Hillary Clinton lies about Congressional subpoena.

[Oldstyle]

I'm amused that Fat Bastard now isn't giving the site origins from which he's pulling his nonsense. Gee, are they THAT bad!

You are pissed because I am kicking you lying ass by going to Google and pasting in the first 4 or 5 article and what why you defenders of the pedophile party can't say I cherry picked.

I go to Google and past in links to the articles that prove ***** like you are liars.

Listen, you corporate-whoring mouth-breather, you shouldn't have entered this battle of wits unarmed.

You keep coming back and you keep getting your lying ass handed to you.

Don't you think it would be best if you stop being a miserable pig rapist for at least a couple days.

Battle of wits? With you? I hate to point out the obvious, Sparky but you think you "win" when you post things about people sucking dick! You're a rather disgusting perv with a penchant for surfing the web's more liberally slanted sites for misleading statistics that bolster your partisan viewpoint.

 

[Interpol]

When questioned by CNN's Brianna Keiler about deleting emails Clinton replied that she had done what other Secretaries of State before her had done. Keilar replied, "They used a personal server, and while facing a subpoena, deleted emails from them?” Clinton's retort? “You know, you’re starting with so many assumptions," Clinton responded. "I’ve never had a subpoena, there’s nothing -- again, let’s take a deep breath here."

Gosh the nerve of that Keiler! Asking Hillary a hardball question like that!

Clinton has told so many lies about what led up to Benghazi...how her State Department reacted to the crisis as it unfolded...and how they did their best to try and coverup the debacle and blame it on a You Tube video that her credibility is in tatters at this point.

When you're a liberal and you can't get CNN to play ball with you...then you KNOW that you're in deep shit!

The problem with the OP's narrative is that we now know the You Tube video indeed was used as the catalyst for that specific attack. Seven different congressional investigations all admitted as much as well as clearing Secretary Clinton and President Obama of any wrongdoing.

No previous Secretary of State ever saved personal e-mails. God knows what they ever said in any of them that could be construed as "in the public interest." Who cares what these people say? It's what they do that matters. In putting together his options, we learned for a fact that our leading General in charge of AFRICOM at the time expressly gave the President the advice to stand down in Benghazi, swallow the loss, but don't risk losing any others (which would have been done by chopper at night).

I think that was sensible advice. You know, Democrats used to be the more weak-kneed party on foreign policy, but that's just not true anymore. This Benghazi thing with many of our Republican friends reveals how fragile they are about something that every reasonable adult understands perfectly well, which is that sometimes bad shit happens. Bad shit happens to kill innocent Americans abroad under every President. There's really no need to remain so melodramatic as to blame your own country for Benghazi happening instead of blaming the people who actually did it.

 

[Oldstyle]

When questioned by CNN's Brianna Keiler about deleting emails Clinton replied that she had done what other Secretaries of State before her had done. Keilar replied, "They used a personal server, and while facing a subpoena, deleted emails from them?” Clinton's retort? “You know, you’re starting with so many assumptions," Clinton responded. "I’ve never had a subpoena, there’s nothing -- again, let’s take a deep breath here."

Gosh the nerve of that Keiler! Asking Hillary a hardball question like that!

Clinton has told so many lies about what led up to Benghazi...how her State Department reacted to the crisis as it unfolded...and how they did their best to try and coverup the debacle and blame it on a You Tube video that her credibility is in tatters at this point.

When you're a liberal and you can't get CNN to play ball with you...then you KNOW that you're in deep shit!

The problem with the OP's narrative is that we now know the You Tube video indeed was used as the catalyst for that specific attack. Seven different congressional investigations all admitted as much as well as clearing Secretary Clinton and President Obama of any wrongdoing.

No previous Secretary of State ever saved personal e-mails. God knows what they ever said in any of them that could be construed as "in the public interest." Who cares what these people say? It's what they do that matters. In putting together his options, we learned for a fact that our leading General in charge of AFRICOM at the time expressly gave the President the advice to stand down in Benghazi, swallow the loss, but don't risk losing any others (which would have been done by chopper at night).

