RE: Hillary's E-Mails (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

mnottertail -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/7/2015 8:08:24 AM)

Yours are the greater. 7 investigations by the house, all found no wrongs. All republican led. Among them, Intel and Armed Services.




Sanity -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/7/2015 8:20:27 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

General Michael Flynn, the former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, appeared on Megyn Kelly’s program last night. When asked what the odds are that China, Russia or another country hacked into Hillary Clinton’s private email system, he responded “very high.”


"The further down this rabbit hole we go, the worse it looks.

"Keith C. Burris of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette has had a change of heart on the issue.

"He wrote this yesterday:

"Hillary’s email is a story that shouldn’t go away. Maybe it was just contrariness, but my first reaction to the Hillary Clinton email story was a shrug. I think that first reaction was wrong. I don’t mean politically. I’m not sure the story — mini-scandal, if you will — will matter politically, except insofar as it is one more piece of baggage Ms. Clinton carries onto a flight that is already dangerously overloaded. But I think there are lessons here, both large and local. It looks to me like Ms. Clinton broke the spirit, and probably the letter, of the law. That’s a pretty stark and sobering realization.""

http://legalinsurrection.com/2015/04/intel-expert-hillarys-emails-a-national-security-risk/



Any more, one has to be a very stupid and rabid partisan to ignore how this proves Hillary to be devoid of any scruples

Should put a nail in the coffin of any further political aspirations, whether she will admit it or not

So.. Bring on the next Bush

(Kidding)



thompsonx -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/7/2015 8:28:54 AM)

Any more, one has to be a very stupid and rabid partisan to ignore how this proves Hillary to be devoid of any scruples

Anymore one has to be a very stupid and rabid partisan to ignore how this proves politicians to be devoid of any scurples.




bounty44 -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/8/2015 3:53:28 AM)

quote:

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's staff also used personal emails to conduct state business, possibly contradicting assurances that her team's communications took place on government servers.

The New York Times reported on Monday that Clinton, the Democratic presidential front-runner in 2016, emailed her top aides on their private email accounts when discussing the attack on the diplomacy facility in Benghazi, Libya….

The report casts new doubts on whether Clinton was being entirely truthful when she said the "vast majority" of her emails intentionally included a State Department address to ensure they were captured by government servers.

http://www.moberlymonitor.com/article/20150323/BUSINESS/303239995/-1/news



Lucylastic -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/8/2015 4:06:18 AM)

WHy cant you go to the actual source.....
NYT ORIGINAL LINK

WASHINGTON — Two high-ranking Republican senators criticized Hillary Rodham Clinton's use of a personal email server, and one said Clinton likely violated federal law.

Texas Sen. John Cornyn, the No. 2 Republican in the Senate, said Thursday he wants the State Department's inspector general to investigate whether Clinton violated federal law or policy. Cornyn said in a letter to Inspector General Steve Linick that Clinton's use of a private server meant that her emails "remained beyond the reach of congressional investigations, the Freedom of Information Act and the (State) department's record-keeping practices for six years."

Iowa Sen. Charles Grassley, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, said Clinton made a "great big mistake" by using a private email account for public business while she was secretary of state. Grassley told Newsmax TV this week that the use of a private server "probably violates the Freedom of Information Act, it probably violates national security legislation and it really hurts congressional oversight."

Clinton, a likely Democratic presidential candidate, used a private email account and server during her four-year tenure as secretary of state. She has refused a House committee's request to turn over her server for an independent review.

Her lawyer told a House committee investigating the deadly 2012 attacks in Benghazi, Libya, that all emails on the server were permanently deleted.

Clinton faces a Friday deadline to turn over the server, but lawyer David Kendall told the chairman of the Benghazi panel that doing so would be pointless, since "no emails ... reside on the server or on any backup systems associated with the server."

The State Department said last week that Secretary of State John Kerry has ordered an internal audit of the department's record-keeping in the aftermath of the revelations about Clinton's use of a private email account and server. Spokesman Jeff Rathke said the review was not specific to Clinton.

Cornyn, in his letter to the inspector general, said the inquiry should answer a series of questions about Clinton's actions, including whether her deletion of thousands of emails violated any federal civil or criminal law.


http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2015/04/02/us/politics/ap-us-clinton-emails-republicans.html

SO its more accusations of wrongdoing maybe.....
from republicans, Quelle surprise(gag)

but for gods sake link to the ACTUAL article in the originating news paper.







