Clinton reveal more state secrets?

[*PhilHos*]

http://nypost.com/2016/10/09/bin-laden-secrets-revealed-in-latest-clinton-e-mail-leak/

Quote:In her secret speeches to Wall Street bankers, Hillary Clinton backed free trade and claimed politicians need leeway to make backroom deals — and may have disclosed classified details of the raid on Osama bin Laden’s compound, according to the latest emails disclosed by WikiLeaks.

The emails also revealed that back in 2015, the Clinton campaign strategized about ways to elevate Donald Trump and other “extreme” Republicans — as “Pied Piper” candidates who would ultimately be so “unpalatable,” they’d help her win.

These “Pied Piper” candidates also included Ted Cruz and Ben Carson, according to the email, sent to the Democratic National Committee on April 7, 2015.

The email goes on to advise the DNC to “Force all Republican candidates to lock themselves into extreme conservative positions that will hurt them in the general election.”

Other emails disclosing the content of her speeches to bankers and business groups show Clinton revealing insider details of how bin Laden was targeted.

“I was in the small group that recommended to the president that he go after bin Laden,” Clinton said in a 2013 speech to a ­Toronto business organization.

She went on: “The amount of work that was required to get a strong-enough basis of information on which to plan took more than a decade . . . and then all of a sudden putting this matrix together and saying, ‘This guy used to protect bin Laden — he has just made a phone call. He said this in the phone call. We need to figure out where he is. Then we need to follow him.’

“And that is how we found this compound in Abbottabad [Pakistan]” — where a team of Navy SEALs took out bin Laden in May 2011.

WikiLeaks asked in a tweet if Clinton’s comments revealed too much about the bin Laden hunt by mentioning the phone calls.

It’s unclear whether Clinton’s story was classified. But what she said in Toronto varies from other accounts of how the United States determined bin Laden’s whereabouts.

Many reports of the time said the United States was tipped to bin Laden’s location by a Pakistani intelligence officer; other reports say Washington ­tracked him down with extensive surveillance.

The leaked trove of emails from Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta’s account also features damning evidence of major flip-flops and doublespeak from the former secretary of state.

The leaked Clinton comment that most captured the imagination of social media Saturday came from an April 2013 speech to the National Multifamily Housing Council. Clinton said politicians must balance “both a public and a private position” while making deals.

“It is unsavory, and it always has been that way, but we usually end up where we need to be,” Clinton said. “But if everybody’s watching, you know, all of the backroom discussions and the deals, you know, then people get a little nervous, to say the least. So, you need both a public and a private position.”

The full transcripts of the speeches were not released. But WikiLeaks included a document of excerpts from the speeches that Clinton’s campaign flagged as potential political trouble.

In a talk to a Brazilian bank in 2013, Clinton said her “dream” is “a hemispheric common market, with open trade and open borders,” and asked her audience to think of what doubling American trade with Latin America “would mean for everybody in this room.”

Trump, her Republican opponent, has made opposition to trade deals that he says hurt American workers a cornerstone of his campaign.

Clinton’s onetime opponent for the Democratic nomination, Sen. Bernie Sanders, also was vocal in his objection to trade deals, and pushed Clinton to denounce support for the Trans Pacific Partnership.

And there’s more to come.

The leaks came from roughly 2,050 emails sent to and from Podesta, who is also a former chief of staff to President Bill Clinton.

WikiLeaks claimed to have up to 10,000 emails.

“We have published 1 percent of the #PodestaEmails so far,” Wiki­Leaks tweeted Saturday.

“Additional publications will proceed throughout the election period.”

Podesta has said some of the leaked emails may have been altered or faked. He is not confirming or denying their contents.

This woman has proven she cannot be trusted with our nation's secrets and some of you want to elect her as president? SMH

Sent from my SPH-L710T using Tapatalk

[xxlt]

If one understands literally nothing about politics - let's make it even simpler, about competition - then the OP has some damning content.

In competition you certainly know that you match up better against some opponents than others. Ever heard of a boxer "ducking" an opponent. It happens when a higher ranked fighter knows he has less of a chance against a certain contender. Even the great Ali as champ ducked Larry Holmes, and when Holmes finally fought him it was clear why Ali had avoided the match up - Ali never stood a chance. So, if you want to win sometimes you would rather face one opponent than another - not a big revelation. And ultimately, no matter who your opponent is, you try to make them play your game. You want to expose their weaknesses and display your strengths, and not do the opposite. If this is a real mind blower for you - and apparently it is for the OP - then you have a lot to learn about competition, sports, politics, and life.

