Connecting the dots on Hillary Clinton

Search

New member
Joined
Jan 9, 2009
Messages
18,212
Tokens
[h=1]STATE DEPARTMENT: BENGHAZI PANEL HAS 15 HILLARY CLINTON EMAILS THAT WE DON’T[/h]
2902


3

48




gettyimages-478199790-640x427.jpg
Whitney Curtis/Getty Images

by BREITBART NEWS25 Jun 2015108

[h=2]WASHINGTON (AP) — The State Department cannot find in its records all or part of 15 work-related emails from Hillary Rodham Clinton’s private server that were released this week by a House panel investigating the 2012 attack in Benghazi, Libya, officials said Thursday.[/h]The emails all predate the Sept. 11 assault on the U.S. diplomatic facility and include scant words written by Clinton herself, the officials said. They consist of more in a series of would-be intelligence reports passed to her by longtime political confidant Sidney Blumenthal, the officials said.
Nevertheless, the fact that the State Department says it can’t find them among emails she provided surely will raise new questions about Clinton’s use of a personal email account and server while secretary of state and whether she has provided the agency all of her work-related correspondence, as she claims.
Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC)
85%





, chairman of the Select Committee on Benghazi, released a statement Thursday saying, “This confirms doubts about the completeness of Clinton’s self-selected public record and raises serious questions about her decision to erase her personal server – especially before it could be analyzed by an independent, neutral third-party arbiter.”When asked about the discrepancy, Nick Merrill, a Clinton campaign spokesman, said, “She has turned over 55,000 pages of materials to the State Department, including all emails in her possession from Mr. Blumenthal.”
Clinton is running for the 2016 Democratic presidential nomination.
Clinton’s use of the non-governmental email while in office was not publicly disclosed until earlier this year, after the committee sought her correspondence related to the Benghazi attack. She says the single account for personal and professional purposes was a matter of convenience, and says all her work emails were included in the 55,000 pages of documents she later handed over to the State Department. Emails of a personal nature were destroyed, she says.
The State Department informed the Select Benghazi Committee on Thursday that they are no longer certain that’s the case, according to officials who spoke on condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to speak publicly on the matter. The officials said Julia Frifield, the assistant secretary of state for legislative affairs, confirmed that nine emails and parts of six others that the committee made public Monday couldn’t be located in the department’s records.
As for 46 other, previously unreleased Libya-related Blumenthal emails published by the committee, officials said all are in the department’s records. They weren’t handed over to congressional investigators because they had no relevance to events in Benghazi and did not correspond to the committee’s request, the officials said. The officials added that they are willing to provide emails outside the committee’s initial request, but warned that doing so would require more time.
The emails missing from the State Department’s records include missives from Blumenthal in which he sends media accounts about the killing of one of Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi’s sons, various reports on internal politics among Libya’s rebels and news of the assassination of a former Gadhafi minister in Vienna. The last email was sent Aug. 28, 2012, two weeks before the Benghazi attack, and none focus particularly on the eastern Libyan city.
Clinton’s responses are brief. In one from August 2011, she tells Blumenthal she will be in Paris the next day to meet rebel leaders and says she had “to resort to new iPad” because she didn’t have electricity or Blackberry coverage after Hurricane Irene.
In another from March 2012, she passes on an adviser’s skepticism regarding one of Blumenthal’s reports about political intrigue in post-Gadhafi Libya, saying: “This strain credulity based on what I know. Any other info about it?”
And after a long August 2012 note from Blumenthal about Libya’s new interim President Mohamed Yousef el-Magariaf, Clinton writes: “Another keeper – thanks and please keep `em coming.” Four days later, she responds to a follow-up reports about el-Magariaf, saying: “Fascinating. I had a very good call w him.”
Clinton’s critics are likely to focus less on the substance of the emails than on the fact that they weren’t shared with the State Department.
Gowdy, a South Carolina Republican, has pressed for an explanation of why Blumenthal gave the committee emails not previously shared by the State Department. The suggestion has been that either the department or Clinton was hiding something.
Gowdy said Thursday that the emails show Clinton “was soliciting and regularly corresponding with Sidney Blumenthal – who was passing unvetted intelligence information about Libya from a source with a financial interest in the country. It just so happens these emails directly contradict her public statement that the messages from Blumenthal were unsolicited.”
Clinton aides say her submission to the department included all emails from Blumenthal and a dozen more exchanges that weren’t in the records he provided the House committee. They said some from Blumenthal’s record, which was provided as a Microsoft Word document, couldn’t be confirmed as having been sent as emails.
State Department officials also questioned the provenance of some exchanges because they weren’t formatted as emails.
 

