Clinton reveal more state secrets?

[Dill]

(10-14-2016, 12:45 PM)Aquapod770 Wrote: Fair enough, but their desire to quite all opposing viewpoints reminds me of fascism. Although that was also a favorite technique of Stalin. 

Which progressives desire to quiet all opposing viewpoints? 

[Dill]

(10-13-2016, 04:51 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Seriously.  What state secrets were revealed?

You have too look really hard and WANT to see secrets revealed.  People who don't follow foreign policy may not know that the "phone call" story was out the very week bin Laden was killed. 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/8489078/Osama-bin-Laden-killed-phonecall-by-courier-led-US-to-their-target.html

So you write up an article mentioning Hillary's mention of the phone with a big question mark--could that have been a slip???  As with the Clinton Foundation allegations of peddling influence--innuendo is already "fact."

And the result is millions of dis-informed voters find it so very very hard to choose between a competent Senator and Secretary of STate and an authoritarian who ran his business into the ground and knows nothing about foreign policy or how to pull opposing constituencies together to legislate/govern.

[Dill]

(10-12-2016, 11:35 PM)PhilHos Wrote: 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.”

Wow! That has worked to a "T".  And it shows a much better grasp of the electorate than Team Trump has ever had.

What would a hack of Trump campaign emails show--given that people Bannon and Ailes and Giuliani and Christie would likely be in the loop? Long ways from Karl Rove's leadership . . . .  

[*bfine32*]

(10-15-2016, 10:37 PM)Dill Wrote: As with the Clinton Foundation allegations of peddling influence--innuendo is already "fact."

And the result is it is millions of dis-informed voters find it so very very hard to choose between a competent Senator and Secretary of STate and an authoritarian who ran his business into the ground and knows nothing about foreign policy or how to pull opposing constituencies together to legislate/govern.

I hate when folk peddle innuendo as fact. Any current examples of this happening?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(10-15-2016, 10:37 PM)Dill Wrote: You have too look really hard and WANT to see secrets revealed.  People who don't follow foreign policy may not know that the "phone call" story was out the very week bin Laden was killed. 
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/pakistan/8489078/Osama-bin-Laden-killed-phonecall-by-courier-led-US-to-their-target.html

So you write up an article mentioning Hillary's mention of the phone with a big question mark--could that have been a slip???  As with the Clinton Foundation allegations of peddling influence--innuendo is already "fact."

And the result is it is millions of dis-informed voters find it so very very hard to choose between a competent Senator and Secretary of STate and an authoritarian who ran his business into the ground and knows nothing about foreign policy or how to pull opposing constituencies together to legislate/govern.

The movie Zero Dark Thirty revealed more "state secrets." Soon Philhos will have everyone involved in filming Zero Dark Thirty up on charges of treason. But, in a secret kangaroo court in Guantanamo so people don't learn anymore state secrets. 

Republicans are still complaining they don't know what was in the deleted emails or what happened in Benghazi, but at the same time Hillary can't keep a secret. 

[Dill]

(10-16-2016, 12:58 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Republicans are still complaining they don't know what was in the deleted emails or what happened in Benghazi, but at the same time Hillary can't keep a secret. 

Rep for this.

[Dill]

(10-15-2016, 11:43 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I hate when folk peddle innuendo as fact. Any current examples of this happening?

Examples of innuendo as fact seem to stalk the "pay-for-play" Clinton Foundation.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/06/13/did-the-clinton-foundation-raise-hundreds-of-millions-of-dollars-for-a-hospital-in-haiti-that-was-never-built/

“Hillary Clinton … took in hundreds of millions of dollars for a hospital in Haiti that went to the Clinton Foundation, that was never built — that was years ago. Where is that money?”

— Donald Trump surrogate Michael Cohen, interview on CNN, June 1

There’s a lot of criticism lodged against the Clintons for their involvement with recovery efforts in Haiti. But Cohen’s claim that Hillary Clinton raised hundreds of millions of dollars through the Clinton Foundation for a hospital that was never delivered is not credible.

[Dill]

Works the other way in the Trump camp.  Fact becomes only innuendo. Or failing that, CUT HER MIKE!

http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2016/10/14/ben-carson-msnbc-trump-groping-allegations-sot.cnn

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/441022/donald-trump-media-spokesmen-defend-indefensible

http://www.businessinsider.com/ben-carson-trump-tape-2016-10

[*bfine32*]

(10-16-2016, 01:08 AM)Dill Wrote: Examples of innuendo as fact seem to stalk the "pay-for-play" Clinton Foundation.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/06/13/did-the-clinton-foundation-raise-hundreds-of-millions-of-dollars-for-a-hospital-in-haiti-that-was-never-built/

“Hillary Clinton … took in hundreds of millions of dollars for a hospital in Haiti that went to the Clinton Foundation, that was never built — that was years ago. Where is that money?”

