|
Post by Merge on Jul 30, 2016 11:47:56 GMT
Whet about all of the people who have had good experiences? Just last night a local friend posted her story on Facebook...she and some others from our town were in the process of adopting kids from Haiti when the earthquake happened there. After the earthquake, adoptions were put on hold and they were panicking, trying to get the kids out of there. They contacted a local politician, who then contacted Hillary, who helped to expedite the process. This is just one example, but surely there are many, many more like it. What happened in Benghazi was horrible, but like others have said on this topic is relevant. There have been mistakes made in politics throughout history. I personally hold the terrorist responsible for what happened, not Hillary. Could something have been done differently? Yes. Hindsight is 20/20. But I don't think that one situation should define someone's whole life and career. Those men would disagree with you. "It's about leaving Americans behind. It's about Hillary Clinton wants to become Commander in Chief and as Commander in Chief you have a responsibility to help Americans when they're overseas and she did not. And now she wants to be put in charge of the greatest military in the world? " "I'm tired of having people defend that. Hillary Clinton. Because she left us. Bottom line, she left us. I served over seas under George Bush. He never left me behind. Not one time." Kris Paronto (one of the guys who survived Benghazi) Bush sent under-trained and under-supplied soldiers to clear houses in Fallujah during a war we didn't need to be fighting. 82 were killed just in that battle. I'd argue that all of them - plus the thousands of others who lost their lives fighting an unnecessary, expensive and ultimately damaging war - were "left behind." One also wonders whether the Benghazi attackers were radicalized as a result of that war. We created ISIS.
|
|
scorpeao
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,521
Location: NorCal USA
Jun 25, 2014 21:04:54 GMT
|
Post by scorpeao on Jul 30, 2016 12:05:01 GMT
I am more worried about a woman who would use an unsecured personal server that contained top secret emails about national security (for motives that have yet to be fully revealed, 33,000 deleted/destroyed emails) and then lies about it over and over again to the American people. This alone would disqualify Donald Trump from the Presidency if he had done the same thing, but many Americans have a much lower bar for Hillary Clinton. They are used to making excuses and looking the other way for the Clinton's - it's become it's own art form. If Donald Trump were not a petulant child who routinely throws temper tantrums when things don't go his way, if he didn't openly admit that he admires dictators, and if he actually answered some of the questions about what his policy, both foreign and domestic, plans were I could maybe agree with you on this. But he's done nothing but show that he's a narcissistic, immature, demagogue...he will do NOTHING good for this country. Worst case scenario with Clinton is we have 4 more years of the same. Worst case scenario with Trump? I'm terrified to find out, and you're fooling yourself if you think he'll "make America great again." Perhaps in the next 4 years GOP can reorganize and nominate a viable candidate instead of a buffoon; one who has turned our election process into a reality show, making us the laughing stock of the world.
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Jul 30, 2016 12:13:53 GMT
Those men would disagree with you. "It's about leaving Americans behind. It's about Hillary Clinton wants to become Commander in Chief and as Commander in Chief you have a responsibility to help Americans when they're overseas and she did not. And now she wants to be put in charge of the greatest military in the world? " "I'm tired of having people defend that. Hillary Clinton. Because she left us. Bottom line, she left us. I served over seas under George Bush. He never left me behind. Not one time." Kris Paronto (one of the guys who survived Benghazi) Bush sent under-trained and under-supplied soldiers to clear houses in Fallujah during a war we didn't need to be fighting. 82 were killed just in that battle. I'd argue that all of them - plus the thousands of others who lost their lives fighting an unnecessary, expensive and ultimately damaging war - were "left behind." One also wonders whether the Benghazi attackers were radicalized as a result of that war. We created ISIS. Thank you for saying it. I considered making a similar point, but In the end, I was to lazy to deal with the potential shitstorm that might ensue. Kudos to you.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 30, 2016 12:28:33 GMT
Bush sent under-trained and under-supplied soldiers to clear houses in Fallujah during a war we didn't need to be fighting. 82 were killed just in that battle. I'd argue that all of them - plus the thousands of others who lost their lives fighting an unnecessary, expensive and ultimately damaging war - were "left behind." One also wonders whether the Benghazi attackers were radicalized as a result of that war. We created ISIS. Thank you for saying it. I considered making a similar point, but In the end, I was to lazy to deal with the potential shitstorm that might ensue. Kudos to you. Humph. Well, I'm getting on a plane fairly soon, so if they want to have a shitstorm, they'll have to have it without me. What happened in Fallujah is established fact, so I'm not sure what there is to argue about.
