State Dept. redacts Clinton emails of 'classified info'

[Viligant_Warrior]

State Department: About 150 emails in new Clinton batch have classified info

About 150 messages in a soon-to-be released trove of Hillary Clinton emails are being censored because they contain information now considered classified, according to the State Department.

The messages will be included in a massive release of 7,000 pages of emails from the former secretary of state's personal email server. The State Department expects to post the documents online Monday night -- it is the largest email release yet.

But the sheer number of emails that have been redacted stands as the latest example of how much sensitive material was contained in Clinton's email transactions.

But ... but ... but ...

Hillary, July 24:“I am confident I never sent nor received any information that was classified at the time it was sent and received. What I think you’re seeing is a very typical kind of discussion to some extent, disagreement among various parts of the government over what should or what should not be publicly released.”

What? She lied?

[/sarcasm]

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

State Department IT staff among those in the dark about Clinton's private email address

Members of the State Department's information technology staff were among those who were unaware that Hillary Clinton was using a private email address during her time as secretary of state, the latest release of messages from Clinton's private server revealed late Monday.

In one email, dated February 27, 2010, an IT worker on the State Department's computer "help desk" sends a message to Clinton's email address inquiring about why one of Clinton's correspondents has been getting a "fatal error" when she tries to send messages to the secretary of state.

Clinton's use of a private email address may have also created logistical problems communicating with State Department aides.

"Well its clearly a state vs outside email issue," wrote Abedin in August 2010, after another aide reported missing some messages from Clinton. "State has been trying to figure it out. So lj is getting all your emazils cause she's on her personal account too."

OK, so IT at State claims they "didn't know" about Clinton's private email server, yet clearly, from that one exchange between ol' Hill and Abedin, State knew the interface wasn't working.

So the real question is, "Why is Obama throwing Hillary under the bus?" Because none of this gets released, none of the investigation goes forward, without his permission.

Answer: The Obamas hate the Clintons, and vice versa. The prez would love to see her go down in the flames of public humiliation, perhaps even an indictment, and if that means backing Biden, so be it.

 

[Billyd]

What I don't understand is how Hillary could assume that any State Department business is unclassified until it is reviewed and approved for declassification. Until that happens, everything that she sent or received was classified and must be handled as such.

VW where would you be today if you discussed your mission debriefs in public. That's the same type of information that she was sending and receiving on a public server.

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

VW where would you be today if you discussed your mission debriefs in public.

Dead.

Or in a federal prison with no "Exit" sign.

 

[GodIsSalvation]

Note the key words subtly put in, "at the time". These were not classified at the time. The CNN article, is a little more forthright, showing that the e-mails were classified retroactively. Since they are retroactively classified, you will not get very far in a criminal proceeding. Hillary Clinton emails: Gefilte fish, TV shows and redactions - CNNPolitics.com

I've told you all GOPers for a while to just let her release them e-mails. If you would've let her do that you may have had a case. It would almost make me think that the GOP is intentionally trying to shield Hillary. Though I incline moreso that just like with Obama, the e-mails probably show how Obama and the GOP are culpable in skullduggery, and thus they are more likely only covering for themselves.

So thanks a lot GOP, you obstructed the public from getting a treasure trove of info exposing the government, for example the highly curious memo about the government's agenda towards Israel and Netanyahu. Thanks to the GOP, instead we get meaningless e-mails about reality TV amd gefilte fish.

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

Note the key words subtly put in, "at the time". These were not classified at the time. The CNN article, is a little more forthright, showing that the e-mails were classified retroactively.

You still don't understand State Department and classified information protocol.

All communications is to be considered "classified" until it is pronounced "unclassified." Anyone with a security clearance in the government, from the lowliest private in the Army to the president of the U.S., knows that fact. You don't treat anything as unclassified, and for a sitting or former SecState to claim "Well, it wasn't classified when I saw it" is full of male bovine excretory material and knows it.

Since they are retroactively classified, you will not get very far in a criminal proceeding.

And this clueless remark continues to ignore facts. Here's your problem: The unbiased media is actually putting the facts out that CNN ignores.