— Donald Trump surrogate Michael Cohen, interview on CNN, June 1

There’s a lot of criticism lodged against the Clintons for their involvement with recovery efforts in Haiti. But Cohen’s claim that Hillary Clinton raised hundreds of millions of dollars through the Clinton Foundation for a hospital that was never delivered is not credible.

So you can't think of any current examples of folks running with innuendo? If we work together we can perhaps expose them for the hypocrites they are.

[Dill]

(10-16-2016, 10:58 AM)bfine32 Wrote: So you can't think of any current examples of folks running with innuendo? If we work together we can perhaps expose them for the hypocrites they are.

Bfine, that example is hardly dead. Non-facts continue to circulate in the Right Wing bubble long after they are discredited.
Al Gore invented the Internet? Obama born in Kenya? Hillary's "stand down" order the night of the Bengazi attack? Obama trying to set off a nuke in Charleston SC?

If exposing them as hypocrites worked, Trump would not be polling 34%.

But here is some fresh innuendo for you--Trump claiming the election is rigged and Hillary was drugged during the last debate.
http://www.pennlive.com/nation-world/2016/10/trump_suggests_clinton_was_on.html

These come daily from the Trump camp, so it is hard to keep up with them.

[*bfine32*]

(10-16-2016, 04:51 PM)Dill Wrote: Bfine, that example is hardly dead. Non-facts continue to circulate in the Right Wing bubble long after they are discredited.
Al Gore invented the Internet? Obama born in Kenya? Hillary's "stand down" order the night of the Bengazi attack? Obama trying to set off a nuke in Charleston SC?

If exposing them as hypocrites worked, Trump would not be polling 34%.

But here is some fresh innuendo for you--Trump claiming the election is rigged and Hillary was drugged during the last debate.
http://www.pennlive.com/nation-world/2016/10/trump_suggests_clinton_was_on.html

These come daily from the Trump camp, so it is hard to keep up with them.

Alrighty, it's a deal. We'll look for those that run with innuendo on both sides. Let me know if you see anybody on these boards giving credit to innuendo and I'll do the same. Because those folks are what is wrong with the system

[Dill]

(10-16-2016, 06:22 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Alrighty, it's a deal. We'll look for those that run with innuendo on both sides. Let me know if you see anybody on these boards giving credit to innuendo and I'll do the same. Because those folks are what is wrong with the system

Will do, B!

[fredtoast]

(10-16-2016, 06:22 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Alrighty, it's a deal. We'll look for those that run with innuendo on both sides. Let me know if you see anybody on these boards giving credit to innuendo and I'll do the same. Because those folks are what is wrong with the system

The OP claimed Hillary revealed state secrets and I still don't see them.

[Dill]

(10-17-2016, 02:54 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The OP claimed Hillary revealed state secrets and I still don't see them.

You still don't know how to accept innuendo as fact. That's why.

[*bfine32*]

(10-17-2016, 02:54 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The OP claimed Hillary revealed state secrets and I still don't see them.

I can only assume that the OP suggests that Hills sharing the methods used to capture Osama to perhaps be sensitive in nature. WTS, I agree it seems to be quite a reach.

[*bfine32*]

(10-17-2016, 04:21 PM)Dill Wrote: You still don't know how to accept innuendo as fact. That's why.

This is absolutely hilarious, but most likely, not for the reason you think.

[*PhilHos*]

(10-17-2016, 02:54 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The OP claimed Hillary revealed state secrets and I still don't see them.

No, I didn't. I did claim that she's not to be trusted and, might I add, that only a gullible fool would think otherwise.

[*PhilHos*]

(10-17-2016, 05:31 PM)bfine32 Wrote: I can only assume that the OP suggests that Hills sharing the methods used to capture Osama to perhaps be sensitive in nature. 

'Questioned' would be the more accurate term. "... the OP questioned if Hills sharing the methods ..."

So many supposedly knowledgeable people not understanding the purpose of a question mark is scary. 

[SunsetBengal]

..

[fredtoast]

(10-20-2016, 12:40 PM)PhilHos Wrote: 'Questioned' would be the more accurate term. "... the OP questioned if Hills sharing the methods ..."

So many supposedly knowledgeable people not understanding the purpose of a question mark is scary. 

Knowledgible people know that she can not reveal MORE state secrets if she has not already revealed some.