The New Donald Trump

Discussion in 'Political Discussions' started by major56, Apr 28, 2016.

Loading...
  1. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Self-check. Um, so there.
     
  2. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator Staff Member

    My hopes for what?

    I'm so disgusted with the system right now, a part of me hopes that Hillary does get elected, so the country can truly crash and burn. Like the alcoholics say, sometimes you have to hit rock bottom before it sinks in.
     
  3. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator Staff Member

    There is absolutely, positively, no way in hell that anyone who is the target of an active FBI criminal investigation would get any sort of security clearance.

    Do you really believe otherwise??
     
  4. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Except that isn't true. But keep telling it like it isn't.
     
  5. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    I don't like her, but I don't think that another Clinton administration would mean crashing and burning. It would mean more of the same that we've gotten since the end of the Cold War: better economic conditions than Europe, but economic malaise compared with the parts of the world with spicy food and squeaky music (as an old colleague of mine used to put it).
     
  6. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator Staff Member

  7. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Thank you for a citation that illustrates my point. I do appreciate it. You CAN read, right?
     
  8. major56

    major56 Active Member

    The ongoing FBI investigation is a direct indication IMO that HRC was not fully vetted (by the Obama administration) as to her overall suitability for access to sensitive information at the onset and/or the afterward decision by the current administration to both grant and entrust a top level security clearance in lieu of likely investigative agency results. Her inabilities and historical character defect findings (e.g., Rose Law Firm billing records, cattle futures, WH travel staff firings) would have again surfaced if those agencies which conduct background investigations (OPM-Federal Investigative Services (FIS) findings, e.g., FBI, DOD, CIA, etc.) would have been legitimately measured against the probable results before granting her a TS security clearance. She was given a political pass by the Obama administration in my view. And if so, that’s why we’re where we are now re the continuing FBI criminal investigation (document /information security violations, unfiltered emails via she and her inner circle staff’s exclusive use of: 1) an unclassified personal server, 2) destroying evidence (obstruction of justice), and the 3) all-important Clinton Foundation (influence selling) looksee by the FBI). A crucial case of when key decisions are based on political expediency /convenience. Such trivializing has very possibly undermined U.S. national security interests.

    P.S. To my knowledge … Hillary’s security clearance to date has not been suspended even with the current FBI investigation. Generally an individual’s security clearance would be suspended throughout the investigation process. More politics…
     
  9. SteveFoerster

    SteveFoerster Resident Gadfly Staff Member

    Since she's being investigated for actions taken after such access was granted, this doesn't make a lot of sense.
     
  10. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    With no independent facts of your own (I have none, either), you're choosing to draw substantial conclusions. (For example, that Clinton retains her clearance because of "politics.")

    You try to speak with authority, but you have none. As an anonymous poster, the only credibility you can generate must come from other sources. And those sources, obviously, do not agree with your conclusions.

    Clinton is not the subject of a criminal investigation. She is not even the subject of the FBI's examination--although she most certainly is involved. She has not had her clearance pulled. You can claim all the politics and conspiracies you wish, but a simpler explanation is that there isn't anything here. Perhaps that will change. Perhaps not. But you don't know. As for your comments like "generally" and "usually," well, since you have no identity we can't rely on your judgment about what generally or usually happens.

    If Hillary Clinton becomes President, I'll look forward to the mea culpa. But I know we'll just get more rants about conspiracies and injustices instead. These types spent 8 years trying to de-legitimize President Obama, to the point where it hurt the nation and put politics before the people's interest. I expect nothing but more of the same if Clinton becomes President. It's the last gasp of a dying breed. Good riddance.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 2, 2016
  11. major56

    major56 Active Member

    Simply some more deep-seated hostility displayed toward anonymity via the proclaimed (600-900 personnel) Commander Douglas … that embellished claim alone offers such a high level credibility source. And of course … anonymity automatically eliminates any conception of validity or even the freedom to express one’s thoughts according to O-3 Capt (Ret) (section commander) Douglas…

    P.S. Did you bother to read the IMO or in my view as to my conclusions? Oh never mind commander…
     
  12. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator Staff Member

    That statement is so bereft of common sense, it makes my head hurt.

    In related news, Whitey Bulger was never the subject of a criminal investigation, he just happened to live in Boston during the investigation of organized crime in that city.
     
  13. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Yeah, that's an apt analogy. We'll see how it plays out.
     
  14. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    I've been 100% accurate and honest, AND put my name to everything. You're either too stubborn to admit it or too obtuse to understand. Your choice; I don't care.

    You're just an anonymous troll who is pretending to be something he is not. A real officer would not behave like you have. Self-check.
     
  15. major56

    major56 Active Member

    Accurate and honest because you say so; that’s entertaining. And with your embellished commander claims … surely you’re not considering yourself as a standard-bearer for proper officer behavior. Just more (with your name attached) absurd and volatile thinking being revealed yet again…

    My personal privacy decision does not brand me a troll, obtuse or stubborn any more than that very same anonymity option would disprove me being a former US military officer. Did you really intend to author such nonsense? If you did … you’re downright foolish. Adding that your ongoing attitudinal name-calling directed toward those who differ with your politics and opinions further exposes a pathetic and childish disposition.

    As I have said to you before Rich … we’re from different tribes. Learn to live with that. I have—it’s rather easy…
     
  16. Steve Levicoff

    Steve Levicoff Well-Known Member

    Frankly, I'm getting tired of the pissing contest between you two boys. (But I do have to give the edge to the one who is not anonymous, and not solely on that basis. Of course, if Rich ever quotes me on that, I will categorically deny it as a vicious rumor.)

    As for me, I served proudly in the Vietnam era as a C.O.* And no one in this thread would be able to refute that. Get over it.

    Now, boys, kiss and make up.
    _____________________

    * I wouldn't want to mislead anyone. For the record, my service as a C.O. was in the context of conscientious objector.
     
  17. Rich Douglas

    Rich Douglas Well-Known Member

    Which I think, given the times, was an honorable decision.

    Can't make up with an anonymous troll. Who you making up with? Besides, they live for this stuff. In his case, some wannabe who knows what he knows from the internet, reading about it while chugging Skittles and Red Bull. Nothing to see.
     

Share This Page