Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(USA Today)   No matter how you spin it, crooked Hillary is still crooked   (usatoday.com) divider line
    More: Obvious, Ivy League lawyer, Hillary, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, mobile devices, Federal Bureau of Investigation, FBI Director James, them. Clinton aides  
•       •       •

3224 clicks; posted to Politics » on 07 Sep 2016 at 7:43 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



196 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2016-09-07 3:28:08 AM  
Everyone is in on it.  Everyone.  Groundskeeper Willy even buried the hard drive.

It's so massively huge that it must get a new cover-up nickname!  Get your bids in now.  What will be the new "Watergate" term for the 21st Century?  Emailghazi isn't quite there...

But this schmuck explains why so few great writers or lawyers gave come out of Tennessee in the last 50 years certainly.
 
2016-09-07 4:14:35 AM  
Just look at the meta-tags for this headline

Hillary, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton

This means Hillary was executed 30 years ago by a Terminator and Sarah Palin is currently president.
 
2016-09-07 5:22:46 AM  
And Obama was born in Kenya, y'all. For serial.
 
2016-09-07 7:18:19 AM  
After all the crap of investigations, even by a special prosecutor, Hillary stands out as the most vetted Presidential candidate. She's not a crook according to multiple Congressional background checks. Repeating lies over and over again do not make them true.

Trump, on the other hand, is openly racist, ignorant and unstable.

The choice is simple.
 
2016-09-07 7:44:38 AM  
This is literally the liberals defense of her now.

'She's not a criminal, she didn't get away with being above the law, she's just that stupid and incompetent that what she did just looks like criminal behavior on her part'
 
2016-09-07 7:46:33 AM  
Look, if she wasn't guilty of all those things then why would this writer be writing about it?
 
2016-09-07 7:47:15 AM  

randomjsa: This is literally the liberals defense of her now.

'She's not a criminal, she didn't get away with being above the law, she's just that stupid and incompetent that what she did just looks like criminal behavior on her part'


Wrong

My liberal defense of her is, she will be a good president.
 
2016-09-07 7:48:07 AM  
The fark?  I got as far as the link to the statute that they claim doesn't require intent to violate.  Clicked the link, read the first sentence, saw "with intent".  And closed the article.

So we're just gonna lie about easily verifiable things because no1curr about the stuff Clinton actually did.

I farking hate everything.
 
2016-09-07 7:48:45 AM  
"claimed a lot of memory problems, leaving blogger Tamara Keel to write: "

Ok we're getting comments from a blogger.  This is serious.
 
2016-09-07 7:49:01 AM  
Still a gazillion times better than Trump
 
KIA
2016-09-07 7:49:20 AM  

AirForceVet: She's not a crook according to multiple Congressional background checks.


That's not the standard.

She hasn't been prosecuted for obvious wrongdoing that would have landed any normal American in jail.

Nobody's even "asking questions" anymore.  She's dishonest as hell, has sold her office and favors while Secretary of State, has violated confidences and trust, destroyed evidence and obstructed justice, lied about all of the foregoing and thinks she is getting away with it.  She cannot be allowed to hold high office again.
 
2016-09-07 7:51:31 AM  
There's even a #CrookedHillary hashtag on Twitter.

This guy really doesn't know how Twitter works.
 
2016-09-07 7:52:34 AM  
What law did she break?

That's like saying she was responsible for Benghazi because of how many investigations there were.
 
2016-09-07 7:54:08 AM  

foo monkey: There's even a #CrookedHillary hashtag on Twitter.

This guy really doesn't know how Twitter works.


There's even a #PainfulButtStuff hash that on the twitters.

A search for "Glenn Reynolds is a hack fraud" even turns up some results on google!
 
2016-09-07 7:54:57 AM  
FTFA : "She also lost a laptop and multiple Blackberries and other mobile devices"

Yep... My wife broke that same law.  She's been in prison (obviously) for the past 18-24 months.
 
2016-09-07 7:55:14 AM  
I mean, there's crooked, and then there's "Never been right about a single thing in the last 40 years and also believe in nothing that is actually real"

think I'll take a little crooked over literal fascism and 100% wrong all the time.
 
2016-09-07 7:55:48 AM  

randomjsa: This is literally the liberals defense of her now.