Clinton, aides stressed need to protect sensitive State Department information in email

Senior adviser Alec Ross, in a February 2010 email intended for Clinton, cited frustration with "the boundaries of unclassified email" in a message about an unspecified country, which Ross referred to as "the country we discussed." The email appears to focus on civil unrest in Iran during the period preceding the Green Movement, when Iranian protesters used social media and the Internet to unsuccessfully challenge the re-election of then-President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

In an exchange from Feb. 6, 2010, Clinton asks aide Huma Abedin for talking points for a call she's about to have with the newly appointed foreign minister of Ecuador. "You are congratulating him on becoming foreign minister, and purpose is to establish a personal relationship with him," Abedin replied. "Trying to get u call sheet, its classified...."

In another email from January 2010, Clinton aide Cheryl Mills responds angrily to a New York Times story based on leaked classified cables sent by Karl Eikenberry, the U.S. ambassador to Afghanistan. "The leaking of classified material is a breach not only of trust, it is also a breach of the law," Mills wrote.


Clinton also expressed frustration with the State Department's treatment of certain ordinary documents as classified. After an aide noted the draft of innocuous remarks about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was on the State Department's classified messaging system, she responded, "It's a public statement! Just email it."

Sent a moment later, the statement merely said that U.S. and British officials would work together to promote peace. "Well that is certainly worthy of being top secret," Clinton responded sarcastically.

Clinton and her team knew full well that everything they dealt with was considered classified, and even if it wasn't sensitive, it was still classified. There's no way in hell she wiggles out of this, cheerleaders like you on the sidelines notwithstanding.

I've told you all GOPers for a while to just let her release them e-mails.

We waited and waited and waited ... she didn't. It's her server, she could have released them anytime. But she wanted State's approval first. Why?

Because the information on the server was classified!!

 

[GodIsSalvation]

You still don't understand State Department and classified information protocol.

All communications is to be considered "classified" until it is pronounced "unclassified." Anyone with a security clearance in the government, from the lowliest private in the Army to the president of the U.S., knows that fact. You don't treat anything as unclassified, and for a sitting or former SecState to claim "Well, it wasn't classified when I saw it" is full of male bovine excretory material and knows it.

And this clueless remark continues to ignore facts. Here's your problem: The unbiased media is actually putting the facts out that CNN ignores.

Clinton and her team knew full well that everything they dealt with was considered classified, and even if it wasn't sensitive, it was still classified. There's no way in hell she wiggles out of this, cheerleaders like you on the sidelines notwithstanding.

We waited and waited and waited ... she didn't. It's her server, she could have released them anytime. But she wanted State's approval first. Why?

Because the information on the server was classified!!

If it was as you say Hillary would all ready be arrested months ago. Looks to me moreso that FOX propaganda has blinded you and no matter how many ways I show you to defeat Hillary, the GOPers will not hearken. Of course this doesn't surprise me much, I figured the GOP would let their hatred blind them and would squander every chance they get to defeat Hillary. It just surprises me how well they play into her hands.

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

If it was as you say Hillary would all ready be arrested months ago.

Due process, my friend, due process. Unlocking the secrets of a wiped server requires diligence, care, and (since it's a criminal investigation) documentation. Walking each piece of evidence back to its source. The FBI National Security Team doesn't get called in for political intrigue. It gets called in when there is serious suspicion of illegality. And as I said, that team doesn't move without Obama's approval.

Looks to me moreso that FOX propaganda has blinded you and no matter how many ways I show you to defeat Hillary, the GOPers will not hearken.

Oh, come on! Everyone here knows you have no interest in defeating Hillary, but will probably vote for her! So knock off the B/S.

Of course this doesn't surprise me much, I figured the GOP would let their hatred blind them and would squander every chance they get to defeat Hillary. It just surprises me how well they play into her hands.

Yeah, well, tell me what we "squandered" after Hillary's indictment, and Ben Carson's swearing in as president on January 20, 2017.

 

[Billyd]

If it was as you say Hillary would all ready be arrested months ago. Looks to me moreso that FOX propaganda has blinded you and no matter how many ways I show you to defeat Hillary, the GOPers will not hearken. Of course this doesn't surprise me much, I figured the GOP would let their hatred blind them and would squander every chance they get to defeat Hillary. It just surprises me how well they play into her hands.

VW, I, and others here have lead sensitive operations. Every time we left the site, everything relating to the op, including our notes, were locked up. Nothing relating to our sensitive ops was allowed out of operations until it was reviewed and declassified. Once the material became classified, it was handled according to the classification level. To me this is not a political decision that I make, I'm not a member of the GOP, it is a national security decision.