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Jul 30, 2016 12:36:50 GMT
Thank you for saying it. I considered making a similar point, but In the end, I was to lazy to deal with the potential shitstorm that might ensue. Kudos to you. Humph. Well, I'm getting on a plane fairly soon, so if they want to have a shitstorm, they'll have to have it without me. What happened in Fallujah is established fact, so I'm not sure what there is to argue about. In the pod, does there need to be a reason? We are still debating. Benghazi after 8 investigations.
|
|
pyccku
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,817
Jun 27, 2014 23:12:07 GMT
|
Post by pyccku on Jul 30, 2016 12:50:52 GMT
Humph. Well, I'm getting on a plane fairly soon, so if they want to have a shitstorm, they'll have to have it without me. What happened in Fallujah is established fact, so I'm not sure what there is to argue about. In the pod, does there need to be a reason? We are still debating. Benghazi after 8 investigations. Obviously, we need a 9th investigation. Just in case there is something the first 8 didn't turn up. Save
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 19, 2024 11:28:48 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2016 12:56:02 GMT
Speaking of tweets, Heir Trump can't even spell correctly AND now it appears that he's starting to complain about the debates. I'll bet a gazillion dollars his coward ass is going to try and get out of them.
|
|
tincin
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,368
Jul 25, 2014 4:55:32 GMT
|
Post by tincin on Jul 30, 2016 13:16:33 GMT
Donald Trump doesn't have the qualifications of a bona fide dog catcher, let alone president of the United States. The man is an ugly human being... and I use the term "human being" loosely. All the Hillary haters conveniently forget that fact... the man has NO qualifications... NONE! I don't think they've forgotten, they're just "tired of professional politicians." I liken that to having your neighbor repair your teeth because you're tired of professional dentists.
|
|
tincin
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,368
Jul 25, 2014 4:55:32 GMT
|
Post by tincin on Jul 30, 2016 13:27:51 GMT
In the pod, does there need to be a reason? We are still debating. Benghazi after 8 investigations. Obviously, we need a 9th investigation. Just in case there is something the first 8 didn't turn up. SavePerhaps when they are finished investigating that they could try to repeal the ACA once again. Hell if they try real hard they might even hit 100 repeat repeal attempts before the November election.
|
|
|
Post by secondlife on Jul 30, 2016 13:57:23 GMT
For me, the question would be:
Would you let a woman who doesn't qualify for a security clearance ...
be your president? Can you provide a source that says she is officially or formally disqualified from holding a security clearance? What category of clearance was she disqualified from?
|
|
|
Post by BeckyTech on Jul 30, 2016 16:08:02 GMT
Can you provide a source that says she is officially or formally disqualified from holding a security clearance? What category of clearance was she disqualified from? James Comey in his testimony before congress said that if anyone else had done what Hillary did. Anywhere from termination to severe sanctions. All would have resulted in the security clearance being revoked. I had a security clearance and believe me, anyone who had treated classified, or even sensitive, material like Hillary did would have had their clearance revoked in a New York minute and would have been terminated for cause. Of course that company took security seriously.
|
|
Nink
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,947
Location: North Idaho
Jul 1, 2014 23:30:44 GMT
|
Post by Nink on Jul 30, 2016 16:11:51 GMT
Can you provide a source that says she is officially or formally disqualified from holding a security clearance? What category of clearance was she disqualified from? James Comey in his testimony before congress said that if anyone else had done what Hillary did. Anywhere from termination to severe sanctions. All would have resulted in the security clearance being revoked. I had a security clearance and believe me, anyone who had treated classified, or even sensitive, material like Hillary did would have had their clearance revoked in a New York minute and would have been terminated for cause. Of course that company took security seriously. So, bottom line, her security clearance hasn't actually been revoked so your previous statement was incorrect.
