Bengazi hearings.

[Necrosis]

Actually I think gross negligence is punishable. I posted the legal definition earlier.

For what? LOLOLOLOLOLOL.

Should she have been standing at the gates with mjolnir and a vibranium shield ready to fight to the death?

[LurkerNoMore]

Actually I think gross negligence is punishable. I posted the legal definition earlier.

Is that why God is punishing you?  Gross negligence of common sense?

The only thing Clinton is guilty of is striking fear in the hearts of little whining ass Repubs.

[iwantmass]

Is that why God is punishing you?  Gross negligence of common sense?

The only thing Clinton is guilty of is striking fear in the hearts of little whining ass Repubs.

I don't think that is all she guilty of, but I'm glad you are blind to the atrocities of your own party.  I also don't think she should be convicted of anything for this, but that doesn't mean she doesn't have fault.

A good comparison is oj Simpson.   I certainly think he murdered 2 ppl but I don't think he should have been found guilty in the court of law, given the evidence.

Now I ask you a 3rd time, are you claiming she is innocent or that this was a massive waste of time?

[240 is Back]

Now I ask you a 3rd time, are you claiming she is innocent or that this was a massive waste of time?

innocent of what?

1)  Hilary personally issued a stand down order, in order to allow those 4 heroes to be killed?

OR

2) hilary didn't tell the american people the exact motives of the bad guys immediately after the attacks?


Cause last year, all we heard was #1, that hilary let them die.

NOT it's all about either 2) hilary didn't tell us why they attacked

[iwantmass]

innocent of what?

1)  Hilary personally issued a stand down order, in order to allow those 4 heroes to be killed?

OR

2) hilary didn't tell the american people the exact motives of the bad guys immediately after the attacks?


Cause last year, all we heard was #1, that hilary let them die.

NOT it's all about either 2) hilary didn't tell us why they attacked

You didn't hear that from me so I don't know how that applies from what I asked.  As stated earlier, I think her or someone else or a combination of both did the job poorly.  That isn't a crime to me.  The only thing I think she is guilty of is lying.  I'm just wondering why you and the other liberals act like she has clean hands in this.  There is a world of difference in clean hands and guilt in a court hearing

[Straw Man]

You didn't hear that from me so I don't know how that applies from what I asked.  As stated earlier, I think her or someone else or a combination of both did the job poorly.  That isn't a crime to me.  The only thing I think she is guilty of is lying.  I'm just wondering why you and the other liberals act like she has clean hands in this.  There is a world of difference in clean hands and guilt in a court hearing

why don't you just go ahead and tell us what you imagine she is "guilty" of doing

you've got the data from all the various investigations so just lay it out for us rather than asking us to guess what you're thinking

[iwantmass]

why don't you just go ahead and tell us what you imagine she is "guilty" of doing

you've got the data from all the various investigations so just lay it out for us rather than asking us to guess what you're thinking

I've already done that but reading comprehension doesn't seem to be your strong suit .  I think she blamed a video for the attack when she knew full well that the video had nothing to do with it.  That in itself is only a lie, but when coupled with the liberal's tendency to constantly fault racism, sexism, or whatever other -ism they can use to steer away from the truth, the dishonesty has a larger meaning to me.  You and the other liberals don't care because you are guilty of the same finger pointing anytime you can't win an argument or get your way.  That is fine as you are not a public official.  I hold her to a higher standard as it was a lie that steered the narrative to being an attack in response to anti-Muslim rhetoric.

For the 5th time, she is guilty of no crime in court but her hands aren't clean here

[Straw Man]

I've already done that but reading comprehension doesn't seem to be your strong suit .  I think she blamed a video for the attack when she knew full well that the video had nothing to do with it.  That in itself is only a lie, but when coupled with the liberal's tendency to constantly fault racism, sexism, or whatever other -ism they can use to steer away from the truth, the dishonesty has a larger meaning to me.  You and the other liberals don't care because you are guilty of the same finger pointing anytime you can't win an argument or get your way.  That is fine as you are not a public official.  I hold her to a higher standard as it was a lie that steered the narrative to being an attack in response to anti-Muslim rhetoric.

