Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next »

Gunslinger201

Profile Information

Name: Mike
Gender: Male
Member since: Tue May 20, 2014, 12:32 PM
Number of posts: 46,361

About Me

US Navy Retired, Aerospace worker. All around good Dude. Eternal Foe of the work ethic

Journal Archives

US State Department Inspector General Contradicts What Hillary Clinton Has Been Saying



Pretty much sums up the IG report
Posted by Gunslinger201 | Tue May 31, 2016, 03:43 PM (4 replies)

50% Say Clinton Should Keep Running Even If Indicted

I'm shocked, Said Nobody

Most continue to believe likely Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton is a lawbreaker, but half of all voters also say a felony indictment shouldn’t stop her campaign for the presidency.

The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 43% of Likely U.S. Voters think Clinton should immediately stop campaigning if she is charged with a felony in connection with her use of a private e-mail server while secretary of State. Fifty percent (50%), however, think she should continue running until a court determines her guilt or innocence. (To see survey question wording, click here.)

Voters were evenly divided on this question in January, but at that time we didn’t include the name of any candidate.

Among Democratic voters, 71% believe Clinton should keep running, a view shared by only 30% of Republicans and 46% of voters not affiliated with either major party.

Forty percent (40%) of all voters say they are less likely to vote for Clinton because of the e-mail issue, while nearly half (48%) say it will have no impact on their vote. Just eight percent (8%) say the issue makes them more likely to vote for the former first lady.

Sixty-five percent (65%) consider it likely that Clinton broke the law by sending and receiving e-mails containing classified information through a private e-mail server while serving as secretary of State. This includes 47% who say it’s Very Likely. These findings are unchanged from January. Thirty percent (30%) still say Clinton is unlikely to have broken the law with the e-mail arrangement, with 16% who say it’s Not At All Likely.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics/may_2016/50_say_clinton_should_keep_running_even_if_indicted
Posted by Gunslinger201 | Tue May 31, 2016, 10:31 AM (13 replies)

Army Troops in Afghanistan release music video commemerating Memorial Day



Posted by Gunslinger201 | Tue May 31, 2016, 05:46 AM (4 replies)

Writer doesn't know why HuffPo deleted article on Impending Hillary Indictment!



WASHINGTON, D.C. — A writer for The Huffington Post is still waiting for an explanation as to why editors deleted his piece reporting that the FBI will pursue an indictment against Hillary Clinton.

Huffington Post freelance contributor Frank Huguenard, a scientist and public speaker, wrote a report for the liberal site Sunday entitled “Hillary Clinton to be Indicted On Federal Racketeering Charges.” But the piece was not up for long before the Huffington Post pulled it down and replaced it with a “404” Error screen.

“Huffpo has yet to respond to my request for an explanation,” Huguenard tweeted at this Breitbart News reporter Monday morning. “I’ve got my sources, they never asked.”

Huguenard later told Breitbart News, “I want to do another story but my HuffPo account has been temporarily disabled. Not sure what’s happening with them.”

Huffington Post Politics senior editor Sam Stein told Breitbart News that he doesn’t know why the piece was pulled.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/05/30/exclusive-huffington-post-writer-editors-deleted-my-article-on-hillarys-imminent-indictment-disabled-me-from-writing/


* if Anyone would like to read the deleted article here it is:
https://archive.is/bERJ6


Posted by Gunslinger201 | Tue May 31, 2016, 03:26 AM (13 replies)

Hillary will be indicted for Racketeering

When the FBI said they were expanding the Investigation into Public Corruption what did you think they meant?

http://m.washingtonexaminer.com/report-fbi-expands-probe-to-clinton-foundation/article/2580099

Posted by Gunslinger201 | Mon May 30, 2016, 10:13 AM (37 replies)

Look it's Godzilla!



Posted by Gunslinger201 | Sun May 29, 2016, 06:03 PM (8 replies)

'Splody head alert, Oregon Indy voters Trump 53%



https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/05/29/splodey-head-alert-oregon-poll-donald-trump-53-hillary-clinton-26-independents/
Posted by Gunslinger201 | Sun May 29, 2016, 04:27 PM (6 replies)

Political Sensitivities: US Special Operations Forces Ordered To Remove Kurdish Patches…



It is routine for Special Forces to sport the patch of the Units they are training, this is Obama being a Spineless Jellyfish (again)

American special operations forces photographed in Syria sporting patches of a Kurdish rebel group have been ordered to remove the patches because their use was "unauthorized" and "inappropriate," U.S. military officials said today.

Photos of the service members made public Thursday had outraged the Turkish government, which believes the Kurdish rebel group to be a terrorist organization in Turkey.