|
|
|
Post by BeckyTech on Jul 30, 2016 16:13:50 GMT
For me, the question would be:
Would you let a woman who doesn't qualify for a security clearance ...
be your president? She has a security clearance, even though Republicans are trying to suspend it. It is Donald Trump who doesn't hold a security clearance, and who we don't know whether he would qualify, especially since he won't release his tax returns. So, would you let a man who may very well not qualify for a security clearance be your president? And her clearance should be revoked.
Trump can give the FBI his tax returns without releasing them to the world. Tax returns are NOT a requirement of applying for the job.
And what is your basis that he may not qualify for a security clearance?
The answer is no, I don't want ANY person who couldn't qualify for a security clearance to be president.
|
|
|
Post by BeckyTech on Jul 30, 2016 16:16:05 GMT
So, bottom line, her security clearance hasn't actually been revoked so your previous statement was incorrect. She would not qualify if she were to apply today, so I don't think my statement was incorrect.
|
|
|
Post by secondlife on Jul 30, 2016 16:17:44 GMT
Can you provide a source that says she is officially or formally disqualified from holding a security clearance? What category of clearance was she disqualified from? James Comey in his testimony before congress said that if anyone else had done what Hillary did. Anywhere from termination to severe sanctions. All would have resulted in the security clearance being revoked. I had a security clearance and believe me, anyone who had treated classified, or even sensitive, material like Hillary did would have had their clearance revoked in a New York minute and would have been terminated for cause. Of course that company took security seriously. I currently hold a public trust and previously held a full scope. Neither Comey nor the FBI issued those clearances. What I'm asking is not what would your agency or mine have done, my question is if the statement is she is disqualified from clearance, which clearance was she disqualified from and by whom? Comey's testimony is not the same thing. He does not have that authority to grant or revoke her clearance. OPM collects that data and each individual agency decides whether they accept that data or not. So unless she works for Comey, which she doesn't and never has, he has no authority over her clearance. That makes your statement that she is disqualified from security clearance false. Whether she should or shouldn't qualify for a clearance - well, I don't grant those so it's not my wheelhouse. But making correct statements is always helpful.
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Jul 30, 2016 16:32:45 GMT
Can you provide a source that says she is officially or formally disqualified from holding a security clearance? What category of clearance was she disqualified from? James Comey in his testimony before congress said that if anyone else had done what Hillary did. Anywhere from termination to severe sanctions. All would have resulted in the security clearance being revoked. I had a security clearance and believe me, anyone who had treated classified, or even sensitive, material like Hillary did would have had their clearance revoked in a New York minute and would have been terminated for cause. Of course that company took security seriously. The DNI refused Ryan's request to revoke her security clearance.
|
|
|
Post by BeckyTech on Jul 30, 2016 17:07:37 GMT
I currently hold a public trust and previously held a full scope. Neither Comey nor the FBI issued those clearances. What I'm asking is not what would your agency or mine have done, my question is if the statement is she is disqualified from clearance, which clearance was she disqualified from and by whom? Comey's testimony is not the same thing. He does not have that authority to grant or revoke her clearance. OPM collects that data and each individual agency decides whether they accept that data or not. So unless she works for Comey, which she doesn't and never has, he has no authority over her clearance. That makes your statement that she is disqualified from security clearance false. Whether she should or shouldn't qualify for a clearance - well, I don't grant those so it's not my wheelhouse. But making correct statements is always helpful. In my previous world, a top secret clearance (in common parlance) required investigation by the FBI. So yes, even though she or anyone else working at that level doesn't work directly for Comey, the FBI would indeed have authority over that clearance because they have to sign off on it. I really can't see the FBI giving the OKAY to anyone who treats classified information in such a careless and cavalier manner. And I wouldn't want them to. I feel like we are living in a bizarre world.