I think that was sensible advice. You know, Democrats used to be the more weak-kneed party on foreign policy, but that's just not true anymore. This Benghazi thing with many of our Republican friends reveals how fragile they are about something that every reasonable adult understands perfectly well, which is that sometimes bad shit happens. Bad shit happens to kill innocent Americans abroad under every President. There's really no need to remain so melodramatic as to blame your own country for Benghazi happening instead of blaming the people who actually did it.

Are you kidding me? When did any Congressional investigation determine that the YouTube video was the catalyst for the attack in Benghazi? When were Clinton and Obama cleared of any "wrongdoing"? Seriously...how did you arrive at THAT?

No previous Secretary of State ever used a private e-mail server to keep their e-mails from scrutiny by Congress. Condi Rice certainly didn't! She used a State Department e-mail address. Clinton deliberately chose to do ALL of her e-mails...both personal and those dealing with State Department issues on a server that she controlled at her own private residence! She also deliberately chose to hide that fact from Congressional investigators. Then when they did learn that she had been using a private server she erased tens of thousands of those e-mails instead of turning them over to Congressional investigators.

Sometimes bad shit happens? That's your excuse for the debacle that took place in Benghazi? An Al Queda affiliated terror group killed a US Ambassador inside of one of our consulates. It's not "melodramatic" to point that out and ask why it happened? It's also not "melodramatic" to demand that officials in the Executive Branch give us honest answers about how they have conducted themselves. THAT is the reason why they are required by law not to hide documents from Congress.

As far as blaming the ones who did it? The Obama Administration is the one who blamed someone who had nothing to do with the attack on Benghazi! They knew within 48 hours of the attack that it wasn't a protest over the YouTube video that turned violent and yet they continued that narrative that it was for the better part of a week until leaks made that fiction totally unsustainable.

 

[Papageorgio]

When questioned by CNN's Brianna Keiler about deleting emails Clinton replied that she had done what other Secretaries of State before her had done. Keilar replied, "They used a personal server, and while facing a subpoena, deleted emails from them?” Clinton's retort? “You know, you’re starting with so many assumptions," Clinton responded. "I’ve never had a subpoena, there’s nothing -- again, let’s take a deep breath here."

Gosh the nerve of that Keiler! Asking Hillary a hardball question like that!

Clinton has told so many lies about what led up to Benghazi...how her State Department reacted to the crisis as it unfolded...and how they did their best to try and coverup the debacle and blame it on a You Tube video that her credibility is in tatters at this point.

When you're a liberal and you can't get CNN to play ball with you...then you KNOW that you're in deep shit!

The problem with the OP's narrative is that we now know the You Tube video indeed was used as the catalyst for that specific attack. Seven different congressional investigations all admitted as much as well as clearing Secretary Clinton and President Obama of any wrongdoing.

No previous Secretary of State ever saved personal e-mails. God knows what they ever said in any of them that could be construed as "in the public interest." Who cares what these people say? It's what they do that matters. In putting together his options, we learned for a fact that our leading General in charge of AFRICOM at the time expressly gave the President the advice to stand down in Benghazi, swallow the loss, but don't risk losing any others (which would have been done by chopper at night).

I think that was sensible advice. You know, Democrats used to be the more weak-kneed party on foreign policy, but that's just not true anymore. This Benghazi thing with many of our Republican friends reveals how fragile they are about something that every reasonable adult understands perfectly well, which is that sometimes bad shit happens. Bad shit happens to kill innocent Americans abroad under every President. There's really no need to remain so melodramatic as to blame your own country for Benghazi happening instead of blaming the people who actually did it.

The You Tube video? It had nothing to do with the attack and the Obama Administration has backed way off of that narrative.

Your excusing Hillary for the email debacle is amusing. Most people keep emails to cya. Hillary deleted emails to cya.

 

[usmcstinger]

cl

After she left the post; a subpoena was served on THE DEPARTMENT. Not on Clinton. Evidently you do not fact check your statements. The subpoena was to Hillary. The subpoena is on line dumb one. Read it.

link?

Find it yourself. If you can't, get a kid in 6th grade to help you. Are you really this Dysfunctional ?

 

[Camp]

cl

After she left the post; a subpoena was served on THE DEPARTMENT. Not on Clinton. Evidently you do not fact check your statements. The subpoena was to Hillary. The subpoena is on line dumb one. Read it.

link?

