Maybe they were trying to "lock it down" because there was a history of people leaking Trump's conversations. The memo itself was classified. So what's the problem with securing it in a classified system? And now we've all seen the memo. Schiff has obviously known the content of the conversation for over a month, so where is the cover up?
LOL you are such a sad pathetic man. Keep on telling yourself Trump is innocent.
Translation: I'm too fucking stupid to respond with anything intelligent. So I, the dumbfuck who loves to swallow like a bitch (Trump told Cohen to lie to Congress) will call you a sad and pathetic, because seriously, I've got nothing and my talking points don't cover what you said.
Just read the headline. Tell me Bob, what AM radio talk show did you get that insight from?
Not being a dumbfuck like you Hondo, I'm able to think for myself.
Now stop being a fucking Kunt and give me the name of that "prosecutor" who put Clinton under oath.
Be honest Bob. Where did you get the headline from?
Go fuck yourself. Back up your fucking mouth for once in your pathetic life and tell us the name of the "prosecutor" who you claim put Clinton under oath before they had possession of the blue dress. You said it you pathetic fucking moron, back it up.
Just read the headline. Tell me Bob, what AM radio talk show did you get that insight from?
Not being a dumbfuck like you Hondo, I'm able to think for myself.
Now stop being a fucking Kunt and give me the name of that "prosecutor" who put Clinton under oath.
Be honest Bob. Where did you get the headline from?
Go fuck yourself. Back up your fucking mouth for once in your pathetic life and tell us the name of the "prosecutor" who you claim put Clinton under oath before they had possession of the blue dress. You said it you pathetic fucking moron, back it up.
Bob playing word semantics. As always. When he realizes he's fucking dumb. And has no clue what the topic is even about.
Come on Bob, I share my source of information. Why are you always afraid to share your source??? I'm genuinely curious where you got that thought process from.
Just read the headline. Tell me Bob, what AM radio talk show did you get that insight from?
Not being a dumbfuck like you Hondo, I'm able to think for myself.
Now stop being a fucking Kunt and give me the name of that "prosecutor" who put Clinton under oath.
Be honest Bob. Where did you get the headline from?
Go fuck yourself. Back up your fucking mouth for once in your pathetic life and tell us the name of the "prosecutor" who you claim put Clinton under oath before they had possession of the blue dress. You said it you pathetic fucking moron, back it up.
Bob playing word semantics. As always. When he realizes he's fucking dumb. And has no clue what the topic is even about.
Come on Bob, I share my source of information. Why are you always afraid to share your source??? I'm genuinely curious where you got that thought process from.
I quoted what you said you lying sack of shit. There was no "prosecutor" who put Clinton under oath before they had possession of the blue dress. You fucking lied Kunt and instead of having the integrity to admit that you were fucking wrong, you called me a liar and made up some bullshit story about how you weren't talking about the Paula Jones case.
How big a fucking Kunt do you have to be in order to be unable to admit you made a mistake on an anonymous message board?
Just read the headline. Tell me Bob, what AM radio talk show did you get that insight from?
Not being a dumbfuck like you Hondo, I'm able to think for myself.
Now stop being a fucking Kunt and give me the name of that "prosecutor" who put Clinton under oath.
Be honest Bob. Where did you get the headline from?
Go fuck yourself. Back up your fucking mouth for once in your pathetic life and tell us the name of the "prosecutor" who you claim put Clinton under oath before they had possession of the blue dress. You said it you pathetic fucking moron, back it up.
Bob playing word semantics. As always. When he realizes he's fucking dumb. And has no clue what the topic is even about.
Come on Bob, I share my source of information. Why are you always afraid to share your source??? I'm genuinely curious where you got that thought process from.
I quoted what you said you lying sack of shit. There was no "prosecutor" who put Clinton under oath before they had possession of the blue dress. You fucking lied Kunt and instead of having the integrity to admit that you were fucking wrong, you called me a liar and made up some bullshit story about how you weren't talking about the Paula Jones case.
How big a fucking Kunt do you have to be in order to be unable to admit you made a mistake on an anonymous message board?
Bob I honestly don't even remember the specifics of that comment and I'm not going to dig it up, you are welcome to however and I can respond it to. That being said. The point of the comment was that Clinton was put under oath prior to having evidence. Which is absolutely correct. And was in response to you guys all saying Trump couldn't be investigated based on second hand information.
Anyways. What is the source of your headline? Why are you embarrassed to say so Bob?
Just read the headline. Tell me Bob, what AM radio talk show did you get that insight from?
Not being a dumbfuck like you Hondo, I'm able to think for myself.
Now stop being a fucking Kunt and give me the name of that "prosecutor" who put Clinton under oath.
