According to the director’s of FBI own words: Secretary Clinton was “extremely careless in her handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.”
The idiotic policy of rewarding a country that invaded and dismembered our ally by initiating a “reset” policy with said country. It was idiotic because it rewarded the said country for invading and dismembering our ally.
I already proposed the alternative numerous times.
Are you seriously arguing that not rewarding an aggressor by initialing a reset policy with it is not a valid policy?
Out of curiosity, when Russia invaded and dismembered our ally Ukraine, why didn’t we initiate a reset policy with Russia?
Since when is a “reset policy” a reward?
I’m asking you what you would do, not what you wouldn’t do.
Are you saying that above and beyond “not having a reset policy”, you’d do nothing in regards to Russia invading and dismembering our allies?
From the link.
Three, if I remember.
unwilling, not unable.
I’m sorry, you initially said:
I quoted you the Director of the FBI in his own words.
Do you deny that the quote provided is accurate?
Are you saying the FBI site where the director of the FBI is quoted as saying that Hillary Clinton was “extremely careless in her handling of very sensitive, highly classified information” doesn’t reflect his words accurately?
Sure.
:rolleyes:
You aren’t making a very good case for what, to you, is an a priori assumption, I can tell you that.
Not in this thread, I don’t; no.
This thread is specifically about the relationship between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. I don’t see Hillary Clinton’s name in there at all.
Good point. It very well may be that initiating reset policy was meant as a punishment for Russia for invading and dismembering our ally.
Why didn’t we similarly punish Russia when it invaded and dismembered our ally Ukraine?
You must’ve skipped the 2nd page of this thread, where I’ve pointed out that out of the two current presidential candidates, it’s surely Mrs. Clinton (based on her extensive dealings with Mr. Putin), it is surely Mrs. Clinton who’s a patsy here.
Or maybe a “reset” is just a reset, and neither punishment nor reward. Not everything in foreign policy works on the punishment/reward axis.
You said the FBI said that Hillary lied, and the FBI did not say that Hillary lied.
So if it’s not possible with his own brand, how does he expect to bring back millions of jobs?
Ryan needs to do more than"vigorously defend NATO". He needs to clearly state that Trump is a danger to world security, and is actively aiding and abetting Russia’s foreign policy. Ryan needs to cut Trump loose - we’ve only just begun to see the damage he can cause.
McConnell needs to do more than simply bleat that"Trump is wrong about NATO, especially now that Trump has come back and effectively shit all over McConnell.
The thing is, Candidate Trump is ALREADY destabilizing the alliances of the United States. NATO depends on absolute assurances that the allied countries will support each other - not on a “maybe we will, if they pay us enough”. In world politics, uncertainty is a BAD, BAD thing. Trump is introducing uncertainty. It is very, very VERY dangerous.
It’s time for the grown up Republicans to fish or cut bait. Stop supporting this dangerous man-child, just because a minority group of your muslim-hating, immigrant-bashing party members voted for him.
Stop putting your party before your country. Your party has been effectively split and destroyed by Mr. Trump. Supporting him now will not bring it back together again.
Jesus, but Ryan is a putz with no sense of what is good for the country;
So forget about NATO, trash our trade deals… but that’s OK, because we can get some wonderful anti-gay legislation passed and make sure there are no funny people in our bathrooms.
Jesus wept.
By putting a huuuuuuuuuge surcharge on their goods to force them to come back. That’s what he said he would do with Apple. Of course, he doesn’t own Apple, and in fact doesn’t like their politics.
Are these not the quotes from Mrs Clinton’s statements?
“I never sent or received any classified material."
“Let me repeat what I have repeated for many months now, I never received nor sent any material that was marked classified."
Did the FBI investigation not conclude that Clinton both sent and received emails that were classified at the “Top Secret/Special Access Program level” and were classified at the time.
?
We should attack and dismember Hillary!
Yes, you are indeed the first one who brought Clinton into this thread.
Congratulations on your misdirection.
In the meantime, Trump is still destabilizing NATO, with potentially disastrous results. You may enjoy the scapegoating of allies and isolationist rhetoric, but most don’t. Aiding and abetting Russia’s interests may be terrific for you, but not for most.
Again, you said the FBI said that Hillary lied. Not that the FBI contradicted Hillary, or that they said something that was different than what Hillary said. A lie implies intent, and Comey very specifically avoided saying that she lied.
These things can be complicated, and it’s okay to sometimes get them wrong. I’m glad to have the opportunity to help others add to their understanding.