 

[GodIsSalvation]

Due process, my friend, due process. Unlocking the secrets of a wiped server requires diligence, care, and (since it's a criminal investigation) documentation. Walking each piece of evidence back to its source. The FBI National Security Team doesn't get called in for political intrigue. It gets called in when there is serious suspicion of illegality. And as I said, that team doesn't move without Obama's approval.

Oh, come on! Everyone here knows you have no interest in defeating Hillary, but will probably vote for her! So knock off the B/S.

Yeah, well, tell me what we "squandered" after Hillary's indictment, and Ben Carson's swearing in as president on January 20, 2017.

As I have said before I will not vote in the General Election for either party. I vote always the same way for president. So my analyses of politics is more pure than yours as I am not beholden to anyone.

Lol as for Dr. Frankenstein he still has to answer for why he is a participant in the macabre trade in the parts of the unborn. Him saying "it be foolish not to" is a pretty telling answer. Though go ahead and support Carson, you're indirectly supporting Hillary by picking the weak links in the GOP instead of some actually very strong and qualified alternatives like Kasich, Rubio, and Bush.

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

As I have said before I will not vote in the General Election for either party. I vote always the same way for president.

Straight Democratic ticket. Yes we know.

So my analyses of politics is more pure than yours as I am not beholden to anyone.

The Pharisees said the same thing.

Lol as for Dr. Frankenstein he still has to answer for why he is a participant in the macabre trade in the parts of the unborn. Him saying "it be foolish not to" is a pretty telling answer.

I find it most intriguing that a guy who has largely supported abortion on demand, the pro-choice movement, and Planned Parenthood takes this tack when speaking of someone he obviously is scared to death of as president, so forgive me if I laugh into the back of my hand at your hypocrisy.

Though go ahead and support Carson, you're indirectly supporting Hillary by picking the weak links in the GOP instead of some actually very strong and qualified alternatives like Kasich, Rubio, and Bush.

Oh, have no fear, I will continue to support Carson, and again find it intriguing your choices for GOP nominee are three among many who haven't a snowball's chance in hell of beating any Democrat, except perhaps for Sanders. But like Trump, he won't be his party's nominee anyway.

 

[GodIsSalvation]

VW, I, and others here have lead sensitive operations. Every time we left the site, everything relating to the op, including our notes, were locked up. Nothing relating to our sensitive ops was allowed out of operations until it was reviewed and declassified. Once the material became classified, it was handled according to the classification level. To me this is not a political decision that I make, I'm not a member of the GOP, it is a national security decision.

Yea but the military are dogs, trained dogs accountable to the government. The government officials are suppose to be accountable directly to the people. These e-mails should not be classified or hidden away from me. To your advantage, yes, this makes it seem as if the Democrats and GOP are in cahoots to hide something from me.

Nevertheless, it is quite clear at the least that Obama was aware she had this server and that these are going to be considered retroactively classified. At best, the ultimate responsibility falls on Obama. But by now we all know Obama and the word responsibility is an oxymoron. So don't expect this to go very far. If you all need a way to stop Hillary, think more simply. A good place to start is her connections to some questionable people and regimes throughout the world via the Clinton Global Initiative.

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

Yea but the military are dogs, trained dogs accountable to the government. The government officials are suppose to be accountable directly to the people. These e-mails should not be classified or hidden away from me.

That's a stupid comment, my apologies if it steps on your intellectual toes. If it's visible to you, it's visible to our enemies.

And now you are justifying Hillary's using a private server because "these emails should not be classified or hidden away from" you, whereas you were just claiming the emails weren't classified at all?

You're losing it, GiS. Over the deep end. Out to lunch. Half a bubble off center. A few fries short of a Happy Meal.

Or you're just forgetful as to what you're arguing. Either way, you lose.

 

[GodIsSalvation]

Straight Democratic ticket. Yes we know.

The Pharisees said the same thing.

I find it most intriguing that a guy who has largely supported abortion on demand, the pro-choice movement, and Planned Parenthood takes this tack when speaking of someone he obviously is scared to death of as president, so forgive me if I laugh into the back of my hand at your hypocrisy.

Oh, have no fear, I will continue to support Carson, and again find it intriguing your choices for GOP nominee are three among many who haven't a snowball's chance in hell of beating any Democrat, except perhaps for Sanders. But like Trump, he won't be his party's nominee anyway.