New member
Joined
Oct 29, 2010
Messages
40,880
Tokens
Russ....life has beaten you to a pulp.

You only have a few good years left....don't you wanna think on your own for them? Do you really wanna be a sheep that only considers info from right wing sources?

Cmon....be your own man for the time you got left. You can right 70 plus years of you being wrong.
 

Rx Normal
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
51,836
Tokens
Russ, when doc mercer tells you you're wrong you know you're doing it right.

Nice detective work "connecting the dots" on this evil witch.

:toast:
 

Life's a bitch, then you die!
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
28,910
Tokens
Russ....life has beaten you to a pulp.

You only have a few good years left....don't you wanna think on your own for them? Do you really wanna be a sheep that only considers info from right wing sources?

Cmon....be your own man for the time you got left. You can right 70 plus years of you being wrong.

th
 

Life's a bitch, then you die!
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
28,910
Tokens
Poll: Sanders down by just 8 points in New Hampshire.

Hillary Clinton’s once vast advantage over independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders has shrunk to single digits in New Hampshire, according to the latest CNN/WMUR Granite State Poll released Thursday evening.

Among likely Democratic primary voters in the state, 43 percent said they would vote for Clinton, with 35 percent going for Sanders.

Can you imagine what would happen if the Democratic party actually had a real candidate?


Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/...nders-new-hampshire-119460.html#ixzz3eBy57Xta
 

New member
Joined
Jan 9, 2009
Messages
18,212
Tokens
Russ, when doc mercer tells you you're wrong you know you're doing it right.

Nice detective work "connecting the dots" on this evil witch.

:toast:

It ain't over till it's over
 

New member
Joined
Nov 10, 2010
Messages
78,682
Tokens






U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry plays with his crutches as he talks to reporters before leaving for Vienna, Austria, at Andrews Air Force Base in Washington

 

New member
Joined
Apr 29, 2012
Messages
8
Tokens
I know I'm really, really late to this party and I'm not going to impart anything to this thread but I did take the time to read through ALMOST all of this stuff. Some sad, some funny. To me I would simply call it "PAR FOR THE COURSE". Anyway...

MY ABSOLUTE FAVORITE THING IN LIFE IS POLITICAL BETTING!!!

Over the last three election cycles I have only lost one bet out of seventeen and that one was a stupid one the more I thought about it (Larry Hogan beating Martin O'Malley for Governor in Maryland). My winnings just on the Obama elections totaled five figures. Having said that, I want to make it clear that NO MATTER WHO THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE IS, I WILL BE PLACING A HEALTHY SUM OF MONEY ON THEM! Mark my words on this Sunday 6/28 June: The DEMOCRAT will WIN again! Whether you like it or not we all must accept that the Democrats will rule for the foreseeable future.
 

New member
Joined
Jan 9, 2009
Messages
18,212
Tokens
OTOPS: All this thread is about is connecting the dots to Hillary Clinton. Anyone who connects the dots can see her for what she is. She is not trustworthy, not transparent, and has in all these years accomplished nothing. If a Dem would win power to them, I have said that several times. But...Dem's are afraid if Hillary is not their candidate they might lose thus they justify Hillary for all of the wrong reasons. That is my point. If Dem's are rallying around Hillary for all the wrong reasons what are they trying to accomplish. You say NO MATTER WHO THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE IS, I WILL BE PLACING A HEALTHY SUM OF MONEY ON THEM. Are you saying that winning that bet is more important that getting this country back on track with a leader who can get it done. Priorities are what they are, what are yours. You accept that dem's will rule for the foreseeable future but many of us on here have not thrown in the towel. They have already lost the Senate and the House. Anyone who would vote for Hillary despite all the red flags has the wrong priorities and we will all pay the price. You did not say you would vote for her but you said you would bet on her. Would you vote for her? That would be par for the course. I am more worried about our foreseeable future than I am on winning a bet.
 

Life's a bitch, then you die!
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
28,910
Tokens
Hard to argue against the last two posts.

In order to win the 16 election the Silent Majority must get off their collective lazy asses and vote.