For the 5th time, she is guilty of no crime in court but her hands aren't clean here

and we've been over that a million times

the rest of your statement is an indication of your real issue which is your preconceived belief that liberals constantly fault various "isms"

again, we're right back to conservatives pre-fabricated rage about things they imagine to be real and their need to assign that rage to some event or person no matter how fucking ridiculous

thanks for playing the part of the perfect right wing idiot

[iwantmass]

and we've been over that a million times

the rest of your statement is an indication of your real issue which is your preconceived belief that liberals constantly fault various "isms"

again, we're right back to conservatives pre-fabricated rage about things they imagine to be real and their need to assign that rage to some event or person no matter how fucking ridiculous

thanks for playing the part of the perfect right wing idiot

You didn't have to dig in my paragraph to find that I don't like finger pointing to an -ism being a point of most liberal arguments. In the very week where the clock boy gets a visit to the white house from obama after bringing a clock that look like, well....a bomb, I'm going to make those accusations.  It's one thing for you to support your party, it's another to deny their faults.  Sorry to tell you this, keep wearing your rose colored glasses all you want, but libreals used racism for any anti-obama issue and they are already using sexism for hillary.

Thanks for playing the part of the left wing idiot

[Straw Man]

You didn't have to dig in my paragraph to find that I don't like finger pointing to an -ism being a point of most liberal arguments. In the very week where the clock boy gets a visit to the white house from obama after bringing a clock that look like, well....a bomb, I'm going to make those accusations.  It's one thing for you to support your party, it's another to deny their faults.  Sorry to tell you this, keep wearing your rose colored glasses all you want, but libreals used racism for any anti-obama issue and they are already using sexism for hillary.

Thanks for playing the part of the left wing idiot

Hilarious

I'm surprised you didn't resort to the "I'm rubber you're glue defense"

I've already addressed Hilarys changing story about the catalyst for the attack in multiple posts in this thread and it's obvious that your real issue are your preconceived and imaginary grievances about "libs" (and the irony is the Hilary isn't even a lib)

[iwantmass]

Hilarious

I'm surprised you didn't resort to the "I'm rubber you're glue defense"

I've already addressed Hilarys changing story about the catalyst for the attack in multiple posts in this thread and it's obvious that your real issue are your preconceived and imaginary grievances about "libs" (and the irony is the Hilary isn't even a lib)

So you have no comment on the clock boy getting an invite to the white house. Got it.  If I see liberals use those tactics, I will call em out.  You are in complete denial if you think obama's campaign hasn't been tainted with all of his racial bullshit issues ranging from the Harvard professor, trayvon martin, to even mike brown.  He has a history of involving himself in what he assumes to be racial issues without knowing the facts.   I know you aren't very intelligent and you are used to debating coach, but even you can figure some of that out

Secondly, I've been courteous and honest enough to spell out my thoughts on this. I'll ask you to tell me exactly why you think hillary lied, if you even think she lied.  All I see you do otherwise in this thread is beat around the bush. I want your clear cut answer to why you think she blamed the video.   I have no concern for fault or criminal hearings

[240 is Back]

some getbiggers (not you, older ones) were claiming hilary did a 'stand down' order.

in my opinion, there may have been one - but it'd have to come from obama, not hilary.   troops were an hour away, and they bravely fought for 7 hours... you can't tell me they didn't stand down.

BUT gowdy, issa, and the inneffective republicans were unable to prove shit.  So, like other president before, when widely suspected of letting shit happen for whatever reason, they get away with it.

The new repub anger of "why didn't you tell us instantly what bad guys did what" is laughable because they were all about secrecy during Bush era, and suddenly it angers them.  IMO, they're mad because they couldn't prove anything here, and hilary comes out of this looking better than before, how in the F, I don't know.

Gowdy may as well be on clinton's payroll - he's 45 and looked flustered, sweaty and exhausted after badgering hilary for 11 hours.  SHE is 70, and looked composed and was taking victory laps afterwards.

[iwantmass]

some getbiggers (not you, older ones) were claiming hilary did a 'stand down' order.

in my opinion, there may have been one - but it'd have to come from obama, not hilary.   troops were an hour away, and they bravely fought for 7 hours... you can't tell me they didn't stand down.

BUT gowdy, issa, and the inneffective republicans were unable to prove shit.  So, like other president before, when widely suspected of letting shit happen for whatever reason, they get away with it.

The new repub anger of "why didn't you tell us instantly what bad guys did what" is laughable because they were all about secrecy during Bush era, and suddenly it angers them.  IMO, they're mad because they couldn't prove anything here, and hilary comes out of this looking better than before, how in the F, I don't know.