Lol, you know not who I vote for or where I stand, even when I have said so many times.

Doesn't surprise me though, you being corrupted as even you have said yourself. It's in vain though, Carson whom is the end consumer of the trade of the body parts of the unborn has no hope of winning.

 

[GodIsSalvation]

That's a stupid comment, my apologies if it steps on your intellectual toes. If it's visible to you, it's visible to our enemies.

And now you are justifying Hillary's using a private server because "these emails should not be classified or hidden away from" you, whereas you were just claiming the emails weren't classified at all?

You're losing it, GiS. Over the deep end. Out to lunch. Half a bubble off center. A few fries short of a Happy Meal.

Or you're just forgetful as to what you're arguing. Either way, you lose.

Not at all, they weren't classified until recently. Haven't you been following the news? They shouldn't be classified at all. I have said from the beginning I want that info, and as citizen I am entitled to it. Who are my enemies? Are they not those that walk contrary to me? Therefore, by hiding information from us, the GOP and the Democrats make themselves look to be an enemy at the most, and suspicious at the least.

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

Not at all, they weren't classified until recently. Haven't you been following the news? They shouldn't be classified at all.

Yeah, why should we classify communication, documents, and intelligence regarding national security? Any "news" organization that says something that stupid must have very low ratings -- and since MSNBC and CNN both qualify under that criteria, I'm guessing you waste your time listen to propagandist outlets instead of actual news reporting channels or newspapers. You do know what those are, right?

I have said from the beginning I want that info, and as citizen I am entitled to it.

No, you're not. You're too ignorant -- no offense, so am I, this far removed from that kind if material -- to know what to do with it.

Who are my enemies?

If you can't figure that out, you're more dense than I thought.

Are they not those that walk contrary to me?

No. The "real enemy" are those who lie to you -- the liberally-biased news media who act not as watchdogs, but lapdogs to the entrenched neo-socialist movement that fortunately no longer controls the Congress but still occupies the White House.

The aforementioned MSNBC, CNN, as well as the New York Times, The Washington Post, Time, Newsweek, etc., do you far more harm than any GOP candidate or lawmaker ever thought of doing. They are the real hiders of truth, revamping and reworking it so that their masters look good, when in fact their masters wish to destroy this nation.

Therefore, by hiding information from us, the GOP and the Democrats make themselves look to be an enemy at the most, and suspicious at the least.

Sheer foolishness. National security must be maintained, and if you can get the information, then anyone can. And again, this argument is asinine, given you were, just a few posts ago, claiming Hillary's emails were not classified and now are making the argument that they shouldn't be classified as is clearly the case, that they are in fact classified.

Lol, you know not who I vote for or where I stand, even when I have said so many times.

Methinks thou protesteth too much, in light of the volumes your posts speak.

Doesn't surprise me though, you being corrupted as even you have said yourself.

If "corruption" is defined by the attitude of being honest as to who I am, then I must be guilty.

It's in vain though, Carson whom is the end consumer of the trade of the body parts of the unborn has no hope of winning.

Yeah, yeah yeah ...

Keep playing that one string. Sooner or later, it'll break.

 

[GodIsSalvation]

Yeah, why should we classify communication, documents, and intelligence regarding national security? Any "news" organization that says something that stupid must have very low ratings -- and since MSNBC and CNN both qualify under that criteria, I'm guessing you waste your time listen to propagandist outlets instead of actual news reporting channels or newspapers. You do know what those are, right?

No, you're not. You're too ignorant -- no offense, so am I, this far removed from that kind if material -- to know what to do with it.

If you can't figure that out, you're more dense than I thought.

No. The "real enemy" are those who lie to you -- the liberally-biased news media who act not as watchdogs, but lapdogs to the entrenched neo-socialist movement that fortunately no longer controls the Congress but still occupies the White House.

The aforementioned MSNBC, CNN, as well as the New York Times, The Washington Post, Time, Newsweek, etc., do you far more harm than any GOP candidate or lawmaker ever thought of doing.

Sheer foolishness. National security must be maintained, and if you can get the information, then anyone can. And again, this argument is asinine, given you were, just a few posts ago, claiming Hillary's emails were not classified and now are making the argument that they shouldn't be classified as is clearly the case, that they are in fact classified.

