I am a holder of a security clearance. Had it for 50 years. NEVER revealed what I knew. Trump did.

Bogan

Okay, so Hillary Clinton kept 30,000 classified emails, which she had no right at all to have anyway,  on a private server, which could have hacked by hostile agaents, and probably was, but jack/excon makes no mention of this?     Joe Biden kept classified documents all over Chinatown which he had no right to possess at all, but jack/excon strangely does not mention this?    Donald Trump as an ex president had every right to posses classified documents according to the Presidential Records Act.     Of the 37 charges levelled at Trump, 36 of them are not legally going anywhere, unless the Democratic party can use their considerable influence on the judge and jury?       There is only one charge against Trump that MAY be valid, and that was where there is believed that he MIGHT have broken security by possibly showing a journalist the plans for a US attack on Iran.    But even that sounds like cr-ap because all an investigator needs to do, is sk the journo if Trump showed him or her classified documents?     The fact that this has not occurred looks fishy to me.     My thoughts are that all of these charges amount to yet another "Russia, Russia, Russia!" hoax meant to cripple Trump's renomination for President.

With now overwhelming evidence that president Joe Biden is a grifter and probably a traitor, who not only received money from the CCP, but who was involved in other bribery scandals, as well as money laundering, racketeering, perverting the course of justice, and possibly, election interference, one can only wonder at the mentality of jack/excon who seems to have a pathological hatred of the best US President since Ronald Reagan? 
The scale of the Biden family corruption is bad enough, but the fact that the FBI and the DoJ not only refused to prosecute him, it actively suppressed evidence and refused to investigate the most obvious instances of corruption by the Biden family, is now the biggest news of the century.     All I can add to this farce is that us right wingers said "we told you so!"      No matter how jack/excon or his comrades want to spin it, he supported the most corrupt President in US history while  he never stops sneering at President Trump, who wants to save the USA from these filthy rich unelected administration officials, their filthy rich big tech media mates, and the filthy rich multinationals who's CEO's live in the USA, but who's loyalty is only to their companies quarterly balance sheets. 

MichaelElpers

@jack

Shouldnt you also know that posting you hold sensitive or classified secrets online is also ill advised?

JulesKorngold

Argument Topic: "Whatabout" Biden and Hillary

The "whatabout" fallacy is a logical fallacy that is used to deflect criticism by raising a different issue. The fallacy is often used to avoid answering a question or to change the subject.

The name of the fallacy comes from the phrase "what about...?", which is often used to introduce the irrelevant issue. For example, if someone criticizes the United States for its human rights record, a person using whataboutism might respond with "what about China's human rights record?". The implication is that because China also has a poor human rights record, the United States' human rights record is not so bad.

Whataboutism is a form of the tu quoque fallacy, which means "you too" in Latin. Tu quoque fallacies are arguments that attack the character or motives of the person making the criticism, rather than addressing the criticism itself.

Whataboutism is a common fallacy in political discourse. It is often used by governments or politicians to deflect criticism from their own actions. For example, if a government is criticized for its human rights record, it might respond with "what about the human rights record of the United States?".

Whataboutism is a logical fallacy because it does not address the original criticism. It simply changes the subject to a different issue. This can be a very effective way to deflect criticism, but it does not actually address the issue at hand.

Bogan

Hi Jules.    Got it all wrong again, eh?     The USA has a two tiered system of justice where if you are a Clinton, a Biden, an ANTIFA member, or one of the Elites, then the unelected and even elected members of the US government will use their considerable power to make sure your crimes are not investigated, even to the point of hiding evidence, and refusing to follow obvious lines of inquiry.   But if you are anybody else, they will follow the letter of the law.   Unless, of course, you are a political opponent, in which case they will get creative and turn possible misdemeanors into major felonies so that they can frighten or jail their political opponents.

Anybody who has two brain cells to rub together (which automatically does not include jack/excon) can see what is happening in the USA, right now.     What bamboozles me, is how anybody can defend this indefensible situation?     Yet you defend it?     And you try and use a misdirection argument about “what if” to try and throw the hounds off the trail of logic.    Ama-a-a-a-azing.

From the glaring differences in how Hilary Clinton, Joe Biden, and Donald Trump were legally treated in cases involving classified documents, we now get the next glaring example a two tiered system of justice with Hunter Biden.     Biden is being treated for his crimes of influence peddling (which has not even been charged with), money laundering (another crime he has strangely not been charged with), a weapons violation charge that his own father made public statements about how offenders should be severely punished.   A tax evasion charge, which his own father made public statements about how tax cheats must be severely punished, by a thoroughly corrupt FBI, DoJ, and IRS, who are once again hiding evidence, intimidating investigators, and refusing to follow obvious lines of inquiry which they know will lead to the incompetent and corrupt President they and you pair wanted in power.      

If Hunter Biden was anybody else than a politically protected elite, then he would be facing very serious jail time, and everybody in the USA, with the exception of jack/excon and Juleskorngold know it.     Something is very rotten in the state of the USA, and why you pair defend the rights of elitists to be above the law, while simultaneously savagely attacking the primary presidential candidate who is being persecuted by the elites in order to stop the rot, is also beyond me?    

Does it ever enter your tiny brains that since Joe Biden is obviously corrupt, then those at the top of the food chain have him on a string?     President Biden will go along with anything that the elites want him to do because he has to.    They can “make him an offer he can’t refuse” anytime they want.    But what is worse, much worse, is that since it can now be proven that Joe was taking money from A Chinese Communist Party official, then the Chinese, who are your nation’s most dangerous adversary, have got him on a string too? 

And you guys defend Joe Biden and never cease attacking Donald Trump?     The only explanation seems to be, that you pair yourselves are members of “the swamp”, who see your future self interest in being part of an anarchic government full of corrupt totalitarian officials?

jack

Bogan said:

Okay, so Hillary Clinton kept 30,000 classified emails, which she had no right at all to have anyway,  on a private server, which could have hacked by hostile agaents, and probably was, but jack/excon makes no mention of this?    

Hello B:

Yeah, Trump is a lying cheating, SOB who purposely sold out his country, but that's ok, because of Hillary's emails.

Du*de!

excon

jack

MichaelElpers said:

@jack

Shouldnt you also know that posting you hold sensitive or classified secrets online is also ill advised?

Hello M:

That I have a clearance isn't secret..  It's what I KNOW that's secret.

excon

John_C_87

@jack

No!

I am happy to reject your official request for a firing-squad....
We are often disappointed by our parents; we are often disappointed by our children it does not mean they should be intentional lethally shot in such a way which protects the shooter in all possible legal means.
.
I believe punishment is best left in the hands of the Courts. What is made clear through all of this without doubt is that people as voters are inept at proving leaders, they pick are in fact Presidents of the United States of America. Strange story but true, I was accused of punishment at one time for according to my accuser the purpose of becoming incapable of every being a President to the United States of America. What kind of goal is that? It is the goal of someone who had never understood Constitutional rights in America or my limitation that is to be made set by law on Executive officer of the United States of America? 

John_C_87

@jack
LOL...........
I know I'm a real.....
America has not held United State Constitutional scecurity for a little over 50 years...
These two things arn't related are they? 

anarchist100

It's never too late.

John_C_87

@anarchist100
Yes...
It is sometimes to late.