The photos showed American special operations forces advising Kurdish and Arab forces from the Syrian Democratic Forces near the village of Fatisah about 30 miles north of ISIS's de facto capital of Raqqah. The service members could be seen sporting what appeared to be insignia from the Kurdish People's Defense Forces, known by the initials YPG in Kurdish.

“Wearing those YPG patches was unauthorized and it was inappropriate and corrective action has been taken, and we have communicated as much to our military partners and our military allies in the region,” said Col. Steve Warren, the U.S. military spokesman in Baghdad.

Warren said the teams in Syria had been ordered to remove the patches from their uniforms. He said he was unaware of any official disciplinary action resulting from the incident. “The bottom line and the important thing is that the situation has been corrected and that we have communicated to our allies that such conduct was inappropriate and it was unauthorized," he said.

According to Warren, what made the wearing of the patches inappropriate were the “political sensitivities around the organization that that patch represents.” And those sensitivities are "with a NATO ally," said Warren, who did not specifically refer to Turkey.

Earlier Friday, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu criticized the wearing of the YPG patches by American troops as "unacceptable" given his government's belief that the group is part of the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK), which Turkey considers to be a terrorist group. Cooperation with Syrian Kurdish rebel groups to fight ISIS has been tricky for the United States which must balance the military advantage of the ground force they provide with concerns from Turkey, a fellow ally in the fight against ISIS, that sees those same groups as harmful to Turkish interests.

"In that case, we would recommend they use the patches of Daesh, al-Nusra and al-Qaeda when they go to other parts of Syria and of Boko Haram when they go to Africa," Cavusoglu said.

Warren acknowledged that the special operations teams sporting the patches were likely building on past practice of bonding with the local force they were working, much as has happened in Iraq, Afghanistan and other parts of the world. "We have to understand the guys on ground are going to do what they going to do, and they have their customs and courtesies they’ve been following for years," Warren said. "But it’s also important to understand the larger strategic context, which I think that the inappropriateness of it, that they didn’t understand that or appreciate it as they should have.”

He said that had been recognized, corrected and communicated “to our allies that we felt the patches were inappropriate because they are unauthorized, plain and simple, they’re not authorized and we’ve made the correction so everyone is moving on.”

http://abcnews.go.com/International/us-special-operations-forces-syria-photos-ordered-remove/story?id=39435919
Posted by Gunslinger201 | Sun May 29, 2016, 01:23 PM (8 replies)

Hillary and the IG



Hillary Clinton and several people who worked at the State Department refused to cooperate with the Inspector General (IG) even though the law requires them to cooperate. Hillary says she didn’t answer questions from the IG because she answered questions for others. The law certainly does not offer that option.


NLRB regulations require employees to cooperate with the IG and to provide sworn testimony (29 CFR 100.21). In a criminal investigation, the subject will be informed of the right to remain silent. However, that silence, together with other evidence, will not preclude disciplinary action. Subjects in civil and administrative cases and employees who are not subjects do not have a right to remain silent, and may be subject to discipline for refusing to cooperate with an OIG investigation.

There was essentially no Inspector General to serve as watchdog at the State Department while Clinton Served as Secretary of State. Did Hillary have an agreement with Obama not to appoint one?

Hillary and all the people who sent her classified documents also violated the law. This most likely includes people at the White House, the CIA, The Justice Department and many other federal agencies. They are also guilty.

Here is what 18 USC 798 says:


a) Whoever knowingly and willfully communicates, furnishes, transmits, or otherwise makes available to an unauthorized person, or publishes, or uses in any manner prejudicial to the safety or interest of the United States or for the benefit of any foreign government to the detriment of the United States any classified information—

(1) concerning the nature, preparation, or use of any code, cipher, or cryptographic system of the United States or any foreign government; or

(2) concerning the design, construction, use, maintenance, or repair of any device, apparatus, or appliance used or prepared or planned for use by the United States or any foreign government for cryptographic or communication intelligence purposes; or

(3) concerning the communication intelligence activities of the United States or any foreign government; or

(4) obtained by the processes of communication intelligence from the communications of any foreign government, knowing the same to have been obtained by such processes—

Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.


Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/05/hillary_and_the_ig.html#ixzz4A3GOnDMC


Posted by Gunslinger201 | Sun May 29, 2016, 09:35 AM (38 replies)

VIDEO: Democrat State Rep Barbara Norton Attacks Declaration Of Independence On House Floor

&feature=youtu.be

I have had the theory for some time that Liberals hate the "Constitution" and the "Declaration of Independence" because it was written by a bunch of rich white slaveholders. Here is an idiot proving me right AGAIN. This is Weapons Grade Stupidity! (Louisiana Statehouse)

http://thehayride.com/2016/05/video-democrat-state-rep-barbara-norton-attacks-declaration-of-independence-on-house-floor/
Posted by Gunslinger201 | Sat May 28, 2016, 07:27 AM (10 replies)
Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next »