get any better!!!!!

Once LITTLE FLIGHTY digs up all the paper work that memorializes the AUTHORITY of all the speed bumps he is placing in front of the BUS to DECLASSIFY documents that contain CLASSIFIED INFORMATION so that they can be sent to a PRIVATE SERVER and then digs up the INSPECTION AND AUTHENTICATION of the INTEGRITY and SAFETY of the PRIVATE SERVER of HILLARIOUS that was CERTIFIED according to the REQUIREMENTS of her BOSS on December 29, 2009, while SHE WAS SECRETARY OF STATE .... then perhaps we can start getting to the bottom of HER COMPETENCE to serve as POTUS.

Either should couldn't comprehend the rules, and is not competent to serve, or she willfully broke the law, and should be ineligible to serve.

I get the feeling Mr. Trump may revisit the issue during a debate if Hillary is able to steal enough delegates from Bernie and get the nomination.

[JD Barleycorn]

Originally Posted by flghtr65

Patreaus got in trouble because he knowingly gave (leaked) "Classified" information to someone who not Authorized to see it. That someone was his mistress. Perhaps she gave him a MSOG as a reward. For those who do not hobby, MSOG translates to multiple shot on goal.

Hillary and her staffers were authorized to see classified information. Big Difference. If you go back and look at rules in USC 1924 and USC 793, Patreaus was in violation of those rules.

The staffers should have put the correct classification label on the emails, but that is not Hillary's problem, since the BURDEN is on the sender not the recipient. At this point in time a Grand Jury has not been convened.

http://fortune.com/2016/05/23/clinto...une&yptr=yahoo

Still the dupe.