Find it yourself. If you can't, get a kid in 6th grade to help you. Are you really this Dysfunctional ?

You just don't want to produce it because you know it was sent via e-mail and never handed directly to Clinton. There is proof it was sent to a lawyers office, but no proof Clinton ever saw it.
There was no request in the subpoena for Clinton to show up anywhere. That portion of the subpoena is left blank. The materials requested were turned over on time. There was no reason for Clinton to have any knowledge of the alleged subpoena.

 

[Papageorgio]

cl

After she left the post; a subpoena was served on THE DEPARTMENT. Not on Clinton. Evidently you do not fact check your statements. The subpoena was to Hillary. The subpoena is on line dumb one. Read it.

link?

Find it yourself. If you can't, get a kid in 6th grade to help you. Are you really this Dysfunctional ?

You just don't want to produce it because you know it was sent via e-mail and never handed directly to Clinton. There is proof it was sent to a lawyers office, but no proof Clinton ever saw it.
There was no request in the subpoena for Clinton to show up anywhere. That portion of the subpoena is left blank. The materials requested were turned over on time. There was no reason for Clinton to have any knowledge of the alleged subpoena.

It was served to her lawyers which is normal once legal counsel is involved.

So, the lawyer represents Hillary and will inform Hillary that she was served and then work on how to react.

Spare the semantics, she knew she was served and any court of law would recognize the fact the attorney was served, they she was served.

Your lack of knowledge in law is noted.

 

[francoHFW]

Only bought off RW HS grad charlatans tell the truth...lol

Truth? You're the fraud that claims to have a Masters in history but can't write a coherent sentence and didn't know that dissertations are what you write for a Doctorate and a thesis is what you write for a Masters! You wouldn't know "truth" if it bit you on the ass!

You're a gd moron, brainwashed, functional, or not. LOL. U of R, 1990. A dissertation can also be what I write for idiot RWers to prove something to you, dingbat. IF I cared. Ay caramba.

 

[francoHFW]

Watch the idiot dupes go on and on and on about total bs while their heroes steal them blind and wreck the world. Ignorant jackasses...

 

[browsing deer]

Isn't this pure Clinton? Gowdy fails to lay a glove on her as to anything having to do with anything about the emails, probably because there's nothing of substance to the gop's charges, and then she goes off an lies, stupidly, about not being subpoenaed.

So she is either a congenital liar or she has something to hide. Which is it?

This is what is called a false dichotomy. She can be, actually is, both.

 

[Oldstyle]

cl

After she left the post; a subpoena was served on THE DEPARTMENT. Not on Clinton. Evidently you do not fact check your statements. The subpoena was to Hillary. The subpoena is on line dumb one. Read it.

link?

Find it yourself. If you can't, get a kid in 6th grade to help you. Are you really this Dysfunctional ?

You just don't want to produce it because you know it was sent via e-mail and never handed directly to Clinton. There is proof it was sent to a lawyers office, but no proof Clinton ever saw it.
There was no request in the subpoena for Clinton to show up anywhere. That portion of the subpoena is left blank. The materials requested were turned over on time. There was no reason for Clinton to have any knowledge of the alleged subpoena.

So you're claiming that Clinton didn't know that she'd been subpoenaed by Congress? Even though she'd been deliberately hiding materials from Congress? Really, Camp? How would she NOT know?

 

[Oldstyle]

Only bought off RW HS grad charlatans tell the truth...lol

Truth? You're the fraud that claims to have a Masters in history but can't write a coherent sentence and didn't know that dissertations are what you write for a Doctorate and a thesis is what you write for a Masters! You wouldn't know "truth" if it bit you on the ass!

You're a gd moron, brainwashed, functional, or not. LOL. U of R, 1990. A dissertation can also be what I write for idiot RWers to prove something to you, dingbat. IF I cared. Ay caramba.

So you did write a dissertation for that Masters that you claim you got from the University of Rochester? Amazing stuff, Franco! You're the only guy in academics that did doctoral work for a Masters! Duh?

 

[Camp]

cl

After she left the post; a subpoena was served on THE DEPARTMENT. Not on Clinton. Evidently you do not fact check your statements. The subpoena was to Hillary. The subpoena is on line dumb one. Read it.

link?