Methinks thou protesteth too much, in light of the volumes your posts speak.

If "corruption" is defined by the attitude of being honest as to who I am, then I must be guilty.

Yeah, yeah yeah ...

Keep playing that one string. Sooner or later, it'll break.

I said they weren't classified at the time, FOX News says the same thing. As does CNN. Haven't checked NBC, but I'll take your word for it. So then are you saying that either FOX is not to be trusted, or are you saying that FOX is to be trusted and the e-mails were not classified at the time. I don't think they should be classified retroactively either. I want that information and I am entitled to it as it pertains to our government servants and policies.

If the real enemy is who lies to me then I hold to my position that the Democrats and the GOP are suspicious at the least. Haven't forgot that lie about Iraq yet, and for sooth, that lie is on both the parties.

By corruption I mean you have admitted to being a shill for Carson, so you cannot actually be fully honest about the presidential race. That's fine though, one of my close friends has also sold out his principles for money to work for Ben Carson's campaign as well. I am a little more old school though, I can't be bought.

As for that string, lol I'll play it until it breaks indeed. But it's not the only string in that piano. I'll give you a little preview of the next string. Ben Carson might be a little more cozy with Al Sharpton than you are aware of.

 

[Viligant_Warrior]

I said they weren't classified at the time, FOX News says the same thing. As does CNN. Haven't checked NBC, but I'll take your word for it.

Fox has since corrected the assumption that nothing is classified until it is retroactively classified. Here is another single string you can play your note on to no avail. Literally everything that is communicated, email, snail-mailed, hand couriered, or otherwise moved from one place to another in the State Department -- as illustrated by that post I made earlier regarding Hillary's frustration at not being able to even send out an innocuous media release due to classification standards -- proves she knew the protocol quite well, and was frustrated by it.

In her queen complex, it is no great leap to think she'd just find a way around that so she could do what she wanted when she wanted to do it. And what she wanted was not to have government email so she didn't have to watch what she said.

So then are you saying that either FOX is not to be trusted, or are you saying that FOX is to be trusted and the e-mails were not classified at the time.

Neither, though Fox's championing of that idiot Trump certainly calls into question their claim to "Fair. Balanced." The emails were always classified. Get that through your head. In fact, in checking just now, I see that many of the media outlets have made that same correction. All have since reported that to be the case, and the only thing that is retroactive is the level of classification.

I don't think they should be classified retroactively either. I want that information and I am entitled to it as it pertains to our government servants and policies.

Then you're nothing less than a fool, and I don't really believe you are that. It is the argument you've decided to make since you can't win the discussion with the other tack.

If the real enemy is who lies to me then I hold to my position that the Democrats and the GOP are suspicious at the least.

The media doesn't lie for the GOP, just the liberal socialists of the Democratic Party, so I find that feeling of yours difficult to swallow both ways.

Haven't forgot that lie about Iraq yet ...

You mean the one the socialists told that "there were no WMDs" and that the media repeated loudly and ad nauseum to the point even Bush "admittted" there were none, when in fact what we found was exactly what the administration was saying from October 2001 to May 2002, that the stalling tactics of Russia, China, Germany, and France were giving the Iraqis time to move them? Or do you still insist the lie was actually the truth?

By corruption I mean you have admitted to being a shill for Carson, so you cannot actually be fully honest about the presidential race.

Supporting a candidate is not being his shill. We had this discussion once before, and you didn't listen then any more closely than you are listening now, so what's the point.

That's fine though, one of my close friends has also sold out his principles for money to work for Ben Carson's campaign as well.

He's the smart one in the relationship then, hm?

I am a little more old school though, I can't be bought.

I beg to differ. You appear on here regularly, claiming loudly and vociferously "I'm not a liberal! I'm not a Democrat!" But then you go out of your way to defend any wrongdoing by them while magnanimously peppering any general statement of government corruption to include Democrats despite the aforementioned defense of them when they commit corruption, fraud, treason, or other crimes for which they should be brought up on charges, but for eight years have been protected by the socialist in the Oval Office.

As for that string, lol I'll play it until it breaks indeed.

Don't look now, but it already has. No one is talking about it anymore -- except you. That should reveal something to you, but I hold out no hope that it does.

But it's not the only string in that piano. I'll give you a little preview of the next string. Ben Carson might be a little more cozy with Al Sharpton than you are aware of.

Again ...