|
|
|
Post by femalebusiness on Jul 30, 2016 17:15:27 GMT
Can you provide a source that says she is officially or formally disqualified from holding a security clearance? What category of clearance was she disqualified from? James Comey in his testimony before congress said that if anyone else had done what Hillary did. Anywhere from termination to severe sanctions. All would have resulted in the security clearance being revoked. I had a security clearance and believe me, anyone who had treated classified, or even sensitive, material like Hillary did would have had their clearance revoked in a New York minute and would have been terminated for cause. Of course that company took security seriously. I'll translate for you...Hillary still has her security clearance.
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Jul 30, 2016 17:26:04 GMT
She has a security clearance, even though Republicans are trying to suspend it. It is Donald Trump who doesn't hold a security clearance, and who we don't know whether he would qualify, especially since he won't release his tax returns. So, would you let a man who may very well not qualify for a security clearance be your president? And her clearance should be revoked.
Trump can give the FBI his tax returns without releasing them to the world. Tax returns are NOT a requirement of applying for the job.
And what is your basis that he may not qualify for a security clearance?
The answer is no, I don't want ANY person who couldn't qualify for a security clearance to be president.
You think Hillary's clearance should be revoked, but it hasn't. So, your statement was incorrect. We all know you dislike Hillary, but on the Security Clearance issue, I think Trump is on much more shaky ground than Hillary, who has a security clearance, while Donald doesn't. Financial stability is one of the things they look at when issuing security clearances. That Trump potentially has a large amount of outstanding debt could have an impact on his ability to qualify for a security clearance.
|
|
|
Post by secondlife on Jul 30, 2016 17:30:31 GMT
And her clearance should be revoked.
Trump can give the FBI his tax returns without releasing them to the world. Tax returns are NOT a requirement of applying for the job.
And what is your basis that he may not qualify for a security clearance?
The answer is no, I don't want ANY person who couldn't qualify for a security clearance to be president.
You think Hillary's clearance should be revoked, but it hasn't. So, your statement was incorrect. We all know you dislike Hillary, but on the Security Clearance issue, I think Trump is on much more shaky ground than Hillary, who has a security clearance, while Donald doesn't. Financial stability is one of the things they look at when issuing security clearances. That Trump potentially has a large amount of outstanding debt could have an impact on his ability to qualify for a security clearance. The reason being - just for the sake of elaborating - is because they are looking for reasons a person might be susceptible to selling state secrets. Financial problems are a big problem for cleared professionals. However, Trump and Clinton would be on equal ground in this matter because the President's clearance is granted on the basis of being elected President. That is a strange system, I agree, but that is the fact of it.
|
|
|
Post by BeckyTech on Jul 30, 2016 17:40:58 GMT
The point still is that no one with the authority to do it has disqualified Clinton from the clearance I think it is splitting hairs to say that she is qualified to hold a security clearance of any sort. Of course she won't ever be disqualified because she is Hillary Clinton. Enough said. Any other mortal would be disqualified and having held the clearance that you did, you know that better than most.
|
|
|
Post by BeckyTech on Jul 30, 2016 17:46:51 GMT
Financial stability is one of the things they look at when issuing security clearances. That Trump potentially has a large amount of outstanding debt could have an impact on his ability to qualify for a security clearance. Correct, but Clinton's secrecy and e-mail erasure concerning the Clinton Foundation don't look good for her either. Look at all the countries she dealt with that made large donations. Nope, I would worry much more about her potentially underhanded dealings over the years as a point of blackmail than Trump being short of cash. How do I know they are underhanded? Where is all the transparency? Gone, deliberately deleted, that's where.