Find it yourself. If you can't, get a kid in 6th grade to help you. Are you really this Dysfunctional ?

You just don't want to produce it because you know it was sent via e-mail and never handed directly to Clinton. There is proof it was sent to a lawyers office, but no proof Clinton ever saw it.
There was no request in the subpoena for Clinton to show up anywhere. That portion of the subpoena is left blank. The materials requested were turned over on time. There was no reason for Clinton to have any knowledge of the alleged subpoena.

So you're claiming that Clinton didn't know that she'd been subpoenaed by Congress? Even though she'd been deliberately hiding materials from Congress? Really, Camp? How would she NOT know?

A good lawyer would leave those questions in the realm where you currently are, speculation and not provable one way or the other. Attorney client privilege would prevent a usable conclusion from being made.

 

[Oldstyle]

cl

After she left the post; a subpoena was served on THE DEPARTMENT. Not on Clinton. Evidently you do not fact check your statements. The subpoena was to Hillary. The subpoena is on line dumb one. Read it.

link?

Find it yourself. If you can't, get a kid in 6th grade to help you. Are you really this Dysfunctional ?

You just don't want to produce it because you know it was sent via e-mail and never handed directly to Clinton. There is proof it was sent to a lawyers office, but no proof Clinton ever saw it.
There was no request in the subpoena for Clinton to show up anywhere. That portion of the subpoena is left blank. The materials requested were turned over on time. There was no reason for Clinton to have any knowledge of the alleged subpoena.

Let's cut right to the chase here, Camp...

When Congress asked for all material relevant to Benghazi from Hillary Clinton...did she or did she not fail to tell them about all of the e-mails dealing with Benghazi that were on her private server?

Did she or did she not then erase all of those e-mails even though she had to have known that they were EXACTLY what Congressional investigators wanted to see?

 

[francoHFW]

Only bought off RW HS grad charlatans tell the truth...lol

Truth? You're the fraud that claims to have a Masters in history but can't write a coherent sentence and didn't know that dissertations are what you write for a Doctorate and a thesis is what you write for a Masters! You wouldn't know "truth" if it bit you on the ass!

You're a gd moron, brainwashed, functional, or not. LOL. U of R, 1990. A dissertation can also be what I write for idiot RWers to prove something to you, dingbat. IF I cared. Ay caramba.

So you did write a dissertation for that Masters that you claim you got from the University of Rochester? Amazing stuff, Franco! You're the only guy in academics that did doctoral work for a Masters! Duh?

We were talking about a dessertation I would write HERE to try and prove I have a masters lol, IF I CARED. Has NOTHING to do with all that academic stuff, you obsesssive moron. Get a life lol...

 

[Oldstyle]

cl

After she left the post; a subpoena was served on THE DEPARTMENT. Not on Clinton. Evidently you do not fact check your statements. The subpoena was to Hillary. The subpoena is on line dumb one. Read it.

link?

Find it yourself. If you can't, get a kid in 6th grade to help you. Are you really this Dysfunctional ?

You just don't want to produce it because you know it was sent via e-mail and never handed directly to Clinton. There is proof it was sent to a lawyers office, but no proof Clinton ever saw it.
There was no request in the subpoena for Clinton to show up anywhere. That portion of the subpoena is left blank. The materials requested were turned over on time. There was no reason for Clinton to have any knowledge of the alleged subpoena.

So you're claiming that Clinton didn't know that she'd been subpoenaed by Congress? Even though she'd been deliberately hiding materials from Congress? Really, Camp? How would she NOT know?

A good lawyer would leave those questions in the realm where you currently are, speculation and not provable one way or the other. Attorney client privilege would prevent a usable conclusion from being made.

A good lawyer would not receive a subpoena for a client and not inform them! It's laughable that you think that's what took place here.

And attorney client privilege could not be invoked if an attorney was asked by the court if they did indeed tell their client that they had been subpoenaed.

 

[Oldstyle]

Only bought off RW HS grad charlatans tell the truth...lol

Truth? You're the fraud that claims to have a Masters in history but can't write a coherent sentence and didn't know that dissertations are what you write for a Doctorate and a thesis is what you write for a Masters! You wouldn't know "truth" if it bit you on the ass!