KenDckey -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/8/2015 5:58:48 AM)

Sanity I don't think Jeb stands much of a chance.



bounty44 -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/8/2015 6:13:37 AM)

i think he appeals to the moderate/establishment republican, even as he is trying hard to come across as a conservative. I don't get a good vibe from him.

in the meantime (she's not underwater yet but I hope she gets there):

quote:

The Democratic former secretary of state's approval rating has repeatedly tumbled as she moves towards a seemingly inevitable 2016 White House bid. According to a CNN poll released Monday, Clinton now has her lowest favorable and highest unfavorable numbers since 2008, when she last ran for president.

The poll also shows a sharp drop in the wake of recent revelations about Clinton's exclusive use of a personal email address during her time as secretary of state.

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/this-chart-shows-hillary-clinton-is-stumbling-2015-3#ixzz3WislPGhI




[image]local://upfiles/1936645/C8984DFE1D634026B06E271CCED970FB.jpg[/image]



slvemike4u -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/8/2015 9:32:41 AM)

Bounty I'm curious.....just suppose she wins the nomination.
Further suppose she actually wins the election.
Will you be okay ?


I'm serious,I'm concerned.....I know sanity will weather the storm.
He survived eight years of that "other" in office he will be okay(eight more years of railing against the party in power ,but okay all the same)
You ,on the other hand,I'm worried about,the derangement syndrome you are suffering from seems to be a particularly virulent strain.....I'm not sure you will weather a Clinton Presidency.


p.s. Care to attend the inauguration with me ?



Sanity -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/8/2015 9:40:54 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

i think he appeals to the moderate/establishment republican, even as he is trying hard to come across as a conservative. I don't get a good vibe from him.

in the meantime (she's not underwater yet but I hope she gets there):


Like a lot of the old Republican establishment, he isnt trying REAL hard to come across as a conservative

*CoughRINOcough*



Sanity -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/8/2015 9:44:18 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

Bounty I'm curious.....just suppose she wins the nomination.
Further suppose she actually wins the election.
Will you be okay ?


I'm serious,I'm concerned.....I know sanity will weather the storm.
He survived eight years of that "other" in office he will be okay(eight more years of railing against the party in power ,but okay all the same)
You ,on the other hand,I'm worried about,the derangement syndrome you are suffering from seems to be a particularly virulent strain.....I'm not sure you will weather a Clinton Presidency.


p.s. Care to attend the inauguration with me ?


If the choice will be between another RINO and another America loathing Marxist, yeah. I will hold my nose and align with the RINO

Hope it doesnt come to that, though.




slvemike4u -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/8/2015 9:47:47 AM)

How about you sanity ?
Care to meet me in Washington and watch as history is made when the first Madame President takes the oath of office ?


Perhaps after having met we will both find it just a little harder to demonize each other on these pages ?

Wouldn't that be fun [:D]



KenDckey -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/8/2015 2:58:57 PM)

http://www.ijreview.com/2015/04/291294-using-hillary-clintons-first-name-sexist-politics-usual/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=organic&utm_content=conservativedaily&utm_campaign=Politics

Yup it is official. You can't call her Hillary any longer. Hillary is a sexist name.



bounty44 -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/9/2015 10:02:46 AM)

"Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s lead is wilting against leading Republican presidential candidates in three critical swing states, Colorado, Iowa and Virginia, and she finds herself in a close race with U.S. Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky in each state, according to a Quinnipiac University Swing State Poll released today…

"Voters in each state say Clinton is not honest and trustworthy…

"“Ominous for Hillary Clinton is the broad scope of the movement today compared to her showing in Quinnipiac University’s mid-February survey. It isn’t just one or two Republicans who are stepping up; it’s virtually the entire GOP field that is running better against her”….


Colorado

In the presidential race in Colorado, Paul gets 44 percent to Clinton’s 41 percent and other Republicans are effectively tied as well:

• U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida gets 41 percent to Clinton’s 40 percent;
• She ties former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee 41 – 41 percent;
• Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker gets 42 percent to her 41 percent;
• Clinton gets 42 percent to 41 percent for U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas;
• She gets 41 percent to Bush’s 38 percent;
• Clinton gets 41 percent to 39 percent for New Jersey Gov. Christopher Christie.

"Only 34 percent of voters say she’s given satisfactory answers on the e-mail issue, while 57 percent say serious questions remain.