'She's not a criminal, she didn't get away with being above the law, she's just that stupid and incompetent that what she did just looks like criminal behavior on her part'


Your proof otherwise is earth shattering, I'm sure.

This sh*t is old and I'm about ready punch everyone bringing up this "but Hillary r crooked" garbage cuz they heard someone else say it but when pressed for any hard evidence, they proceed dance around and continue ramming their heads up their own asses.
 
2016-09-07 7:56:20 AM  

BeesNuts: foo monkey: There's even a #CrookedHillary hashtag on Twitter.

This guy really doesn't know how Twitter works.

There's even a #PainfulButtStuff hash that on the twitters.


It's my home page.
 
2016-09-07 7:58:45 AM  
If Clinton is crooked then Trump is the spawn of Pol Pot and Al Capone.
 
2016-09-07 7:58:58 AM  
Monkeys can't understand why the poo's not sticking.
 
2016-09-07 7:59:01 AM  
Between the independent investigations in the 90s, the multiple Benghazi hearings, and the email investigation, over $100 million tax dollars have been spent investigating Hillary for wrong doing.

Not a single prosecutable offense has been found. Either she is some Lex Luthor level evil supergenius or most if not all of the corruption accusations brought against her are bs.
 
2016-09-07 8:02:16 AM  

Copperbelly watersnake: Between the independent investigations in the 90s, the multiple Benghazi hearings, and the email investigation, over $100 million tax dollars have been spent investigating Hillary for wrong doing.

Not a single prosecutable offense has been found. Either she is some Lex Luthor level evil supergenius or most if not all of the corruption accusations brought against her are bs.


And either way, she's a better choice for President.
 
2016-09-07 8:03:24 AM  

KIA: AirForceVet: She's not a crook according to multiple Congressional background checks.

That's not the standard.

She hasn't been prosecuted for obvious wrongdoing that would have landed any normal American in jail.

Nobody's even "asking questions" anymore.  She's dishonest as hell, has sold her office and favors while Secretary of State, has violated confidences and trust, destroyed evidence and obstructed justice, lied about all of the foregoing and thinks she is getting away with it.  She cannot be allowed to hold high office again.


The standard appears to be "why isn't clinton answer for the made up BS that her detractors have thrown at her for 30+ years."  We get to watch the spectacle of breathless investigations into the clinton foundation which show no wrongdoing while totally ignoring her opponent whose foundation is now being criminally charged with paying off the AG of Florida.

The Clinton is probably one of the least crooked politicians currently running for office.  She came froma  middle class family and married a poor boy who made good.  Meanwhile her opponent is a silver spooned millionaire who literally lives in a gilded palace and admits to bribing officials.  Yet she is the corrupt one and he is the man of the people.

The right wing in this country is perniciously stupid, the best part of this election is watching all the "principled conservatives" here and elsewhere basically give up on every "conservative" principle to back Donald Trump.
 
2016-09-07 8:03:31 AM  
Still squeaky after all these years........
i18.photobucket.comView Full Size
 
2016-09-07 8:04:25 AM  

KIA: AirForceVet: She's not a crook according to multiple Congressional background checks.

Nobody's even "asking questions" anymore.  She's dishonest as hell, has sold her office and favors while Secretary of State, has violated confidences and trust


You guys keep saying that and the only evidence you have to show is that people kept trying to buy her with little or no return on investment.

The article's claims of "mass deletion" of emails right as news of her private server came out was a new one to me. Of course clicking the link provided lead to the CNN home page. Also, since mass deletion is in quotes, I assume nothing of the sort actually happened.

Accusations of Clinton corruption do concern me, but all the "proof" I've seen so far is circumstantial at best and always seem to come from frothing mouth loons who have shown no hesitation about lying in the past. Yes, it worries me that Clinton may use her office for personal gain. Seeing as Trump WILL use his office for personal gain, I'm still voting D in November.
 
2016-09-07 8:05:31 AM  
All part of the GOP's plan. They know they are going to lose, so it is time to:

Poison a Clinton presidency

"Some of the campaign and allies' conspiracies are designed to delegitimize her personally. Most are simply designed to spread fear and mistrust. And I am sure if she wins, the right wing will continue to spread these theories. Just because they may have zero basis in truth doesn't mean they can't be corrosive. So in this cycle I believe you have to call out the truly destructive theories calmly, but aggressively, and in real time."

