America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 7 years ago by Abrignac. 31 replies replies.
Just wondering why
Jump to Bottom | Previous Topic | Next Topic
Abrignac Offline
#1 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 11:41 AM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,263
this concern wasn't shared when a certain SoS used a dubious email server lacking basic security protocols to conduct official business.


Quote:
In a joint statement, Representative John Conyers Jr. of Michigan, the ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, and Representative Elijah E. Cummings of Maryland, the ranking Democrat on the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, said, “We in Congress need to know who authorized his actions, permitted them and continued to let him have access to our most sensitive national security information despite knowing these risks. We need to know who else within the White House is a current and ongoing risk to our national security.”
teedubbya Offline
#2 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 11:46 AM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
nice deflection and very different circumstance.... the other side will do the same by asking why all the incessant investigations in to said SoS but the same hound dogs going after SoS are saying lets move along nothing to see here regarding Russia and Trump.

you sure love trump :)
Abrignac Offline
#3 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 12:26 PM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,263
teedubbya wrote:
nice deflection and very different circumstance.... the other side will do the same by asking why all the incessant investigations in to said SoS but the same hound dogs going after SoS are saying lets move along nothing to see here regarding Russia and Trump.

you sure love trump :)


Absence doesn't imply agreement.

I believe what Hillary did was incredibly stupid. It's not about what may or may not hacked, it's her cavalier attitude with secrets she was entrusted with that repulses me. That plus I hate pants suits. If a women wants to wear a garment that has legs, I prefer it be a pair of Daisy Dukes. In Hillay's case I'd be happy if she wore a Burka and a Hijab so I don't have to gaze upon her.

Do I love Trump the person, the answer is a resounding NO! As I have said before, I'm of the opinion that he's an ogre. But, do I love his idea of making our country a better place for all who are here legally? I must confess that I'm smitten.
teedubbya Offline
#4 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 12:35 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Hillary wasn't dumb she was slimy and purposeful. She did that on purpose because she figured she could survive it and control her message. Lessor of two evils to her but she was wrong. And she sucks balls.

She was investigated repeatedly however. Multiple times on the same subjects. I assume you are wanting a full and complete investigation of the Trump/Russia relationship. It's to the point that defending the indefensible is starting to look silly. At some point falling for the con turns in to being complicit with it.
DrafterX Offline
#5 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 12:39 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,536
Hillary lied and people died... Mellow
teedubbya Offline
#6 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 12:41 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
And if the investigation finds nothing.... so be it.
Abrignac Offline
#7 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 12:43 PM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,263
teedubbya wrote:
Hillary wasn't dumb she was slimy and purposeful. She did that on purpose because she figured she could survive it and control her message. Lessor of two evils to her but she was wrong. And she sucks balls.

She was investigated repeatedly however. Multiple times on the same subjects. I assume you are wanting a full and complete investigation of the Trump/Russia relationship. It's to the point that defending the indefensible is starting to look silly. At some point falling for the con turns in to being complicit with it.



I don't see how a impartial facts driven investigation could ever be conducted in either instance. Time to move on.
teedubbya Offline
#8 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 12:44 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Abrignac wrote:
I don't see how a impartial facts driven investigation could ever be conducted in either instance. Time to move on.



LMAO
DrafterX Offline
#9 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 12:44 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,536
I heard Obama gave her one of them secret pardons.. Mellow
victor809 Offline
#10 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 12:46 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Hahahahahahahahahahahah!!!

Oh my...

Thanks Anthony...

I needed a good laugh...
DrafterX Offline
#11 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 12:53 PM EST
Joined: 10-18-2005
Posts: 98,536
Did he send you that joke about TW..?? Huh
Mr. Jones Offline
#12 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 12:59 PM EST
Joined: 06-12-2005
Posts: 19,419
#9 DrafterX

I heard I might "have gotten a double secret PROBATION pardon"
But Hymie the Robot won't tell me.
teedubbya Offline
#13 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 1:04 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
In fairness to Trump, he has not hidden his intent. From the Manafort situation, to removing anti Ukraine invasion statements from the party platform, to his refusal to say anything anti putin, to this. He clearly wants a different relationship with russia. Thats an ok thing, and something to debate. But it sure smells like something else is there.
ZRX1200 Offline
#14 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 1:46 PM EST
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,582
And nobody cares to comment about this getting leaked.
teedubbya Offline
#15 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 1:52 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
That's a problem too. I know trump loves Wikileaks. I don't.

I struggle with the leaks. If whistleblower go through proper channels. I have the same stance I did when it hurt hill and the dems.... both issues are important... the leak is wrong and should be tracked down and handled accordingly. That does not bring amnesty to the dirty deed hill or the dems or trump etc did. both can be addressed, one does not absolve the other.
teedubbya Offline
#16 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 1:53 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Zrx if I remember correctly you are pro leaks right?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUtT0b0EnSw
RMAN4443 Offline
#17 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 2:00 PM EST
Joined: 09-29-2016
Posts: 7,683
DrafterX wrote:
Hillary lied and people died... Mellow

"What difference at this point does it make?"