In the Republican presidential primary leading up to this election, and every primary in history as well as every general election, there has been a tension between appealing to your party's base and not taking positions so extreme as to make you unpalatable to the voters in the general election. And, shrewd politicians always try to push their opponents to those extreme positions that make them unelectable. This happens within parties and between parties.

As to the she is giving away state secrets by talking about killing Bin Laden, give me a break. The last president said, "I don't think much about [Bin Laden]." The current president oversaw the personnel who located and ultimately killed him. So much for being safer with a Republican in the White House. Suck it.

The OP is another song in the conservative song book and they all follow the same pattern. The logic and the narrative goes something like this. Watermelons are green, the sky is blue, see, you can't trust the Clintons, especially the one with a vagina, just look what her husband did because of that Doomsday machine between her legs.

I look forward to hearing the songs for four more years while Mrs. C occupies the White House. Keep singing!

[*bfine32*]

(10-13-2016, 09:06 AM)xxlt Wrote: I look forward to hearing the songs for four more years while Mrs. C occupies the White House. Keep singing!

I went to the Hillary school of classified email handling. I assume you called her Mrs. C because you had already refered to other folks as Mrs. A and Mrs. B.

[Rotobeast]

(10-13-2016, 09:06 AM)xxlt Wrote: Watermelons are green, the sky is blue, see, you can't trust the Clintons, especially the one with a vagina, just look what her husband did because of that Doomsday machine between her legs.

This wreaks of personal experience and I now have a greater understanding of your allegiance (and knowledge of hunting small children) involving the woman.
I would sign her praises to avoid being "mugged", too.

Side note: I think I would have had to stare at watermelons and the sky, as well.



Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

[xxlt]

(10-13-2016, 12:29 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: This wreaks of personal experience and I now have a greater understanding of your allegiance  (and knowledge of hunting small children) involving the woman.
I would sign her praises to avoid being "mugged", too.

Side note: I think I would have had to stare at watermelons and the sky, as well.



Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

You are correct, I have over 25 years of personal experience listening to the Holier than Thou choir sing their songs from the "The Clintons are Evil" songbook. My allegiance to truth, justice, and sound policy is resolute. I've pointed our Slick Willy's many shortcomings as well as his successes. I have no problem taking issue with Mrs. C when she is right of center - which is far to often. She ain't my dream candidate, but she is my candidate in this election. And, I have a sliver of hope after living through the nightmares of Reagan and two Bushes that she may exceed my expectations in a good way, just as they exceeded them by being worse than even I imagined they could be.

[Aquapod770]

(10-13-2016, 01:40 PM)xxlt Wrote: You are correct, I have over 25 years of personal experience listening to the Holier than Thou choir sing their songs from the "The Clintons are Evil" songbook. My allegiance to truth, justice, and sound policy is resolute. I've pointed our Slick Willy's many shortcomings as well as his successes. I have no problem taking issue with Mrs. C when she is right of center - which is far to often. She ain't my dream candidate, but she is my candidate in this election. And, I have a sliver of hope after living through the nightmares of Reagan and two Bushes that she may exceed my expectations in a good way, just as they exceeded them by being worse than even I imagined they could be.

[Rotobeast]

(10-13-2016, 01:40 PM)xxlt Wrote: You are correct, I have over 25 years of personal experience listening to the Holier than Thou choir sing their songs from the "The Clintons are Evil" songbook. My allegiance to truth, justice, and sound policy is resolute. I've pointed our Slick Willy's many shortcomings as well as his successes. I have no problem taking issue with Mrs. C when she is right of center - which is far to often. She ain't my dream candidate, but she is my candidate in this election. And, I have a sliver of hope after living through the nightmares of Reagan and two Bushes that she may exceed my expectations in a good way, just as they exceeded them by being worse than even I imagined they could be.

Regardless of how I may come off, I will always respect anyone's choice, and I respect it immensely if they substantiate it with facts.
You fall within the latter, no matter your preference in doomsday machines.



Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

[fredtoast]

I did not see any state secrets in any of that.

What am I missing?

[*bfine32*]

(10-13-2016, 04:25 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I did not see any state secrets in any of that.

What am I missing?

Objectivity?

[fredtoast]

(10-13-2016, 04:27 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Objectivity?

Seriously.  What state secrets were revealed?

[xxlt]

(10-13-2016, 04:03 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: Regardless of how I may come off, I will always respect anyone's choice, and I respect it immensely if they substantiate it with facts.
You fall within the latter, no matter your preference in doomsday machines.



Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

Understood. Love, peace, and Who Dey upon your house.