Be honest Bob. Where did you get the headline from?
Go fuck yourself. Back up your fucking mouth for once in your pathetic life and tell us the name of the "prosecutor" who you claim put Clinton under oath before they had possession of the blue dress. You said it you pathetic fucking moron, back it up.
Bob playing word semantics. As always. When he realizes he's fucking dumb. And has no clue what the topic is even about.
Come on Bob, I share my source of information. Why are you always afraid to share your source??? I'm genuinely curious where you got that thought process from.
I quoted what you said you lying sack of shit. There was no "prosecutor" who put Clinton under oath before they had possession of the blue dress. You fucking lied Kunt and instead of having the integrity to admit that you were fucking wrong, you called me a liar and made up some bullshit story about how you weren't talking about the Paula Jones case.
How big a fucking Kunt do you have to be in order to be unable to admit you made a mistake on an anonymous message board?
Bob I honestly don't even remember the specifics of that comment and I'm not going to dig it up, you are welcome to however and I can respond it to. That being said. The point of the comment was that Clinton was put under oath prior to having evidence. Which is absolutely correct. And was in response to you guys all saying Trump couldn't be investigated based on second hand information.
Anyways. What is the source of your headline? Why are you embarrassed to say so Bob?
Yeah, you only made them this morning lying sack of shit. Hondo is constantly trying to hold people accountable for shit they've never said years ago. Pizzagate!!! Seth Rich!!! While Hondo the fucking Kunt takes no responsibility for bullshit that left his mouth this very day.
Just read the headline. Tell me Bob, what AM radio talk show did you get that insight from?
Not being a dumbfuck like you Hondo, I'm able to think for myself.
Now stop being a fucking Kunt and give me the name of that "prosecutor" who put Clinton under oath.
Be honest Bob. Where did you get the headline from?
Go fuck yourself. Back up your fucking mouth for once in your pathetic life and tell us the name of the "prosecutor" who you claim put Clinton under oath before they had possession of the blue dress. You said it you pathetic fucking moron, back it up.
Bob playing word semantics. As always. When he realizes he's fucking dumb. And has no clue what the topic is even about.
Come on Bob, I share my source of information. Why are you always afraid to share your source??? I'm genuinely curious where you got that thought process from.
I quoted what you said you lying sack of shit. There was no "prosecutor" who put Clinton under oath before they had possession of the blue dress. You fucking lied Kunt and instead of having the integrity to admit that you were fucking wrong, you called me a liar and made up some bullshit story about how you weren't talking about the Paula Jones case.
How big a fucking Kunt do you have to be in order to be unable to admit you made a mistake on an anonymous message board?
Bob I honestly don't even remember the specifics of that comment and I'm not going to dig it up, you are welcome to however and I can respond it to. That being said. The point of the comment was that Clinton was put under oath prior to having evidence. Which is absolutely correct. And was in response to you guys all saying Trump couldn't be investigated based on second hand information.
Anyways. What is the source of your headline? Why are you embarrassed to say so Bob?
Yeah, you only made them this morning lying sack of shit.
What's your source Bob? Don't be a pussy. Post it up.
Just read the headline. Tell me Bob, what AM radio talk show did you get that insight from?
Not being a dumbfuck like you Hondo, I'm able to think for myself.
Now stop being a fucking Kunt and give me the name of that "prosecutor" who put Clinton under oath.
Be honest Bob. Where did you get the headline from?
Go fuck yourself. Back up your fucking mouth for once in your pathetic life and tell us the name of the "prosecutor" who you claim put Clinton under oath before they had possession of the blue dress. You said it you pathetic fucking moron, back it up.
Bob playing word semantics. As always. When he realizes he's fucking dumb. And has no clue what the topic is even about.
Come on Bob, I share my source of information. Why are you always afraid to share your source??? I'm genuinely curious where you got that thought process from.
I quoted what you said you lying sack of shit. There was no "prosecutor" who put Clinton under oath before they had possession of the blue dress. You fucking lied Kunt and instead of having the integrity to admit that you were fucking wrong, you called me a liar and made up some bullshit story about how you weren't talking about the Paula Jones case.
How big a fucking Kunt do you have to be in order to be unable to admit you made a mistake on an anonymous message board?
Bob I honestly don't even remember the specifics of that comment and I'm not going to dig it up, you are welcome to however and I can respond it to. That being said. The point of the comment was that Clinton was put under oath prior to having evidence. Which is absolutely correct. And was in response to you guys all saying Trump couldn't be investigated based on second hand information.
Anyways. What is the source of your headline? Why are you embarrassed to say so Bob?
Yeah, you only made them this morning lying sack of shit.
What's your source Bob? Don't be a pussy. Post it up.