Gowdy may as well be on clinton's payroll - he's 45 and looked flustered, sweaty and exhausted after badgering hilary for 11 hours.  SHE is 70, and looked composed and was taking victory laps afterwards.

i think she lied about the motive of the attack. Any of us here are only speculating as to her motive.  I don't think she did anything else that was unethical.  Now as to strawman's dumbass denying that liberals don't play the -ism fiddle a whole lot, that would be like me denying conservative politicians don't sleeze their way into their voter base with their fake religious beliefs.   

[240 is Back]

so we are mad that a politician didn't immediately reveal the motive of the attackers, when the attackers were still at large.

think about how often police give false info to allow the main suspect to get comfy, and sloppy?  The moment you say "so-and-so did it!", then so-and-so lawyers up, disappears, etc.

Blaming a video, who knows, maybe that's a strategy for all we  know.   the bad guys stay out in the open?

[iwantmass]

so we are mad that a politician didn't immediately reveal the motive of the attackers, when the attackers were still at large.

think about how often police give false info to allow the main suspect to get comfy, and sloppy?  The moment you say "so-and-so did it!", then so-and-so lawyers up, disappears, etc.

Blaming a video, who knows, maybe that's a strategy for all we  know.   the bad guys stay out in the open?

I'm not mad about any of it.  She behaved like a politician as did trey Gowdy and his whole panel.  It just seems to be rather often that posters on this board blast conservatives for being dishonest when hillary seems to be the most dishonest of the bunch In many ways.  Additionally, all the pandering to Muslims in this country as a previously mentioned -ism that the liberals lIke to resort to so often seems to fit this scenario.   I don't think they said it was a video to trip up the guilty party.  You are equating politicians to detectives on a crime stopping spree and that isn't the case here.  If you guys don't like posters such as coach and the former 333... fella posting  1 sided arguments, I would expect your behavior to hold up to your own standard

[Straw Man]

i think she lied about the motive of the attack. Any of us here are only speculating as to her motive.  I don't think she did anything else that was unethical.  Now as to strawman's dumbass denying that liberals don't play the -ism fiddle a whole lot, that would be like me denying conservative politicians don't sleeze their way into their voter base with their fake religious beliefs.   

I've addressed Hillary's alleged "lie" already in this thread

Here is just one example

no it's not a lie unless she knew it was false

if she thought it was AQ on the day it happened and later was getting intel saying it was something else then it's not a lie

also, governments have no obligation to tell the truth about everything to everyone all the time or at any given time. 
if they had some strategic reason to call it something else then so be it.  Governments do that all the time.  You may not like it but it's not a crime

and again, what the fuck does it matter??

I don't give a rats ass about clock boy an not even sure why you brought it up

it that an example of one of your "isms"

if so, which one

why don't you go ahead and lay out that entire premise in it's own thread with specific examples

[iwantmass]

I've addressed Hillary's alleged "lie" already in this thread

Here is just one example

I don't give a rats ass about clock boy an not even sure why you brought it up

it that an example of one of your "isms"

if so, which one

why don't you go ahead and lay out that entire premise in it's own thread with specific examples

You are as simple minded as they come.  Clock boy was made a victim because liberals said he was targeted due to being Muslim.  I question how you can't figure that out yourself.  As a result he got to meet the president and liberals boo hoo-ed for him.  Even bill Maher cautioned liberals to exercise more common sense in the situation.  It's because it looked like a bomb.

And no, the quote above does not state whether you think she was lying or not.   You skirt around the issue and don't address it head on. You stated that she wasn't lying if she didn't know it to be false.  It's your way of dodging the issue and attempting to live up to your screen name.  You aren't smart enough to use a strawman argument successfully.  Come up with a new name if this is the best you got

[Straw Man]

You are as simple minded as they come.  Clock boy was made a victim because liberals said he was targeted due to being Muslim.  I question how you can't figure that out yourself.  As a result he got to meet the president and liberals boo hoo-ed for him.  Even bill Maher cautioned liberals to exercise more common sense in the situation.  It's because it looked like a bomb.

And no, the quote above does not state whether you think she was lying or not.   You skirt around the issue and don't address it head on. You stated that she wasn't lying if she didn't know it to be false.  It's your way of dodging the issue and attempting to live up to your screen name.  You aren't smart enough to use a strawman argument successfully.  Come up with a new name if this is the best you got

it's very simple

this is your idiotic premise and I'm not going to make any assumptions about it

btw  genius, I didn't use any strawman argument (do you even know the definition)

I don't think she lying and I don't care if she is and I've explained why

wtf does the clock kid have to do with Hilary again?