You're a gd moron, brainwashed, functional, or not. LOL. U of R, 1990. A dissertation can also be what I write for idiot RWers to prove something to you, dingbat. IF I cared. Ay caramba.

So you did write a dissertation for that Masters that you claim you got from the University of Rochester? Amazing stuff, Franco! You're the only guy in academics that did doctoral work for a Masters! Duh?

We were talking about a dessertation I would write HERE to try and prove I have a masters lol, IF I CARED. Has NOTHING to do with all that academic stuff, you obsesssive moron. Get a life lol...

All that academic "stuff"? LOL You don't have the faintest idea about all that academic "stuff" because you're one of the least academic individuals posting on this board.

 

[francoHFW]

cl

After she left the post; a subpoena was served on THE DEPARTMENT. Not on Clinton. Evidently you do not fact check your statements. The subpoena was to Hillary. The subpoena is on line dumb one. Read it.

link?

Find it yourself. If you can't, get a kid in 6th grade to help you. Are you really this Dysfunctional ?

You just don't want to produce it because you know it was sent via e-mail and never handed directly to Clinton. There is proof it was sent to a lawyers office, but no proof Clinton ever saw it.
There was no request in the subpoena for Clinton to show up anywhere. That portion of the subpoena is left blank. The materials requested were turned over on time. There was no reason for Clinton to have any knowledge of the alleged subpoena.

So you're claiming that Clinton didn't know that she'd been subpoenaed by Congress? Even though she'd been deliberately hiding materials from Congress? Really, Camp? How would she NOT know?

Hillary wasn't subpoenaed until AFTER she deleted her private e-mails like all before her. The gov't ones are with the state dept. Jeebus fecking christ. And there's no scandal to HIDE. Pub dupe idiocy.

 

[francoHFW]

Only bought off RW HS grad charlatans tell the truth...lol

Truth? You're the fraud that claims to have a Masters in history but can't write a coherent sentence and didn't know that dissertations are what you write for a Doctorate and a thesis is what you write for a Masters! You wouldn't know "truth" if it bit you on the ass!

You're a gd moron, brainwashed, functional, or not. LOL. U of R, 1990. A dissertation can also be what I write for idiot RWers to prove something to you, dingbat. IF I cared. Ay caramba.

So you did write a dissertation for that Masters that you claim you got from the University of Rochester? Amazing stuff, Franco! You're the only guy in academics that did doctoral work for a Masters! Duh?

We were talking about a dessertation I would write HERE to try and prove I have a masters lol, IF I CARED. Has NOTHING to do with all that academic stuff, you obsesssive moron. Get a life lol...

All that academic "stuff"? LOL You don't have the faintest idea about all that academic "stuff" because you're one of the least academic individuals posting on this board.

Thank you. ASSHOLE. lol. The better to get thru your incredibly thick skulls. But that doesn't appear to be possible. Talk about not being able to see the forest for the trees...

 

[Oldstyle]

cl

After she left the post; a subpoena was served on THE DEPARTMENT. Not on Clinton. Evidently you do not fact check your statements. The subpoena was to Hillary. The subpoena is on line dumb one. Read it.

link?

Find it yourself. If you can't, get a kid in 6th grade to help you. Are you really this Dysfunctional ?

You just don't want to produce it because you know it was sent via e-mail and never handed directly to Clinton. There is proof it was sent to a lawyers office, but no proof Clinton ever saw it.
There was no request in the subpoena for Clinton to show up anywhere. That portion of the subpoena is left blank. The materials requested were turned over on time. There was no reason for Clinton to have any knowledge of the alleged subpoena.

So you're claiming that Clinton didn't know that she'd been subpoenaed by Congress? Even though she'd been deliberately hiding materials from Congress? Really, Camp? How would she NOT know?

Hillary wasn't subpoenaed until AFTER she deleted her private e-mails like all before her. The gov't ones are with the state dept. Jeebus fecking christ. And there's no scandal to HIDE. Pub dupe idiocy.

Did Clinton know about the e-mails on her private server? Obviously she did because it's HER private server! So when Congress asked for all relevant information related to Behghazi...why did Clinton fail to tell them about her e-mails on that private server? Why was it necessary for Congressional investigators to get a subpoena to force her to turn over something that she should have done when they first requested that information?