You drop that little bombshell into the conversation knowing some people will say "Really?" -- just like you hope -- without ever investigating for themselves. And most won't, so you will have succeeded in unfairly tainting a man's good reputation.

Yes, Carson was invited to speak at Sharpton's National Action Network because "we both want the same thing" -- namely, a stronger America. They just have a very, very different view of how that happens. Here's what Carson said on the Kelly File when she asked him why he would risk his image with the GOP to speak to a Sharpton crowd:

Ben Carson: Al Sharpton and I Have the Same Goal

"You won't get me to defend him," Carson replied. "But I will tell you that the audience, a little cool when I first started, but by the time I finished [I got a] standing ovation and were very warm."

"We don't want to categorize people based on an individual," Carson added. "We want to give them all an opportunity to listen and evaluate, because it's the only way we are going to heal the deep divisions that exist in our country."

Now ...

I know that's not the conclusion you wanted people to jump to in making that bombastic but unexplained claim. That's why I went to the trouble to clarify, because I know you -- as the liberal you deny being -- won't bother doing so.

 

[GodIsSalvation]

Fox has since corrected the assumption that nothing is classified until it is retroactively classified. Here is another single string you can play your note on to no avail. Literally everything that is communicated, email, snail-mailed, hand couriered, or otherwise moved from one place to another in the State Department -- as illustrated by that post I made earlier regarding Hillary's frustration at not being able to even send out an innocuous media release due to classification standards -- proves she knew the protocol quite well, and was frustrated by it.

In her queen complex, it is no great leap to think she'd just find a way around that so she could do what she wanted when she wanted to do it. And what she wanted was not to have government email so she didn't have to watch what she said.

Neither, though Fox's championing of that idiot Trump certainly calls into question their claim to "Fair. Balanced." The emails were always classified. Get that through your head. In fact, in checking just now, I see that many of the media outlets have made that same correction. All have since reported that to be the case, and the only thing that is retroactive is the level of classification.

Then you're nothing less than a fool, and I don't really believe you are that. It is the argument you've decided to make since you can't win the discussion with the other tack.

The media doesn't lie for the GOP, just the liberal socialists of the Democratic Party, so I find that feeling of yours difficult to swallow both ways.

You mean the one the socialists told that "there were no WMDs" and that the media repeated loudly and ad nauseum to the point even Bush "admittted" there were none, when in fact what we found was exactly what the administration was saying from October 2001 to May 2002, that the stalling tactics of Russia, China, Germany, and France were giving the Iraqis time to move them? Or do you still insist the lie was actually the truth?


Supporting a candidate is not being his shill. We had this discussion once before, and you didn't listen then any more closely than you are listening now, so what's the point.

He's the smart one in the relationship then, hm?

I beg to differ. You appear on here regularly, claiming loudly and vociferously "I'm not a liberal! I'm not a Democrat!" But then you go out of your way to defend any wrongdoing by them while magnanimously peppering any general statement of government corruption to include Democrats despite the aforementioned defense of them when they commit corruption, fraud, treason, or other crimes for which they should be brought up on charges, but for eight years have been protected by the socialist in the Oval Office.

Don't look now, but it already has. No one is talking about it anymore -- except you. That should reveal something to you, but I hold out no hope that it does.

Again ...

You drop that little bombshell into the conversation knowing some people will say "Really?" -- just like you hope -- without ever investigating for themselves. And most won't, so you will have succeeded in unfairly tainting a man's good reputation.

Yes, Carson was invited to speak at Sharpton's National Action Network because "we both want the same thing" -- namely, a stronger America. They just have a very, very different view of how that happens. Here's what Carson said on the Kelly File when she asked him why he would risk his image with the GOP to speak to a Sharpton crowd:

Now ...

I know that's not the conclusion you wanted people to jump to in making that bombastic but unexplained claim. That's why I went to the trouble to clarify, because I know you -- as the liberal you deny being -- won't bother doing so.

Lol, looks like I struck a chord on the string.

Just because you want me to be a liberal doesn't make it so. Though I might question just how much of a conservative you really are seeing as you constantly defend big government's attempts to obstruct the truth from the people.

So do tell, you down to work with Al Sharpton now? It's fine by me if you do, just seems a bit funny how you pretend to be against the evil trade of the parts of the unborn and Al Sharpton and then turn around to defend the guy whom is involved with both.