|
|
|
Post by mollycoddle on Jul 30, 2016 18:12:49 GMT
Financial stability is one of the things they look at when issuing security clearances. That Trump potentially has a large amount of outstanding debt could have an impact on his ability to qualify for a security clearance. Correct, but Clinton's secrecy and e-mail erasure concerning the Clinton Foundation don't look good for her either. Look at all the countries she dealt with that made large donations. Nope, I would worry much more about her potentially underhanded dealings over the years as a point of blackmail than Trump being short of cash. How do I know they are underhanded? Where is all the transparency? Gone, deliberately deleted, that's where. Well personally, I find it disturbing that Trump is reaching out to foreign politicians for cash. fortune.com/2016/06/29/donald-trump-foreign-campaign-donations/You know, I really weigh my responses on here. Sometimes I just don't want the hassle. But this is bad. And I hope that those of you who are concerned about those emails take this just as seriously.
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Jul 30, 2016 19:43:53 GMT
Or, he was weary and said the wrong name. Kinda like I sometimes call my brother by my husband's name and vice versa. I know the difference. Sometimes my tongue doesn't. There are far more legitimate things to hammer Donald Trump on than that. That makes people look petty, IMO. Now that I'm really awake, I need to add to my previous, more flippant, response. He didn't just mix up the name. He had the wrong name, the wrong state, and the wrong issues with voters. He just plain had the wrong man. And you may be more forgiving than I am, but I see it as evidence not of a brief brain blip, but of not even bothering to acquaint himself with who Hillary's running mate actually is. So there's that.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 19, 2024 11:28:48 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2016 19:52:18 GMT
Wait...what?!
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 19, 2024 11:28:48 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 30, 2016 22:20:54 GMT
Those men would disagree with you. " It's about leaving Americans behind. It's about Hillary Clinton wants to become Commander in Chief and as Commander in Chief you have a responsibility to help Americans when they're overseas and she did not. And now she wants to be put in charge of the greatest military in the world? " " I'm tired of having people defend that. Hillary Clinton. Because she left us. Bottom line, she left us. I served over seas under George Bush. He never left me behind. Not one time." Kris Paronto (one of the guys who survived Benghazi) Bush sent under-trained and under-supplied soldiers to clear houses in Fallujah during a war we didn't need to be fighting. 82 were killed just in that battle. I'd argue that all of them - plus the thousands of others who lost their lives fighting an unnecessary, expensive and ultimately damaging war - were "left behind." One also wonders whether the Benghazi attackers were radicalized as a result of that war. We created ISIS. Bush did not literally leave them behind as Hillary did. And she's asking us to put her in charge again, not Bush. General Petraeus gave the order to go. After he left, who gave the order to not go? Hillary was the highest ranking official there at the time. Why hasn't that question been answered? Among many others.
|
|
AmeliaBloomer
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,842
Location: USA
Jun 26, 2014 5:01:45 GMT
|
Post by AmeliaBloomer on Jul 30, 2016 22:40:37 GMT
Y'all are clinically obsessed.
No, I'm not saying which of y'all.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 31, 2016 0:07:47 GMT
Y'all are clinically obsessed. No, I'm not saying which of y'all. I have no idea what you're talking about. Worry not; I go back to school on August 8th so my involvement in political threads will be a lot more sporadic.
|
|
|
Post by lucillebluth on Jul 31, 2016 0:36:20 GMT
Bush sent under-trained and under-supplied soldiers to clear houses in Fallujah during a war we didn't need to be fighting. 82 were killed just in that battle. I'd argue that all of them - plus the thousands of others who lost their lives fighting an unnecessary, expensive and ultimately damaging war - were "left behind." One also wonders whether the Benghazi attackers were radicalized as a result of that war. We created ISIS. Bush did not literally leave them behind as Hillary did. And she's asking us to put her in charge again, not Bush. General Petraeus gave the order to go. After he left, who gave the order to not go? Hillary was the highest ranking official there at the time. Why hasn't that question been answered? Among many others. Wait, what? What do you mean here? After Petraeus left where? Where was Hillary the highest ranking official?
|
|
|
Post by peano on Jul 31, 2016 4:13:57 GMT
The first I heard of this was right around the time of the Brexit vote--I think it got overshadowed by that. Because my reaction was the same as yours.
|
|