Virginia

Clinton leads Bush 47 – 40 percent in Virginia, compared to a 42 – 42 percent tie February 18. She gets 47 percent to Paul’s 43 percent, her closest race in the Old Dominion.
In other races:
• Clinton tops Christie 46 – 40 percent;
• Clinton over Huckabee 48 – 40 percent;
• Clinton tops Walker 47 – 40 percent;
• She beats Rubio 48 – 40 percent;
• Clinton tops Cruz 49 – 39 percent.

"Serious questions about the e-mail scandal remain, 54 percent of voters say,

Iowa

Every Republican is tied or close to Clinton in Iowa:
• She gets 41 percent to 39 percent for Christie:
• She gets 41 percent to 40 percent for Bush;
• Paul at 43 percent to Clinton’s 42 percent;
• Huckabee ties her 42 – 42 percent;
• Clinton edges Walker 44 – 40 percent;
• She gets 43 percent to 40 percent against either Rubio or Cruz.

"54 percent say serious questions remain (about the email scandal)"

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/04/09/scandals-skewer-hillary-in-swing-states/
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/images/polling/sw/ps04092015_sh322kd.pdf



servantforuse -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/9/2015 12:00:40 PM)

The democrats are in big trouble in 2016. They run Hillary and they are cooked.



mnottertail -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/9/2015 12:21:33 PM)

Who will be the chef from the clown club?



bounty44 -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/9/2015 3:50:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

The democrats are in big trouble in 2016. They run Hillary and they are cooked.


I like to think so...but im skeptical too. this is a little encouraging, but I don't know if it amounts to much:

quote:

While Hillary Clinton has not officially announced whether she is running for president, the thought of her running is causing some Democrats to have “buyer’s remorse,” said MSNBC host Thomas Roberts.


http://freebeacon.com/politics/msnbc-hillary-clintons-continued-scandals-may-cause-buyers-remorse-for-democrats/



DaddySatyr -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/9/2015 4:13:28 PM)




quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

The democrats are in big trouble in 2016. They run Hillary and they are cooked.



I like to think so...but im skeptical too.


NEVER underestimate the ability of the left to rationalize and move goal posts to fit an agenda/narrative. I think the anti-Christ gets the DEM nod.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

this is a little encouraging, but I don't know if it amounts to much:

quote:

While Hillary Clinton has not officially announced whether she is running for president, the thought of her running is causing some Democrats to have “buyer’s remorse,” said MSNBC host Thomas Roberts.


http://freebeacon.com/politics/msnbc-hillary-clintons-continued-scandals-may-cause-buyers-remorse-for-democrats/


She is "on the clock". She "rented" space from a campaign contributor about a week ago and FEC rules puts a time limit on how long after a move like that requires an announcement.



Michael



bounty44 -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/9/2015 5:16:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr




quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

quote:

ORIGINAL: servantforuse

The democrats are in big trouble in 2016. They run Hillary and they are cooked.



I like to think so...but im skeptical too.


NEVER underestimate the ability of the left to rationalize and move goal posts to fit an agenda/narrative. I think the anti-Christ gets the DEM nod.

quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44

this is a little encouraging, but I don't know if it amounts to much:

quote:

While Hillary Clinton has not officially announced whether she is running for president, the thought of her running is causing some Democrats to have “buyer’s remorse,” said MSNBC host Thomas Roberts.


http://freebeacon.com/politics/msnbc-hillary-clintons-continued-scandals-may-cause-buyers-remorse-for-democrats/


She is "on the clock". She "rented" space from a campaign contributor about a week ago and FEC rules puts a time limit on how long after a move like that requires an announcement.



Michael


oh I don't disagree...and I mentioned earlier here too, there are people who would vote for her still even if she ate kittens and killed puppies.

I think other signs are pointing to an announcement soon too...

im reminded of something: liberals want conservatives to be quiet, conservatives want liberals to keep talking. the point being the more American sees and hears them, the worse it is for them. so in that regard, I welcome Hillary getting out there and being her despicable self.



Lucylastic -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/9/2015 5:23:51 PM)

we are wandering into fantasy land again....
come back to reality fellas,



slvemike4u -> RE: Hillary's E-Mails (4/9/2015 7:06:39 PM)

I might have started it by inviting sanity to meet me in Washington .



Page: <<   < prev  20 21 [22] 23 24   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875