I don’t care if Granny Meaningless pulls Obama like numbers with Blacks and Hispanics, it won’t matter.

Conservatives sat out the last 2 presidential elections in record numbers but came out with vengeance in 14 and we all saw the results.

It’s all up to them. Stay home and lose or get out and vote and win. Their choise.
 

Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2006
Messages
24,884
Tokens






U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry plays with his crutches as he talks to reporters before leaving for Vienna, Austria, at Andrews Air Force Base in Washington


How fitting that this turd is now as physically feeble as he is feeble-minded.
 

New member
Joined
Apr 29, 2012
Messages
8
Tokens
OTOPS: All this thread is about is connecting the dots to Hillary Clinton. Anyone who connects the dots can see her for what she is. She is not trustworthy, not transparent, and has in all these years accomplished nothing. If a Dem would win power to them, I have said that several times. But...Dem's are afraid if Hillary is not their candidate they might lose thus they justify Hillary for all of the wrong reasons. That is my point. If Dem's are rallying around Hillary for all the wrong reasons what are they trying to accomplish. You say NO MATTER WHO THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE IS, I WILL BE PLACING A HEALTHY SUM OF MONEY ON THEM. Are you saying that winning that bet is more important that getting this country back on track with a leader who can get it done. Priorities are what they are, what are yours. You accept that dem's will rule for the foreseeable future but many of us on here have not thrown in the towel. They have already lost the Senate and the House. Anyone who would vote for Hillary despite all the red flags has the wrong priorities and we will all pay the price. You did not say you would vote for her but you said you would bet on her. Would you vote for her? That would be par for the course. I am more worried about our foreseeable future than I am on winning a bet.

First, the primary purpose of this forum is to discuss betting. Correct? (Not trying to be combative. Just making a simple observation.) For this reason alone, winning a bet is "more important" to me.

Second, I do not know who I will vote for at this point. Having said that, I am not for anybody that favors the uber-rich corporation. (Unfortunately that is what EVERY politician is.) I have very little faith in any side due to the rich puppeteers pulling the strings.

Third, politics follows in cycles. Mid-term elections often swing to the other side of the ruling party. Just the way it goes. For that reason, I wouldn't put a whole lot of weight on the fact that Republicans won the House and the Senate. As a matter of fact, if you look back at sections of the "cycle" that look like our last set of four years you will see that this past mid-term might indicate a Democratic takeover in the next set of elections. However none of us own a crystal ball and for that reason I will live by my favorite phrase, "ONLY TIME CAN TELL."

Four, I have never worried about my future being determined by any politician. One thing for sure is that I can guarantee this will never change. I have done pretty well with Bush in office, Clinton in office (actually really well but not because of him), W. Bush in office (really well (again) and definitely not because of him) and Obama in office (best of all due to the wonderful gains I have made with my investments, again, not because of him).

Lastly, I want to emphasize that I didn't come in here to be a nuisance or pick a side. I simply wanted to make a point that I think the Democrat will win the next election and there will be a lot of money to make. (I have always posted my plays in another forum but I will make a point to add them here when the time comes.)

Thanks for the conversation.
 

Member
Joined
Aug 6, 2006
Messages
24,884
Tokens
OTOPS: All this thread is about is connecting the dots to Hillary Clinton. Anyone who connects the dots can see her for what she is. She is not trustworthy, not transparent, and has in all these years accomplished nothing. If a Dem would win power to them, I have said that several times. But...Dem's are afraid if Hillary is not their candidate they might lose thus they justify Hillary for all of the wrong reasons. That is my point. If Dem's are rallying around Hillary for all the wrong reasons what are they trying to accomplish. You say NO MATTER WHO THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE IS, I WILL BE PLACING A HEALTHY SUM OF MONEY ON THEM. Are you saying that winning that bet is more important that getting this country back on track with a leader who can get it done. Priorities are what they are, what are yours. You accept that dem's will rule for the foreseeable future but many of us on here have not thrown in the towel. They have already lost the Senate and the House. Anyone who would vote for Hillary despite all the red flags has the wrong priorities and we will all pay the price. You did not say you would vote for her but you said you would bet on her. Would you vote for her? That would be par for the course. I am more worried about our foreseeable future than I am on winning a bet.

He's looking at it from the POV of his pocketbook Russ. He knows there isn't much that can be done to stop this train. It could derail and the witch still become president, even after a full-blown scandal. The country is overfilled with fucking morons.
 