[iwantmass]

it's very simple

this is your idiotic premise and I'm not going to make any assumptions about it

btw  genius, I didn't use any strawman argument (do you even know the definition)

I don't think she lying and I don't care if she is and I've explained why

wtf does the clock kid have to do with Hilary again?

Clock kid has to do with your assertion that conservatives believe liberals to use -ism arguments falsely.  That is one example that liberals do in fact rely on -isms in spite of you claiming to be imaginary.

Apparently you need to look up the definition of a strawman argument yourself, chief.   You tried to explain to us the definition of a "lie" versus telling us whether you think she lied.  While I'll admit it's a poor argument, as I already did above, you certainly attempted to evade and rely on slight of hand. Everyone here has a firm grasp of what a lie is from the time they are 2.  We didn't need your narrative on the matter.

And finally, you actually gave an answer to the question directly.  You don't think she lied, which is what I thought, and nor do you care, which I also thought.  That implies nothing she would do would lose your favor for her.

You need to stick to ripping into coach.  You are way outta your iq range on this one

[Straw Man]

Clock kid has to do with your assertion that conservatives believe liberals to use -ism arguments falsely.  That is one example that liberals do in fact rely on -isms in spite of you claiming to be imaginary.

Apparently you need to look up the definition of a strawman argument yourself, chief.   You tried to explain to us the definition of a "lie" versus telling us whether you think she lied.  While I'll admit it's a poor argument, as I already did above, you certainly attempted to evade and rely on slight of hand. Everyone here has a firm grasp of what a lie is from the time they are 2.  We didn't need your narrative on the matter.

And finally, you actually gave an answer to the question directly.  You don't think she lied, which is why I thought, and nor do you care, which I also thought.  That implies nothing she would do would lose your favor for her.

You need to stick to ripping into coach.  You are way outta your iq range on this one

my premise?

dude you're lost

I don't know if Hilary lied or not about the reason for the attack and I don't care if she did

go look up Straw Man argument because you truly haven't got a clue

[iwantmass]

my premise?

dude you're lost

I don't know if Hilary lied or not about the reason for the attack and I don't care if she did

go look up Straw Man argument because you truly haven't got a clue

Nice rebuttle.  You have an opinion of whether she lied, and you said you don't think she did.  That's all I wanted from you, to admit your bias and it wouldn't change your opinion. One way or the other.

And while you've proven you aren't smart, at least you were smart enough to leave the clock kid example alone. That issue is a perfect example of the Liberal behavior that you deny exist.

[LurkerNoMore]

For someone claiming other people are not very smart and making remarks about their IQ...   there's a whole lot of misspellings and bad grammar in their posts.

Projections are a bitch.    Just saying....

[iwantmass]

For someone claiming other people are not very smart and making remarks about their IQ...   there's a whole lot of misspellings and bad grammar in their posts.

Projections are a bitch.    Just saying....

Well, I was awaiting your participation, and I gotta say I'm a bit disappointed.  Commenting on my spelling while I type on my phone and have no desire to correct it implies nothing about my iq or the strength of the argument.  It does however imply that your argument is weak and you are grasping at straws. 

If I wasn't smart and had nothing to contribute to the body of an argument, I suppose I too would use your tactic and try to scrutinize grammar and spelling

[LurkerNoMore]

So sorry your phone is from 1990.  The ones today have auto spellcheck.  Get with the times maybe?

So sorry that you have to tune into GB on your phone while away from home because your real life is that dull, because you are that 'net addicted, or you just don't have internet at home or work.

Projections......   strong stuff.

[iwantmass]

So sorry your phone is from 1990.  The ones today have auto spellcheck.  Get with the times maybe?

So sorry that you have to tune into GB on your phone while away from home because your real life is that dull, because you are that 'net addicted, or you just don't have internet at home or work.

Projections......   strong stuff.

Wow, you are a fragile one. I'm going to continue to type on my phone/computer depending on the circumstance, and I'll let you point out my grammatical/spelling errors (which you didn't do and i don't care to look).  I'll just continue to dominate your mind in the debates and let you have the grammar/spelling victory.  

You have nothing left.  You are a sissy.  You might as well let someone slap you in the face like 240 and walk off if you haven't already done such before.