Sarcasm
ZRX1200 Offline
#18 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 2:11 PM EST
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,582
Obama was the harshest POTUS in regards to whistle-blowers, and he had a compliant media that held weekly conference calls with him. Sometimes things are needed.

Obama mentioned his flexibility with the ruskie president before reelection. ....no leak no outrage. And the left didn't care one fing bit about influence with the Clinton foundation.
teedubbya Offline
#19 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 2:47 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
Hmm. I'm not the left but I've taken issue with wiki leaks etc and been pro whistleblower protection when done correctly.

I've also been critical or Hillary obama etc.

I'm confused though. Sometimes things are needed. But only when who exactly thinks they are needed?

The leaks are bad no matter if you agree with the person they help or hurt. The deed or action that is the subject of the leak is equally important.

When you start priclaiming when something is ok or even needed based on your position in any given subject or person is where I disagree.

Rail all you want on obama or Clinton. I don't like either. But a ducks a duck.
teedubbya Offline
#20 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 2:50 PM EST
Joined: 08-14-2003
Posts: 95,637
By the way when it comes to whistleblower protection trump went after them immediately. To the point it even bothered chuck grassley.
victor809 Offline
#21 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 3:02 PM EST
Joined: 10-14-2011
Posts: 23,866
Libtard
Abrignac Offline
#22 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 3:44 PM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,263
Gon' Fishing
ovid Offline
#23 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 4:07 PM EST
Joined: 01-24-2017
Posts: 141
I hate all this "my party is always right" crap Yes I voted for Trump but that doesn't mean I'm going to defend everything he does. What Hillary did was arrogant and dangerous. What Flynn did was lie to his Vice President and vetter and was also dangerous. This is potentially life and death stuff. It's our national security fer chisfuginsake.
elRopo Offline
#24 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 4:36 PM EST
Joined: 02-17-2014
Posts: 905
ovid wrote:
I hate all this "my party is always right" crap Yes I voted for Trump but that doesn't mean I'm going to defend everything he does. What Hillary did was arrogant and dangerous. What Flynn did was lie to his Vice President and vetter and was also dangerous. This is potentially life and death stuff. It's our national security fer chisfuginsake.

They won't mess with you now.Sarcasm
tailgater Offline
#25 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 5:23 PM EST
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
teedubbya wrote:


Rail all you want on obama or Clinton. I don't like either. But a ducks a duck.


And the sheep are scared.
tonygraz Offline
#26 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 9:59 PM EST
Joined: 08-11-2008
Posts: 20,231
Thats why they voted how they did.
ZRX1200 Offline
#27 Posted: Tue, Feb 14 2017, 10:40 PM EST
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,582
Yup, Soetoro authorized a tap on a private US citizen and someone waited to leak this.

Exactly why they voted how they did
gummy jones Offline
#28 Posted: Wed, Feb 15 2017, 8:50 AM EST
Joined: 07-06-2015
Posts: 7,969
as long as the sec of state spots the ruskies a few uranium mines every couple years (in exchange for "foundation" donations of course) we should be okay
ZRX1200 Offline
#29 Posted: Sat, Feb 18 2017, 4:13 PM EST
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 60,582
http://www.anonews.co/deep-state-trump/
delta1 Offline
#30 Posted: Mon, Feb 20 2017, 11:39 PM EST
Joined: 11-23-2011
Posts: 28,778
ZRX1200 wrote:
Yup, Soetoro authorized a tap on a private US citizen and someone waited to leak this.

Exactly why they voted how they did


I don't think most Trump voters would've objected to a drone strike that killed Anwar Al Awlaki along with his teenage son and a few other people, who used social media to rally and recruit Al Queda terrorists as a "spokesperson" for AQAP while hiding in Yemen. He was an American moderate Islamic imam who originally advocated that radical Muslims were dangerous and needed to be controlled, but gradually turned to the other side when the focus of the war on terrorism left Osama Bin Laden and his followers and turned to Iraq and the killing and displacement of hundreds of thousands of innocent muslims.

Obama adopted the war strategy of the Bush administration's military intelligence experts, taking out Islamic terrorist leaders that emerged using drones instead of boots on the ground. Obama authorized thousands of such strikes, while Bush did about a hundred.

Critics say bad intelligence, where local tribe members use the US military to settle scores for example, and off-target strikes has killed many hundreds of supposedly innocent people thereby increasing the number of terrorists rather than diminishing the threat.
Abrignac Offline
#31 Posted: Tue, Feb 21 2017, 8:03 AM EST
Joined: 02-24-2012
Posts: 17,263
I don't doubt it for a minute that collateral damage caused by indiscriminate bombing has very negative impact on US - Arab relations. In the 80's we helped a loose coalition of Arab tribes who drove out the Russians. As Al has posted, since then we have been caught up in the struggle where the once friendly militias are now trying to exercise dominance over one time partners.

If you think about it, this is very similar to our own struggles as a nation where at various times the US Govt. partnered with different Native American tribes to wipe out rivals.

The US problem in the Middle East is is traceable to how we left things when we pulled out. After funding the mujaheddin, when the war was over we walked away. When we removed Saddam from Iraq, we walked away. When we removed Qaddafi we walked away.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
Back to Top