Just read the headline. Tell me Bob, what AM radio talk show did you get that insight from?
Not being a dumbfuck like you Hondo, I'm able to think for myself.
Now stop being a fucking Kunt and give me the name of that "prosecutor" who put Clinton under oath.
Be honest Bob. Where did you get the headline from?
Go fuck yourself. Back up your fucking mouth for once in your pathetic life and tell us the name of the "prosecutor" who you claim put Clinton under oath before they had possession of the blue dress. You said it you pathetic fucking moron, back it up.
Bob playing word semantics. As always. When he realizes he's fucking dumb. And has no clue what the topic is even about.
Come on Bob, I share my source of information. Why are you always afraid to share your source??? I'm genuinely curious where you got that thought process from.
I quoted what you said you lying sack of shit. There was no "prosecutor" who put Clinton under oath before they had possession of the blue dress. You fucking lied Kunt and instead of having the integrity to admit that you were fucking wrong, you called me a liar and made up some bullshit story about how you weren't talking about the Paula Jones case.
How big a fucking Kunt do you have to be in order to be unable to admit you made a mistake on an anonymous message board?
Bob I honestly don't even remember the specifics of that comment and I'm not going to dig it up, you are welcome to however and I can respond it to. That being said. The point of the comment was that Clinton was put under oath prior to having evidence. Which is absolutely correct. And was in response to you guys all saying Trump couldn't be investigated based on second hand information.
Anyways. What is the source of your headline? Why are you embarrassed to say so Bob?
Yeah, you only made them this morning lying sack of shit.
What's your source Bob? Don't be a pussy. Post it up.
Pretty sure they already had the blue dress before Clinton was put under oath by Starr. But when do you ever get anything right.
You then put your head up your ass and responded:
Bob is wrong. As always:
Clinton gave a sworn deposition on January 17, 1998, where he denied having a "sexual relationship", "sexual affair" or "sexual relations" with Lewinsky. He also denied that he was ever alone with her.
That Jan 17, depo wasn't given to Starr, it was a civil suit and despite the fact that you crammed your head even further up your ass and claimed Clinton was put under oath by a "prosecutor"
There was no proof before the sworn deposition in January of 1998. So.... He was put under oath before the prosecutors had the dress or anything.
You made all of these bullshit statements just a few hours ago and now you lie and claim you don't recall them.
How big a fucking coward do you have to be in order to unable to admit you were wrong on an anonymous message board?
Pretty sure they already had the blue dress before Clinton was put under oath by Starr. But when do you ever get anything right.
You then put your head up your ass and responded:
Bob is wrong. As always:
Clinton gave a sworn deposition on January 17, 1998, where he denied having a "sexual relationship", "sexual affair" or "sexual relations" with Lewinsky. He also denied that he was ever alone with her.
That Jan 17, depo wasn't given to Starr, it was a civil suit and despite the fact that you crammed your head even further up your ass and claimed Clinton was put under oath by a "prosecutor"
There was no proof before the sworn deposition in January of 1998. So.... He was put under oath before the prosecutors had the dress or anything.
You made all of these bullshit statements just a few hours ago and now you lie and claim you don't recall them.
How big a fucking coward do you have to be in order to unable to admit you were wrong on an anonymous message board?
Thanks Bob for showing that you are a word semantics genius and I suck at being exactly precise on my wording. Now that are you done with that exercise and you've shown your superiority. Do you want to comment on the actual point that Clinton was put under oath before any actual corroborated evidence was found? Hell he was under oath before Monica even admitted to it. Monica never confirmed it until she was offered a deal.
Pretty sure they already had the blue dress before Clinton was put under oath by Starr. But when do you ever get anything right.
You then put your head up your ass and responded:
Bob is wrong. As always:
Clinton gave a sworn deposition on January 17, 1998, where he denied having a "sexual relationship", "sexual affair" or "sexual relations" with Lewinsky. He also denied that he was ever alone with her.
That Jan 17, depo wasn't given to Starr, it was a civil suit and despite the fact that you crammed your head even further up your ass and claimed Clinton was put under oath by a "prosecutor"
There was no proof before the sworn deposition in January of 1998. So.... He was put under oath before the prosecutors had the dress or anything.
You made all of these bullshit statements just a few hours ago and now you lie and claim you don't recall them.
How big a fucking coward do you have to be in order to unable to admit you were wrong on an anonymous message board?
Thanks Bob for showing that you are a word semantics genius and I suck at being exactly precise on my wording. Now that are you done with that exercise and you've shown your superiority. Do you want to comment on the actual point that Clinton was put under oath before any actual corroborated evidence was found? Hell he was under oath before Monica even admitted to it. Monica never confirmed it until she was offered a deal.
