jerseyhoya wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:lol good one jh

I came up with it by myself before going to Twitter and seeing 17 other people on my feed had already made the same joke.

Hillary Clinton ‏@HillaryClinton 4m4 minutes ago
Hillary Clinton Retweeted Donald J. Trump
Do you want to build a strawman?

smitty wrote:LG's opinion in regards to this issue would be very valuable as he is up to date on this stuff.

Mark Hammer ‏@markhammer1987
The genius of the Trump Clinton Twitter war of 2016 is that it consumes Trump's every waking minute & Clinton doesn't know it's happening.

momadance wrote:So was James Buchanan.

jerseyhoya wrote:To paraphrase Pitt from Inglorious Basterds, the gigantic orange manbaby realizes he is going to lose in November and would rather be the victim of having the nomination 'stolen' from him than lose to Hillary...Oblige him.

drsmooth wrote:

momadance wrote:So was James Buchanan.

you may still be hyperventilating about your personal circumstances, so have managed to miss my point: she is not unqualified for the office, much less profoundly unqualified. She is qualified substantially beyond the technical thresholds. the R candidate for the office is manifestly not. He is qualified to be certified for admission to a mental health facility.

CalvinBall wrote:There's a difference between qualified and was a good president

CalvinBall wrote:There's a difference between qualified and was a good president

momadance wrote:

smitty wrote:

Gimpy wrote:

smitty wrote:And we're getting a lot of different stories. Were these emails marked? Were they classified at the time she received and sent them out? I'm reading conflicting stuff about this. And these issues are critical to know in order to draw conclusions.

From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were “up-classified” to make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the e-mails were sent.

Classified information in emails is not something I'm familiar with. Were these emails marked? I'm not clear regarding what a "chain" is. I'm not certain we'll get the nitty gritty details on this since it's classified.

LG's opinion in regards to this issue would be very valuable as he is up to date on this stuff.

I have a device in my house that changes a floating point number every 30 seconds. Just to check my email you need my PIN plus that number.

drsmooth wrote:

CalvinBall wrote:There's a difference between qualified and was a good president

I don't believe our moma's listening to us, calvin

Bucky wrote:

momadance wrote:

smitty wrote:

Gimpy wrote:

smitty wrote:And we're getting a lot of different stories. Were these emails marked? Were they classified at the time she received and sent them out? I'm reading conflicting stuff about this. And these issues are critical to know in order to draw conclusions.

From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were “up-classified” to make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the e-mails were sent.

Classified information in emails is not something I'm familiar with. Were these emails marked? I'm not clear regarding what a "chain" is. I'm not certain we'll get the nitty gritty details on this since it's classified.

LG's opinion in regards to this issue would be very valuable as he is up to date on this stuff.

I have a device in my house that changes a floating point number every 30 seconds. Just to check my email you need my PIN plus that number.

60, unless you're forsaking my company

momadance wrote:

Bucky wrote:

momadance wrote:

smitty wrote:

Gimpy wrote:

smitty wrote:And we're getting a lot of different stories. Were these emails marked? Were they classified at the time she received and sent them out? I'm reading conflicting stuff about this. And these issues are critical to know in order to draw conclusions.

From the group of 30,000 e-mails returned to the State Department, 110 e-mails in 52 e-mail chains have been determined by the owning agency to contain classified information at the time they were sent or received. Eight of those chains contained information that was Top Secret at the time they were sent; 36 chains contained Secret information at the time; and eight contained Confidential information, which is the lowest level of classification. Separate from those, about 2,000 additional e-mails were “up-classified” to make them Confidential; the information in those had not been classified at the time the e-mails were sent.

Classified information in emails is not something I'm familiar with. Were these emails marked? I'm not clear regarding what a "chain" is. I'm not certain we'll get the nitty gritty details on this since it's classified.

LG's opinion in regards to this issue would be very valuable as he is up to date on this stuff.

I have a device in my house that changes a floating point number every 30 seconds. Just to check my email you need my PIN plus that number.

60, unless you're forsaking my company

If its your company, I had a variable of all zeros once.

Woody wrote:are you guys really arguing over the meaning of the word qualified

Bucky wrote:

Gimpy wrote:

Bucky wrote:

I have one of those from my job too. You guys do good work