Which, grifter-in-chief, will parlay into:
 

TRUMP TV!!!

Yep. Everyone who had TTV down, go ahead and collect your bets.

Continuing the fight against "Crooked Hillary" represents a potentially lucrative business opportunity wrapped in face-saving and patriotism.
 
2016-09-07 8:07:04 AM  
The media is trying unusually hard this time around to make it look like a race. Could be because the fundamentals are showing that it isn't
 
2016-09-07 8:07:51 AM  

KIA: AirForceVet: She's not a crook according to multiple Congressional background checks.

That's not the standard.

She hasn't been prosecuted for obvious wrongdoing that would have landed any normal American in jail.

Nobody's even "asking questions" anymore.  She's dishonest as hell, has sold her office and favors while Secretary of State, has violated confidences and trust, destroyed evidence and obstructed justice, lied about all of the foregoing and thinks she is getting away with it.  She cannot be allowed to hold high office again.


If the wrongdoing is so farking "obvious", professor, where's the hard evidence? And if there's hard evidence, why isn't she being prosecuted?

Oh, that's right: there isn't any. But since you know better than the head of the FBI about prosecutable activities, then maybe you should pursue a career in the law.

I always wondered about your handle. Now I know it refers to your brain.
 
2016-09-07 8:09:42 AM  

jso2897: Still squeaky after all these years........
[i18.photobucket.com image 500x379]


Damn hinges on that thing have to be shot by now
 
2016-09-07 8:10:10 AM  
...and I'll still happily choose her over whatever the fark the GOP has got going on right now.

Easy choice.
 
2016-09-07 8:11:24 AM  
I think the important question now is who isn't in on the Clinton Coverup?
 
2016-09-07 8:12:13 AM  
When asked, "Clinton could not give an example of how classification of a document was determined," the FBI recorded. Hillary could not explain what the (C) - for Confidential - classification marking at the beginning of a paragraph was. She thought it perhaps had something to do with alphabetical order.

I had a clearance for about eight years.  And I worked in a couple offices where you needed one just to get past the armed guard.

And I never saw paragraphs of a document marked classified.  Big notices at the top and bottom of the page, red stickers on hardware, yellow paper in the printers so that anything that comes out of them is visually identified as classified by color - all that all I saw.

But paragraphs A, B, and D marked classified while paragraphs G, I, and L might not be?  That I never even heard of.

But you know what does have letter identified paragraphs?  Contracts and laws - the kind of thing a lawyer and Senator like Hillary would have worked with.  Which means seeing some other document where the only indicator of classification was apparently a single (C) in front of a single paragraph and thinking it's just there for reference a.k.a "As you will see in subsection 1, paragraph C" and thinking that's what it meant isn't unreasonable.
 
2016-09-07 8:13:28 AM  
"Donald Trump likes to call his opponent, Hillary Clinton, "Crooked Hillary." There's even a #CrookedHillary hashtag on Twitter. Meanwhile, Hillary seems to be doing her best to make that nickname stick."

The person who wrote the above paragraph had their 'opinion' piece published by USA Today.

Think about that. Then maybe have a drink.
 
2016-09-07 8:13:43 AM  

BeesNuts: foo monkey: There's even a #CrookedHillary hashtag on Twitter.

This guy really doesn't know how Twitter works.

There's even a #PainfulButtStuff hash that on the twitters.

A search for "Glenn Reynolds is a hack fraud" even turns up some results on google!


I'd assume Glenn Reynolds was just being disingenuous (and considered making #GlennReynoldsCriscoBoy a thing), but then a lot of people don't know how Twitter works. And it seems more than a few don't know how knowledge works in general.

The hashtag that might mitigate the damage all these suckers might cause: #VoteOnTheNinth
 
2016-09-07 8:15:06 AM  
Conveniently enough, the FBI was unable to subject these "lost" devices - some were actually destroyed with a hammer by an aide - to forensic analysis.

If you know it was beaten with a hammer, then it wasn't 'lost', was it?  And physical destruction is a fairly standard procedure for decommissioning hardware that had been used to handle classified information.  Some tech wizard might be able to resurrect data off of a hard drive that was wiped, and it's pretty hard to look at a drive and tell if it's safe to throw away or not.

But a drive that's been broken up into a dozen different pieces?  That's a good bit harder to access.
 