[xxlt]

(10-13-2016, 02:58 PM)Aquapod770 Wrote:

She has fascist leanings, but in 21st century America the average person is blind to them. Orwell and others were prophetic. I can only hope those five little knee slappers slap you upside your head and knock some sense into it.

[xxlt]

(10-13-2016, 04:25 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I did not see any state secrets in any of that.

What am I missing?

The H-virus? Vaginaphobia?

[Aquapod770]

(10-14-2016, 01:13 AM)xxlt Wrote: She has fascist leanings, but in 21st century America the average person is blind to them. Orwell and others were prophetic. I can only hope those five little knee slappers slap you upside your head and knock some sense into it.

There you go thinking it's all about right wing vs left wing (and that all opinions other than your own are horribly wrong). Really it's authoritarian vs (full) libertarian. Progressives are neo-fascist. You can call that right wing if you want, but there is no difference between Hillary's neo-fascism and Bernie's "democratic" socialism. By the way, I guarantee my sense adds up to more than yours   You seem like the kind of person who would support the firing of teachers who vote for Trump 

[Belsnickel]

(10-14-2016, 12:33 PM)Aquapod770 Wrote: There you go thinking it's all about right wing vs left wing (and that all opinions other than your own are horribly wrong). Really it's authoritarian vs (full) libertarian. Progressives are neo-fascist. You can call that right wing if you want, but there is no difference between Hillary's neo-fascism and Bernie's "democratic" socialism. By the way, I guarantee my sense adds up to more than yours   You seem like the kind of person who would support the firing of teachers who vote for Trump 

I don't think I'd call it neo-fascism. Progressives are authoritarian, but they lack the nationalistic tendencies (at least when they aren't campaigning) required to fall under the fascist umbrella.

[Aquapod770]

(10-14-2016, 12:42 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: I don't think I'd call it neo-fascism. Progressives are authoritarian, but they lack the nationalistic tendencies (at least when they aren't campaigning) required to fall under the fascist umbrella.

Fair enough, but their desire to quite all opposing viewpoints reminds me of fascism. Although that was also a favorite technique of Stalin. 

[fredtoast]

(10-14-2016, 12:45 PM)Aquapod770 Wrote: Fair enough, but their desire to quite all opposing viewpoints reminds me of fascism. 

I don't think you understand the definition of "fascism".

Based on your definition EVERY political party is fascist.

[xxlt]

(10-14-2016, 12:33 PM)Aquapod770 Wrote: There you go thinking it's all about right wing vs left wing (and that all opinions other than your own are horribly wrong). Really it's authoritarian vs (full) libertarian. Progressives are neo-fascist. You can call that right wing if you want, but there is no difference between Hillary's neo-fascism and Bernie's "democratic" socialism. By the way, I guarantee my sense adds up to more than yours   You seem like the kind of person who would support the firing of teachers who vote for Trump 

If you are equating fascism and socialism then we clearly have different understandings of what those labels mean. My meanings come from dictionary definitions, conversations with political scientists, and the study of history and the world around me. I do support a better education system for teachers and all others, and I have nothing but pity for someone who made it through college (or pre-school, for that matter) and could still give more than the briefest consideration to a vote for Trump. You will note, the only candidate in this election to talk about locking up his opponents is Mr. Trump. Guess that makes him a liberal democrat on your scorecard.  

[Aquapod770]

(10-14-2016, 03:48 PM)xxlt Wrote: If you are equating fascism and socialism then we clearly have different understandings of what those labels mean. My meanings come from dictionary definitions, conversations with political scientists, and the study of history and the world around me. I do support a better education system for teachers and all others, and I have nothing but pity for someone who made it through college (or pre-school, for that matter) and could still give more than the briefest consideration to a vote for Trump. You will note, the only candidate in this election to talk about locking up his opponents is Mr. Trump. Guess that makes him a liberal democrat on your scorecard.  

Well Trump has been a liberal most of his life up until just recently. Plus has been on both sides of many positions. I have pity for someone who can't even open themselves to the possibility that anyone with an opposing viewpoint is even remotely correct or justified in their reasoning for having those views. 

[Dill]

(10-14-2016, 03:48 PM)xxlt Wrote: If you are equating fascism and socialism then we clearly have different understandings of what those labels mean. My meanings come from dictionary definitions, conversations with political scientists, and the study of history and the world around me. I do support a better education system for teachers and all others, and I have nothing but pity for someone who made it through college (or pre-school, for that matter) and could still give more than the briefest consideration to a vote for Trump. You will note, the only candidate in this election to talk about locking up his opponents is Mr. Trump. Guess that makes him a liberal democrat on your scorecard.  

Rep