Life's a bitch, then you die!
Joined
Jul 10, 2007
Messages
28,910
Tokens
First, the primary purpose of this forum is to discuss betting. Correct? (Not trying to be combative. Just making a simple observation.) For this reason alone, winning a bet is "more important" to me.

Second, I do not know who I will vote for at this point. Having said that, I am not for anybody that favors the uber-rich corporation. (Unfortunately that is what EVERY politician is.) I have very little faith in any side due to the rich puppeteers pulling the strings.

Third, politics follows in cycles. Mid-term elections often swing to the other side of the ruling party. Just the way it goes. For that reason, I wouldn't put a whole lot of weight on the fact that Republicans won the House and the Senate. As a matter of fact, if you look back at sections of the "cycle" that look like our last set of four years you will see that this past mid-term might indicate a Democratic takeover in the next set of elections. However none of us own a crystal ball and for that reason I will live by my favorite phrase, "ONLY TIME CAN TELL."

Four, I have never worried about my future being determined by any politician. One thing for sure is that I can guarantee this will never change. I have done pretty well with Bush in office, Clinton in office (actually really well but not because of him), W. Bush in office (really well (again) and definitely not because of him) and Obama in office (best of all due to the wonderful gains I have made with my investments, again, not because of him).

Lastly, I want to emphasize that I didn't come in here to be a nuisance or pick a side. I simply wanted to make a point that I think the Democrat will win the next election and there will be a lot of money to make. (I have always posted my plays in another forum but I will make a point to add them here when the time comes.)

Thanks for the conversation.

Yes it is and I have mixed emotions.

On one hand I wish you luck and on the other hand I hope you lose your shirt.
 
Joined
Dec 11, 2006
Messages
48,571
Tokens
He's looking at it from the POV of his pocketbook Russ. He knows there isn't much that can be done to stop this train. It could derail and the witch still become president, even after a full-blown scandal. The country is overfilled with fucking morons.

"overfilled with fucking morons"

I listen to Hillary. I look at her record of do nothing Senator and do nothing Secretary of State. I look at her character.

I listen to virtually any of the Republican candidates. I look at their records of accomplishment. I look at their character.

Any of those Repub candidates should trounce Hillary.

But we "are overfilled with fucking morons".
 

New member
Joined
Jan 9, 2009
Messages
18,212
Tokens
First, the primary purpose of this forum is to discuss betting. Correct? (Not trying to be combative. Just making a simple observation.) For this reason alone, winning a bet is "more important" to me.

Second, I do not know who I will vote for at this point. Having said that, I am not for anybody that favors the uber-rich corporation. (Unfortunately that is what EVERY politician is.) I have very little faith in any side due to the rich puppeteers pulling the strings.

Third, politics follows in cycles. Mid-term elections often swing to the other side of the ruling party. Just the way it goes. For that reason, I wouldn't put a whole lot of weight on the fact that Republicans won the House and the Senate. As a matter of fact, if you look back at sections of the "cycle" that look like our last set of four years you will see that this past mid-term might indicate a Democratic takeover in the next set of elections. However none of us own a crystal ball and for that reason I will live by my favorite phrase, "ONLY TIME CAN TELL."

Four, I have never worried about my future being determined by any politician. One thing for sure is that I can guarantee this will never change. I have done pretty well with Bush in office, Clinton in office (actually really well but not because of him), W. Bush in office (really well (again) and definitely not because of him) and Obama in office (best of all due to the wonderful gains I have made with my investments, again, not because of him).

Lastly, I want to emphasize that I didn't come in here to be a nuisance or pick a side. I simply wanted to make a point that I think the Democrat will win the next election and there will be a lot of money to make. (I have always posted my plays in another forum but I will make a point to add them here when the time comes.)

Thanks for the conversation.

I know this is a betting forum (check me out in college football, been around for years). I did not start coming to this part of the forum until 2009 when I realized what Obama was doing and I then connected the dots on him. Obama has done nothing to facilitate our economy. He is all about politics.

Hope you join in the college football forum. We have a good group of preseason posters on board at this point of the season, gets a little crazy once the season starts.

I use my crystal ball (along with a huge spreadsheet) on college football only. As far as elections go it is all about the turnout.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,118,698
Messages
13,558,424
Members
100,668
Latest member
willsonjames480
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com