2016-09-07 8:16:04 AM  
Tough choice.

"crooked Hillary" vs "Batshiat insane criminal racist tiny-handed asshat Donald"

Yes sir. that sure is a tough choice.

Whatever will we do?
 
2016-09-07 8:18:02 AM  

Karac: When asked, "Clinton could not give an example of how classification of a document was determined," the FBI recorded. Hillary could not explain what the (C) - for Confidential - classification marking at the beginning of a paragraph was. She thought it perhaps had something to do with alphabetical order.

I had a clearance for about eight years.  And I worked in a couple offices where you needed one just to get past the armed guard.

And I never saw paragraphs of a document marked classified.  Big notices at the top and bottom of the page, red stickers on hardware, yellow paper in the printers so that anything that comes out of them is visually identified as classified by color - all that all I saw.

But paragraphs A, B, and D marked classified while paragraphs G, I, and L might not be?  That I never even heard of.

But you know what does have letter identified paragraphs?  Contracts and laws - the kind of thing a lawyer and Senator like Hillary would have worked with.  Which means seeing some other document where the only indicator of classification was apparently a single (C) in front of a single paragraph and thinking it's just there for reference a.k.a "As you will see in subsection 1, paragraph C" and thinking that's what it meant isn't unreasonable.


Oh, crap, that's what those ( C ) things meant? I thought somebody was drawing a Ziggy cartoon in the email as a way to cheer me up before reading some bad news. Crap crap crap. I've got to call my lawyer :-(
 
2016-09-07 8:18:35 AM  

randomjsa: This is literally the liberals defense of her now.

'She's not a criminal, she didn't get away with being above the law, she's just that stupid and incompetent that what she did just looks like criminal behavior on her part'


What she did 'just looks like criminal behavior'.. yes! You nailed it.   She's obviously not a criminal, but what she did just looks like criminal behavior to really really dumb people. Like, all the stupidest people think 'what she did' looks criminal.  Really thick morons.
 
2016-09-07 8:19:22 AM  
Guys this is settled, Clinton by her own admission is stupid and incompetent, but not crooked.
 
2016-09-07 8:20:59 AM  

KIA: AirForceVet: She's not a crook according to multiple Congressional background checks.

That's not the standard.

She hasn't been prosecuted for obvious wrongdoing that would have landed any normal American in jail.

Nobody's even "asking questions" anymore.  She's dishonest as hell, has sold her office and favors while Secretary of State, has violated confidences and trust, destroyed evidence and obstructed justice, lied about all of the foregoing and thinks she is getting away with it.  She cannot be allowed to hold high office again.


LOL what the fark are you babbling on about?  Explain this Standard please. The one where she's crooked despite all evidence to the contrary?  That standard?
 
2016-09-07 8:21:46 AM  
As someone that watched the Republican response to the Beirut bombing and the Iran-Contra Affair, the Right can go get cancer.
 
2016-09-07 8:24:07 AM  
I Humbly Request Subby Engage in Autonecrosis
 
2016-09-07 8:26:55 AM  

tommyl66: Karac: When asked, "Clinton could not give an example of how classification of a document was determined," the FBI recorded. Hillary could not explain what the (C) - for Confidential - classification marking at the beginning of a paragraph was. She thought it perhaps had something to do with alphabetical order.

I had a clearance for about eight years.  And I worked in a couple offices where you needed one just to get past the armed guard.

And I never saw paragraphs of a document marked classified.  Big notices at the top and bottom of the page, red stickers on hardware, yellow paper in the printers so that anything that comes out of them is visually identified as classified by color - all that all I saw.

But paragraphs A, B, and D marked classified while paragraphs G, I, and L might not be?  That I never even heard of.

But you know what does have letter identified paragraphs?  Contracts and laws - the kind of thing a lawyer and Senator like Hillary would have worked with.  Which means seeing some other document where the only indicator of classification was apparently a single (C) in front of a single paragraph and thinking it's just there for reference a.k.a "As you will see in subsection 1, paragraph C" and thinking that's what it meant isn't unreasonable.

Oh, crap, that's what those ( C ) things meant? I thought somebody was drawing a Ziggy cartoon in the email as a way to cheer me up before reading some bad news. Crap crap crap. I've got to call my lawyer :-(


At the end of your post, I see the universal symbol :-( which means "Colon minus C" which is "olon".  This of course is the acronym for
OvertLy Obvious Nouns
which means if we look at the noun you used just prior ("lawyer") and break it apart ("law" and "yer") we can clearly see that yer trying to use the law for your own ends.  You might as well plead guilty.
 
