15 thoughts on “Another Lie Falls”

    1. Jim shows really, really good message discipline.

      If Rand brings up a topic near and dear to Jim, Jim will respond promptly and strongly with the correct point of view. Others can weigh in, and the back-and-forth will generate a really fat thread.

      But come up with not just a strong counterargument from a partisan viewpoint, but something irrefutable or un-ignorable from a more object standpoint, Jim won’t continue arguing the topic; he will just fade away. If there is a partisan-political post from Rand that doesn’t have a good response, Jim won’t post anything — that is until there is enough time in the “spin cycle” that a counterargument is developed.

  4. It’;s becoming ever more apparent that there’s an easy way to discern the lies in this case; if Hillary Clinton said it, it’s a lie.

    BTW, it’s worth bearing in mind that her excuse, legally invalid as it is, that “it wasn’t marked classified at the time” is preposterous in another way as well; only the ORIGINATING agency can reclassify (including later marking classified). In other words, the State Department can only alter the classification (or create it) on things originating from the State Department. Therefor, it’s patently false to say this about anything from any other agency (that the state department later classified it).

    But, “patently false” seems to be Clinton’s stock in trade.

  5. This is totally unfair to Hillary. We should be looking through Donald’s emails or Palin’s. Hillary, whatever her faults, has been around long enough to automatically become president so she can rebuild America’s image in the world like Obama has.

    Besides, she’s a girl!!! Nobody can prove anything so what difference does it make? She has the secret red button to make it all better.

  6. In keeping with all the transgender stuff going on, Trump should announce that she is now a woman.

    Heads explode everywhere!

    1. That goes along with Mark Steyn’s opening line when he filled in for Rush this week. He noted that Tuesday night was historic, having seen the first person to self-identify as a woman become a [presumptive] Presidential nominee.

      Well, Donald could go her one better…

  7. Well if you want to be dunderhead could say she only replied to emails marked confidential, she actually didn’t create it and was too stupid/ technology incompetent on the reply to not quote the confidential part. I guess the original sender should be even in more trouble for marking stuff as confidential that wasn’t deemed confidential.

    1. I think her claim will be, “I have the authority to declassify”, which she does, if it was State that classified it. So it is true, and true enough for Hillary supporters, but I think the email in question was classified by DoD, thus she did not have the authority.

      1. Arguably, she may have had the authority to declassify …. but she didn’t. She does not have the authority retroactively to declassify anything.

        And it isn’t just her suborning these security breaches….there are people who SENT her the classified information that are equally guilty. Think they’re all going to take one for the crooked Clinton crime cartel? Besides Huma, of course…..I’ve never seen such a submissive personality (in every sense of the word).

  8. So, wait, something was classified CONFIDENTIAL? Seriously, in more than twenty years in this business, I’ve never seen anything classified confidential. And if I did, I’d recommend sending it by telegraph encrypted in valspeak on account of all three being as thoroughly deprecated in contemporary usage.

    Curious, that,

    1. Well I’ve seen CONFIDENTIAL. Though outside of internal State Department/government, or really specialized Email systems nothing Classified should be sent by Email at all.
      Email and any information security is incompatible. Really need to be a better system for it or regs need to be brought to the modern era. Since a file encrypted on a computer in a foreign country with a literal reading would violate ITAR/Export let alone Classified. Which with Email, any file / email could easily be sent thru a foreign server unintentionally unless everyone on the same server.

  9. The article you link to in The Observer (published by Jared Kushner, Ivanka Trump’s husband) muddles the story pretty badly by circling the after-the-fact classification marking (1/29/2016 for this 4/9/2012 email) in their image of the top of the email in question and never discusses or includes an image of the “portion marking” which is the meat of the Fox News article they reference.

    Rand, why bother linking to an article about an article (particularly one which screws things up as badly as this one does) when you can point to the original article and image of the entire email (which includes the offending portion marking) directly?

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/06/11/despite-clinton-claims-2012-email-had-classified-marking.html

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/interactive/2016/06/10/banda-email/

Comments are closed.