• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

WikiLeaks Exposes Pres. Obama Lied on Hillary Clinton Emails

JasperL said:
And I'm someone who recognizes that the POTUS might have an 'official' email account and like many of us, have a second or more email addresses he'd like to keep private, if nothing else so he can actually use those accounts instead of when/if it's made public being inundated with a few thousand, maybe 10s of thousands of emails per day. Doesn't mean he's doing a thing wrong, just that the POTUS might in fact have been assigned more than one address....

Heck, lots of mortal humans nowhere near that level use aliases for email, Twitter, debating on DP..... Point is jumping straight to "he's guilty" as if that's the only possible explanation is ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Except the claim now is he didn't know about the particulars of her email setup, that it was a private server.

Obama used a pseudonym in emails with Clinton, FBI documents reveal - POLITICO

"In an April 5, 2016 interview with the FBI, Abedin was shown an email exchange between Clinton and Obama, but the longtime Clinton aide did not recognize the name of the sender.

"Once informed that the sender's name is believed to be a pseudonym used by the president, Abedin exclaimed: 'How is this not classified?'" the report says. "Abedin then expressed her amazement at the president's use of a pseudonym and asked if she could have a copy of the email."

So you're either saying that Obama didn't email Hillary a single time, for work purposes, during the entire 4 years or that he used his own personal email to email her personal email to talk about government related stuff, which isn't supposed to happen because of transparency laws. Either one you pick, Obama screwed up.
 
JasperL said:
OK, my Gmail or Macbook mail program don't show the email address unless I look for it, but maybe yours is set up differently.

And obviously I have no idea what he knew or when. It's certainly possible he lied about it.
Click to expand...

This also isn't gmail or macbook mail. This is .gov which have their own formatting so it's clear where it's coming from due to there being a full tracked database for the various global address books.
 
azgreg said:
It was sarcasm.
Click to expand...

Oh, you were being sarcastic. So you are not saying that it's no big deal since it's common for politicians to lie. Got it. Good that you recognize that he's a liar. Obviously, this one is small compared to his others.
 
Anthony60 said:
Oh, you were being sarcastic. So you are not saying that it's no big deal since it's common for politicians to lie. Got it. Good that you recognize that he's a liar. Obviously, this one is small compared to his others.
Click to expand...

The point was that all politicians lie. After reading your posts for a while now I understand why you didn't get it in the first place.
 
Surrealistik said:
Again, with respect to the title subject, damning evidence, no surprises. Jordan offers a pretty through breakdown of recent Wikileaks releases and their implications.
Click to expand...
As we know, the Democrat playbook is to deny, deny, deny, until you start to look stupid -- then you either claim that everyone does it, or that it was so long ago that people just need to move on.
 
azgreg said:
The point was that all politicians lie. After reading your posts for a while now I understand why you didn't get it in the first place.
Click to expand...

I guess you are all good with generalizing, in that every lie is the same. So, Obama lying about what he knew about Hillary's emails is the same as making a campaign promise that you never intend to keep.

Also, please explain what you saw in my posts that lead you to believe I "didn't get it in the first place". I'd like to hear that one.
 
Fishking said:
One of the details I don't see being focused on is that he used an alias. That's what you do when you know you're wrong. When you're operating on the up and up, you use your real name with your full signature line, and all that jazz. There is no doubt he knew that email address wasn't an official .gov email.

Anyone saying otherwise is either lying or they are just carrying Obama's water for him.
Click to expand...
Agreed.
azgreg said:
A politician lied. Hmmm.....that's new.
Click to expand...
Certainly not new for Obama. He's been lying since before he entered the White House.
apdst said:
He l8ed about having knowledge of a crime.
Click to expand...
There in lies the nub. A criminal president. My, shouldn't we be proud. :roll:
 
Fishking said:
One of the details I don't see being focused on is that he used an alias. That's what you do when you know you're wrong. When you're operating on the up and up, you use your real name with your full signature line, and all that jazz. There is no doubt he knew that email address wasn't an official .gov email.