He was put under oath in a civil suit not a criminal suit. You're comparing apples to dog shit. And the only person playing a "word semantics" game is you Kunt. I clearly said Clinton was put under oath by Starr and that Starr already had the dress. You're the one who decided to stick your head up your ass and claim the "prosecutors" put him under oath in the Paula Jones case. It's obvious you didn't know that January depo was in the Jones case, instead of just admitting your error you went full Kunt.
But emailing classified information on a non-secured serve is not a crime.
Got it.
My post from earlier certainly aged well. Dance bob dance!
I love how this board full of uneducated right wing nutjobs thinks they know more about national security than the actual professionals. Can't wait to see the dance of the bitchass partisan Kunt.
So explain to us dumbfuck, what's the crime of putting classified materials on a classified server? You claimed I didn't want to talk about that an now you're running and hiding like a Kunt from the topic.
The whistleblower says in the complaint that they had learned from several sources that senior White House officials had intervened to "lock down" all records of the call, particularly an official word-for-word transcript.
"This set of actions underscored to me that White House officials understood the gravity of what had transpired in the call," the whistleblower wrote in the complaint.
The whistleblower says details of the call were stored in a "stand-alone computer system reserved for codeword-level intelligence information, such as covert action".
The whistleblower adds that officials said it was "'not the first time' under this administration that a presidential transcript was placed into this codeword-level system solely for the purpose of protecting politically sensitive - rather than national security sensitive - information".
All bullshit since he has ZERO first hand info. Odd you believe the mystery "Someone said something to me guy" but the president of the Ukraine denies it happened in any way means shape or from. You believe someone violating security, likely committing a crime themselves over the victim saying it didn't happen.
Fuck your arms must be 20 feet long to reach that far.
Pretty sure they already had the blue dress before Clinton was put under oath by Starr. But when do you ever get anything right.
You then put your head up your ass and responded:
Bob is wrong. As always:
Clinton gave a sworn deposition on January 17, 1998, where he denied having a "sexual relationship", "sexual affair" or "sexual relations" with Lewinsky. He also denied that he was ever alone with her.
That Jan 17, depo wasn't given to Starr, it was a civil suit and despite the fact that you crammed your head even further up your ass and claimed Clinton was put under oath by a "prosecutor"
There was no proof before the sworn deposition in January of 1998. So.... He was put under oath before the prosecutors had the dress or anything.
You made all of these bullshit statements just a few hours ago and now you lie and claim you don't recall them.
How big a fucking coward do you have to be in order to unable to admit you were wrong on an anonymous message board?
Thanks Bob for showing that you are a word semantics genius and I suck at being exactly precise on my wording. Now that are you done with that exercise and you've shown your superiority. Do you want to comment on the actual point that Clinton was put under oath before any actual corroborated evidence was found? Hell he was under oath before Monica even admitted to it. Monica never confirmed it until she was offered a deal.
He was put under oath in a civil suit not a criminal suit. You're comparing apples to dog shit. And the only person playing a "word semantics" game is you Kunt. I clearly said Clinton was put under oath by Starr and that Starr already had the dress. You're the one who decided to stick your head up your ass and claim the "prosecutors" put him under oath in the Paula Jones case. It's obvious you didn't know that January depo was in the Jones case, instead of just admitting your error you went full Kunt.
So he was put under oath prior to having actual evidence. Thanks for finally admitting that. Fuck it's painful talking to you man.
Comments
Now stop being a fucking Kunt and give me the name of that "prosecutor" who put Clinton under oath.
Come on Bob, I share my source of information. Why are you always afraid to share your source??? I'm genuinely curious where you got that thought process from.
How big a fucking Kunt do you have to be in order to be unable to admit you made a mistake on an anonymous message board?
Anyways. What is the source of your headline? Why are you embarrassed to say so Bob?
I'm not a fucking moron like you Hondo.
Pretty sure they already had the blue dress before Clinton was put under oath by Starr. But when do you ever get anything right.
You then put your head up your ass and responded:
Bob is wrong. As always:
Clinton gave a sworn deposition on January 17, 1998, where he denied having a "sexual relationship", "sexual affair" or "sexual relations" with Lewinsky. He also denied that he was ever alone with her.
That Jan 17, depo wasn't given to Starr, it was a civil suit and despite the fact that you crammed your head even further up your ass and claimed Clinton was put under oath by a "prosecutor"
There was no proof before the sworn deposition in January of 1998. So.... He was put under oath before the prosecutors had the dress or anything.
You made all of these bullshit statements just a few hours ago and now you lie and claim you don't recall them.
How big a fucking coward do you have to be in order to unable to admit you were wrong on an anonymous message board?
Fuck your arms must be 20 feet long to reach that far.