2016-09-07 8:27:42 AM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2016-09-07 8:28:38 AM  

Karac: Conveniently enough, the FBI was unable to subject these "lost" devices - some were actually destroyed with a hammer by an aide - to forensic analysis.

If you know it was beaten with a hammer, then it wasn't 'lost', was it?  And physical destruction is a fairly standard procedure for decommissioning hardware that had been used to handle classified information.  Some tech wizard might be able to resurrect data off of a hard drive that was wiped, and it's pretty hard to look at a drive and tell if it's safe to throw away or not.

But a drive that's been broken up into a dozen different pieces?  That's a good bit harder to access.


So there is no official and LAWFUL procedure for decommissioning electronic devices that have held national security related communications?

We just 'hit them with a hammer' and it's all good, Federal Records Act, WTF is that?
 
2016-09-07 8:31:09 AM  

Witty_Retort: All part of the GOP's plan. They know they are going to lose, so it is time to:

Poison a Clinton presidency

"Some of the campaign and allies' conspiracies are designed to delegitimize her personally. Most are simply designed to spread fear and mistrust. And I am sure if she wins, the right wing will continue to spread these theories. Just because they may have zero basis in truth doesn't mean they can't be corrosive. So in this cycle I believe you have to call out the truly destructive theories calmly, but aggressively, and in real time."

Which, grifter-in-chief, will parlay into:
 

TRUMP TV!!!

Yep. Everyone who had TTV down, go ahead and collect your bets.

Continuing the fight against "Crooked Hillary" represents a potentially lucrative business opportunity wrapped in face-saving and patriotism.


What? A right wing media figure is in it for the grift? No. You don't say.
 
2016-09-07 8:31:10 AM  
Sure, she's obviously for sale, but she's also much less likely to blow up the world. Chalk it up to the lesser of two assholes.
 
2016-09-07 8:31:59 AM  

HotWingConspiracy: Guys this is settled, Clinton by her own admission is stupid and incompetent, but not crooked.


Don't put her in charge of the White House IT department and everything is fine.
 
2016-09-07 8:34:17 AM  

Karac: When asked, "Clinton could not give an example of how classification of a document was determined," the FBI recorded. Hillary could not explain what the (C) - for Confidential - classification marking at the beginning of a paragraph was. She thought it perhaps had something to do with alphabetical order.

I had a clearance for about eight years.  And I worked in a couple offices where you needed one just to get past the armed guard.

And I never saw paragraphs of a document marked classified.  Big notices at the top and bottom of the page, red stickers on hardware, yellow paper in the printers so that anything that comes out of them is visually identified as classified by color - all that all I saw.

But paragraphs A, B, and D marked classified while paragraphs G, I, and L might not be?  That I never even heard of.

But you know what does have letter identified paragraphs?  Contracts and laws - the kind of thing a lawyer and Senator like Hillary would have worked with.  Which means seeing some other document where the only indicator of classification was apparently a single (C) in front of a single paragraph and thinking it's just there for reference a.k.a "As you will see in subsection 1, paragraph C" and thinking that's what it meant isn't unreasonable.


Well, obviously your agency was careless. Portion marking (ie marking each paragraph) is important as it gives the reader a better understanding of which parts of a document are really classified. Without it you have to assume that everything in a document, including maybe the color of the sky on a sunny day is something that needs to remain secret. But I've seen a lot of fairly competent people that forget that stuff in e-mail so it doesn't really surprise me.
 
2016-09-07 8:34:33 AM  

randomjsa: This is literally the liberals defense of her now.

'She's not a criminal, she didn't get away with being above the law, she's just that stupid and incompetent that what she did just looks like criminal behavior on her part'


Short answer = No. Long answer = If there were ever any actual evidence of genuine corruption or crimes, we'd be following Clinton's trial, not her campaign.

"Wolf! Wolf! For Chrissake-wooooooooooollllllllllffffff!!!!! Over there, dammit-WWWWOOOOLLLLFFFFF!!!"

"Yeah-we heard you. Hope it eats you. Bye."
 
Displayed 50 of 196 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.