Anyone saying otherwise is either lying or they are just carrying Obama's water for him.
Click to expand...

Beyond the scope of the video, but I agree, it probably should have been mentioned as something intimately related.

I do believe that TYT covered this as well; they've been pretty on top of the Wikileaks. In general the news group is of the best counterpoints to the typical accusation of progressive media being political waterboys for Clinton/Obama without exception (though yes, they do hate Trump more).
 
Last edited:
Surrealistik said:





Again, with respect to the title subject, damning evidence, no surprises. Jordan offers a pretty through breakdown of recent Wikileaks releases and their implications. The video carries on after that for reasons that are beyond me, but I could not find a more concise version (though the majority of the following dissection is quite good).

Also yes, to preempt the obvious, I agree, he should put some distance between himself and the camera.
Click to expand...


When will this desperate **** end? Trump is going to lose no matter how much crap you dig up. Get over it!
 
EnigmaO01 said:
When will this desperate **** end? Trump is going to lose no matter how much crap you dig up. Get over it!
Click to expand...

It's funny because I'm voting Hillary (who despite being horrible is certainly the lesser of two evils... while this is being reported on by a progressive news group that has no interest in Trump).

That said, I will never stop holding corporatists, false progressives and neoliberals accountable, nor should anyone else.
 
Surrealistik said:
It's funny because I'm voting Hillary (who despite being horrible is certainly the lesser of two evils... while this is being reported on by a progressive news group that has no interest in Trump).

That said, I will never stop holding corporatists, false progressives and neoliberals accountable, nor should anyone else.
Click to expand...

LOL..."the lesser of two evils" is still evil, while your positive vote for her holds no one accountable. "despite being horrible" ...why vote for horrible?
 
Schism said:
LOL..."the lesser of two evils" is still evil, while your positive vote for her holds no one accountable. "despite being horrible" ...why vote for horrible?
Click to expand...

Because voting for someone horrible keeps someone untenable out of office.
 
Surrealistik said:
Beyond the scope of the video, but I agree, it probably should have been mentioned as something intimately related.

I do believe that TYT covered this as well; they've been pretty on top of the Wikileaks. In general the news group is of the best counterpoints to the typical accusation of progressive media being political waterboys for Clinton/Obama without exception (though yes, they do hate Trump more).
Click to expand...

Well, it was a video that didn't have Chunk on it, being the doucheface that he is, with a face that wants to be punched, so it's a huge step of for the TYT channel.
 
Fishking said:
Well, it was a video that didn't have Chunk on it, being the doucheface that he is, with a face that wants to be punched, so it's a huge step of for the TYT channel.
Click to expand...

Cenk has a hell of a temper and gets seriously, unbearably ugly when his red lines are crossed, but denigrating him over flaws that are ultimately outweighed by the value of his organization (including WolfPAC) and insight into American politics is a step too far.

I can see loathing him if he often strikes firm positions you vehemently disagree on that are a matter of value judgement (as opposed to things where one side can be factually proven right/wrong) as he can and does dial up the smarm/contempt to 11 in those cases, which I also don't really agree with, much as I find it occasionally amusing.
 
Surrealistik said:
Cenk has a hell of a temper and gets seriously, unbearably ugly when his red lines are crossed, but denigrating him over flaws that are ultimately outweighed by the value of his organization (including WolfPAC) and insight into American politics is a step too far.

I can see loathing him if he often strikes firm positions you vehemently disagree on that are a matter of value judgement (as opposed to things where one side can be factually proven right/wrong) as he can and does dial up the smarm/contempt to 11 in those cases, which I also don't really agree with, much as I find it occasionally amusing.
Click to expand...

Eh...I find his analysis heavy on the smarm and weak on the actual analysis, to the point of utter misrepresentation. I also find it difficult to respect any channel that names itself after a group that committed genocide.
 
Fishking said:
Eh...I find his analysis heavy on the smarm and weak on the actual analysis, to the point of utter misrepresentation. I also find it difficult to respect any channel that names itself after a group that committed genocide.
Click to expand...

Depends on what he's analyzing; when it comes to social justice stories I largely agree with you.
 
Andy McCarthy, who has analyzed this subject in a long series of articles at National Review, wrote a long time ago that he suspected one reason Obama was shielding Clinton was that he himself was implicated, by receiving and responding to certain of her e-mails, in her criminal mishandling of government information. This new revelation is evidence his suspicion was justified. By having his Attorney General rig things to assure Clinton would not be prosecuted for violating the Espionage Act, Obama was covering his backside as well as hers. This is a case of two damned Marxist liars doing what comes naturally to them.
 
apdst said:
He's above the law. Laws are for the littoe people.

We all know his sychophants are going to ignore it.
Click to expand...

It is simply another example of why it is irrational to place faith in the statements of known liars, pathological liars. Sadly, the state of the nation these days.
 
JasperL said:
I'm just pointing out what you can probably see with your own email manager - the email address doesn't show on mine for the vast majority of emails, even from accounts that are not in my address book. All I see without purposely looking is the name of the person or business or whatever. TBH I don't care a whole lot - already voted....
Click to expand...

when you reply it shows the name and email address.

It is very hard to miss.
 
matchlight said:
Andy McCarthy, who has analyzed this subject in a long series of articles at National Review, wrote a long time ago that he suspected one reason Obama was shielding Clinton was that he himself was implicated, by receiving and responding to certain of her e-mails, in her criminal mishandling of government information. This new revelation is evidence his suspicion was justified. By having his Attorney General rig things to assure Clinton would not be prosecuted for violating the Espionage Act, Obama was covering his backside as well as hers. This is a case of two damned Marxist liars doing what comes naturally to them.
Click to expand...

Considering the totality of the two cases, I wonder which was worse.

Was what happened after the Watergate break in worse than what has happened in this case?
 
Obama and Hillary may hate one another, but they share one trait in common.
They are both Bold-Faced Liars; always were, and always will be.

A match made in hell!
 
Roger1 said:
Obama and Hillary may hate one another, but they share one trait in common.
They are both Bold-Faced Liars; always were, and always will be.

A match made in hell!
Click to expand...

And you're a rabid partisan hack. What else is new?
 
Anthony60 said:
I guess you are all good with generalizing, in that every lie is the same. So, Obama lying about what he knew about Hillary's emails is the same as making a campaign promise that you never intend to keep.

Also, please explain what you saw in my posts that lead you to believe I "didn't get it in the first place". I'd like to hear that one.
Click to expand...

No small wonder many voters care not for either Clinton or Trump.

Ask yourself these questions:

1. Who is actually sending out these WiKiLeaks?

2. Who will be the beneficiaries (meaning more than one) of these leaks?

Once you figure out the correct answers you may find yourself rethinking.

What I find surprising is how naive many of our politicians are especially at the Federal level on email security.
 
Glowpun said:
No small wonder many voters care not for either Clinton or Trump.

Ask yourself these questions:

1. Who is actually sending out these WiKiLeaks?

2. Who will be the beneficiaries (meaning more than one) of these leaks?

Once you figure out the correct answers you may find yourself rethinking.

What I find surprising is how naive many of our politicians are especially at the Federal level on email security.
Click to expand...

Where ever they are coming from, you can't just ignore the content. Ask yourself something, are they true emails or have they been doctored?
 
Anthony60 said:
Where ever they are coming from, you can't just ignore the content. Ask yourself something, are they true emails or have they been doctored?
Click to expand...

Yeah. You can tell how truly guilty these people are because every time these emails get released they try changing the subject to Russia Hacked them, Russia is trying to influence the election, Trump instigated the Russians to hack the emails and who knows if these emails are real or if they have been doctored. Anything they can do to bide time until November 8th is over, then they can put the FBI and the DOJ in charge of finding out the truth (haha). Donna Brazile was really doing the fast shuffle with Megyn Kelly the other night and then proof came out that her emails could not have been doctored.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom